Code Audit Project Feedback
Block Perimeter Comments
Listed in order received. Some comments have been edited to remove personal information.
8/28/2020
"The video was clear and easy to understand. It seems a required block perimeter is determined by what you want to walk to. In the NYC example, lots of people were walking because there were places to walk to. In Houston and behind the Corvallis Safeway, what is the walking attraction? Thus, block size should be determined by context. In single-family neighborhoods why worry about block size?
I live...near Wilson School. We chose this house because there was a walkway to Wilson School and at the time we bought our house we had young elementary school children that the walkway allowed to walk safely to Wilson School. Walking is really not an issue in the neighborhood, because most of the neighbors drive everywhere they go. Short block lengths to 9th Street are desirable, especially for access to the 7/11. Long straight block faces were actually disliked by many neighbors. For example, at one time Conifer was slated to connect Highland to 9th Street. Since Crescent Valley High School students liked to cut through the neighborhood to get to "hamburger row" on 9th Street, the neighborhood purposely had sections of Conifer eliminated and turns on and off Highland limited. Further, for traffic reasons, the neighbors cut two block of Conifer out of the road next work to make the drive from Highland to 9th more difficult.
From this experience, I think block sizes and internal pathways should be determined by the potential walking destinations. So, for me, it is all about context. Context would be the same for residential or industrial zones. Take Research Way, why would anyone walk along it? If the bus did not stop near the State and County office buildings walkability should be considered. But why would someone walk from the OSU Credit Union Offices to the Benton County Offices? This is really not a walkable opportunity, unless someone wants to walk their property take payment from the CU to the County. Thus, sidewalks and pathways should be designed to get pedestrians to a desired destination.
The other element that seems forgotten here is that walkability in the NYC example has wider sidewalks that connect to useful destinations that are in the area. In subdivisions, a tremendous amount of land is given up to wide streets, on-street parking, street buffers, and sidewalks. This seems like a very profligate use of space. In NYC all the space street, sidewalk, and buildings have a purpose for the neighborhood. Look at all the additional residential square footage that could be gotten on Hemlock if the street were narrowed, on-street parking eliminated, and the buffer and front yard set backs revised. It seems to me that Hemlock from 9th to the walkway to Wilson School could easily triple or quadruple the residential space and provide walkability to Wilson School and to Starbucks on 9th Street. This way the cars in the Starbucks drive through might not extend into 9th Street at certain times. My point here is that the context of the proximity of Hemlock to Wilson School and 9th Street makes it a potentially desirable area for triplexes and quadraplexes, and maybe even 3 and 4 story buildings. With this type of development the sidewalks and pathways would be very desirable walking spaces. At the current time the sidewalks have many young people heading to 9th Street. Thus, if triplexes, quadraplexes, and multifamily living is to be encouraged, it seems to me that we should be willing to modify the infrastructure to accommodate it. In summary, blocks and pathways should be designed with something to walk to in mind, i.e., context is critical. Second, flexibility in the modification of infrastructure has to be available. On-street parking needs to be reconsidered.
And finally, we need to look at the broader context of where a neighborhood could and should go. I think we have to get away from single uses on single pieces of land and start to think about the future of whole neighborhoods. I am sure most of my neighbors would not like these ideas, but my estimate is that one third of the homes on this stretch of Hemlock have been purchased as rentals and it would be a wasted opportunity to have a few duplexes, triplexes, quadraplexis, and multifamily dwellings scatted around the neighborhood in a haphazard fashion.
Thank you for indulging these comments, which are pushing the block size question into a larger discussion of a more holistic perspective on neighborhood development from the neighborhood perspective, not just from what individual landowners choose to do."
8/27/2020-8/28/2020
"...part of the informing made me realize how complicated this topic is. I could not begin to figure out some clear and objective ways to resolve this other than the increase in block perimeter limits. I do like the idea/concept of allowing mid-block public paths as an alternative to a new street. It favors the pedestrian by having shorter “walking/biking” distances without requiring the pavement or cost of a street.
I agree about walking and the examples. We do a lot of walking around here these days and use those sorts of connections frequently to avoid traffic noise (Walnut) and people. I have use the path you highlight though it is hard to find. More paths would help but they also ought to be more visible."
8/29/2020
"Video boiled down complex issue (I am an engineer). The problem with the process was that it was not clear how to comment. The last slide should show how people should comment and phone number.
Walkability is important in residential areas. Paths are a great way to get that walkability, they are fun. Walkability in industrial areas is important, the blocks can be larger. You never know in land use changes how things might move. Also particularly in commercial areas."
8/31/2020
"I thought the video was very well done: easy to understand and uncomplicated. Using real-life examples and pictures is always a winner in my book.
This format seems a quantum leap in advancing communication, at least for this subject.
I can see this idea moving forward and being quite effective provided there are additional means available for dialogue, Q&A and FAQs. "
9/2/2020
"I really appreciate the video presentation on block perimeter standards. I am very intrigued by the idea of larger block standards with the requirement of pedestrian connections. Especially in residential zones, larger blocks with pedestrian connection seem to allow for the possibility of more affordable housing, decreased impervious surfaces, and increased pedestrian access. It also seems that providing pedestrian only connections through blocks would take some pedestrian traffic off of streets where motorized transportation is present. While I do think block perimeter standards could be larger in industrial zones, I also think it is worth considering the zones neighboring an industrial zone and the overall pedestrian access through an industrial zone.
I'm not sure I have enough information to suggest factors for consideration when determining a block perimeter standard, but I would support a larger block standard with the requirement of pedestrian connection and consideration of neighboring zones. Thanks and I look forward to seeing where this project goes. "
9/5/2020
"I just watched the block perimeter video and have some responses to the questions at the end.
- I’m flexible about increasing the size. I haven’t read the TF’s recommendations or their analysis but I would likely support their findings.
- Walkability is more important than just vehicular traffic. I like pedestrian paths. One example – I would really like to see one connecting Whiteside to Hawkeye in SW Corvallis, near my house on Fairhaven. There was a public meeting about the property proposed to be subdivided at the corner of Hawkeye. The meeting was held at a house on Whiteside. There was no way to walk from Hawkeye to the house unless one climbed a hill and walked through poison oak. Originally there was supposed to be a street connection. A pedestrian connection IMHO should have been required rather than just giving a variance from extending the street.
- It seems that block perimeter standards may be an obstacle to business. I would support some difference for industrial property.
9/5/2020
"I watched the video about block perimeters and would like to recommend a couple of relevant videos from other sources. A key idea from the first video, from the BBC, is the superblock which is introduced about 4-1/2 minutes into the 8-minute video:
https://www.bbc.com/reel/video/p07t2tpg/are-we-living-in-a-man-s-world-
The second video is more generic about walkable cities and how to build them. One point he makes that was missed in your video is that the amount of pedestrian traffic depends less on block size than on there being places to walk to. Single-use zoning should be eliminated everywhere in Corvallis to give people places to walk to. The video is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cL5Nud8d7w
Thanks for opening the planning process to Corvallis citizens"
9/6/2020
"I LOVE the effort that the Community Development Department is making to engage the community. Thank you! Here’s why:
- I am a visual learner, so it was extremely helpful to be able to watch a video that includes graphics instead of simply reading text.
- I needed to watch it twice to absorb the information, and the second time my husband and I watched it together and discussed it along the way. That was very helpful!
- Community members are much more likely to watch a video than they are to read a document, drawing more people into the process.
Content
While I share the stated goals of more affordable housing and greater pedestrian connectivity, I had some problems with the presentation:
- I’m not sure why we were looking at big cities like New York and Houston, since they are so different from Corvallis. Also, there are so many other variables in those examples, other than block perimeter, that make New York pedestrian-friendly and Houston auto-centric. It was an “apples to oranges” comparison and way too simplistic.
- In the two examples of different configurations for the 24 houses, it seemed to me that the second graphic (higher maximum block perimeter) would require someone living in house A to walk a lot farther to get to house B. I didn’t really see how having a higher maximum would be more pedestrian-friendly.
- In the real-life example of the Sylvia development, the developer knew (or should have known since they’ve been in Corvallis for a long time) what the code requirements were and chose to design the development in a way that would require a variance. Even if the block perimeter were a higher maximum and saved Legend Homes $3000, those homes would still not be considered affordable.
- The presentation was clearly biased toward raising the maximum block perimeter standard and allowing developers more latitude, but I’m not convinced that doing so would result in developments that are either more affordable or more pedestrian-friendly.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide my input."
9/6/2020
"I am providing feedback on Block Perimeter Standards. Thank you for the opportunity to do this. I watched the video three times, and have taken some notes which I will provide free-form in this email, as I didn't see any formal feedback format.
I appreciate taking into consideration affordability when considering code requirements. I would also suggest carbon footprint and impervious surfaces as having a similarly high priority for consideration.
When considering block perimeter lengths, the video illustrated two different designs which featured the same number of houses but with a difference in the road center lines and the amount of impervious pavement (1800 feet vs 1600 ft), as a feature of different block perimeter sizes. In that illustration, choosing a code that would minimize pavement and maximize residential density would favor affordability and carbon footprint reduction.
This brings into consideration street widths and parking requirements for dwellings. If streets are narrowed so that they do not provide on-street parking, and if driveways are eliminated or vehicle parking is efficiently grouped at one end of a block on a pervious surface, we are starting to get somewhere with a design that favors affordability and carbon footprint reduction. Is there a way to work these ideas into the block perimeter discussion?
Minimizing and discouraging motorized vehicle usage is important and designs that address that could help shape desired behavior. If the block perimeters are increased to a length greater than convenient for bikes or walkers to maneuver, then short-cut walkways should be required, with that requirement being expanded beyond the currently existing code for multi-unit housing.
As for block perimeter variances driving up development costs and discouraging affordability, the developers should be required to construct buildings that are net-zero for energy consumption over the lifetime of operating the building. I realize this is a building code issue, not a land development code issue, but if there were any way to incorporate that net zero energy operation requirement into development, it could offset variance costs for the developers with long term savings for the homeowners. (The trick would be how to pencil out this plan - maybe raise the costs for variances for perimeter lengths or other leveragable code requirements, and then waive costs for variances if the developer adopts narrow streets, no driveways, and net zero homes?)
Also, when it comes to carbon footprint and solar-ready roofs, orientation of roof lines to east/west are helpful, with unobstructed exposure for solar panels. This is true whatever the length of the blocks, but if it could be worked into the block perimeter discussion, that would be awesome.
I realize this code is directed at new development. I am also hoping that existing block perimeters might be considered for retrofitted improvements where there are cul de sacs and other blockages to easy movement for walkability or bikeability. That may be a topic for another forum, which I would like to see discussed.
Again, thanks for the opportunity to provide comments and suggestions. I look forward to future chances to weigh in."
9/7/2020
"Thanks for the opportunity to weigh in on this. Pedestrian and alternative transportation access to the surrounding neighborhood should always be a key factor in determining block perimeters. A great example of Superblocks can be found in Barcelona, Spain. This might be a great way to make our downtown more pedestrian and bicycle friendly. Having 1st street become a pedestrian and bicycle only street would be a good beginning."
9/7/2020
" The video was great! I liked the structure building from the historical basis, thru contemporary examples both in Corvallis and elsewhere, and ending with the questions now being faced. Of the ‘big questions,’ the only feedback I have is for (2), with a resounding YES!. Other than that, I just wanted to say I appreciate all the clearly very thoughtful work done on the project."
9/7/2020
"I have been a member of a sustainability committee and I saw the vimeo you shared with the Committee. I appreciate its thoroughness and I understand the complexity of the issues. What I think is important is that in developments, houses should be laid out to maximize energy. That is, to maximize the ability to use solar energy via solar panels, orientation to achieve sunshine inside the homes and the ability to provide shade at the appropriate season, etc. Also I agree that walkability is essential. I live on a short street of 3 blocks...It is flat, which is great for walkability and biking and had at one time close access to the city bus (now it is farther). It allows solar panels (we are in year 14 for ours). It allows an area to dry clothes outside, and it is relatively good for heat conservation in winter and for cooling in summer. These attributes were not planned for, but they just happened and were developed as the house aged and people adapted it.
I wish such things had been designed in and I realize it is a complex problem, so I congratulate you for working on some parts of the problems that cities face. However, I wanted you to think more broadly, as well. Good Luck!"
9/12/2020
"Addressing the "Big Questions for this Phase" slide:
- The block sizes in the Job's Addition neighborhood seem to be ideal for residential development. The block sizes are fairly small and on a square grid. From observation and participant observation over the years, this design has appeared to be highly walk-able, bike-able, and served as a traffic speed calming mechanism for most sensible drivers as intersections are quite frequent and relatively short distances apart. I've witnessed quite a bit of community interaction among neighbors within this design format.
- Pedestrian access is important to neighborhoods to encourage walking as opposed to the feeling one must always need to drive to get into or out of their neighborhood. Large blocks and convoluted neighborhood designs are definitely intended for those who prefer to drive. Having at least one neighborhood pedestrian connection on each side of a large block may encourage more walk-ability for large blocks depending on whether or not the neighborhood has resources to walk to.
- The video appeared to address residential neighborhoods rather than industrial, so I don't have any informed feedback to offer at this time regarding perimeter standards for industrial zones.
Thank you for your time and work regarding this matter. "
