On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 21:05:16 -0500 "Tom Goldstein/Elysian Fields Quarterly" <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can also understand why
> opposition would exist, especially for a five-story structure in what
> appears to be an area with mostly single-family homes and two-to-three story
> apartment buildings. So I think it's healthy if there is concern among
> neighbors about any new developments that may be planned, so long as that
> concern is about design and quality and aesthetics and potential traffic
> issues rather than strictly from NIMBYism, i.e., we don't want it in our
> neighborhood under any circumstances,
I've spent over 12 years on two different Planning Commissions (and chaired each for a
total of five years) and never heard anyone really say NIMBY. The complaints are
_always_ positioned in terms of design, quality, aesthetics and traffic congestion.
Usually comparative density and the need to protect/preserve nature get trotted out as
well.
More often than not, however, the true underlying complaint is NIMBY.
›the attitude often confronted in the
> suburbs where land is so expensive because zoning laws have been written to
> ensure minimum lot sizes that generally discourage the development of low
> income housing. That attitude accounts, in part, for why there is such a
> shortage of quality affordable housing, but I always think it's important
> for neighbors to be concerned about any new developments in the
> neighborhood.
Hate to burst your bubble, but the reason why land is so expensive in the suburbs has
little to do with minimum lot size and much more to do with the marketplace and the
sellers' market for vacant land that bids up the prices to high levels.
And, we often receive Planned Unit Development proposals which propose smaller-than
-'permitted' lots in order to generate _more_ living units so that the land
acquisition/development costs can be shared among a larger number of units and not be
priced outside a willing market's price level.
There are two developments coming on line in our community. One has projected lot
costs of $200k and the other around $250k Both are PUDs with lots either just at or
below the minimum required.
Rick Mons
Tanglewood - Shoreview
_____________________________________________
To Join: St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_____________________________________________
NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul
Archive Address:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
