Council may scrap 'scrapes'
Boulder leaders consider limits on razing old houses to replace with larger ones
By Ryan Morgan (Contact)Tuesday, March 11, 2008
A few of Boulder's elected and appointed leaders will sit down Thursday night to ponder the best way to keep "mega" houses from being built on the remains of more modest ones.
The question of whether "pop-and-scrape" residential redevelopments should be limited is just one of several land-use issues the members of the City Council and Planning Board will discuss at Thursday's meeting, Mayor Shaun McGrath said.
McGrath said members of the City Council have heard lots of complaints from people across Boulder upset when small homes are razed and replaced with many-thousand-square-foot homes. One City Council member is even proposing a maximum size of 2,500 square feet for rebuilt homes, prompting debate among leaders.
"We've heard from a lot of people who have worried about how scrapesin particular are changing the character of neighborhoods," McGrath said. "I don't know what the end policy might look like, but we certainly want to have a conversation with the community."
Critics say big, new homes in older neighborhoods -- such as the Newlands in north-central Boulder -- are an environmentally destructive, aesthetic assault. They're particularly upset by new homes that spread from one end of a housing lot to the other, crowding their neighbors.
This isn't the first time members of the City Council have expressed an interest in possibly limiting residential redevelopment -- but Thursday's meeting could be the first step toward putting an ordinance in place.
Two years ago, City Councilwoman Crystal Gray tried to bring up the issue, but it didn't gather much momentum. That's changed, said Gray, who's now the city's deputy mayor.
"I just think that the pace of redevelopment has really picked up and spread to all areas of the city," she said, so an issue that only raised eyebrows in a few neighborhoods a few years ago now has broader resonance.
Many cities have enacted measures limiting house sizes, and Gray said Boulder has plenty of new regulatory options from which to choose. The City Council could tighten existing caps on "floor-area ratios" for homes -- that is, the percentage of a property that's covered with finished square footage.
They could examine more subtle and flexible "building envelope" limits, or even "character guidelines," which would be more labor-intensive to enforce.
Policy-makers often use the shorthand term "pops and scrapes" when talking about the issue. But both Gray and McGrath said they're more concerned with scrapes -- the practice of demolishing a home and replacing it with something much bigger -- than pops, which just expand the size of existing homes.
Any proposal is likely to be controversial. Susan Graf, president of the Boulder Chamber of Commerce, said people in the city's business and residential community are nervous.
"I would hope that the City Council and the Planning Board would clearly identify the problem they're trying to solve," she said. "They point to a few specific examples of big houses or ugly houses, and I don't know that that constitutes a problem. ... I'd be worried they're trying to hit a fly with a sledgehammer."
And elected leaders will likely disagree about the best way to go forward. City Councilman Ken Wilson delivered a rebuke Monday to a proposal from City Councilwoman Lisa Morzel on the City Council's "hot line," a public e-mail list officials use to communicate.
In a post to the e-mail list, Morzel wrote that she'd "strongly suggest our building size maximums start at 2,500 (square feet) for the main structure/house, allowing 450 (square feet) for garages."
To which Wilson replied, "I guess I will need to tear down a third of my home. I will not support regulations that limit my neighbors building something smaller than the home I live in, or a (floor-area ratio) less than mine -- which has been at its current size since the mid-1920s."
Wilson said he'd consider asking the city's staff to assemble a list of the sizes and floor-area ratios of City Council members' houses.
"I think it is only fair to see where our homes fall into this mix," he said.
That drew a reply from City Councilman Macon Cowles, who said the city has a duty to maintain the supply of affordable and reasonably sized housing, protect existing neighborhoods and address the environmental impacts of new construction.
"The council has a fiduciary obligation with respect to each of these three things, and the route forward cannot be determined by using the house sizes of individual people as a yardstick with which to measure an appropriate response for the city," he wrote.
No comments:
Post a Comment