Travelling through Singapore’s Jurong and Kuala Lumpur’s Glenmarie, the keen-eyed flâneur will notice something interesting: industrial and residential zones are not merely coexisting but forging new paradigms of urban living. These industrial-residential crossovers highlight the need to rethink zoning policies, embrace active placemaking and address the competing pressures of employment generation and housing demand.
Contemporary land-use strategies demand integration rather than segregation, with the post-pandemic surge in e-commerce logistics in particular revealing the limitations of rigid zoning. Urban research and innovation network INTEGER’s research into mixed-use logistics spaces underscores this shift, advocating for a blend of logistics hubs with residential and retail elements. This approach is not merely functional; it reimagines logistics as a driver of community and ecological value. For instance, final-mile logistics hubs can be strategically located near urban settlements, reducing carbon footprints while enhancing local accessibility. Such hubs, as INTEGER suggests, transform industrial spaces into vibrant nodes of urban interaction, fostering social cohesion and economic activity. ‘We’re defining industry broadly — small-scale making, craft, clean technology, things like that,’ says Jonathan Pile, Principal of INTEGER and Senior Director of Oval Partnership. ‘As production becomes cleaner, some industrial spaces are now as hygienic as offices.’
What we can term ‘industrial placemaking’ replaces outdated zoning models, integrating ecological and social goals into urban planning. By embedding industrial functions into mixed-use developments, cities can promote active engagement and a sense of belonging. Biophilia and biodiversity play crucial roles too: Singapore’s Urban Redevelopment Authority integrates green corridors and vertical gardens into industrial areas, while Kuala Lumpur’s grey-belt areas — lands once industrial or neglected — offer opportunities for ecological restoration and residential innovation. As industries adopt greener practices, these integrations become not only possible but highly desirable, creating spaces where industry and nature thrive together.
Yet, challenges persist. Skewed land values favour residential development, often sidelining industrial priorities. Local governments face conflicting pressures, with mandates to deliver housing targets competing with grassroots resistance to sacrificing employment spaces. Most importantly, integrating industrial and residential land use requires both public and private actors to reshape their paradigms, moving both legislation and investment away from single-use zoning. ‘Ultimately, what this is about is land use. We’re duty-bound to not impose a single use on any land anymore,” says Pile. ‘That overlaps with not only the idea of mixed use but also working out how to make it viable spatially. Industrial infrastructure should not just be about roads, sewage and water — it should drive placemaking.’
Ultimately, the industrial-residential crossover is a test of urban ingenuity. By prioritising mixed-use development and active placemaking, cities like Singapore and Kuala Lumpur are proving that industrial infrastructure, far from being a relic of the past, can drive the future of urban design. It is not merely about coexistence but about creating spaces where people can live, work and play seamlessly within the same urban fabric.
