What do they want to see in a development on this large vacant downtown block?
To: East Washington Avenue 800 Block North Committee
From: Tenney-Lapham Neighborhood Association Council800 Block Committee Members:
First, we would like to commend the Council and the city’s 800 Block Committee for your work on this project. The development that is eventually erected on the 800 block of East Washington will shape our community — either positively or negatively — for years to come.
The Tenney Lapham Neighborhood Association Council would like the proposal selected to include the following elements:
1. Support diversity in neighborhood housing through a variety of workforce rental and affordable owner-occupied units.2. Propose a full size supermarket with a minimum of 50,000 square feet or larger. We feel this provides an attraction for current and future residents.
3. Encourage quality employment in the area by providing both retail and commercial space.
4. Mitigate the increase of neighborhood motor vehicle traffic by:
a. Including motor vehicle parking access via streets other than E. Mifflin,
b. Including parking with unit rentals within the cost,
c. Designating space for secured bike storage, B-cycle stations, and car-share parking space.5. In addition to conforming to the neighborhood plan regarding height, setbacks and other physical attributes, provide a creative and dramatic architecture as well as high quality construction.
6. Ensure one or more prominent bike and pedestrian entrances into the 800 block retail and commercial area from Paterson and/or East Mifflin.
Regards,
Tenney Lapham Neighborhood Association Council
The neighborhood association is committed to providing affordable housing, and yet includes this as one of the elements they would like to see in any development:
4. Mitigate the increase of neighborhood motor vehicle traffic by:
b. Including parking with unit rentals within the cost,
I would point you to this recent article, which includes links to the research showing that requiring a certain minimum parking actually works against affordable housing:
“Study: Loosening Parking Mandates Leads to More Affordable Housing”
http://streetsblog.net/2013/04/02/how-parking-mandates-make-housing-less-affordable/
Why should someone pay for parking they don’t want and don’t need? There are all sorts of other studies along the same line – that including parking in rents or condo costs makes the units less affordable.
We should also remember that TIF is often requested because the parking is so expensive. Parking is not a use that generates much additional property taxes, so not requiring tons of parking would probably mean a better return on the TIF for the city.
I would also point you to this article on research from New York (not Manhattan) that shows that people with guaranteed off-street parking tend to drive more than those that rely on street parking. So by providing a parking spots, you are actually encouraging MORE traffic. Want less neighborhood traffic? Don’t give people their own spot.
http://www.ssti.us/2012/03/off-street-parking-access-linked-to-higher-vmt/