I recorded a short video in which I ask about the logic behind the upzonings LC(R) properties to S2.
Seeking clarity about inclusion of certain parcels in the analysis - Watch Video
One of the City’s goals for rezoning is for the regulations to reflect what’s actually built, so property owners can have their full rights and neighbors can have accurate expectations for what may happen in the future.
In the example you showed of 69 Cummins Hwy, the developer needed a zoning variance to build the 3-story, 22.6k sq ft building as the current LC (Local Commerical) zoning only allows for 2.5 stories at a Floor Area Ratio of 0.5. The lot is about 10k sq ft, so only a 5k sq ft building is allowed by-right.
Even though the ZBA has set a precedent for approving a building of such scale, redevelopment of the other properties within LC would still require a lengthy variance process, which creates a lot of uncertainty. Rezoning levels the playing field and produces more predictable results for all parties.
It’s worth noting that both of these recent projects are fully residential projects in a Local Commerical zone, reflecting the economic realities that make ground floor retail challenging. While S1 may be more consistent with the scale, without applying an S2 or higher, there would a strong incentive for future projects to be similar and also not have ground floor active uses.