10-06-10-PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Maintain R -2 zoning Our homes are zoned R -1. As part of this redevelopment, we understand there is a proposal to change the zoning from R -2 to R -4 on the PHS parcels. We further understand the reason for this change is to bring the permitted unit density of the current site closer to the actual density even though the density will still exceed R -4 limits. A second reason for changing, R -4 permits multiple dwelling units and mixed use. Unless there is something we do not know about or do not understand we are inclined to oppose the zoning changes for the following reasons: 1. On the Arden Hills zoning map, I can find no place where R -1 housing abuts a R -4 zone. R -4 zoning appears to directly contradict the meaning of R -1 zoning when they share a property line. While the purpose of R -1 zoning is "to restrict encroachment in incompatible uses," The purpose of R -4 is to "permit the most intensive residential development allowed in the City." These are cross purposes; they conflict. Perhaps that's why they are not adjacent on the map. 2. We are told the number of units is not going to significantly change from what is there now. The number of units there now exceeds the unit density allowed in R -2 zones and in R -4 zones, so nothing is gained there. A SUP (Special Use Permit) can adjusts the limitations to permit institutional use. But a SUP can be trumped by a P.U.D. A P.U.D. in Arden Hills is an overlay district that does not change the underlying zoning. But with a P.U.D. in place, it doesn't matter whether the underlying zone is R -2 or R -4, and a SUP is not needed. Multiple housing units can be permitted; mixed -use can be permitted, based on the P.U.D. alone. Furthermore, if a parcel is zoned R -4, a P.U.D. is mandatory for redevelopment. In sum, it is difficult to see how anything gets better or clearer with R -4 zoning. The P.U.D. is what matters and the P.U.D. is mandatory. 3. If nothing gets better with R -4 zoning, does anything get worse? Perhaps. Suppose that in 5 or 10 or 15 years Presbyterian Homes decides to sell this parcel. Someone buys it and decides to redevelop it. Redevelopment, if executed, cancels all previous P.U.D. and SUP agreements. Now the underlying zoning matters greatly. Suppose they want to build high rise condos. They would have an easier time achieving that if the area was zoned R -4 than if it was zoned R -2. If, on the other hand, they wanted to develop the site into single family homes, the process would be straight forward with R -2 zoning. Let the high -rise developer fight the re- zoning battle. In sum, having R -4 zoning abutting R -1 is at least highly unusual if not operating at cross purposes. The value of R -4 zoning for the current project is nebulous at best. R -4 zoning might encourage the wrong kind of redevelopment in the future, such as high rise condos. Single family homes on R -4 zoning are not as valuable as SFHs on R -2. Shorewood Drive. Page 10 of 15