What we want Broadway to look like

The Edgewater Beach Neighbors Association (EBNA) held a meeting this past Tuesday, January 25, 2005 at the Edgewater Presbyterian Church at the corner of Bryn Mawr and Kenmore. EBNA has its own blog (ebnaedge.blogspot.com) where the meeting minutes should be posted soon. This is my independent commentary.

One of the items on the agenda was a presentation by Adam Burck and John Ritsu, representing the Edgewater Development Corporation (EDC), on the development of Broadway. It was recognized that, as things stand, Broadway is a highway that is difficult to cross and acts as a barrier separating the two halves of the community. The situation creates an urban landscape that, to the pedestrian, feels barren, and it stunts commercial development.

Burck and Ritsu also noted that properties on a given block are often used in ways that are incompatible with each other. Among these uses are restaurants, gas stations, auto body shops, hair salons, home furnishing stores, grocery stores, and auto dealerships. Because of the multiple incompatible uses, the area lacks a distinctive identity.

It is the EDC's position that Broadway should be zoned B1-3, which allows for 65'-tall buildings (6 stories) on sufficiently wide lots. This is taller than most of the existing buildings, so one might question if a lower density designation would be appropriate, such as B1-2, which would allow buildings up to 50' tall (4 stories) on sufficiently wide lots.

If Broadway ends up lined with 6-story buildings, would this create a "canyon effect"? EDC says no, due to the width of the street. But I still have my concerns. The tall buildings might not look out of scale to someone standing in the middle of Broadway, but nobody lives on the centerline of a highway. What about those who live a block east or west of Broadway? To the west, the houses on R3-zoned Magnolia would be dwarfed by a wall of B1-3-scale buildings just on the other side of the alley.

Is it necessary to zone Broadway B1-3 in order to attract development? EDC says yes. Ritsu gave this example: The former BP station at the corner of Hollywood and Broadway was sold for $140 per square foot. If it is to be profitably developed with condos above first-floor retail, you multiply $140 by at least 5, then multiply by the area of the lot (7500 sq ft), and divide by a reasonable price for a 2-bedroom condo unit. The result is the number of units you need to break even. And in this example, you end up needing 20 units, which would fit snugly in a six-story building. It's a nice mathematical exercise, but I don't buy it.

The value of an undeveloped parcel of land depends on what can be developed on it. If the parcel in the above example were in a B1-2 zone, a wise developer would know that only 12 condo units would fit on it and would pay no more than $90 per square foot in today's market. Should the price of dirt dictate the zoning, which in turn dictates the character of the neighborhood? Or should we first decide what we want our neighborhood to look like, then use that as a basis to select a zoning, which would then influence the value of undeveloped land? My thinking tends toward the latter. I contend that it would still be possible to develop Broadway profitably while limiting buildings to four stories in height.