With Downtowns Abandoned, Put Tiny Businesses Back Into Residential Neighborhoods

[M II A II R II K]

With Downtowns Staying Abandoned, Put Tiny Businesses Back Into Residential Neighborhoods


07-23-20

By Adele Peters

Read More: https://www.fastcompany.com/90530672...-neighborhoods

What if we started creating tiny storefronts (ACUs, or accessory commercial units) in neighborhoods to serve people where they are—and give businesses a chance at new customers. --- If backyard cottages (also known as ADUS, or accessory dwelling units) have become an increasingly common way to add new housing to existing neighborhoods, ACUs in the front could help add new businesses.

- This type of space was more common in the past; if you walk around some 1920s-era neighborhoods, it’s not unusual to see a tiny grocery store or even smaller commercial space sitting on an otherwise residential block. As cars became widespread in cities, some businesses chose to relocate to streets with the most traffic. Zoning laws also changed. Zoning updates became more exclusively residential, and beyond that, became more exclusively single-family, so we sort of just zoned everything out. --- To make the idea possible, zoning laws would have to change. Cities would also have to take steps to make it simple for small businesses to get permits to use the spaces. But if more former ACUs are reactivated as tiny restaurants or coffee shops or stores—or if new ACUs were built—residential neighborhoods would benefit. --- The buildings could help be part of what some planners call the 15-minute city, the idea that all residents should be able to walk or bike to take care of their daily needs within 15 minutes. People would likely drive less. The concept could be applied even in sprawling suburbs.

.....

[mhays]

Any city worth its salt has countless little clusters all over town already, so everyone in prewar neighborhoods at least can walk to coffee, drinks, etc.

But definitely a good idea to retrofit the places that don't have them.

Retrofitting existing house-only areas is a steep challenge, but an interesting idea.

[eschaton]

We've personally been using the small neighborhood grocery the next neighborhood over (about a 15-minute walk) much more regularly since COVID started. We try to do our "big shopping trip" every other week, but things like produce just don't last through two weeks, meaning I typically have to do a litle grocery run every so oft.

[M II A II R II K]

Promote it as a suburban business opportunity.

[llamaorama]

No, I hate this idea. It depends on density only a few cities have. It means whatever retail and entertainment can survive after Covid gets locked up in areas where anyone whose not local to that neighborhood is unwelcome. I don’t want downtowns to be abandoned, either.

Also this only works in trendy neighborhoods. In working class neighborhoods a lack of zoning results in nuisances like truck lots and machine shops and ghetto liquor stores or mini marts, etc. So most people choose deed restricted HOA subdivisions that are even more insular and anti-urban. And HOA communities are poison to municipal government, because they can rely on special utility districts, they have their own parks, etc.

This is how you get Houston, a couple cool neighborhoods with no parking and the rest live in a soulless carpet of sprawl with pockets of underdeveloped rural-urban slums.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

No, I hate this idea. It depends on density only a few cities have. It means whatever retail and entertainment can survive after Covid gets locked up in areas where anyone whose not local to that neighborhood is unwelcome. I don’t want downtowns to be abandoned, either.

Also this only works in trendy neighborhoods. In working class neighborhoods a lack of zoning results in nuisances like truck lots and machine shops and ghetto liquor stores or mini marts, etc. So most people choose deed restricted HOA subdivisions that are even more insular and anti-urban. And HOA communities are poison to municipal government, because they can rely on special utility districts, they have their own parks, etc.

This is how you get Houston, a couple cool neighborhoods with no parking and the rest live in a soulless carpet of sprawl with pockets of underdeveloped rural-urban slums.

No way man. I live in Kingwood...I want one of my neighbors to open up a bar out of their garage. lol

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

Is that Justin Timberlake and Andy Samberg's coffee shop?


As to the main topic... some of us live downtown .

[C.]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

No, I hate this idea. It depends on density only a few cities have. It means whatever retail and entertainment can survive after Covid gets locked up in areas where anyone whose not local to that neighborhood is unwelcome. I don’t want downtowns to be abandoned, either.

Also this only works in trendy neighborhoods. In working class neighborhoods a lack of zoning results in nuisances like truck lots and machine shops and ghetto liquor stores or mini marts, etc. So most people choose deed restricted HOA subdivisions that are even more insular and anti-urban. And HOA communities are poison to municipal government, because they can rely on special utility districts, they have their own parks, etc.

This is how you get Houston, a couple cool neighborhoods with no parking and the rest live in a soulless carpet of sprawl with pockets of underdeveloped rural-urban slums.

Thankfully, you're not in charge of planning in my city.

I, for one, love my mixed-use neighborhood (and my local pub) and it's the main reason why I chose to live here.



I also have to give a shootout to my favorite neighborhood restaurant. Imagine courtesy of Uptown Acron.

[llamaorama]

I, for one, love my mixed-use neighborhood (and my local pub) and it's the main reason why I chose to live here.

Yes, but you live in a nice neighborhood with high land values and a demographic with disposable income.

So commercial development mixed with residential is going to be things like restaurants and pubs and boutique retail, and the physical structures are going to be built to code and be aesthetically pleasing. People overlook the hassles of it(do you really want to live next to a bar?) because it increases the amenity of a neighborhood. What happens in cheap neighborhoods is people park trucks everywhere, yards get walled in and trees disappear, etc, and then you have small light industry and storage businesses. It's not just ugly, its a nuisance because of noise, traffic, lights at night, etc. ADU's mean trailers in someone's backyard and you don't know what kind of people are coming and going.

I guess you could accuse me of being classist, sure, but there's reasonable steps that could be taken to regulate how a small business can operate in a residential neighborhood. Like park vehicles in a fenced area, business hours need to end at a certain time, you can't have too many employees or visitors, you can't have a dumpster, etc.

Again, what ultimately happens is people move into subdivisions that have legal restrictions because while they won't admit it upfront, they don't want to live in a trashy neighborhood, etc. So you get some "cool" areas that are popular, but not really a draw because they are hidden and hard to get to, and then the rest of the city takes the master planned suburb model.

[mhays]

It requires a land use code to control the businesses. For example I'd limit new businesses to small areas, require walkable urban formats, limit parking, and limit businesses to types that work well with residents. Any bar would need to have limits on hours and noise.

The gentrified, dense model works. I can see a moderate-income neighborhood doing well to, if people can offer services at lower prices.

[Pedestrian]

My city, San Francisco, has commercial ("high") streets in virtually every neighborhood now and a planning code that favors ground floor retail in new buildings of whatever use above the ground floor. The result, currently, is a lot of empty, even boarded up, store fronts which is a condition likely to get worse post-COVID, because we are "over-stored" in the age of online shopping and the most common bricks/mortar uses--things like bank branches and restaurants--are bulls eye targets for the virus.

Even when/if things return to normal, the e-tailing of everything will not stop and many restaurants are likely gone for good (eventually, I believe they will be replaced but that could take years).

So bottom line: We emphatically do NOT need more storefronts and aren't likely ever to. What we may need to do, in fact, is lift the current ban on "chain" retailing in many areas and allow better-capitalized national retailers to open in some of the empty locations.

[benp]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

My city, San Francisco, has commercial ("high") streets in virtually every neighborhood now and a planning code that favors ground floor retail in new buildings of whatever use above the ground floor. The result, currently, is a lot of empty, even boarded up, store fronts which is a condition likely to get worse post-COVID, because we are "over-stored" in the age of online shopping and the most common bricks/mortar uses--things like bank branches and restaurants--are bulls eye targets for the virus.

Even when/if things return to normal, the e-tailing of everything will not stop and many restaurants are likely gone for good (eventually, I believe they will be replaced but that could take years).

So bottom line: We emphatically do NOT need more storefronts and aren't likely ever to. What we may need to do, in fact, is lift the current ban on "chain" retailing in many areas and allow better-capitalized national retailers to open in some of the empty locations.

The arrival of a chain retailer is likely to cause more empty storefronts when it arrives. Hundreds of dead small town Main Streets can thank the Walmart on the interstate for their condition. Supermarkets put thousands of corner delis out of business. Etc.

[The North One]

This is hardly an either or situation. Neighborhood commercial does not take away from a downtown. Like, at all.

This would basically loosen up zoning to when neighborhoods grew naturally and built what they needed nearby. This is just mixed use.

And frankly this is the whole idea of good urbanism and the amenities that urban neighborhoods provide.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by benp

The arrival of a chain retailer is likely to cause more empty storefronts when it arrives. Hundreds of dead small town Main Streets can thank the Walmart on the interstate for their condition. Supermarkets put thousands of corner delis out of business. Etc.

I wasn't thinking of Walmart (although I wish there was one in town) or any other "big box". The spaces referenced aren't large enough for any of that. And I will say that in SF there's a corner market on almost every block in multifamily areas in spite of having the usual supermarkets (Safeway, Whole Foods and Trader Joe's are dominant). The best ones, the ones that offer quality merchandise and/or service, especially thrive and the rest are just a quick place to grab a 6-pack or the one or two items you forgot when at the supermarket but they do OK.

But the choice seems to be between allowing a Supercuts or Chipotle or Walgreen's or Panda Express or Footlocker or Dick's and on and on, or having an empty storefront. Even local brands with multiple stores can find themselves locked out by zoning codes such as Allbirds. So we have so many empty stores we passed a tax on them last election (now suspended due to COVID).

[benp]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

I wasn't thinking of Walmart (although I wish there was one in town) or any other "big box". The spaces referenced aren't large enough for any of that. And I will say that in SF there's a corner market on almost every block in multifamily areas in spite of having the usual supermarkets (Safeway, Whole Foods and Trader Joe's are dominant). The best ones, the ones that offer quality merchandise and/or service, especially thrive and the rest are just a quick place to grab a 6-pack or the one or two items you forgot when at the supermarket but they do OK.

But the choice seems to be between allowing a Supercuts or Chipotle or Walgreen's or Panda Express or Footlocker or Dick's and on and on, or having an empty storefront. Even local brands with multiple stores can find themselves locked out by zoning codes such as Allbirds. So we have so many empty stores we passed a tax on them last election (now suspended due to COVID).

I suspect that many of the storefronts are empty because landlords don't want to lower the rent to attract new tenants as it may affect the rates charged on the occupied properties - ie existing tenants may demand reductions. I have seen properties in Houston vacant for years while landlords wait for the "right" tenant. Property owners with large holdings may find it more beneficial to constrain the supply in order to maintain current rental rates.

[benp]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

Yes, but you live in a nice neighborhood with high land values and a demographic with disposable income.

So commercial development mixed with residential is going to be things like restaurants and pubs and boutique retail, and the physical structures are going to be built to code and be aesthetically pleasing. People overlook the hassles of it(do you really want to live next to a bar?) because it increases the amenity of a neighborhood. What happens in cheap neighborhoods is people park trucks everywhere, yards get walled in and trees disappear, etc, and then you have small light industry and storage businesses. It's not just ugly, its a nuisance because of noise, traffic, lights at night, etc. ADU's mean trailers in someone's backyard and you don't know what kind of people are coming and going.

I guess you could accuse me of being classist, sure, but there's reasonable steps that could be taken to regulate how a small business can operate in a residential neighborhood. Like park vehicles in a fenced area, business hours need to end at a certain time, you can't have too many employees or visitors, you can't have a dumpster, etc.

Again, what ultimately happens is people move into subdivisions that have legal restrictions because while they won't admit it upfront, they don't want to live in a trashy neighborhood, etc. So you get some "cool" areas that are popular, but not really a draw because they are hidden and hard to get to, and then the rest of the city takes the master planned suburb model.

There are a lot of "uncool" neighborhoods in many cities that have mixed-use buildings at all income levels. I would say pretty much every city in the upper Midwest, Great Lakes, and Northeast has these neighborhoods, most of which probably date back to the 1930s or earlier. Some of these only became "cool" when suburban people "discovered" them in the last 10-20 years, but they have always been around.

[Encolpius]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

No, I hate this idea. It depends on density only a few cities have. It means whatever retail and entertainment can survive after Covid gets locked up in areas where anyone whose not local to that neighborhood is unwelcome. I don’t want downtowns to be abandoned, either.

Also this only works in trendy neighborhoods. In working class neighborhoods a lack of zoning results in nuisances like truck lots and machine shops and ghetto liquor stores or mini marts, etc. So most people choose deed restricted HOA subdivisions that are even more insular and anti-urban. And HOA communities are poison to municipal government, because they can rely on special utility districts, they have their own parks, etc.

This is how you get Houston, a couple cool neighborhoods with no parking and the rest live in a soulless carpet of sprawl with pockets of underdeveloped rural-urban slums.

This must be exactly what most American cities are thinking. The basic assumption is that what every city-dweller wants is actually to live in a gated community. Therefore, the only way to fight HOAs is to turn the whole city into an HOA, except for the one disneyfied Entertainment District at the edge of downtown (bland, but welcoming to people who aren't local). Any urban or mixed use in my neighborhood = 'nuisance'. And anyway I don't live in Manhattan therefore my city isn't really dense enough to support commercial activity that isn't strip malls.

I'm no expert, but I don't think working-class neighborhoods are the places most likely to form HOAs. If anything, they're the places that disproportionately need and benefit from local blue-collar jobs, walkable shops and spaces to congregate (including the 'ghetto liquor store'). The more cramped and crowded things are at home, the more likely your vehicle is in the shop or needs to be shared between family members, the more these neighborhood amenities are essential.

And what's wrong with mini marts, for chrissakes??

[mhays]

Mini marts are awesome. I get half my calories from the two nearest me.

Ideally they're in urban format...owned by the guy at the register, no parking.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by benp

I suspect that many of the storefronts are empty because landlords don't want to lower the rent to attract new tenants as it may affect the rates charged on the occupied properties - ie existing tenants may demand reductions. I have seen properties in Houston vacant for years while landlords wait for the "right" tenant. Property owners with large holdings may find it more beneficial to constrain the supply in order to maintain current rental rates.

Storefronts are empty because of several factors but you've identified one of them. Still, landlords can only hold out for so long and the rents they charge would come down if there were actually tenants lined up to rent at a reasonable level. I'm pretty sure another factor is that we already just have too many storefronts for the demand. Hence we don't need anything like what's proposed in this thread (and we can probably stop putting more storefronts in every new building).

[llamaorama]

I don't think mini marts are bad, its just when you have totally unregulated development and you get shady places that attract shady people.

I'm no expert, but I don't think working-class neighborhoods are the places most likely to form HOAs. If anything, they're the places that disproportionately need and benefit from local blue-collar jobs, walkable shops and spaces to congregate (including the 'ghetto liquor store'). The more cramped and crowded things are at home, the more likely your vehicle is in the shop or needs to be shared between family members, the more these neighborhood amenities are essential.

Blue collar jobs in the year 2020 can pay a living wage with the correct skill set, my observation looking at Houston is that there are a lot of affordable cookie cutter housing developments on the heavy industrial far east side of the metro.

It's not so much that old, struggling neighborhoods would want to form an HOA, that's silly. it's just that due to a lack of zoning the situation becomes polarized where you have unrestricted development that's slummy, and then people want to avoid that so they live restricted subdivisions. If there was a compromise with some open-ended zoning that mostly regulated nuisance or polluting land uses and required property owners to maintain their land and buildings better, I think some otherwise decaying neighborhoods in Houston would have held up better and there would be less leapfrog style suburban growth.