The 80-20 rule and transportation policy

[flyingember]

As we know there’s thousands of needy projects around transportation, Not everything can be funded. Just my neighborhood needs tens of millions in sidewalks and there’s a hundred neighborhoods in the same situation

The 80-20 rule says 80% of effects come from 20% of causes and if you find what this small thing is you can have a big impact

If we could only focus on one thing around transportation to change and focused all our money at it what would it be and why?

Is it...
Making better use of existing roads through systems like OGL?
Bus system improvements?
A reduced focus on changing parking requirements and encouraging sharing parking?
Pedestrian level improvements like sidewalks, crosswalks, crossing distances and road diets?
Density and walkability in zoning and planning?
Improved biking infrastructure?
Is it better ADA compliance?
Is it encouraging sharing vehicles rather than owning?
Is it long distance transportation like high speed rail to other cities?
Is it encouraging work from home to reduce peak use issues?
Is it around indirect incentives, pushing road costs onto developers?
Is it better enforcement of existing traffic laws?

[FangKC]

If I could decree it, I would implement a 60-40 development rule. This would only allow developers to build 40 percent detached single family houses, and require 60 percent multifamily units. Multifamily could be apartment buildings, attached townhouses, duplexes, triplexes, or single family houses with a accessory dwelling unit. I would end zoning for detached single family-only neighborhoods. City block sizes would have to conform to a certain measure, and return to the basic grid design. No more of these wandering cul-de-sac neighborhoods that make you drive further just to exit the neighborhood. Certainly exceptions would be made for certain geological and landscape features. All new detached single family houses without an ADU would have to conform to a designated city lot size as well. No more of these huge hots that create very low density neighborhoods. Those wanting large estate-sized lots would be allowed to have them as long as they paid four times the property tax assessment for the land portion of their property. This policy would be in place for 50 years until former historic density levels are achieved, and then be subject to review, retention, or revocation depending on city goals and needs.

[flyingember]

I would implement a retail parking maximum that scales with a modifier based on the design of the project. We need to encourage shopping centers to be built where you can walk around more.

The idea is a space is unique if you have to step off of a sidewalk into a parking lot or street to reach the next building in the development. The Legends has 18 buildings but only 9 unique spaces under this idea.

Let's look at the Target development at Shoal Creek.
You could argue there's 9x basic spaces to this center and it's a lot less walkable.

1 building: lose no parking
2-5: lose 5%
6-9: lose 10%
10-15: lose 15%

The next modifier would be the maximum distance from any one point without passing by a public entrance or window. Like if it goes over a certain amount lose 5% of parking. This is to encourage less giant blank faces. Imagine if Target had windows around the structure. It would immediately change the feel of the building. Imagine if instead of pad sites you put the Target centered in the lot and every out building is right next to their giant blank facade to one side.

I would also add a street proximity modifier. For each building that does not have an entrance that faces the closest city street remove another 5% of allowable parking.
This would apply to the Costco and Home Depot not facing Linwood. Go look at the Target at Chouteau/I-35, it's example is behind the project. Instead of facing the neighborhood with anything they put 175 employee parking spots and a row of bushes.

[FangKC]

I like your window idea for big stores. It would also be easier to modify vacant Walmart, Kmart, Montgomery Ward, and Sears stores if those windows already existed. The interior spaces could be subdivided if the store closed, and either rented to smaller stores, or the space closest to the mall court could remain a windowless retail store, and the outer portions of the store that have windows could be walled off and rented to office tenants, call centers,etc. Some of those department stores in malls already have a second or third floor, so it might be easy for an office tenant to rent all three floors, or the developer could rent each floor with windows to separate office tenants.

Store builders would hate it though since they like to line walls with racks. I think the solution though is to design punch outs where windows could be installed later. You see this in older buildings.

A former Walmart store with windows could be subdivided into three small retail or commercial space towards the front. The back portion where the loading docks are would be walled off and maybe used for a warehouse, or rental storage spaces.

One thing I always wished cities would do is require developers to build apartment buildings on top of grocery stores and around the edges of shopping centers. This would benefit seniors--when they stop driving--especially since they could rent apartments in developments that have a grocery and drug store within walking distance. Imagine if Metro North Mall had apartment towers built up against all those blank walls, and around the perimeter of mall. A built-in population might have helped it survive.

Another idea I had. I read the local auto museum was looking for a permanent space to display cars. I think they are renting a small space right now in some warehouse in Olathe. Imagine a former Macy's or Sears store that has three levels at the end of a mall court that is converted into the local auto museum. You would already have the ability to have sections to display different types of vehicles. Level one might be automotive memorabilia (signs, posters, advertising, etc). Level two might be passenger cars, and level three would be trucks. One might have to build a special elevator that could lift the cars into the different levels. The freight elevators might not be big enough.