Finding Mutual Benefit in Urban Development

Abstract

Problem, research strategy, and findings Public and nonprofit agencies struggle to compete for space in cities as development pressures and unaffordability intensify. We have identified a potential solution in creative mixed-use projects: ad hoc, cross-sectoral partnerships to develop mixed-use buildings involving a public or nonprofit use. We built our analysis on a census of 54 projects in Toronto (Canada), interviews with 24 stakeholders, and a rich data set of secondary sources. We traced the emergence of this approach in Toronto over 2 decades, mapping its geographical expansion, stakeholder diversification, and the various mutually beneficial spatial arrangements of buildings. Building on the theory of collaborative advantage, we analyzed the motivations behind cross-sector partnered ventures, finding a gradual shift from resorting to partnership in reaction to obstacles to partnerships strategically designed to pool together land, resources, and support for development. Third, we highlight here the role of champions in underwriting risks and the limits of relying on market solutions for social purposes. We conclude by discussing the relevance of collaborative city-building in land-constrained North American planning contexts.Takeaway for practice Government agencies, nonprofit organizations, and developers alike can benefit from creative mixed-use partnerships, which unlock access to land, resources, development capacities, and community support. Contrary to popular perceptions, intentional separation of nonprofit and for-profit uses can be mutually beneficial. Despite the one-off nature of creative mixed-use development, it can be propelled by an initial cohort of successful partnerships and landmark projects. Limited-time leases, insufficient organizational capacity, and low market demand hinder its implementation.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.