- Jul 20, 2016
- 6,572
- 20,209
Our city leaders have spent $10 million over the last 8 years trying to change the zoning codes to allow multi-family development everywhere and do away with single-family development. The traditional plan was retail and office along major streets, with multi-family behind it, and single-family behind that. Housing prices have soared here in the last 10 years, which has made it more difficult for people to buy homes in the city. Those needing lower-priced homes have moved to the satellite communities that ring the city.
In their infinite wisdom, the council decided that if multi-family units could be built anywhere, then more people would live in the city. However, there is a catch - these are rental units, which only make the owners wealthy and not the tenants. It is part of the plan - you won't own anything and will be happy. I've seen the rent rates of new apartments and purchase prices of new condos, and they would make your eyes water. So, the plan does not accomplished the publicized rhetoric.
The regulations for the infill units do not address off street parking or percentage of land cover. In the traditional single-family neighborhoods, there are few cars parked on the narrow streets, which makes them safer for kids to ride bikes, people to walk, etc. It also allows a community to grow. With limits on how much of a lot can be covered, there is enough land to absorb rainfall and even to have a garden. This new type of infill development places greater stress on drainage, schools, public infrastructure like water, sewer, and electricity, as well as increasing the heat island effect. We have many creeks here that are prone to flooding, so increasing runoff will have disastrous effects. Many schools already are over-crowded, but no one talks about that. City provided water and electricity services have had nothing but trouble for years.
There is no easy solution to what happens to housing in a growing city. When I first came here in the 1970s, there was not that much growth, and student housing included rooms in the mansions built near downtown in the early 1900s. When things did pick up in the 80s, these grand old homes were purchased and turned into offices (lots of law firms), and new apartment complexes were built farther out for the incoming students and young adults. I could go on and on, but there is a flow of changing use and development. In one of the community meetings, a lovely university student stood up and told her story of not being able to find affordable housing near the university. What she and the others nodding in agreement did not understand is that the rental and sales prices of any kind of building reflects the costs to build.
Now what is working is a style called live-work-play. Rather than group people and businesses in a big city, there are smaller developments built around large and smaller employers. Of course, this means that the tax dollars will not go to the city. Yet, they are flourishing in the surrounding towns.
In the end, the courts upheld that the city violated the state statute of notice to affected property owners. There has been a push for this type of redevelopment across the country. It sounds nice, but the reality is far different.
So, are people becoming more aware of the actualities rather than the rhetoric? I sure hope so.
In their infinite wisdom, the council decided that if multi-family units could be built anywhere, then more people would live in the city. However, there is a catch - these are rental units, which only make the owners wealthy and not the tenants. It is part of the plan - you won't own anything and will be happy. I've seen the rent rates of new apartments and purchase prices of new condos, and they would make your eyes water. So, the plan does not accomplished the publicized rhetoric.
The regulations for the infill units do not address off street parking or percentage of land cover. In the traditional single-family neighborhoods, there are few cars parked on the narrow streets, which makes them safer for kids to ride bikes, people to walk, etc. It also allows a community to grow. With limits on how much of a lot can be covered, there is enough land to absorb rainfall and even to have a garden. This new type of infill development places greater stress on drainage, schools, public infrastructure like water, sewer, and electricity, as well as increasing the heat island effect. We have many creeks here that are prone to flooding, so increasing runoff will have disastrous effects. Many schools already are over-crowded, but no one talks about that. City provided water and electricity services have had nothing but trouble for years.
There is no easy solution to what happens to housing in a growing city. When I first came here in the 1970s, there was not that much growth, and student housing included rooms in the mansions built near downtown in the early 1900s. When things did pick up in the 80s, these grand old homes were purchased and turned into offices (lots of law firms), and new apartment complexes were built farther out for the incoming students and young adults. I could go on and on, but there is a flow of changing use and development. In one of the community meetings, a lovely university student stood up and told her story of not being able to find affordable housing near the university. What she and the others nodding in agreement did not understand is that the rental and sales prices of any kind of building reflects the costs to build.
Now what is working is a style called live-work-play. Rather than group people and businesses in a big city, there are smaller developments built around large and smaller employers. Of course, this means that the tax dollars will not go to the city. Yet, they are flourishing in the surrounding towns.
In the end, the courts upheld that the city violated the state statute of notice to affected property owners. There has been a push for this type of redevelopment across the country. It sounds nice, but the reality is far different.
So, are people becoming more aware of the actualities rather than the rhetoric? I sure hope so.
