Garage Mahal on Glenwood

This house has so many OTT qualities that it is nominated for the belated July and current August Over The Top Award.

There are many things that make this house special. I hesitate to nominate it since it is being built as a private home rather than a spec house. But as I walked the neighborhood, it was clear this one is Over The Top from so many perspectives, it could become the poster house for defining the problems of over-sized rebuilds in old neighborhoods. Let me count the ways.




1) Streetscape: The original house on this lot blended with its neighbors. When in doubt remember this handy formula:
Streetscape = S1 + S2 + S3, where S1 = Setback, S2 = Style, and S3 = Size





2) Impact on existing neighbors: this courtesy can be accomplished by careful design. Pay attention to height, setbacks, views, tree canopy, and possible runoff from large amounts of impervious surfaces. Your neighbors will love you for it.



3) Respect neighborhood quality of life: this ambiance is what attracted you here in the first place. Lifetimes were spent tending this ground for future generations' enjoyment.






Up close and personal ...






This property was purchased for $385,000 in June 2005. Two years in the making, and still going, this house may single-handedly change the character and tax values of this section of Glenwood Avenue and the settled community behind it. We can be all for rights, but one's rights should require balancing with the impact such freedom can have on the wider public and private realm. I am certain that is why they invented zoning regulations.

Stepback

The debate over the new rules so far has pitted some property owners concerned about their right to use their land against environmental advocates who say owners don’t have the right to send sediment downstream — a problem the rules are designed to fight.

City staff have prepared the new rules in response to a state law requiring larger municipalities to enforce buffers of at least 30 feet along streams.

--Streams form battle lines: Property owners, environmentalists face off over proposed development limits
by Mark Barrett | CITIZEN-TIMES.COM

I find it neverendingly fascinating that every attempt to re-balance the zoning laws to protect existing property owners from negative effects caused by rapid development is met with the retort that this is a violation of "property rights." Is there no end to the irony that both sides of this issue believe it is primarily Their rights that are being infringed by the Other. Reminds me of a couple arguing over who was angry first, as if that is the ultimate litmus test for a valid issue.

Zoning came along to provide guidance for protection of individual property rights. It is a developer's protection as well as a set of regulations that require attention. It is the civic right of the citizenry to ask for stricter zoning, just as it is the right of the landowner (private, public, or business) to ask for lesser zoning. Civic process is the place these rights are heard and balanced.

Word that Rolling Meadows may impose a fee of as much as $5,000 on teardowns has prompted a group representing Northwest suburban real estate agents to prepare to fight what it dubs a "teardown tax."

City officials next month plan to discuss imposing a $1,500 fee for homes that are completely demolished to make way for larger homes. Leaders say replacing the city's post-World War II homes can change the character of the neighborhood.

A city committee looking at maintaining affordable housing in Rolling Meadows has suggested increasing the proposed fee to $5,000.

And the back and forth:

Jeff Metzger, government affairs director for the Realtor Association of Northwest Chicagoland, said the fee amounts to a tax. He questions how setting a fee would encourage affordable housing.

"We think property owners should have the right to do whatever they want with their property," Metzger said.

A person who razes a home to build a new one might not necessarily be building a larger one, he added.

Metzger said a newer home that sells for more on the market also improves the community and adds property taxes to the city's coffers.

City officials pushing for the fee, which will be formally discussed by aldermen next month, disagree.

"The increase in property values is precisely the phenomenon that keeps middle-class professionals and young families from being able to buy a home," said a report from the city's affordable housing committee.

--Realtors oppose teardown fee plan
By Ames Boykin | Chicago Daily Herald - Chicago, IL, USA

It all sounds mighty familiar. But what if it is true? What if we all have the same rights to protect or use our property as we see fit as long as it is legal. Where are the lines to be drawn?

If you can block my view, can I ruin yours in return?

If you can cut down all your trees, what about my shade?

If your runoff floods my property, will you clean it up?

I kinda think this line of reasoning is fraught with problems. Since we do not live in a vacuum, how's about we tackle these things civilly. Feigning shock that the other point of view has a point of view is troublesome to Fallonia.

Setbacks: Part IV

There are several ways to maximize an addition or renovation in ways that impact less the surrounding community. We can even go so far as to call these improvements because they were done in consideration of the tone of the neighborhood.

In this example a one story house received a second floor. It is next door, and slightly uphill, to a house that was already renovated and that has a 2nd floor bumping out of the roofline. The design solution was to step the roof of the renovated house down on the side. You can see the difference this makes in these pictures. There are probably variances involved as well, as that line is pretty close to the structure on the left.




In this example, in the same area and with the same zoning requirements, all effort was put into maximizing the size of the new home.



The result is not so pleasant for the original neighbor in the house on the right.



Remember, this streetscape looked like this for the past 60 plus years.



On the same street, an example of how you can bump out in the front without challenging the setback appearance. This house could legally have built into the front yard.



Like this one, and its twin up the street.



Problem solving is actually the mother of creativity. We have been fortunate to have so many builders working in the neighborhood, before the teardown era began, that created some fine solutions.

"Builder" only recently became a word met with mixed feelings. Maybe some things are just over the top.

Setbacks: Part III

Investigation Continues Into Rolesville House Fires

The heat from the flames were so intense, it melted the siding on nearby houses. The fire chief said that because the homes were so close together, the blaze was hard to contain.

As a result of the fire, residents are raising questions about the proximity of the houses and how that may have played a role as to how the fire spread so quickly.

A committee made up of building inspectors and developers is being formed to discuss whether zoning laws may need to be changed. (from WRAL-TV5)

Fire Destroys Nottingham Road Home (video)

RALEIGH, N.C. -- An early morning house fire burned a home under construction near the intersection of Farrior and Nottingham roads Wednesday. Investigators said the home, which was in the 1500 block of Nottingham Road, was unoccupied at the time the fire broke out just before 4 a.m. Wednesday, Aug 01, 2007 - By NBC17

Early morning fire tears through $900,000 home

Fire all but destroyed a 4,000-square-foot house under construction inside the Beltline early Wednesday morning. Investigators have not determined what caused the fire at 1419 Nottingham Drive.

. . .

Given the severe damage, work crews will have to tear down the house, Bland said.

"When all that's charred like that, you have to knock it down completely and start over," he said.

Bland said that firefighters told him the flames were shooting up 30 feet from the roof when they arrived shortly after 4 a.m.
The main living area appeared to be completely gutted, though the attached garage was untouched. (from N&O, see link above)

So, it is possible that setbacks affect more than community character. As in the fire in Rolesville, the possibility that stick built homes 10 feet apart can spread to the next home is cause for pause. In the Nottingham case, the house is one of 5 in a row that are being built in R-10 zoning. This house is on .28 acres. The description of the flames in the fire make one realize how lucky the neighborhood was that it was contained so quickly.

Here are setback tables for Raleigh zoning.

R-4 is 4 units per acre
  (10,890 square feet minimum lot size)
R-6 is 6 units per care
  (7,260 sq. ft. minimum lot size)
R-10 is 10 units per acre
  (5,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size)

Yards and setbacks
Zone .. Front .. Side .. Aggregate* .. Rear
R-4........ 30’ ..... 10’..... 20’ ..... 30’
R-6.........20’ ..... 5’ ..... 15’ ..... 20’
R-10.......20’ ..... 5’ ..... 15’ ..... 20’
* The total of the two side yards. There are variations for corner lot side yards.

Just because you can develop to minimum setbacks does not mean you should. Common sense and a sense of community are always the best guide to setback standards, in Fallonia's humble opinion.

"New city homes must 'fit better'"

The Atlanta City Council voted unanimously Monday to adopt zoning regulations that are designed to end the era of big houses being built on the sites of previously demolished smaller homes.

Copyright 2007 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

August 21, 2007 Tuesday

New city homes must 'fit better'

Atlanta council's vote keeps developers from building big houses that tower over those already in neighborhood.
DAVID PENDERED; Staff

The Atlanta City Council voted unanimously Monday to adopt zoning regulations that are designed to end the era of big houses being built on the sites of previously demolished smaller homes.

Developers no longer will be able to build houses that are drastically bigger than others nearby, or which tower over adjacent rooftops because the new house was built on a mound of dirt trucked in to get around a zoning code.

"I think what we're going to see in new home construction in neighborhoods throughout the city are homes that are going to be more compatible and generally fit better into the scale and character of the neighborhood," said city planning Commissioner Steve Cover. "And we can do that without taking away any of the benefits of building homes of the size people want to build."

That concept delights Buckhead resident deLille Anthony. She moved to Buckhead last year, after a big house was built across the street from her former home in Virginia-Highland. No sooner had she moved to Garden Hills than the house across the street was torn down and replaced with two that measure at least 6,500 square feet each.

"I don't want regulations that are so strict people can't do anything on their property, but some of the developers have gone too far," she said.

The zoning ordinance would allow bigger homes on bigger lots and smaller homes on smaller lots, except for two neighborhoods where lots are unusually small, and bigger homes would be allowed. In addition, the ordinance would require that the square footage of basements and attics that can be converted into living areas be counted toward a house's overall square footage. The plan also would prevent a developer from hauling in dirt to create a hill on which to build a house, so that a finished basement could be added later.

Mayor Shirley Franklin is expected to sign the ordinance.

Councilman Jim Maddox commended Councilwoman Mary Norwood for her work to pull together the development community, planners and residents to craft a method to regulate the new houses without thwarting the city's renewal. ...

The information about the zoning changes can be found here.

Fallonia used to say that she did not want Raleigh to turn into another Atlanta, but today, she is rethinking that.

Setbacks: Part II

When you develop to the minimum legal guidelines, then you will see more house and less yard. This new neighborhood is being developed from the ground up to the minimum setbacks. It will have more conformity than some of the surrounding streets because of this visual consistency.

At R-10 or R-6, the minimum side setback is 5 feet, but the combined left and right must be 15 feet. So one house may be 5 feet from the line on one side and 10 feet from the other side. Houses in this zoning will generally have a driveway on the wide side, and no drive on the short side. This means that the minimum spacing between houses could be 10 feet and the the maximum could be 20 feet.


This is what 15 feet looks like:



This is what 10 feet looks like:



When homes are torn down and replaced with structures that conform to the letter of the law, they may not blend with the spirit of the established community.

What's the deal about setbacks: Part I

As one neighborhood's rezoning effort winds its way thru the process, one word keeps coming up over and over.

The word is Setbacks.

Defined as: Zoning restrictions on the amount of land required surrounding improvements; the amount of space required between the lot line and the building line.

Boring sounding stuff, but it is the one thing that unifies a neighborhood -- more than building style or color.

Setbacks from the street are usually a combination of factors. The minimum setback is set in the zoning, and is in addition to the right of way. In older neighborhoods, the setbacks may be even deeper than the minimum. The tone was set by the orginal development.




Over the years, multiple renovations have occurred in this neighborhood, by respecting the established setbacks, there is a uniformity.



In older neighborhoods, you also see greater setbacks between the side lots than the minimum requirement. In our neighborhood, we call these yards.