3 ms·
Not exactly the same thing. Upzoning allows the owner to build more than one residence on what was a single family property. This might include removing an exi
by amanaplanacanal 1y ago
Not exactly the same thing.
Upzoning allows the owner to build more than one residence on what was a single family property. This might include removing an existing home to build a duplex or triplex, dividing a house into a duplex, or building an accessory dwelling unit on the property.
Urban renewal was typically the government using eminent domain to raze whole neighborhoods to build low income apartment buildings or some such. This also might include using the "Tower in a park" architecture that was all the rage at the time, but a terrible urban form.
- LastTrain 1y agoSure, but by the time upzoning makes it through city council and all the compromises are made it looks a hell of a lot like urban renewal. What else do you call allowing the removal of two historic structures from a city block to make way for another five over two?
- presentation 1y agoAnother five over one (which is what I think you mean) is not the same as a whole neighborhood getting razed and replaced with towers in the park. By the way, the whole point of streamlining permitting and zoning processes are to get rid of the unreasonable watering down of every proposal because as you state the end result is worse for everyone, aesthetics included. Also it isn’t just about historic structures, there’s situation like that San Francisco Mission District strip-mall-esque laundromat steps from the BART station, that can’t be replaced because NIMBYs are afraid of “changing the neighborhood character.” If crap architecture like that ends up in the same historic bucket then whoever is declaring 80% of every city as being “historic” has done a disservice to anyone who wants to actually protect historic architecture by diluting the name for their anti-change cause.