|
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 12, 2011 8:58:57 GMT -8
October 2011 Planning and Programming Board Board MemoIn a nutshell Metro recognizes that local regulations often work against building TOD due to a variety of reasons. (Editorial: For example zoning may limit size, require excessive parking or the entire process may be so complex that it takes years to approve). To address this Metro has funding (amount?) that will be distributed to cities that work to change existing regulations, streamline the approval process, or alternatively to perform environmental studies for potential projects. The scope will be limited to Expo (1 and 2), Foothill (2A), and Crenshaw/LAX, but may be expanded to existing lines if additional funding is found. The priority for receiving funding will primarily be for cities that make the most significant changes to existing regulations or that streamline the existing approval process. What they are hoping is that cities allow for the creation of "transit villages" near rail stations that allow for much more dense development than might otherwise be allowed. I think that this is great, but has it really been funding that has been holding this back or community opposition to high density development? And allowing for the funding of environmental studies sounds like it may have been designed to funnel money to LA because iinm LA already allows transit villages in principle and already has started streamlining the approval process. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 12, 2011 9:20:14 GMT -8
I think that this is great, but has it really been funding that has been holding this back or community opposition to high density development? And allowing for the funding of environmental studies sounds like it may have been designed to funnel money to LA because iinm LA already allows transit villages in principle and already has started streamlining the approval process. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Excessive parking requirements is the # 1 urban killer. We mandate parking for the "day after Thanksgiving" sales. Developers have to jump through many hoops to get some exemptions (i.e. Madong plaza at K-Town had a 10% Metro reduction, after some time). Each underground parking spot can cost $50K, which in turn, is either eaten up by the developer or passed onto the consumer. People need to realize that parking should no longer be a right, but a privilege. In NYC, SF, Chicago, parking is maximum, not minimum. Hence why they can build more urban about transit stations and LA requires humongous developments in order to make a development profitable. Imagine if we could build just 20 - 50 units at some stations with only 10 parking spots. That makes the housing affordable for developer and consumer. Not everybody needs a parking spot. We need some parking, but not excessive parking. 53% of downtown LA is paved for parking, the highest of any urban area in the nation. People will never be satisfied with parking...ever, but let's not keep adhering to this late 20th century mindset.
|
|