airquotesNotAtWork
airquotesNotAtWork t1_j2xofn4 wrote
Reply to comment by rvafun100 in Your City Is the Most Livable in America, Until We Publish This Article About It by ValancourtB
~80% of northside is zoned for SFH only with massive setbacks and side yards. There’s a lot of room for development that doesn’t have to be the cheap and massive 5/1s that you see in only those specific neighborhoods. Especially ginter, laburnum, and Sherwood park neighborhoods could use to be more like the fan or even other parts of their own neighborhoods.
Like the Canopy at Ginter Park looks like about 300 units over 14ish acres for about ~21 units per acre. There’s many places here northside that are less than 2 units per acre.
Allowing similar levels of density by right wouldn’t change things overnight (you need to have lots sell to developers and let them build and that takes time) but over time would help densify the city more and also bring some more affordability to wealthy neighborhoods.
airquotesNotAtWork t1_j0ci3vw wrote
Reply to comment by dovetc in Youngkin proposes $230 million behavioral health overhaul by greenhousecrtv
it is because of the filibuster that we have such big bills.
airquotesNotAtWork t1_iy3a1l6 wrote
Reply to Onto Christmas Mondaily by The_UnknownTA
Rsv has been running through the house so no family thanksgiving. To placate the kids we’ve put up most of our Christmas stuff. We’ve got enough lights on the tree this year to be seen from space!
airquotesNotAtWork t1_j2ylih9 wrote
Reply to comment by rvafun100 in Your City Is the Most Livable in America, Until We Publish This Article About It by ValancourtB
Do you mean 3100 block of Kensington? Either way it’s a good illustration of what I’m talking about. These five townhomes are only permitted via a special use permit that had to be approved by council because of, among other things, the setbacks for the townhomes are less than what the lost is zoned for (R-6) allows. see here for the special use permit. see the R-6 zoning code for yards and setbacks here
These should have been able to have been built by right, or even something higher density like one or two of the 6-plexes that exist across the street. Instead the developer had to go to the mayor and council for a variance to build these. This is unnecessary cost and uncertainty for zero benefit. They could have by right built one to ~three homes no problem based on current zoning no variance needed.
As a different example, six stand alone single family houses in my neighborhood (on moss side between the church and ladies mile road) met their zoning requirements no problem and were built in a few months time from property transfer and demo of the old building to people moving in the new homes. These are $600k homes, R-3 zoned six of them on ~one acre. It should and could have been something higher density but the zoning didn’t allow it. Because that was easiest and quickest it was what was built, no approval from council on any zoning variation needed as was the case on Kensington.
If you don’t allow density by right then the default is that single family homes get built. The developer in Kensington went out of their way for that, the one on moss side did not. One got 5 homes on a ~quarter acre and the other 6 on ~an acre. We should be encouraging the former and not the latter