Report a Comment

Before touting "performance parking" as a solution to 17th Street commercial district issues, why not do daytime and evening census (surveys) of the customer base, of both people who patronize the district as well as a broader sample of residents and office workers within 1 mile.

Similarly, you need to know the prevailing rents, and determine the rough retail trade area served by the commercial district.

My sense is that for most customers or potential customers, driving/parking isn't as big an issue as the business owners might believe.

But you won't know if you don't do a survey.

1. The nature of retail is different today. The fact that there is a supermarket, hardware store, and drug store together in this commercial district separates it from most other such commercial districts. (A goodly part of this is due to the population density there, with a modicum of assistance from the office buildings on 16th, P, and Massachusetts.)

2. The issue with liquor licenses is indirect. If more were allowed, the rents would go up because restaurants can pay more for space, because they have much more frequent patronage compared to other retails (except maybe for CVS). This would lead to a crowding out of non-food retail.

People eat every day, and that favors restaurant in the current retail economy.

So I would argue that indirectly, having the moratorium has probably helped save non-prepared food retail.

Like how historic preservation is sometimes the only tool that can help preserve buildings, in the want of other tools, so perhaps is this moratorium.

by Richard Layman on Feb 3, 2009 3:37 pm • link • report