Comments on: Has Mixed-Use Development Damaged Oakland? http://virtuocity.com/2006/12/11/has-mixed-use-development-damaged-oakland/ Planning and Managing Human-Friendly Development and Growth Wed, 08 Sep 2010 10:37:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: David M. Long http://virtuocity.com/2006/12/11/has-mixed-use-development-damaged-oakland/comment-page-1/#comment-10064 David M. Long Sun, 08 Jul 2007 06:41:04 +0000 http://virtuocity.com/2006/12/11/has-mixed-use-development-damaged-oakland/#comment-10064 Unfortunately, the problems that Oakland is experiencing are certainly not confined to that City. Therefore, I am not sure it is fair to lay the blame at the feet of the Brown Administration. Part of the blame for the conflict between night club patrons and residents over noise can be laid squarely at the feet of developers who apparently did not pay adequate attention to design, structure and orientation of residential to non-residential uses. Furthermore, traffic choked streets and poor public transit existed well before the Brown Administration and cures for these seemingly intractable problems do not come to fruition in the short-term. It does appear that the Brown Administration was on the correct track with its intent of locating residential near anticipated retail uses. The fact that the retail has not yet materialized does not mean that it will not in the future. Retailers are very often cautious and wary when following residential patterns. Big box retailers may not be the solution if a city must dangle the tax increment financing carrot in front of it. With tax increment financing in place, the smaller retailers actually subsidize the Big Box who could eventually force the smaller retailers out of business. This is hardly the fix for the downtown retail community. In addition, the last thing many downtowns need is a Big Box set amidst a sea of parking. Smart Growth and sustainable places do not happen overnight just as the conditions we face today did not happen overnight. Unfortunately, the problems that Oakland is experiencing are certainly not confined to that City. Therefore, I am not sure it is fair to lay the blame at the feet of the Brown Administration. Part of the blame for the conflict between night club patrons and residents over noise can be laid squarely at the feet of developers who apparently did not pay adequate attention to design, structure and orientation of residential to non-residential uses.

Furthermore, traffic choked streets and poor public transit existed well before the Brown Administration and cures for these seemingly intractable problems do not come to fruition in the short-term. It does appear that the Brown Administration was on the correct track with its intent of locating residential near anticipated retail uses. The fact that the retail has not yet materialized does not mean that it will not in the future. Retailers are very often cautious and wary when following residential patterns.

Big box retailers may not be the solution if a city must dangle the tax increment financing carrot in front of it. With tax increment financing in place, the smaller retailers actually subsidize the Big Box who could eventually force the smaller retailers out of business. This is hardly the fix for the downtown retail community. In addition, the last thing many downtowns need is a Big Box set amidst a sea of parking.

Smart Growth and sustainable places do not happen overnight just as the conditions we face today did not happen overnight.

]]>