I ask....for enlightenment.
The municipality I live in is looking to rezone some areas to a less intense residential district. The targeted areas are currently zoned medium to high density multi-family. They are looking to make them single-family or low density two-family.
This push for rezoning was ignited this past summer when a developer was looking to build an 11 unit condo building on a street of mainly single-family houses that is zoned high density residential. Well, the neighbors exploded with accusations of ruining their properties and destroying the "character". The elected officials took heed and instituted a moratorium on demolitions in this areas.
Well, now the rezonings are coming before the Plan Commission. The major concept in the staff report constantly refers to "preserving the character" and that single family areas zoned high density multi-family are not "compatible" with what the zoning district allows.
My municipality is a desirable 1st ring suburb of Chicago with high taxes, old housing stock, great transit access, and high property values.
Therefore, my question is why does the preservation of single-family houses and uses always seem to be the most 'loved' and automatically have less impact than multi-family?
BTW, I will be going to the PC meeting tonight to give my balanced and fair opinion.