Report a Comment

I agree with you and with Richard Layman that this is a problem. Throughout the Comp Plan process, we heard from many neighborhoods, especially rowhouse districts, about how poorly designed "pop-ups" had ruined the rhythm of their blocks. However, I also think that citywide design review could be problematic from the point of view of resources and creating uncertainty in the residential markets. People need to have some certainty whether or not they can build another floor.

The proposed new zoning regulations have suggested a way to handle this. The code would allow neighborhoods to ask the Zoning Commission to alter individual dimensions of the zoning, such as height or number of floors, in order to protect neighborhood character, somewhat like an overlay does now. Richard is critical that new code would enact the ability to do this now, but it would have to be effectuated by the individual neighborhoods later.

While I agree that this is not ideal, the length of time required by the zoning rewrite, and the resulting uncertainty have created a lot of angst, with much misinformation being pedaled to alarm residents about alleged neighborhood-destroying provisions. To drag it out further by making OP go and do an assessment of each neighborhood to design in the appropriate restrictions would not be worth the delay. I'm intrigued by Richard's suggestion of the Nashville approach, and will certainly read up on that. In this case, though, the perfect is the enemy of the good. The new code is designed to permit much tailoring of the regs to recognize that one size does not fit all. Let's go with what has been proposed, but start thinking creatively about how we supplement that to permit homeowners the flexibility to expand their units to meet their needs, but in a way that doesn't destroy the property values and appeal of their neighbors' units.

by Ellen McCarthy on May 25, 2012 12:03 pm • link • report