David Brauer posted his concerns regarding Good Samaritan's proposed redevelopment, and included Kingfield's policy of granting variance requests and upzoning if a project meets certain affordability guidelines, but denying the same if the project doesn't. (I deleted the original message, but David feel free to correct me or provide us with the exact language if I am misstating this, ). I responded off-list, but David and I agree that it might be a good topic for discussion. Please see the clip below. Sorry about the length, but it is meant to be thought-provoking. What do list members think?
Snip What possible basis could there be > to deny the variance/upzoning for a project that serves the middle class, > but grant it for the very same project because slightly poorer people will > live there? If there is any basis, wouldn't that allow neighborhoods, or > entire cities, to do exactly the reverse? Could Lynnhurst adopt a policy to > deny variances and upzonings unless they kept rents above "affordable" > levels? Could Edina adopt such a policy? Could Willard-Hay adopt such a > policy, on the basis that putting more affordable housing there is further > segregating our population? Several cities (I'm not making this up) will > not grant approvals to housing projects if the developer can't show that the > units will pay for themselves in terms of taxes paid for services required. > This is an absolute bar to affordable housing. > If Kingfield can adopt the policy you cite (deny if it's not affordable > enough), then what is to keep other jurisdictions from adopting similar > "policies du jour" to combat the social crises of the day? Would you grant > a variance to a pillar of the community and deny the same to a newcomer? > Would you grant it to a bank-financed project but deny it to a cash buyer? > Grant it to a project with public art but deny it to a project with a > swingset instead? I can't even think what's at the end of the slippery > slope you are headed down, but it seems to be the same logic that would lead > to granting it for a U.S. citizen but not a non-citizen, or granting it for > a Christian but not an atheist (or a Muslim), or granting it for an owner > who promises to give the profits to charity but not an owner who will use > them for his children's college. Would you grant it for an abortion clinic? > Do you think that people in Minnesota's pro-life hotbeds should be able > to deny zoning approvals for their social engineering reasons? Could a city that bars > "miscegenation" force a developer to keep apartments single-race? Berlet > residents? Bar unmarried couples from cohabitating? You may think these > are outlandish, but an unmarried cohabitation ban was litigated last year, > and I guarantee thousands of cities out there would do everything in their > power to deny approvals to any building aimed at serving GLBT folks. > These things are all completely unrelated to the impact the building has on > its surroundings. They are unrelated to any public health, safety, or > welfare factor. Once you start regulating for what you believe is the > social good, you open the door to every other interpretation of what is the > social good. I assure you, David, that kind of logic will exclude much more > affordable housing than Minneapolis can ever produce. It gives people the > fuel to say - "Minneapolis bends zoning laws to favor the social environment > they want, so why can't we do the same to get the environment we want?" > So I would urge you to be pro-active in recruiting developers and in trying > to help affordable housing with whatever money you have, but you cannot > discriminate by granting approvals to the same building for "noble" goals > but denying approvals if the building doesn't serve those goals. If > Kingfield truly has such a "affordable/grant, market/deny" policy, I would > urge you to drop it and view zoning approvals on their land-use merits, not > on your version of the social good. > > Neal Blanchett > Lynnhurst _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
