The Life of the City is in the Streets

[ablarc]

It's all done with zoning, not eminent domain.

Everyone treats zoning as though it had the Olympian detachment of genuine altruism.

Just modify the definition of a zoning category and you're home free.

Zoning is like the Fire Department: who dares doubt its dedication to the public interest?

 

[czsz]

Zoning is like the Fire Department: who dares doubt its dedication to the public interest?

Most of the people who show up at community meetings? They think zoning is a BRA-industrial complex conspiracy against their neighborhoods - a mentality that's not changed so easily, whatever that zoning's content. And, as I just said:

Given all this, the best government strategy would probably be strict zoning regulations to create at least a simulacrum of smaller parcels, but I wouldn't hold my breath for this. There would be arguments it would curtail or disincentivize development, etc., and it has no chance if elected officials are too close to developers (as many of our friends in City Hall seems to be).

 

[a630]

Zoning regulates use, density and bulk. Subdivision/platting regulates streets, access to lots, etc etc. Quite different, overseen by separate planning divisions. There is often zoning incident to subdivision, but you can't 'zone' a parcel into smaller lots. There are also private covenants often involved with subdivision.
And yes, many doubt zoning's dedication to the public interest on all sides of every land use debate.
cden4 check out Donald Shoup's "The high cost of free parking"

 

[tobyjug]

Zoning regulates use, density and bulk. Subdivision/platting regulates streets, lot size, access to lots, etc etc. Quite different, overseen by separate planning divisions. There is often zoning incident to subdivision, but you can't 'zone' a parcel into smaller lots.

Your comments are perceptive and enjoyable, but I differ only slightly on the last one. Dejure you are absolutely correct; however, one can defacto zone a large parcel into smaller lots by making smaller lots more profitable by increasing the density/height allowed on smaller parcels. The highest and best use of the property (and resultant increased tax assessment) will lead property owners toward subdividing mega parcels into profitable smaller ones.

Maybe it is chicken and the egg. Maybe not. It is anti-landscraper, though!

 

[a630]

Ya you can create incentives to subdivide larger pacels through zoning - I thought other posters were suggesting you may literally be able to directly zone them into existence.

There is "small lot zoning" which is really a combination of revisions to zoning and subdivision codes - it operates as an incentive like you described. It involves decreasing minimum lot size and allowing a higher number of units/sf, with reduced setbacks etc. To my knowledge it has been used almost exclusively in western cities: Los Angeles, Fremont, Sacramento and Seattle come to mind. It is used in these places to increase options in homeownership where as of now you're basically limited to a condominium or a single family home (due to historic/contemporary zoning practices long story). Selling it is based on the fact that in these cities single fam homes on small lots are a traditional feature of the built environment, and townhomes are well, just so cute these days.

With small lot zoning townhome or small bungalow housing is encouraged (nothing bigger to my knowledge); there is no increase in net density on the parcel, you just end up with townhomes or small single family homes on small lots in place of an apartment building covering a large parcel. Implementation has been limited, as politically it is sometimes unpopular (it addresses an underserved market and can stimulate development leading to cries of gentrification), and there are sometimes concerns about access of emercency vehicles/general circulation/lack of open space in these subdivisions. See Venice, CA.

 

[scootie]

why not just design the 'preferred' city and have the Zoning require that the lots must be built-out according to the design?

Oh yeah... that pesky "private property rights"/"free market" thingy.