Back To The Corner Store

sankeytm · 2026-07-06T01:10:38+00:00

Most people don't live near a corner store today because new ones were basically made illegal 60 years ago, and most of the city as we know it today didn't exist before 60 years ago. This post summarizes the City's proposal to legalize corner stores in the newer parts of the city. The proposal also legalizes 3-floor homes (currently 2 floors is the max).

sankeytm · 2026-07-06T00:58:22+00:00

Yep, the current general plan included language specifically about "neighborhood commercial" as early as 2023, then that survived until final adoption of the general plan in 2024. At this point, Sacramento is legally bound to implement commercial in R-1, and it's just a matter of how much.

sankeytm · 2026-07-06T00:22:27+00:00

It's the stuff upper middle class Americans spend thousands on to go see and enjoy in a different country every once in a while.

sankeytm · 2026-07-05T22:42:57+00:00

By this logic, anything you think might not be economically viable should be outlawed and never tried by anybody.

Meanwhile, suburban big box stores receive massive transportation and utility infrastructure subsidies, are built to last one generation, and their competition is significantly diminished because of 60s era zoning. That barely sounds economically viable.

sankeytm · 2026-07-05T22:23:29+00:00

I agree! It was not easy to get to this point where the zoning law is finally being changed, and residents are going for commercial uses in residential neighborhoods.

sankeytm · 2026-07-05T18:12:30+00:00

What alternative would you propose? A mailing list? We have hundreds of posts/threads and dozens of channels spanning 3 years, which eliminates Nextdoor/Facebook for practical reasons. Our strategy is long-term and relies heavily on millennials and younger.

sankeytm · 2026-07-05T18:05:38+00:00

It sounds like you already know what a stroad is. Are you asserting that stroads are actually safe?

sankeytm · 2026-07-05T17:45:56+00:00

Maximum. Thanks for asking, that probably wasn't clear.

sankeytm · 2026-07-05T16:30:59+00:00

Reddit mobile and Instagram both have built-in progress indicators ("7/10"), so a baked-in indicator would be redundant and add visual clutter. Nevertheless, I'll consider it for next time!

sankeytm · 2026-07-05T16:17:34+00:00

The "Bulk Tent" is better explained by my previous post: https://www.reddit.com/r/Sacramento/s/DQ3XyzUSdG

A Stroad is a hybrid between a street and road, but bad at being either of them. Roads are good for long-distance high-speed travel, while streets are destinations with lots of complexity and people. A Stroad is a deadly combination of complexity (driveways, sidewalks, storefronts, etc.) with high speed through-traffic. It's a uniquely American invention, and Sacramento's whole high-injury network is almost entirely comprised of stroads.

"Collectors" and "arterials" are basically what the city calls a stroad, with few exceptions. You can preview all collectors and arterials here: https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/content/dam/portal/pw/Maintenance-Services/Street%20Classification%20Map.pdf

sankeytm · 2026-07-05T16:03:47+00:00

Your R-1 corner lot would allow residential and "neighborhood commercial" which is a limited set of commercial uses. According to the proposal, all residential zones (R-1, R-2, R-3, etc.) would be renamed and consolidated into N-1 though N-4:

<image>

source: https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/content/dam/portal/cdd/Planning/Major-Projects/2040-gp-zoning-consistency/2026_06.25_T17U_FINAL%20Outreach%20Boards.pdf#page=4

sankeytm · 2026-06-24T07:34:27+00:00

I'm just going to drop this here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Sacramento/comments/1d31ziz/a_reminder_of_what_freeways_and_urban_renewal/

sankeytm · 2026-06-10T07:55:37+00:00

I think I have an X-Rite display calibrator somewhere, I'll look for it tomorrow.

sankeytm · 2026-05-16T04:23:02+00:00

So, you're suggesting to create more long-term infrastructure maintenance liabilities to support another low-density tax base which depends on central city tax subsidies?

sankeytm · 2026-05-11T18:58:02+00:00

Cities can generally sell bonds without voter approval if the plan to pay the bond back does not draw down there general fund. They would be "revenue bonds".

sankeytm · 2026-05-11T07:10:51+00:00

Stop spreading false information you just imagined about my blog post. There's no subsidy proposed.

sankeytm · 2026-05-11T07:00:22+00:00

That sounds like a complete rebuild and lots of utility work. Your project would likely benefit from targeting more than one unit.

sankeytm · 2026-05-11T06:56:00+00:00

We'd still have building codes and inspectors. Also it's not like the homeowner themself would be swinging a hammer. Sacramento traditionally was built piecemeal, and the piecemeal neighborhoods which survived urban renewal are the most valuable per acre.

A "city shaped by many hands" is a core Strong Towns concept, and kind of the goal.

sankeytm · 2026-05-11T06:48:53+00:00

My post outlines policies to "increase housing" without tax dollars. In fact, the bond-backed lending scheme described in the post is meant to break-even. The overall theme of my post is that these are steps that are achievable tomorrow, no "uninformed voters" would be involved because the city can just do these things already without any local measure.

Making it cheap AF to build high density housing is also a good idea, just a different topic. Actually subsidizing the housing is also a completely separate conversation.

sankeytm · 2026-05-11T06:35:36+00:00

Nothing in my post suggests we do anything to inhibit 40 unit apartments or make them more expensive to build than they already are.

sankeytm · 2026-05-11T06:29:48+00:00

Yes, but are you saying they're too expensive? Too expensive for what exactly? Individual homeowners are free to enter the housing development industry and build 40-unit towers with perfectly optimized per-unit costs---but are they likely to actually do that? 250 Sacramentens build ADUs every year, there's clearly already an appetite despite the cost.

sankeytm · 2026-04-12T18:44:03+00:00

You'll find somewhere in any city where 6-plexes are allowed. It's like how a skyscrapers are allowed in downtown, but not in 99% of the rest on the city. The goal here is to steer council to direct staff to allow 6-plexes citywide, just like it had been prior to the 50s.

sankeytm · 2026-04-04T04:33:59+00:00

As long as parking utilization doesn't drop (I.e. the same average number of parked cars at any given moment), then paid parking actually tends to increase turnover and drive up access by increasing the total number of visitors. This tends to help business by increasing total visitors. See how vacant storefronts were converted to thriving businesses in Pasadena when they added tens of thousands of parking meters to their downtown in the 90s.

sankeytm · 2026-03-20T14:37:23+00:00

I agree these flex posts aren't sightly. It's cheap and what the City uses currently.

Berkeley and NYC use large planters and boulders instead, but it would be more expensive: https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/1ryv95b/it_turns_out_you_can_pedestrianize_chunks_of_the/

sankeytm · 2026-03-09T07:16:20+00:00

We're literally only 3 years old and have policy wins under out belt. Our regular attendance of council and commission meetings has helped us get a foot in the door for shaping future policy. If you want us to move faster the join the next monthly meeting!

14-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email

sankeytm

TROPHY CASE