A sustainable approach to development balances social, economic, and environmental considerations (Bacior & Prus, 2018). This approach also considers balancing the current needs of the community and the needs of future generations (Brundtland, 1987). Commercial development can impact local communities in many ways, so meaningful involvement of stakeholders in the planning process is important for managing growth in an effective way (Bengston et al., 2004). 

A study of commercial development in one Upstate New York community found that a downside of an increase in chain stores was the removal of decision-making power from the local community.  Chain stores typically do not make decisions about which goods and services are offered at the local level (Halebsky, 2010). Additionally, consolidation of local economies to a few large corporations has been found to be associated with greater civic apathy of community members and less involvement in local politics (Blanchard & Matthews, 2006). 

Commercial development can also impact property values. Small-scale development, such as a corner store, can have a positive impact on property values, but large-scale commercial development negatively impacts property values (Song & Knaap, 2004). A study of the impact of proximity to big box stores in Arizona found a U-shaped relationship, where residential property values increase with distance from the stores to a point, then decrease with further distance (Corlija et al., 2006). This study shows the interaction between the positive impact of convenient access to shopping areas and the negative impact of noise and air pollution. 

Another potential downside of commercial development is the increased traffic that can be produced. Roadway traffic can have many negative environmental impacts, including habitat destruction, pollution, altered hydrology, and disturbances such as animal-vehicle collisions (Coffin et al., 2021). A study of road-effect zones in protected wildlife habitat in the Mojave Desert found that country roads have a negative impact on wildlife habitat adjacent to the roadways and that larger roads with greater traffic had an even greater impact (Peaden et al., 2015). 

A traffic impact analysis (TIA) can help assess whether development will lead to congestion or other negative impacts (Pulugurtha & Mora, 2015). Economic impacts of traffic can include property value changes. Although access to transportation can improve residential property values (Boarnet & Chalermpong, 2001), both traffic and noise pollution can lead to significant decreases in property values (Wilhelmsson, 2000; Ozdenerol et al., 2015). One study of property values in Salt Lake County, Utah found that the negative impact of noise and air pollution was larger than the positive impact of accessibility of transportation (Tian et al., 2017). Additionally, people living closer to high-traffic roads are exposed to higher levels of noise and air pollution and can show increased levels of heart disease and other health conditions. Individuals in lower socio-economic levels were also more frequently found to live close to these high-traffic roads (Dragano et al., 2009).  

Community severance is another potential impact of motorized traffic. This separation between areas of a community occurs because high-traffic roadways provide limited opportunities to cross for pedestrians. There is often little consideration given to severance in the process of roadway planning (Anciaes et al., 2016). 

References 

Anciaes, P. R., Jones, P., & Mindell, J. S. (2016). Community severance: where is it found and at what cost?. Transport Reviews, 36(3), 293-317. 

Bacior, S., & Prus, B. (2018). Infrastructure development and its influence on agricultural land and regional sustainable development. Ecological Informatics, 44, 82-93. 

Bengston, D. N., Fletcher, J. O., & Nelson, K. C. (2004). Public policies for managing urban growth and protecting open space: policy instruments and lessons learned in the United States. Landscape and urban planning, 69(2-3), 271-286. 

Blanchard, T., & Matthews, T. L. (2006). The configuration of local economic power and civic participation in the global economy. Social Forces, 84(4), 2241-2257. 

Boarnet, M. G., & Chalermpong, S. (2001). New highways, house prices, and urban development: A case study of toll roads in Orange County, CA. Housing policy debate, 12(3), 575-605. 

Brundtland, G. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. United Nations General Assembly document A/42/427. 

Coffin, A. W., Ouren, D. S., Bettez, N. D., Borda-de-Água, L., Daniels, A. E., Grilo, C., Jaeger, J. A. G., Navarro, L. M., Preisler, H. K., & Rauschert, E. (2021). The Ecology of Rural Roads: Effects, Management, and Research. Biological, Geological, and Environmental Faculty Publications, 251. https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/scibges_facpub/251 

Corlija, M., Siman, E., & Finke, M. S. (2006). Longitudinal analysis of big box store construction on nearby home values. Consumer Interests Annual, 52, 187-97. 

Dragano, N., Hoffmann, B., Moebus, S., Möhlenkamp, S., Stang, A., Verde, P. E., Jöckel, K-H., Erbel, R., & Siegrist, J. (2009). Traffic exposure and subclinical cardiovascular disease: is the association modified by socioeconomic characteristics of individuals and neighbourhoods? Results from a multilevel study in an urban region. Occupational and environmental medicine, 66(9), 628-635. 

Halebsky, S. (2010). Chain stores and local economies: a case study of a rural county in New York. Community Development, 41:4, 431-452, DOI: 10.1080/15575330903503351 

Ozdenerol, E., Huang, Y., Javadnejad, F., & Antipova, A. (2015). The impact of traffic noise on housing values. Journal of Real Estate Practice and Education, 18(1), 35-54. 

Peaden, J. M., Tuberville, T. D., Buhlmann, K. A., Nafus, M. G., & Todd, B. D. (2015). Delimiting road-effect zones for threatened species: implications for mitigation fencing. Wildlife Research, 42(8), 650-659. 

Pulugurtha, S. S., & Mora, R. (2015). Traffic impact analysis (TIA) and forecasting future traffic needs: Lessons from selected North Carolina Case Studies. In Journal of the Transportation Research Forum (Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 43-59). 

Song, Y., & Knaap, G. J. (2004). Measuring the effects of mixed land uses on housing values. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 34(6), 663-680. 

Tian, G., Wei, Y. D., & Li, H. (2017). Effects of accessibility and environmental health risk on housing prices: A case of Salt Lake County, Utah. Applied Geography, 89, 12-21. 

Wilhelmsson, M. (2000). The impact of traffic noise on the values of single-family houses. Journal of environmental planning and management, 43(6), 799-815.