Newest Iteration for Kuebler Village at Planning Commission Tuesday

On a remand from City Council, tomorrow, Tuesday the 4th, the Planning Commission will consider revisions to the Kuebler Village concept and plan. This is immediately to the east of the new Costco, and west of I-5.

From the Staff Report:

[Council] voted to remand the decision to the Planning Commission for further consideration on the Mixed-Use proposal, with instructions to incorporate all new evidence that was presented to the City Council, including the public hearing recording, in their reconsideration of the application...[Recently] the applicant revised their proposal to eliminate their request for CR and CO zoning and instead are proposing a zoning designation of MU-II (Mixed Use-II) for 8.06 acres, and MU-III (Mixed Use-III) for 16.58 acres

Old (top) and new concept plans

At the general level of zoning, the neighborhood association now has close what they have asked for, and in the revised application the developer indicated they can move forward with that. This looks, then, like it could be an acceptable compromise. It would also be a legitimate test case for what our new mixed use zoning can accomplish. 

If the neighborhood association continues to object, it will be because they asked for Mixed-use zones I and II, and the developer prefers zones II and III. The Staff Report does not appear to have an updated comment from the NA on the very latest proposal, and instead refers to earlier comments offered at the City Council hearing that resulted in the remand, comments offered before this particular proposal was advanced. There might be more to say later on that. (You may recall SCAN's preference for zone II over zone III along a portion of middle commercial. Zone III is not very different from existing commercial type zoning.)

We're still approving drive-thrus?

The Staff Recommendation is for approval with conditions.

Some of the conditions, however, are worth more comment.

If we are serious about reducing driving and reducing emissions, we will need to think more critically about the ways drive-thrus induce driving. We should ban new ones.

This may be in tension with evolving fast-serve trends. Slate had a piece earlier this month that was worrisome, "Take Your Fries and Leave: Why fast food is racing to ditch the dining room."

This summer, Taco Bell opened something it calls Taco Bell Defy, which is not a restaurant at all but a purple taco tollbooth powered by QR code readers and dumbwaiters that bring the food down from a second-story kitchen. The operation is, by most accounts, astoundingly efficient. Wingstop’s “restaurant of the future” doesn’t have seats or take cash.

What’s driving this trend? Partly savings on real estate and labor. But mostly it’s a response to consumer preference. Pushed by pandemic restrictions and pulled by the increasing ease of mobile transactions, customers have rushed into drive-thrus, delivery, and mobile ordering.

This is far, far from walkability.

In the new traffic analysis, the premises of it still rely on the old patterns of autoism.

Is our "mixed use" zoning configured right?

For the "reasonable worst-case" analysis, they assumed 70% of the parcel would be "parking lots, sidewalks, internal roadways, and landscaping." That's just an embroidered way to say "parking lot."

If our mixed-use zoning still yields 70% lot coverage for parking, it may be that the zoning needs further refinement. That looks like more of the same, not something new.

So with those assumptions, the new traffic analysis yields several recommended "mitigations." These are mainly new turn lanes.

Mitigations proposed in new traffic analysis

Some of them are visible in the new concept plan drawings.

New slip lanes at Nos. 1 and 2
with multi-phase, fragmented crosswalks

If 27th at Costco isn't already stroaderiffic, these new slip lanes certainly will make it so.

The fragmentation now for multiple-phase crosswalks and refuge islands is a real hit for walkability, and again in real tension with our goals for mixed-use zoning and development. The streets also lack bike lanes.

Car travel and flow is plainly the priority here.

via Twitter

Last week in a terrific week-long thread with snapshots from a "week without driving," including school drop-off and pick-up, our Board President for Cherriots touched on the existing roundabout. He didn't dwell on the details much, but you can see how the bike lane ends (left image) and the design enforces the sidewalkification of bicycling. Car travel remains primary, and other road users are wedged in on the margins and extra bits. He compared it briefly to a roundabout in Bend whose design he found meaningfully superior.

from Walkable City Rules, Jeff Speck

In the plan at the Planning Commission, the "mitigations" proposed will further degrade 27th and the roundabout for non-auto travel. They are mitigations only in the service of free-flow car travel, and mitigate nothing for those traveling by other means.

As far as the legal, approval framework goes, it is hard to see the Planning Commission not approving this proposal. There would also be a separate site plan review for a later time. This is a zoning change only.

Only in an autoist fantasy is this "walkable"
(from the Staff Report)

But if we are serious about better conditions for walking and biking, about reducing the need for car travel, and about leveraging new mixed-use zoning, there's still a ways to go here. As Speck says "Vocabulary counts, and curving streets softly whisper 'suburbia.'" The vocabulary at Costco and again in this proposal speak "suburbia" much more loudly than a whisper.

See notes on previous iterations for Kuebler Village here.