tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post9170922216844495755..comments2024-03-25T17:49:41.408-07:00Comments on Salem Breakfast on Bikes: Some Ways Parking Distorts our Analysis of the City and Our Salem ProjectSalem Breakfast on Bikeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15618055627843335993noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post-50739371383370375762021-05-24T10:17:32.048-07:002021-05-24T10:17:32.048-07:00"We suggest building flexibility into zoning ..."We suggest building flexibility into zoning related to parking by setting a minimum" is one of the more amazing lines I've seen in testimony.<br /><br />I'd suggest the Realtors check out the TGM publication on managing parking in residential zones. Lots of smarter approaches than just requiring lots of parking with each development. https://www.oregon.gov/lcd/TGM/Documents/ManagingResidentialParking.pdf Evanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01011420959025344982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post-36001562060429235362021-05-24T07:27:12.082-07:002021-05-24T07:27:12.082-07:00Re: "Why not just say to all property owners ...Re: "Why not just say to all property owners along arterials or collects that they can ask to rezone their property when they need to in order to create a business?"<br /><br />Yes, we should expand by-right incremental intensifications of use! This is central tenet of the Strong Towns philosophy, as you likely know.<br /><br />Re: Sunnyview, I have biked it often. <br /><br />You may have a kind of zoning determinism: If we rezone a parcel, it will necessarily be redeveloped that way. <br /><br />The argument here is that we need to have a surplus of candidate sites so that market forces can zero in to optmize locations. If we make neighborhood hubs widely available, or R4 zoning widely distributed, the places where it will actually work are more likely to be discovered. If we have a restricted application of these kinds of zoning, we will likely miss viable spots or try to force it in non-viable places. We should zone more generously, not more restrictively.<br /><br />Re: "Evaluate why it worked and then do more of that. I see none of that in this process." Yes, very much. Total agreement. That was an important point in <a href="https://breakfastonbikes.blogspot.com/2021/04/zoning-subcommittee-meets-friday-six-zoning-concepts-our-salem-greenhouse-gas-reduction.html" rel="nofollow">this post in talking about evaluating the Fairview project</a>.Salem Breakfast on Bikeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15618055627843335993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post-17250938383446015922021-05-24T05:34:46.545-07:002021-05-24T05:34:46.545-07:00Salem has had the option to put in duplexes on sin...Salem has had the option to put in duplexes on single family lots for decades. But do we see a lot of them being built? Salem has allowed Planned Unit Developments (cottages or small houses) for decades, but do we see a lot of them in Salem? Mixed use has been zoned in several places around town and yet after decades nothing has happened on those lots. I'd like to see some time examining what works, what we tried and did not work, and then do more of the what works projects. I know I keep harping on the committee I served on 25 years ago when we last did the huge rezoning to increase land for higher density, but there were lessons learned during that process and there were lessons learned since.<br /><br />One big lesson we learned along the way was taught to the planners and the neighbors by Larry Epping, one of Salem's largest developers. He said, all I care about is can I build it and make a profit. Bottom line, create zones and development codes that get you what you want, but also create them so that they will happen. That changed a large part of what the committee did. They looked around Salem and said, what is working well and meets our goals. Evaluate why it worked and then do more of that. I see none of that in this process.<br /><br />It will be a waste of time to create a document with a vision for change that does not actually result in change. I do not argue for more of the same, but for real change and not just paper that looks nice, but produces nothing useful.Susann Kaltwasserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06404427207564730619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post-74143020187277128522021-05-24T05:34:18.285-07:002021-05-24T05:34:18.285-07:00Thank you for picking my comment to feature in thi...Thank you for picking my comment to feature in this post. However, you missed part of my point because you wanted to talk about parking only.<br /><br />My concern is more that when we do zone changes for Our Salem that we create options that people will actual take. If you want to create locations within walking distance of where people live that a business can be successful, it is essential that you look at the feasibility of that happening. Putting a zone on a map or property does not mean it will actually get developed as such. A business needs customers and parking is only one aspect of what might be needed. <br /><br />An example of a low impact service business that like does not need much parking might be an insurance agent, or a dog groomer, or a hair dresser/barber shop. I can see some people setting up a business in a neighborhood HUB or even R4. But frankly, most of those businesses can happen now in a RS single family zone too., so why rezone?<br /><br />I assume that the designers of this zone HUB and R4 were thinking that the services might bring in more people than the occasional customer. They give examples of things like neighborhood restaurants or a fruit stand. But when you ask if they did any market analysis of such businesses, they say no. They assume the market will determine what will succeed. And therein lies the rub. Why rezone a whole row of properties to a different use when you have no data to support the need or the viability of such a thing happening. Salem is not going to reach its goal of reducing GHG by just changing a bunch zones on properties. It is going to reach that goal by enabling behavioral changes. Why not just say to all property owners along arterials or collects that they can ask to rezone their property when they need to in order to create a business? Then reduce the costs of that rezoning to help facilitate it. <br /><br />And your comments about Sunnyview show me that you have not been to that area. Please take a bike ride out there some nice day...there are plenty of bike lanes...and find where you think a business could be located or a four-flex without parking or limited parking can be built. Some of the lots earmarked for upcoming are pretty small. All of them are currently developed, so any changes would need to be profitable, because no one is going to tear down a perfectly good house to build something that is not going to pencil out for them. <br /><br />This is my main point about the flaws in the proposals, not lack of parking per se, but how can we get people to change their ways. I do not even get any sense that the planners have looked at building codes for these proposed businesses. They show pictures of a regular older home with a shop sort of slapped on the front of it where flowers or vegetables are sold. Did they actual cost out what that would require? They said, we would coordinate that with code department at some point. Well, I happen to know a bit about that because a friend wanted to create such a building in that area. She was going to have a green grocer in the front part of the building and her house in the back with a garden on the rest of the property where she would grow the organic foods. She went through a lot of torture meeting all the building codes to satisfy the needs for a commercial operation. Stronger beams, thicker glass, safety exits and so on. In the end it cost her about $20,000 more to build the structure. And when she was done meeting all the requirements, she still could not get the building certified as a business and then she was out of money to actually open the store. <br /><br />My point is we need to think a lot harder on what is being suggested. Not just about parking, but uses and fees and what will actually go into such a location. <br /><br />Susann Kaltwasserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06404427207564730619noreply@blogger.com