[Sent this morning to the planputnam mailing list.]
Aside from the oddity that Patterson will benefit while the project has the most impact on Kent, I think a mercantile development on that site has some promise. Unfortunately, I don’t think it does with the site plan as currently conceived.
Crossroads are natural places to conduct commerce. This is one such site. It is quite reasonable for Mr. Camarda to develop this as a commercial property. The problem here is that cars don’t shop; people do. The plan, like most developments since World War II, emphasizes use by cars rather than people. But, again, this is to be expected. His potential tenants don’t much care what kinds of buildings they inhabit, nor what impact they have on the local communities, only how fast they can transfer the goods from the warehouse to the shopping cart. Target, Lowe’s and CostCo, even Wal-Mart, have all adapted if asked to adapt, but why should they go out of their way if none suggest doing so?
The towns do not encourage development on a human scale. Their zoning codes are stuck trying to segregate uses, which may be fine for keeping the rendering plant from stinking up my bedroom, but is not good for life. Their traffic plans emphasize throughput, but forget that there are many ways to move between two points. Their parking requirements force us to bear the costs of “free parking” in higher costs to develop, higher rents, higher taxes, and higher property values. And while I love having more equity in my home, I’d like to at least have the option to walk to store.
The choices made by our elected officials, at all levels of government but particularly in town, dictate that this is the only shape a development at Patterson Crossing can take. We the electorate, failing to understand the effect of large lot sizes, of parking requirements, and of using single-use zoning to keep Those Uses out of our backyards, dictate that this is the only shape a development at Patterson Crossing can take.
Why would Mr. Camarda, or any other property owner, propose a mixed-use commercial and residential neighborhood between I-84 and Lake Carmel, connecting with the existing street network, and possibly improving the residents’ lot, when he knows that he’ll have to fight the residents and town hall to get it approved? It’s simpler just to follow the codes, do the things in the most cost-effective fashion, and wait.
So you don’t want Patterson Crossing? That’s great. I personally could give a rat’s ass about any of the big box retailers, but I would like to walk to a store every now and again — and sometimes do between Home Depot and Kohl’s, up a hill, pushing a stroller and wishing for a clue-by-four. I suggest that the site plan be redrawn, with thought given to multiple uses by people, not cars.