DOCSLIB.ORG

Zoning Code Text Amendment Applicable Section(S) of The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Zoning Code Text Amendment Applicable Section(S) of The CPED STAFF REPORT Prepared for the City Planning Commission CPC Agenda Item #11 June 14, 2021 ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT Initiator: Council Members Gordon, Schroeder, and Goodman Introduction Date: July 17, 2020 Prepared By: Amber Turnquest, Principal City Planner, (612) 352-6047 Jason Wittenberg, Planning Manager, (612) 673-2297 Ward: Citywide Neighborhood: Citywide Intent: Amend zoning ordinance regulations to adopt a regulatory framework to allow for new — and to better regulate existing —single room occupancy (SRO) units to implement policies in Minneapolis 2040. APPLICABLE SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING CODE Title 20, Zoning Code: 1. Chapter 520 Introductory Provisions. 2. Chapter 535 Regulations of General Applicability. 3. Chapter 546 Residence Districts. 4. Chapter 547 Office Residence Districts. 5. Chapter 548 Commercial Districts. 6. Chapter 549 Downtown Districts. 7. Chapter 551 Overlay Districts. The following chapters were also introduced: Chapter 525, 527, 530, 531, 536, 537, 541 and 550. However, staff is not recommending changes to these chapters as part of this amendment and is therefore recommending returning them to the author. BACKGROUND Council Members Gordon, Schroeder, and Goodman introduced an ordinance on July 17, 2020, to amend the City’s regulations to permit the development of single room occupancy (SRO) units. The intent of these amendments are to implement policy guidance in Minneapolis 2040 that calls for the pursuit of innovative housing types and eliminating homelessness. The City Planning Commission Committee of the Whole previously reviewed and provided comments to this zoning code text amendment at the March 25, 2021 meeting. Staff held two stakeholder engagement meetings. The first on September 29, 2020, to review the history and operational requirements and on February 5, 2021, to review the language and provide comment. Department of Community Planning and Economic Development The text amendment is intended to allow residential units that would fill a gap on the affordable housing continuum for people who earn low-wages or work intermittently, creating a regulatory framework to allow for new — and to better regulate existing — rooming houses and single room occupancy units. Rooming-type units are currently allowed only when establishing housing with supportive services (e.g., supportive housing, community residential facilities, assisted living, nursing homes). While SROs are proposed to be classified as a type of congregate living within the zoning code, SRO housing would not include supportive services. Definition. SRO units are distinguished from “dwelling units” by the fact that each living space would not be required to include kitchen or bathroom facilities. The definition of single room occupancy housing is proposed to be introduced in Chapter 520.160: Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Housing - A facility providing housing that is operated by a non-profit organization, government agency, or healthcare agency, as defined in and meeting the requirements of Chapter 244, Housing Maintenance Code. It does not include: 1) Community residential facilities. 2) Board and care homes, nursing homes, assisted living facilities. 3) Supportive housing. New SRO units would generally be limited to parcels where policy and regulation allow four or more dwelling units, beginning with lots 7,500 square feet or larger located in the Interior 2 built form district and more intense districts. The R3 zoning district is proposed as the lowest intensity district where SROs would be allowed. In the R3 district, the use could be established on a lot with at least 7,500 square feet, aligning with the locations where buildings with four or more residential dwelling units are allowed. In the R4 district and above, 5,000 square feet of lot area would be required. Conversions of existing buildings and new construction of SROs would be permitted. SROs would be limited to no more than two occupants per room. Rooming units are not subject to minimum zoning requirements related to minimum floor area (300 for accessory dwelling units, 350 square feet for efficiency units, and 500 square feet for units with one or more bedrooms). The required size of rooms/units within SROs is left to the building code and Housing Maintenance Code to address. SRO units could only be established by non-profit or government agencies with a track record of successfully managing housing. Standalone licenses would ensure renter protections for tenants. FINDINGS What is the reason for the amendment and what public purpose will be served? The reason for the amendment is to permit the development of single room occupancy (SRO) units. The text amendment is intended to allow residential units that would fill a gap on the affordable housing continuum for people who earn low-wages or work intermittently, creating a regulatory framework to allow for new — and to better regulate existing — rooming houses and single room occupancy units. The proposed text amendment is intended to encourage the establishment of SRO units. 2 Department of Community Planning and Economic Development How is the amendment consistent with the purpose of the zoning district(s) or ordinance chapter(s) being amended? New SRO units would generally be limited to parcels where policy and regulation allow four or more dwelling units, beginning with lots 7,500 square feet or larger located in the Interior 2 built form district and more intense districts. Minneapolis 2040 includes the following description of the Interior 2 built form district: “New and remodeled buildings in the Interior 2 district should be small-scale residential. Individual lots are permitted to have up to three dwelling units. Multifamily buildings with more than three units are permitted on larger lots. Limited combining of lots is permitted. Building heights should be 1 to 2.5 stories.” The R3 zoning district is proposed as the lowest intensity district where SROs would be allowed. In the R3 district, the use could be established on a lot with at least 7,500 square feet. In the R4 district and above, 5,000 square feet of lot area would be required. Conversions of existing buildings and new construction of SROs would be permitted. Note that some R3 zoning districts may exist in the Interior 1 built form district. To align with policy, any R3 (or higher) residential zoning will likely be removed from the Interior 1 district when the citywide land use rezoning study is completed. Rezoning from an R1-R2B district to an R3 district is generally not supportable in the Interior 1 built form district or on lots smaller than 7,500 square feet in the Interior 2 built form district. A maximum parking requirement for SRO housing was adopted as part of the recent zoning code amendment affecting off-street parking and travel demand management. Are there consequences in denying this amendment? Denying this amendment would continue to limit housing options and prevent the City from taking steps to align its zoning regulations with the new comprehensive plan. Such a lack of alignment would stifle progress toward important policy goals. What adverse effects may result with the adoption of this amendment? Substantial adverse effects are not anticipated as a result of this amendment. The policies that are informing proposed regulations were adopted following a robust public engagement process. The City is now implementing those policies. Staff acknowledges that there is a stigma associated with SROs which could be contentious in many circumstances because of real or perceived impacts. As proposed, SRO units could only be established by non- profit or government agencies with a track record of successfully managing housing. Standalone licenses would ensure renter protections for tenants. Further, this zoning code text amendment will be accompanied by amendments to the Housing Maintenance Code, with licensing standards intended to avoid or mitigate any adverse effects. Licensing through the Housing Maintenance Code includes a requirement that an applicant demonstrate the ability to operate units effectively and will provide tenants with protections afforded to renters. Tier III rental dwellings would not be eligible for use as SROs. Changes to the Housing Maintenance Code will be considered at a public hearing by the City Council’s Business, Inspections, Housing & Zoning (BIHZ) Committee. How does the amendment relate to other City ordinances? CPED is coordinating with other City departments on additional amendments to other City ordinances to address licensure, health, safety, etc. An amendment to Chapter 244, the Housing Maintenance Code, will occur concurrently with the zoning code text amendment process. The Housing Maintenance Code will be amended to define single room occupancy housing units, redefine the definition for rooming houses, and lists requirements for SROs. What factors are influencing the timing of the proposed amendment? Why? There is a need to permit the development of additional housing types within the City to fill a gap on the affordable housing continuum for people who earn low-wages or work inconsistently. Affordable housing has become more difficult to secure for those working in low-wage occupations. This zoning code amendment is one piece in the City’s overall effort to ensure that people have access to safe and dignified housing. 3 Department of Community Planning and Economic Development How does the amendment compare to practices in other cities? Staff found in a number of the cities surveyed, SROs are used as housing options for low income individuals and senior citizens. Communities such as San Francisco, New York City, and Boston are using SROs to provide additional affordable housing options. How will this amendment implement the comprehensive plan? The amendment will implement the following applicable goals of Minneapolis 2040 (2020): Goal 2. More residents and jobs: In 2040, Minneapolis will have more residents and jobs, and all people will equitably benefit from that growth. Goal 3. Affordable and accessible housing: In 2040, all Minneapolis residents will be able to afford and access quality housing throughout the city.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Section 6 - Open Space Residential Design (Osrd)
    SECTION 6 - OPEN SPACE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN (OSRD) 6.100 PURPOSE An Open Space Residential Design (OSRD) is a residential development in which the buildings or lots are clustered together with reduced lot area, frontage, setback and lot coverage requirements. The total number of allowed residential units is based on the number of units that could be permitted for conventional development. The land not included in the building lots is preserved as open space. Open Space Residential Design is the preferred form of residential development in the Town of Dartmouth. The purpose of Open Space Residential Design (OSRD) is: To encourage a more efficient form of development that consumes less open land and conforms to existing topography and natural features better than a conventional subdivision. To allow for greater flexibility and creativity in the design of residential developments. To encourage the preservation of open space, agricultural and forestry land, plant and wildlife habitat, other natural resources including aquifers, waterbodies, wetlands, historical and archeological resources. To protect existing and potential municipal water supplies. To preserve and enhance Dartmouth’s traditional New England landscape. To protect scenic vistas as viewed from the Town’s roadways and other public places. To reduce the construction cost and maintenance of streets, utilities and public services in a more economical and efficient manner in harmony with the site and neighborhood. To protect the value of real property. To minimize the total amount of disturbance on the site. To preserve open space areas for active and passive recreational use, including the provision of neighborhood parks and trails. To encourage the provision of diverse housing opportunities especially housing that is affordable to Town residents and the integration of a variety of housing types.
    [Show full text]
  • Residential High-Rise Clusters As a Contemporary Planning Challenge in Manama by Florian Wiedmann Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences Dr
    Revista Gremium® | Volumen 2 | Número 04 | Agosto - Diciembre 2015 | ISSN 2007-8773 | México, D. F. Residential High-Rise Clusters as a Contemporary Planning Challenge in Manama by Florian Wiedmann Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences Dr. Florian Wiedmann is a Senior Urban Planner and part-time Lecturer at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences. He holds a PhD in urban planning and his recent research efforts are focused on the urbanization in the Gulf region. In addition to his academic occupation he is co-founder and principal of ARRUS, an urban planning consultancy located in Frankfurt and Chicago. Email: [email protected] Received: 29 April 29 2015 Accepted: 05 July 2015 Abstract Available online: 01 August 2015 This paper analyzes the different roots of current residential high-rise clusters emerging in new city districts along the coast of Bahrain’s capital city Manama, and the resulting urban planning and design challenges. Since the local real-estate markets were liberalized in Bahrain in 2003, the population grew rapidly to more than one million inhabitants. Consequently, the housing demand increased rapidly due to extensive immigration. Many residential developments were however constructed for the upper spectrum of the real-estate market, due to speculative tendencies causing a raise in land value. The emerging high-rise clusters are developed along the various waterfronts of Manama on newly reclaimed land. This paper explores the spatial consequences of the recent boom in construction boom and the various challenges for architects and urban planners to enhance urban qualities. Keywords: high-rise, cluster development, housing, urban planning, Bahrain, Manama Introduction gaining national independence during 1970, the urban transformation process was dominated Since the end of the 20th century, a new vision by the welfare state mechanisms and a car- in urban development has been introduced based model of town planning (imported by in the case of the cities in the gulf, in order to Western architects and planners).
    [Show full text]
  • Model Zoning Ordinance for Rural Cluster Development
    #45801 v1 - MODEL CLUSTER ZO NMA/wb 1/30/14; 02/06/02 MODEL ZONING ORDINANCE FOR RURAL CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT This model zoning ordinance for rural cluster development, which may also be referred to as open space subdivisions, is intended to be used as a guide to communities in the formulation of local ordinances. Competent legal, planning, and engineering assistance should be sought by communities in developing or modifying local ordinances. This ordinance is designed as a mapped district to be applied to parcels of 35 acres or larger. The ordinance is designed as a mandatory district, which would require all residential development within the district to be clustered, and to preserve a minimum of 60 percent of the site as common open space. The permitted density is one dwelling unit per five net acres. Because the district requires clustering for residential development, any applicant wishing to develop a conventional subdivision would need to apply for a rezoning to a district that does not require clustering. It should be noted that this model ordinance is an example of just one way to implement cluster development through a zoning ordinance. Numerous aspects of the regulations may be modified to suit the conditions in a particular municipality. Such aspects would include primarily the principal permitted and conditional uses in Subsections B and D, respectively; the density and dimensional standards in Subsection G; and the calculation of site capacity in Subsection H. Explanatory comments are italicized. The following regulations are intended to be added to existing local zoning ordinances as an additional residential development district.
    [Show full text]
  • Milwaukie Cottage Cluster Analysis
    Milwaukie Cottage Cluster AnalysiS Final Report JUNE 2019 ACG ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS City of Metro COnsulting Milwaukie Rebecca Small TEAM Patrick McLaughlin Staff Cascadia Partners Alma Flores Alex Joyce Valeria Vidal Stakeholder Garlynn Woodsong Dennis Egner Advisory Alex Steinberger David Levitan Committee Neil Heller Templest Blanchard Victor Tran Leila Aman Members Irene Kim Vera Kolias Kerrie Bartel-Christensen Jaime Crawford Celestina DiMauro Opticos Design Kiley Ford Dan Parolek City Council Sherry Grau Alex Vondeling Mayor Mark Gamba Stephan Lashbrook Drew Finke Councilor Lisa Batey Martha McLennan John Miki Councilor Angel Falconer Mary-Rain O'Meara Orange Splot Councilor Kathy Hyzy Matthew Rinker Councilor Wilda Parks Eli Spevak Property Owners Planning Commission Tony DaRosa ACG Chair Kim Travis Michelle DaRosa Ayreann Colombo Vice Chair John Henry Burns Jennifer Dillan Adam Argo Mark Fretz Joseph Edge Donna Lomnicki Greg Hemer Lauren Loosveldt Robert Massey TABLE OF CONTENTS 01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 02 INTRODUCTION 6 03 ENGAGEMENT 10 04 ZONING CODE ANALYSIS 14 05 FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY 18 06 INITIAL SITE DESIGN CONCEPTS 26 07 PROPOSED CLUSTER HOUSING CODE RECOMMENDATIONS 38 08 CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS 46 APPENDICES A. EXPERT REVIEW OF ZONING CODE ANALYSIS 50 B. STUDY SITE IDENTIFICATION METHOD 53 C. DETAILED MARKET ANALYSIS 60 D. NON-PROFIT AND SUBSIDIZED AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS 62 4 Executive Summary 01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Cluster Housing: The The proposed Cluster Next Generation Housing Code showcases The focus of this document is Milwaukie’s update of its cottage cluster ordinance, resulting innovative solutions for in an innovative cluster housing code that uses cities in the 21st century pro-forma-based planning and empowers developers to build market-rate workforce and to allow context-sensitive affordable housing more quickly and efficiently by design.
    [Show full text]
  • Article 11-Land Divisions and Planned Developments 062320
    Amendments to the Albany Development Code (ADC) Draft code amendments are written as follows: additions bold red underlined and deletions in strike-out. Sections not amended are omitted unless needed for context. Omitted sections are indicated by asterisks: *** ARTICLE 11 LAND DIVISIONS AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS Commentary: With the exception of the Cluster Development section, proposed amendments to Article 11 are limited to updating cross-references, updating terminology for review procedures, and renumbering tables and figures consistent with the new numbering protocol. Proposed amendments to the Cluster Development section are noted in the commentary for that section. 11.000 Overview. The most permanent feature of a community is the way land is divided into parcels. This article describes the process of converting raw land into building sites. The primary goals of this design review are to better ensure that natural features have been taken into account; that roads and utilities are properly designed and installed, and that adequate open space has been provided. This article establishes the standards and procedures for property line adjustments, partitions, subdivisions, planned developments, and condominiums. The following is a list of the main headings in this article. ■ General Provisions ■ Lot and Block Arrangement ■ Property Line Adjustments ■ Subdivisions and Partitions ■ Planned Developments ■ Condominiums ■ Cluster Development [Ord. 5668, 4/11/07] GENERAL PROVISIONS *** 11.040 Pre-application Conference. A pre-application conference, in accordance with Section 1.2021.130, is required prior to submittal of an application for any land division. A pre-application conference is not mandatory for property line adjustments. 11.050 Acceptance of Application. The Director will review the application for compliance with established application requirements within thirty (30) working days.
    [Show full text]
  • Residential High-Rise Clusters As a Contemporary Planning Challenge in Manama by Florian Wiedmann Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences Dr
    Revista Gremium® | Volumen 2 | Número 04 | Agosto - Diciembre 2015 | ISSN 2007-8773 | México, D. F. Residential High-Rise Clusters as a Contemporary Planning Challenge in Manama by Florian Wiedmann Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences Dr. Florian Wiedmann is a Senior Urban Planner and part-time Lecturer at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences. He holds a PhD in urban planning and his recent research efforts are focused on the urbanization in the Gulf region. In addition to his academic occupation he is co-founder and principal of ARRUS, an urban planning consultancy located in Frankfurt and Chicago. Email: [email protected] Received: 29 April 29 2015 Accepted: 05 July 2015 Abstract Available online: 01 August 2015 This paper analyzes the different roots of current residential high-rise clusters emerging in new city districts along the coast of Bahrain’s capital city Manama, and the resulting urban planning and design challenges. Since the local real-estate markets were liberalized in Bahrain in 2003, the population grew rapidly to more than one million inhabitants. Consequently, the housing demand increased rapidly due to extensive immigration. Many residential developments were however constructed for the upper spectrum of the real-estate market, due to speculative tendencies causing a raise in land value. The emerging high-rise clusters are developed along the various waterfronts of Manama on newly reclaimed land. This paper explores the spatial consequences of the recent boom in construction boom and the various challenges for architects and urban planners to enhance urban qualities. Keywords: high-rise, cluster development, housing, urban planning, Bahrain, Manama Introduction gaining national independence during 1970, the urban transformation process was dominated Since the end of the 20th century, a new vision by the welfare state mechanisms and a car- in urban development has been introduced based model of town planning (imported by in the case of the cities in the gulf, in order to Western architects and planners).
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Prosperity Strategy a Five-Year Economic Development Strategic Plan for North Iowa
    April 2018 REGIONAL PROSPERITY STRATEGY A FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN FOR NORTH IOWA Working together to improve the lives of all North Iowans. VISION NORTH IOWA REGIONAL PROSPERITY STRATEGY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS TIP Strategies would like to thank the many individuals and organizations who contributed to the development of the Vision North Iowa Economic Development Strategic Plan. Your insight and expertise helped us build a better understanding of the North Iowa region’s assets and opportunities. We are especially grateful to the leadership of the Clear Lake Area Chamber of Commerce, Mason City Chamber of Commerce, and North Iowa Corridor EDC for their partnership, oversight, and investment in this important project. And a special thank you to the project steering committee and key stakeholders for devoting their time and input throughout the planning process. KEY PARTNER ORGANIZATIONS EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE • Cerro Gordo County • Robin Anderson, Mason City Chamber of Commerce • City of Clear Lake • Tim Coffey, Clear Lake Area Chamber of Commerce • City of Mason City • Chad Schreck, North Iowa Corridor EDC • Clear Lake Chamber of Commerce KEY STAKEHOLDERS • Clear Lake Tourism • Mayor Eric Bookmeyer, City of Mason City • North Iowa Corridor EDC • Mayor Pro Tem Travis Hickey, City of Mason City • Iowa Works • Mayor Nelson Crabb, City of Clear Lake • John Pappajohn Entrepreneurial Center • Mayor Pro Tem Mike Callanan, City of Clear Lake • Mason City Chamber of Commerce • Mayor Bill Schickel, City of Mason City • North Iowa Area
    [Show full text]
  • Cluster Subdivisions
    AMERICAN SOCIETY OF PLANNING OFFICIALS 1313 EAST 60th STREET - CHICAGO 37, ILLINOIS lnfoTmation Report No. 135 June 1960 . CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS The typical postwar development operator was a man who figured how many houses he could possibly cram onto a piece of land and have the local zoning board hold still for it. Then he whistled up the bulldozers to knock down all trees, bat the lumps off the terrain, and level the ensuing desolation. Then up went the houses, one after another, all alike. John Keats, The Crack in the Picture Window1 In recent years there has been a search for alternatives to subdivision design practice, which ,l:1.as become conventionalized since World War II. Metropolitan· areas ·have burst forth onto the surrounding countryside, which has been con­ sumed in the wave of suburban development. The "look..:alike" pattern of these developments is familiar. Architecture, street pattern, setback, and yard spacing are unvaried. While the phenomenon has been the cause of much com­ ment, criticism, and despair, it has also been a boon to the nation's car- -~oonis ts . The whole problem has been well summed up by William L. Nelson; who observes: From the standpoint of community design, the scattered disorgan­ ization of subdivision development completely destroyed any sense of community cohesiveness; aesthetically even the gracefully curv­ ing streets with regularly set back ranch houses began to have a look of neatly landscaped sterility not much less monotonous than the rows of rectilinear streets of the past; the lots designed large enough to handle individual sewage disposal accentuated the sprawling, [ and] were often larger than the homeowner wished to maintain.
    [Show full text]
  • Model Land-Development Regulations
    Smart Codes: Model Land-Development Regulations Marya Morris, General Editor American Planning Association Planning Advisory Service Report Number 556 This report was prepared in two phases by the Research Department of the American Planning Association in Chicago, under the guidance of William R. Klein, aicp, Director of Research. Marya Morris, aicp, a planning consultant in the Chicago area, was the general editor and coauthor of Phase II and coauthor of Phase I. From 2006 to 2008, she was a senior associate with Duncan Associates in Chicago. Prior to that she spent 18 years as a senior research associate at APA, where she served as director and principal author of numerous studies on health and the built environment, smart growth, and urban design, including Planning Active Communities (PAS Report 543/544) and Integrating Planning and Public Health (PAS Report 539/540). Phase II coauthors include Brad Gregorka, Meghan Lewis, aicp, Joseph MacDonald, aicp, Kristen Raman, Lynn M. Ross, aicp, and James C. Schwab, aicp. Ann Dillemuth provided critical editorial support. For Phase I, Stuart Meck, faicp, director of the Center for Government Services at the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University, was the principal investigator and coauthor. Rebecca Retzlaff, aicp, now of Auburn University, assisted Meck and Morris. Other coauthors of Phase I include Kirk Bishop, executive vice president of Duncan Associates; and Eric Damian Kelly, faicp, vice president of Duncan Associates and professor of planning at Ball State University. James Hecimovich was the editor, and Lisa Barton was the designer. This report was funded by grants from the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Residential/Mixed Use: 150+ Residents and Jobs/Hectare
    Residential/Mixed Use: 150+ Residents and Jobs/Hectare PORTICO Vancouver, British Columbia RELEVANT GROWTH PLAN POLICIES 5 min. (400 m) walk radius GRANVILLE ISLAND N bus line / bus stop Policy 2.2.3.7 (b, c, d, e, f): Plan and design intensification Sutcliffe Park areas to provide a diverse mix of land uses to support vibrant neighbourhoods; provide high quality public open spaces with False Creek urban design standards that create attractive and vibrant places; 4th Avenue West support transit, walking and cycling; and achieve higher densities Granville Loop Park 5th Avenue West than the surrounding area, with an appropriate transition of built PORTICO form to adjacent areas. 6th Avenue West Burrard Street PROJECT OVERVIEW 7th Avenue West Hemlock Street Granville Street The Portico development transformed an underused brownfield (the former Pacific Press site) into a higher density, mixed-use, infill Broadway West development that is pedestrian- and transit-friendly. Located in Vancouver, British Columbia at the base of the Granville Street Bridge, Portico is a gateway to the city core. Location: Granville Street, 7th Avenue and Hemlock Street The 4 ha (10 ac) Portico development is part the Fairview community, which is south of downtown Vancouver. Fairview consists of mostly low- PROJECT DATA and high-rise condominium and rental apartment buildings and a large number of commercial and industrial buildings. At 118 dwelling units Residents and Jobs Per Hectare 322 per hectare, Portico’s residential density is more than double that of the Ratio of Jobs to Residents 1:18 entire Fairview community, at 52.2 dwelling units per hectare.1 Gross Residential Density 118 units/ha (48 units/ac) 1 City of Vancouver Statistics (2006 Census Data), “Community Webpages: Fairview,” Site Area 4.05 ha (10 ac) City of Vancouver, http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/census/2006/localareas/ fairview.pdf (accessed May 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • CLUSTER REDEVELOPMENT Roshan A
    CLUSTER REDEVELOPMENT Roshan A. Pagar1, Vishakha V. Pawar2, Dhananjay S. Desale3 1,2,3Department of Civil Engineering, Guru Gobind Singh Collage of Engineering & Research Centre, Nashik (India) ABSTRACT Mankind is urbanizing. The 20th century saw a dramatic growth in urban population. Current models predict that the world will be close to 70% urban by 2050. One of the biggest challenges posed by rapid urbanization is the provision of decent and affordable housing for urban dwellers. To help address these issues, a rather new concept in development, cluster or conservation design, has become predominant in many communities. In response to this phenomenon, one tool that has received an increasing amount of attention is cluster redevelopment. Redevelopment is the process of demolishing existing old society building and reconstructing and Cluster development is the grouping of a particular development's residential structures on a portion of the available land, reserving a significant amount of the site as protected open space. Cluster redevelopment is not just about transforming and redeveloping old and dilapidated buildings in a city but also providing amenities like schools, clubs, open spaces and medical facilities in the clusters. Although at its nascent stage in India, cluster redevelopment is the ideal way to progress in futureCities like Mumbai, Chennai and Delhi have been developed haphazardly without considering traffic. Keywords: Redevelopment, Urbanization, Grouping, Mazgaon Chawl. I. INTRODUCTION Now day the population of urban area is increasing rapidly. The % of migrants to city is very large. There are various reasons behind it. Like there is rapid increase in Industrialization in urban areas, so more employments are available in city.
    [Show full text]
  • Section I - General Page
    INDEX SECTION I - GENERAL PAGE Section 100 Purpose & Authorization 1 Section 101 Basic Requirements 1 Section 102 Particular Purpose & Intent Regarding P.C.D. Districts 1 Section 103 Purpose of Subsidized Housing (SH) District 2 Section 104 Purpose of Highway Mixed Use-I (HM-1) 3 Section 105 Purpose of Highway Mixed Use-II (HM-2) 3 Section 106 Purpose of Highway Mixed Use-III (HM-3) 3 Section 107 Purpose of Limited Commercial (LC) District 3 Section 108 Purpose of Affordable Housing Development Program 3 Section 109 Purpose and Intent of Highway Overlay Districts (HOD) 4 Section 200 Definitions 5 SECTION II - USE DISTRICTS A. Types of Districts 1 B. Location of Districts (Zones) 2 SECTION III - USE REGULATIONS A. Use Regulations 1 A.1. Permitted Uses in Districts 1 A.2. Use Regulation Schedule 2 A.3. Flood-Plain District 18 A.5. Aquifer Protection District (APD) 23 a-f A.6. Affordable Housing(IHOP, HOOP, SGO Districts) 24 B. Highway Mixed Use-1 (HM-1) District Use Regulations 44 C. Highway Mixed Use-II (HM-II) District Use Regulations 48 D. Use Regulations for LC Districts 53 E. Downtown Mixed Use District (DM) 57 F. Cluster Development Allowed in Certain Districts 64 1.F. Town House Cluster Development (RSA District) 64 2.F. Single-Family Town House Cluster Development (RSB; RSD; and RSE Districts) 68 SECTION III - USE REGULATIONS PAGE 3.F. Single-Family Town House Cluster Development (RSC District) 74 4.F. Cluster Development - AP and PCD Districts 80 5.F Comprehensive Cluster Development Option 85 G.
    [Show full text]