Teardowns: Raleigh studying whether to close barn door.
Uh, is there a problem inside the Raleigh Beltline with smaller, older homes being torn down and replaced by bigger — usually mega-bigger — new homes? Neighborhood leaders have been saying so since, in my experience anyway, at least five years ago. (For some background, here’s our May 9 story. Or visit the blog entitled Over the Top-Inside the Beltline. And if you’re not aware how controversial this subject is, read the comments attached to our August 29 story on two of the contested City Council races.) They’ve been asking the City Council to write an infill ordinance, not to prevent teardowns — because some older houses are in bad shape and are better torn down — but rather to set some standards for what can built in a teardown’s stead. In that time, how many houses do you suppose have bitten the dust? The answer, according to City Planning Director Mitch Silver, is 588. More below the fold.
The thing is, lot sizes in some of these neighborhoods are quite small, and the houses quite close together. Which is not a problem for two adjacent small houses, but is a problem when a big, tall new house towers over its older neighbor. Put a mega-house next to a little one, you’ll find, and the value of the latter may drop to the value of the land beneath it. Why? Because the small house, regardless what shape it’s in, now has teardown written all over it too.
If neighborhood folks think they should get some protection from this, however, the builders want free rein to “follow the market” so they can buy, tear down and replace houses at will — and if the value of a neighbor’s house drops in the process, all the better, since now they can buy tear it down more cheaply. So one guess which side the Council’s been on to date?
That’s right. For five years, the Council’s done nothing. But in June, with the heat really on from the neighbhorhoods and the toll of teardowns now in excess of 500, the Council decided that doing absolutely nothing was no longer an option. The solution? Righ again. They voted to do a study. (!)
Of course. The Council majority did not want to do what Councilors Stephenson and Crowder suggested, which was to put a temporary height limit on replacement houses while quick hiring an expert consultant to draft a comprehensive infill ordinance. Instead, it decided to add a full-time position in the city’s planning department, and as soon as the newbie’s hired, and can locate all the bathrooms, give her — or him — the job of figuring out what to do.
Meanwhile, though, Raleigh Planning Director Mitch Silver — who wanted that expert consultant — put some interns to work, and they came up with alarming information about how many horses have already disappeared from the city’s open teardown door. Since 2002, the number is 588. His press release today:
Sept. 14, 2007
DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING COMPLETES FIRST PHASE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFILL ANALYSIS
The Raleigh Department of City Planning has completed the first phase of research to determine the amount of infill development that has occurred in the Capital City.
Since January 2002, 588 new single-family homes have been developed on sites where a building was previously demolished. The majority of this activity was concentrated inside the Beltline north of Wade Avenue and west of Wake Forest Road. There are 84,100 single family homes in Raleigh.
In June 2007, the City Council acknowledged that neighborhood infill development warranted attention and created a new planning position to address the issue. The Department of City Planning in partnership with Preservation North Carolina hired interns to research the issue over the summer.
The Department of City Planning and the City’s GIS Division examined the number of one- and two-family homes, located in a residential zoning district that have been demolished and replaced with new single-family homes. From 2002 to 2007, the Department found that of the 588 single-family homes built, 52 percent were less than 4,000 gross square feet, and 48 percent were more than 4,000 gross square feet in size. Gross square feet includes non-heated square footage such as garages, porches and basements.
“We don’t have enough data at this time to fully assess the magnitude of the infill development issue,” Planning Director Mitchell Silver said. “Our initial research is
telling us that infill sites have been redeveloped for homes in a variety of sizes. Additional analysis and field work is needed to better understand the difference in square
footage between the old and new houses, and the relationship to existing zoning, lot size and neighborhood character.”The next phase of the Neighborhood Infill analysis will start as soon as the new planner is hired. Interviews for the position are commencing this month. The Department of City Planning estimates the infill study should be completed by May 2008. The department will study the size and scale of the new single-family homes being developed in infill locations in relation to neighborhood context and existing zoning regulations. The department will also study best practices from cities across the country and recommend alternatives that work best for Raleigh’s neighborhoods. Preservation North Carolina has already undertaken a significant amount of best practices research.
The Department of City Planning will hold public meetings to obtain citizen input on both the scope of the issue and potential responses before a formal report is presented to the City Planning Commission and the City Council in 2008.