By Bob Hommond Finally, it appears as though someone realizes
that something different must be done in order to enable Morgan
Hill to have the vibrant, pedestrian friendly type of downtown that
everyone wants, but no none agrees on how to make it happen.
By Bob Hommond
Finally, it appears as though someone realizes that something different must be done in order to enable Morgan Hill to have the vibrant, pedestrian friendly type of downtown that everyone wants, but no none agrees on how to make it happen. Acknowledging that problems exist is one thing. Providing solutions is another. Mr. Sellers and Mr. Kennedy offered some suggestions that would have to be considered “out of the box” by Morgan Hill’s standards, but commonplace in many neighboring cities which have successfully achieved a downtown similar to what Morgan Hill desires. I heard the term “vision” used and over-used during the June 8 workshop. Everyone has a vision of what the downtown should look like, however, if you really want this vision to become a reality, there are inherent problems that inhibit this vision that need to be recognized, addressed and changed before this can happen.
Let’s look at why, in spite of the diligent efforts of many people for many years, virtually nothing has changed in our downtown. There are many contributing factors, so let’s identify and discuss them.
Measure C is an inhibitor to the implementation and realization of the Downtown Plan. Measure C contradicts itself with respect to developing from the inside out, eliminating leap frog development, and utilizing small lots within the Central Core for residential development. It states that these are it’s objectives, however, the scoring criteria actually hinders these type of projects in the competition. Simply modifying the scoring criteria to accommodate vertical mixed-use projects or higher-density residential project in the downtown is only a Band-Aid and will not provide the desired results necessary to fulfill the vision of the Downtown Plan.
Economic viability Simple economics tells you that if it costs X to build, you must sell or lease it for Y, or, you simply don’t build it. Consider the two block area that some policy makers are so focused on. There is one large parcel, the old Sunsweet site, which incidentally is tucked behind several other Monterey Road frontage businesses. Other than this site, how do you create the critical mass you need to justify development? There are numerous small parcels under different ownership. In order to consider a project, the developer would have to purchase many of these individually owner sites at inflated prices, demolish existing structures, and then try to justify building a project. It doesn’t pencil, and other than the one isolated site that will probably get developed, you have gained very little – not even improving the image on the Monterey Road frontage. Maybe, the City of Morgan Hill should provide a large parking facility in the downtown – proximate to public transportation. This would enable the utilization of smaller lots within the downtown area to develop and provide some economic viability to induce developers to build projects in that area. It would certainly provide a comfort level for retailers, or restaurants who might otherwise be reluctant to locate in the downtown because of the perceived parking shortage. A centralized parking facility would spur development interest in the downtown. Without it the economics of buying land, and then having to accommodate parking on this land, makes development economically unfeasible.
Developer incentives Many cities that have been successful in creating vibrant, pedestrian friendly downtowns with all the amenities, have done so by providing incentives to developers in many forms, in order to induce them to design and build projects within the downtown. Several of the policy makers at this meeting recognized this, however trying to agree on the process and the specific incentives was another matter of contention among the attendees. Downtown will stagnate and remain unchanged, unless adequate incentives to potential developers proposing quality projects is part of the City’s strategy.
Density is another inhibitor to the Downtown Plan The current CC-R zoning permits a maximum of 18 units per acre. Other than what have been dubbed “opportunity sites,” which allow from 26 to 40 units per acre, this standard is totally inadequate to provide incentive to develop, it is actually a single family detached standard and should not be applied to downtown area vertical mixed-use or high-density residential projects. This will prevent many potentially valuable sites from developing in the downtown.
Limiting the area to be developed When you limit an area to only two blocks to be considered to development, you short-change to entire process. We have already concluded that not enough undeveloped space exists in the specified area, and to create the space needed would make development costs prohibitive. So, why would you consider limiting the boundaries for downtown development? By imposing rigid geographic limitation to those areas which you consider to be most desirable, you eliminate or at very least inhibit, valuable parcels that could be developed which would further enhance the objectives of the downtown plan.
Morgan Hill decision makers need to learn from other cities that have created successful downtowns. Consider Willow Glen, Los Gatos, Santa Cruz, Carmel, Palo Alto, or any other city which possess a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly downtown, and realize why these cities were able to achieve success while Morgan Hill has continually failed. Providing set asides for downtown area housing is certainly a step in the right direction, but more needs to be done. Mr. Sellers and Mr. Kennedy put forth some unique ideas which admittedly were a departure from the traditional way of thinking and they were filibustered by a long-winded response from several of the Planning Commissioners. These ideas, although somewhat unprecedented, are the type of thing the City of Morgan Hill needs to consider in order to bring to fruition the vision of the downtown that everyone desires. Both Mr. Sellers and Mr. Kennedy over the years, have listened attentively to the advice of the Planning Commission, but have come to the realization that things have not, and probably will not, change unless some innovative measures are taken. It is time for the elected officials of the City Council to provide direction, not just listen to negative rhetoric which neither changes or accomplishes the objectives everyone is seeking.
The message is this: The City Council needs to be driver of the collectively shared vision – not just a respondent to the never-ending list of reasons why we cannot, or should not, do something. If the Council takes the initiative and gives the Commission clear direction, we can achieve the downtown that everyone wants. If the Council does not take a strong unwavering position in this regard, we can all look forward to years of more of the same, and that is something that nobody wants.
