Comments on: Developer size and development patterns

By: hcat

hcat — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 01:49:00 +0000

I live in a Paleo new urbanist town 2 miles from a huge and prestigious mall. The effect of the mall is that the town proper has very few chain stores.

By: hcat

hcat — Fri, 14 Mar 2014 01:48:00 +0000

In So Cal, it depends on whether Mexican land grants broke up early or not. Where they broke up early, you have diverse development; where they didn’t, you have humongous “planned communities.”

By: Rockwall Personal Assistant

Rockwall Personal Assistant — Mon, 24 Feb 2014 17:44:53 +0000

… [Trackback]

[…] Informations on that Topic: marketurbanism.com/2013/02/22/developer-size-and-development-patterns/ […]

By: How get a “complete neighborhood” by market forces, not planning? Start with smaller buildings | TownhouseCenter.org

Tue, 02 Apr 2013 10:00:39 +0000

[…] “During her presentation, Deborah Ratner Salzberg stressed her firm’s objective of creating a ‘complete neighborhood’ with a balance of residential development and a mix of retail. By one firm developing this entire small neighborhood, they had the advantages of knowing which tenants were likely to sign leases in which buildings and controlling the vision for development within one company. However, they were not bidding against other developers to determine the highest-value buildings for each parcel, meaning that planning, rather than the price mechanism, shaped the definition of a ‘complete neighborhood.’” Full article here. […]

By: northendmatt

northendmatt — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:31:00 +0000

I don’t have personal experience in terms of trying to get a project through, but it has been a hot issue. The director of planning basically proposed increasing the pain put on developers or putting a moratorium on development because they couldn’t keep up with the flow of applications (http://la.curbed.com/archives/2012/12/panic_as_samo_considers_halting_development_agreements.php ) but thankfully it looks like they will address the issue by expediting some projects (http://santamonica.patch.com/articles/council-responds-to-request-to-slow-down-development#photo-12889333 ).

I live in LA proper now but lived in SM during the last election cycle, and development was the main issue in local elections. I got a lot of election mailers for city council and planning commission urging me to vote for candidates who would put the brakes on development, endorsed by the usual coalition of environmental groups that claim to support smart growth (e.g. Sierra Club) and NIMBY groups with nebulous titles (e.g. Santa Monicans for Smart Growth).

By: Emily Washington

Emily Washington — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 02:50:00 +0000

Great comment. Do you have experience in Santa Monica development?

By: northendmatt

northendmatt — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 22:15:00 +0000

Any large development is going to have one PM and therefore the entire project will have the same thematic elements. IMHO this is the most underappreciated issue in city development. I’ve commented on it at places like Streetsblog and Atlantic Cities without getting any response. The essence of the problem is:

1 – it’s no coincidence that the majority of America’s best loved urban neighborhoods, the ones that show the fine-grained fabric that people talk about, all predate zoning. Today, owners of small parcels can’t pay the ante to get into the game. Impact fees, the need for zoning variances, permitting, etc. Things like zoning variances, conditional use permits, and environmental impact reviews are hassles for a large developer. For someone who owns an SFR and would like to build some ADUs or put up a small apartment building, they’re an insurmountable barrier.

2 – what hasn’t dawned on many people yet is that the type of urban development they want to see is impossible under the current zoning and permitting scheme. Even if small property owners could afford to overcome the regulatory hurdles, the city zoning/permitting infrastructure wouldn’t be able to move fast enough, because cities don’t have the resources to apply that level of scrutiny to so many projects. For example, Santa Monica’s planning department recently slowed down development because they couldn’t keep up with all the applications.

So not only is the price system a better way, it’s the only way.

By: Emily Washington

Emily Washington — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 17:20:00 +0000

I agree that issues 4 and 5 that you point out are the primary concerns and contribute to banal development in ways that are not visible to residents unless they carefully follow the development process. As you’ve said, larger developers may be less likely to take risks, and by selling the entire site in one deal, the city and federal governments have introduced a conservative bias. Additionally, this deal like many large deals in DC, includes tax incentives for both the developer and tenants, making it more difficult for smaller developers to compete.