MLU is considered as one of the main component leading to a successful urban planning and urban regeneration operations. This policy was advocated as principal characteristics of contemporary urban trends. Most of the literature focalized on the relationship between MLU and other factors such as transport, health and other social aspects. However, the study of relationship between MLU and LUC seems to be completely ignored even such studies are scarce when talking about Algerian cities. Hence, this paper is a part of a study where one of the main objectives is to explain the relationship between MLU and LUC and by using Algiers’ bay as a case study. This paper is structured in three sections. The first section deals with the review of the development of mixture through the available literature. The second section is related to the assessment of the MLU and its compatibility, this assessment is done by using Algiers Bay as a case study. The last section consists of evaluating the relationship between those two factors by using Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient. This study leads us to confirm that there is a direct relationship between MLU and LUC. However, it is important to mention that MLU may have a negative impact on land use compatibility, so, the challenge for the planners is to find the balance between MLU and LUC. Moreover, it is imperative to integrate LUC as a variable in measuring MLU.

Abedini, A., Lotfian, M., & Moradi, M. (2015). Land Use Compatibility Assessment Using a Modified Topsis Model: a Case Study of Elementary Schools in Tehran. The International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 40(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-1-W5-5-2015

Bahadure, S., & Kotharkar, R. (2015). Assessing Sustainability of Mixed Use Neighbourhoods through Residents’ Travel Behaviour and Perception: The Case of Nagpur, India. Sustainability, 7(9), 12164-12189. https://doi.org/10.3390/su70912164

Bakhtiarifar, M., Mesgari, M., Karimi, M., & Chehreghani, A. (2011). Land use change modeling using multi-criteria decision analysis and GIS. Journal of Environmental Studies, 37(58), 43-52.

Bordoloi, R., Mote, A., Sarkar, P. P., & Mallikarjuna, C. (2013). Quantification of land use diversity in the context of mixed land use. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 104, 563-572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.150

Coupland, A. (1997). Reclaiming the city: Mixed use development: Taylor & Francis.

da Cruz, N. F., & Marques, R. C. (2017). Structuring composite local governance indicators. Policy Studies, 38(2), 109-129.

Duncan, M. J., Winkler, E., Sugiyama, T., Cerin, E., Leslie, E., & Owen, N. (2010). Relationships of land use mix with walking for transport: do land uses and geographical scale matter? Journal of urban health, 87(5), 782-795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-010-9488-7

Ferretti, V., Bottero, M., & Mondini, G. (2014). Decision making and cultural heritage: An application of the Multi-Attribute Value Theory for the reuse of historical buildings. Journal of cultural heritage, 15(6), 644-655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2013.12.007

Forman, E., & Peniwati, K. (1998). Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. European journal of operational research, 108(1), 165-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00244-0

Frank, L. D., & Pivo, G. (1994). Impacts of mixed use and density on utilization of three modes of travel: single-occupant vehicle, transit, and walking. Transportation research record, 1466, 44-52.

Gehrke, S. R., & Clifton, K. J. (2016). Toward a spatial-temporal measure of land-use mix. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2015.725

Grant, J. (2002). Mixed use in theory and practice: Canadian experience with implementing a planning principle. Journal of the American Planning Association, 68(1), 71-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360208977192

Haining, R. (1991). Bivariate correlation with spatial data. Geographical Analysis, 23(3), 210-227. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-4632.1991.tb00235.x

Hajna, S., Dasgupta, K., Joseph, L., & Ross, N. A. (2014). A call for caution and transparency in the calculation of land use mix: measurement bias in the estimation of associations between land use mix and physical activity. Health & place, 29, 79-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.06.002

Huang, S.-W., & Hsieh, H.-I. (2014). The Study of the Relationship between Accessibility and Mixed Land Use in Tainan, Taiwan. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, 5(4), 352. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJESD.2014.V5.508

Javadi, G., Taleai, M., & Karimi, M. (2013). Evaluating various criteria for determining diversity of urban Mixed Land Use via GIS (Case Study: neighborhoods and districts of Tehran Municipality No. 7).

Lagendijk, A. (2001). Regional learning between variation and convergence: the concept of ‘mixed land-use’in regional spatial planning in the Netherlands. Canadian Journal of Regional Science, 24(1), 135-154.

Masoomi, Z. (2014). Modeling physical impacts ofurban land-use change using optimization algorithms and spatial analyses, PhD Thesis in Geographic Information Systems: Khaje Nasir Toosi University of Technology.

McNeill, D. (2011). Fine grain, global city: Jan Gehl, public space and commercial culture in central Sydney. Journal of urban design, 16(2), 161-178. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2011.548977

Nabil, N. A., & Eldayem, G. E. A. (2015). Influence of mixed land-use on realizing the social capital. HBRC Journal, 11(2), 285-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2014.03.009

Ozbil, A., Peponis, J., & Stone, B. (2011). Understanding the link between street connectivity, land use and pedestrian flows. Urban Design International, 16(2), 125-141. https://doi.org/10.1057/udi.2011.2

Rupjyoti, B., Amit, M., Partha, S. P., & Mallikarjuna, C. (2013). Quantification of Land Use diversity in the context of mixed land use. Procedia-Socail and Behavioral Sciences 104, 563-572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.150

Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 9-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I

Saaty, T. L. (2002). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Scientia Iranica, 9(3), 215-229.

Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International journal of services sciences, 1(1), 83-98. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590

Shi, B., & Yang, J. (2015). Scale, distribution, and pattern of mixed land use in central districts: A case study of Nanjing, China. Habitat International, 46, 166-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.11.008

Sohn, D.-W. (2016). Do all commercial land uses deteriorate neighborhood safety?: Examining the relationship between commercial land-use mix and residential burglary. Habitat International, 55, 148-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2016.03.007

Song, Y., & Rodríguez, D. A. (2005). The measurement of the level of mixed land uses: A synthetic approach. Carolina Transportation Program White Paper Series, Chapel Hill, NC.

Song, Y., Merlin, L., & Rodriguez, D. (2013). Comparing measures of urban land use mix. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 42, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2013.08.001

Taleai, M., Sharifi, A., Sliuzas, R., & Mesgari, M. (2007). Evaluating the compatibility of multi-functional and intensive urban land uses. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 9(4), 375-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2006.12.002

Taleshi, M., & Ghobadi, A. (2012). Urban Land Use Sustainability Assessment through Evaluation of Compatibility Matrix Case Study: Karaj City. OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development, 3(1), 57-64.

Teller, J., & Becue, V. (2005). Comment concevoir un quartier «multifonction» pour promouvoir un développement urbain durable? Paper presented at the Proc. du colloque Développement urbain durable, gestion des ressources et gouvernance.

Vaezi, S., Mesgari, M., & Kaviary, F. (2015). Evaluation of Effecting Parameters on Optimum Arrangement of Urban Land Uses and Assessment of Their Compatibility Using Adjacency Matrix. The International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 40(1), 725. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-1-W5-725-2015

Vargas, L. G. (1990). An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 2-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90056-H

Verhagen, A. P., Ostelo, R. W., & Rademaker, A. (2004). Is the p value really so significant? Australian Journal of Physiotherapy, 50(4), 261-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-9514(14)60122-7

Vreeker, R. (2004). Urban multifunctional land use and externalities.

Zahedi, F. (1986). The Analytic Hierarchy Process—A Survey of the Method and its Applications. Interfaces, 16(4), 96-108. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.16.4.96