5 ms·

I have done a lot of architecture... mostly technical archtectuere (data centers, dense corp HQs (goog, FB, Salesforce, Brocade, etc...) and a shit ton of medic

I have done a lot of architecture... mostly technical archtectuere (data centers, dense corp HQs (goog, FB, Salesforce, Brocade, etc...) and a shit ton of medical (SF General, El Camino, Sequoia, Nome, and many others) And I have worked in a few foreign cities (Singapore, Hong Kong, etc) To me; Singapore is the most amazing city. But here is my takeaway from all of that WRT zoning: There should be no commercial property or residential high-rise that does not have the following: Every building should incorporate underground parking, and no residential building should have tenants on the ground floor and at ground level, there should be commercial space (bakeries, shops, etc.) But every building project should include parking and commercial space. Zoning should be much more both maleable and specific at the same time. It doesnt make sense off the cuff, but the thing is that zoning should be PER PROPERTY + ENVIRONMENT + NEED + COMMUNITY - REGULATION - NIMBYism

danans 6y ago
> There should be no commercial property or residential high-rise that does not have the following: > Every building should incorporate underground parking, and no residential building should have tenants on the ground floor and at ground level, there should be commercial space (bakeries, shops, etc.) I agree with that, but this ... > But every building project should include parking. Mandatory parking minimums are a big problem - especially in dense areas with good transit access. They drive up the cost of building significantly [1]. In mixed single/multi family neighborhoods, parking minimums make it difficult for homeowners to add ADUs and other structures that can help achieve higher density via incremental up-zoning. We should be solving our transit problems by building better transit systems, not by building more housing for cars. 1. https://www.brookings.edu/research/parking-requirements-and-foundations-are-driving-up-the-cost-of-multifamily-housing/ https://www.brookings.edu/research/parking-requirements-and-...
natchy 6y ago
> every building project should include parking How much would it cost to add parking under each building? Could that money be used toward light rails or bullet trains.
- Tyr42 6y ago
  If the alternative is surface lots which spread out the city and make it less walkable...? It's not like that pool of money can be put into a train, right?

danans 6y ago

> There should be no commercial property or residential high-rise that does not have the following: > Every building should incorporate underground parking, and no residential building should have tenants on the ground floor and at ground level, there should be commercial space (bakeries, shops, etc.) I agree with that, but this ... > But every building project should include parking. Mandatory parking minimums are a big problem - especially in dense areas with good transit access. They drive up the cost of building significantly [1]. In mixed single/multi family neighborhoods, parking minimums make it difficult for homeowners to add ADUs and other structures that can help achieve higher density via incremental up-zoning. We should be solving our transit problems by building better transit systems, not by building more housing for cars. 1. https://www.brookings.edu/research/parking-requirements-and-foundations-are-driving-up-the-cost-of-multifamily-housing/ https://www.brookings.edu/research/parking-requirements-and-...

natchy 6y ago

> every building project should include parking How much would it cost to add parking under each building? Could that money be used toward light rails or bullet trains.

Tyr42 6y ago
If the alternative is surface lots which spread out the city and make it less walkable...? It's not like that pool of money can be put into a train, right?