Dublin Core
Title
Box 18, Folder 26, Document 29
Text Item Type Metadata
Text
August 9, 1967
HOUSING RESOURCES COMMITTEE
ca
Comparison of July 5 Analysis by HRC from Zoning Map and
Appendix to July 21 Memo. from Planning Department
Zoning Map was revised April 31, 1967.
Appendix was compiled as of January 1966.
As can be seen, discrepencies exist in both land lots and acreages
between the Zoning Map Analysis and the Appendix. This may be accounted for
by zoning — and new developments which have taken place since the
compilation shown in the Appendix. However, this reduces the dependency which
can be placed now on the compilation of figures showm in the Appendix.
See Summary at end of the attached Comparative Tabulations for acreazges
already committed; turned down or rejected; and planned for other uses.
Vacant areas zoned A-L (understood to be generally for a specifically
planned development) and A-2) (not generally accepted locally as suitable for
low-cost housing, except for the Elderly) have not been generally included
in this comparison. The vacant land in both categories is relatively small
howevere
CONCLUSION:
In any event, from the attached comparison, it is quite obvious that the
land currently zoned A-1 is both inadequate in quantity and unequitably
distributed throughout the City to meet requirements of the low-income housing
program.
Encls Comparative Tabulations RENT oe
Malcolm D. Jones
Supervisor of Inspection Services
hoo
2
HOUSING RESOURCES COMMITTEE
ca
Comparison of July 5 Analysis by HRC from Zoning Map and
Appendix to July 21 Memo. from Planning Department
Zoning Map was revised April 31, 1967.
Appendix was compiled as of January 1966.
As can be seen, discrepencies exist in both land lots and acreages
between the Zoning Map Analysis and the Appendix. This may be accounted for
by zoning — and new developments which have taken place since the
compilation shown in the Appendix. However, this reduces the dependency which
can be placed now on the compilation of figures showm in the Appendix.
See Summary at end of the attached Comparative Tabulations for acreazges
already committed; turned down or rejected; and planned for other uses.
Vacant areas zoned A-L (understood to be generally for a specifically
planned development) and A-2) (not generally accepted locally as suitable for
low-cost housing, except for the Elderly) have not been generally included
in this comparison. The vacant land in both categories is relatively small
howevere
CONCLUSION:
In any event, from the attached comparison, it is quite obvious that the
land currently zoned A-1 is both inadequate in quantity and unequitably
distributed throughout the City to meet requirements of the low-income housing
program.
Encls Comparative Tabulations RENT oe
Malcolm D. Jones
Supervisor of Inspection Services
hoo
2
Comments