Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7A <br />Page 87 <br /> <br />R2 Si.ngle Family Dwelling Density <br /> <br />Density <br />Units/Acre <br /> <br />"'- <br /> <br />One acre <br />16.4 units '",,- <br />~ <br /> <br />-------------~--_.- <br /> <br />r---I-- <br />r------ <br /> <br />_...r..r-_r-- II' <br />,.....1 <br />rJ <br />I <br /> <br />Proposed'Zoning <br />max 17.4 acre <br /> <br />15 -:~:: <br /> <br />10-+ <br />~~._._.. <br />I <br />51 <br />i <br />1; <br /> <br />Current Zoning <br />max 8.7 per acre <br /> <br />-f'" <br />.~t- <br /> <br />+mi--t <br />10,000 <br /> <br />t I-t----t---j+ I <br />20,000 30,000 40,000 <br /> <br />I ~ Lot Size <br /> <br />For example, based on current property values, and estimated construction costs a developer could <br />purchase adjacent duplexes to create a large lot of 15,000 sq ft or more. If the property were <br />redeveloped for five (5) single-famUy dwellings, the developer could potential net $800k in profit. <br />Details of this one example are shown below. <br /> <br />. Purchase two (2) adjacent duplexes @$600k <br />. Build five (5) 2,000 sq ft single-family dwellings @$400k cost <br />e Sell five single..family dwellings @$800k <br />. Profit::: $800k ;: 5 * $800k - (2 III $600k + 5 * $400k) <br /> <br />The analysis must include all smaller contiguous parcels with a viable potential for redevelopment at <br />higher density. The analysis must also identify the density impact of each R2 dIstrict. One would not <br />expect the density increase to be evenly distributed across all districts. <br /> <br />The analysis as disclosed 15 not complete and not adequate for determlnlns the density Impact. <br />Therefore, the Initial Study Is not CEQA compliant. <br /> <br />NOT CONSISTENT WITH PAST DEVELOPMENT <br /> <br />Within the referenced documents, and in public hearing testimony, City Staff ctalms the City's <br />Interpretation of R2 density Is consistent with past development. This Is a false statement. <br /> <br />13 <br />