It’s time to step back and re-assess the likely impacts of BRT and TOD on established neighborhoods and identities instead of relying on the desired, but unproven outcomes pitched by those who stand to make a business profit.
A more sensible approach would’ve been incremental, introducing MM reforms in neighborhoods where actual frequent transit service is available within short walking distances. As frequent transit routes are added, MM’s application could be expanded.
Reining in the worst aspects of this MM giveaway to the development industry is a big test for the new Council. Hope they’re up to it.
With the implementation of the new comprehensive plan and UDO, Phil believed there was a real opportunity for a more predictable and efficient process. Today, unfortunately, rather than following approved plans, everything seems negotiable. This undermines the whole idea of predictability and erodes the trust in the review processes and in city leadership.
Let’s stipulate a couple of points up front. Missing Middle, done well, is a good thing. But….What the previous Council produced is MM done deviously, and sloppily. Much of it, in fact, undermines the whole premise of MM, which is to offer an increased number of affordable-housing options than would exist without it.
In the More Homes, More Choices presentations, Patrick Young admits that the Missing Middle will not create housing that becomes affordable until at least one to two generations after it is built.
Tonight, I have given Council members a draft framework for creating housing that will be more affordable than what is being built under the guise of the Missing Middle.