Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck
They already had gradual steps. And they definitely matter to home owners given by how much council time has been wasted on the changes over the years when somebody proposed a change to one.
So if you're set on R-C1. Then for a gradual change there is R-C1(s) which allows for suites. Then there's R-C1N for lot splits. And R-C1N(s) for a lot split with a secondary suite. And because R-C1 doesn't have the freedom of R1, you need R-C1L to have some rules about houses on a larger land parcel (and of course you'd need R-C1L(s) for that secondary suite, etc.
So what is it that you're actually proposing when you say 'gradual steps'? Gradual steps to what? Your neighborhood likely has a lot of those zoning types. Does everything get bumped up a bit? All R-C1 switches to R-C1(s) which switches to R-C1N(s) -> R-C2 -> R-CG -> M-1 and so forth? If I bought an R-C1 home, planned my life around it even, what are you proposing that becomes? Because I didn't buy R-C1 with the idea of lot splits or suites; if I wanted that I would have bought into an R-C1N(s) neighborhood.
'The consolidations do not matter' and 'just make gradual changes' are inherently incompatible positions, as the consolidations are a result of so many gradual steps being added over the years.
|
I did not say skip all consolidation, in fact I think I said go ahead with 90% of them, and I did not say take microscopic steps but more refined steps toward density than what the last council implemented.
For example: Merging the RC1s together is a lot less dramatic than merging the RC1s and RC2s into RCG. Then move that consolidated RC1 to a mid-point between RC1 and RCG. Taking gradual steps (without re-splitting the zoning) to make adoption more likely.
The reason to do this: If you cannot get buy-in for your idea and your idea gets repealed then what do you have?
I do not think this has been said yet but if you blow your first implementation with users it gets a LOT harder to bring back the same idea for a second implementation. After the blanket rezoning gets repealed it is going to be very hard to bring it back. That is not good.
If you treat the blanket rezoning as a project, then "repealing blanket rezoning" is the ultimate failure of the project. If I failed a project this hard, I would be hosting the biggest Lessons Learned session to understand all of the errors of the project and come back with a better plan to execute the next time (if there is a next time).