Revised Discussion Conversion of Existing Zoning Districts

Thanks for clarifying. Believe it or now, all other RG-2 (save 5 lots on Atlanta Ave, 10 on Troy Street, and some one-offs) are large complexes. We will look into options. Thanks!

Thank you, Yes, it is specifically St. Charles/Greenwood Ave in Virginia-Highland. I believe there are others.

Thank you for bringing this error to our attention. I reviewed the source conversion methodology and all three NC districts in Virginia-Highland should have converted to NX5. Assigning NC-11 to NX1 was a scrivener's error and has been corrected, as noted. We're very sorry About that.

If I understand your request correctly, there is currently no proposed Conservation District for more urban bungalow neighborhoods (remember, Conservation Districts only change height). Can you please be specific about where you are referring too? Is it St. Charles/Greenwood Ave in Virginia-Highland? Other than the two streets, almost all RG-2 in the City is large apartment complexes (I just ran a search using GIS). Thanks!

Thank you. To develop this a bit more: Are there any thoughts for creating a Conservation District for the existing legacy single family/duplex homes within the existing RG-2 to UG3A Districts with additional buffering/setback requirements similar to what may be proposed for the R-3 and R-4 equivalents as mentioned above? For these RG-2 to UG3A Districts, could there be a new Form diagram more like N5B forms to be applied to any UG3A sites abutting these legacy RG-2 single family/duplex homes so there is a Conservation strategy to harmonize new development with these existing RG-2 single family/duplex homes, since the UG3A diagrams don't offer a way to address this This alternative form would also be a strategy to address the setback issue in the post below and scale issues mentioned in related posts.

Perhaps a new UG2 ?? Something that has setbacks of say 3-5' on side and rear, front setbacks that match existing, a 35' height limit or 2.5 floors, no limit on number of units, and a similar ~.4 FAR based on GLA.

I want to clarify here, the issue with the proposed form is that the RG2 has 7ft setbacks within its zone, so an RG2 to RG2 requires 7ft setbacks on side and rear even when adjacent to another RG2. This is something worth preserving (could perhaps decrease to 5ft). But the UG3A has no such within UG3A setback requirements. Why not? From a property access and safety perspective setbacks should be preserved.

The proposal continues the current regulation of having a "transitional yard" where an RG district abuts R1-R5 in place of side or rear setbacks (see Division 8.4 of Chapter 8 of the draft). This generally requires a 10 or 20 ft landscape setback or matching the setback of the adjacent House-Scale or Neighborhood-Scale District. Within NS Districts, the number of stories has been reduced from current 3 to 2.5, which better matches existing built patterns. There is currently a Conservation District proposed for R-3 and R-4 equivalents.

Thanks. Related question: In select areas of the RG-2 districts there are still many remaining 1 1/2 story bungalow and two story single family/duplex homes interspersed with garden apartments/condos. Also UG3A setbacks appear to be less than existing in RG-2. Are there any transitional buffer and height planes envisioned to buffer these legacy homes from potentially larger developments than exist now or may be created out of assembled and replatted lots? Is there the possibility of creating Conservation Districts for these legacy single family/duplex homes?

Thank you for your comments. The FAR of RG-2 (0.348) is LESS than the allowed FAR in most House-Scale Districts. Because RG-2 is intended to create low-density garden apartments, we have grouped it with the "Form District" that results in a typical 2 to 3 story "house-scale" building. This said, we are going to review if RX1 is the best conversion based on the input of you and others. Thanks!

Thank you for your idea. You and others have commented on the RG-2 and RG-3 "islands" within neighborhoods. We're going explore if we can find a way to convert these districts in a way that doesn't create unforeseen problems in other neighborhoods.

Thank you for your comment.