You may have heard that Mayor Franklin ordered a temporary moratorium on the construction of new large homes on sites where smaller homes once stood in several intown neighborhoods (Buckhead, Va-Hi, Morningside, Ansley Park, and Lake Claire), essentially freezing the residential nature of the neighborhood for the time being. This moratorium stays in effect until the city council votes on Feb. 6 on a longer 120 day moratorium for the same neighborhoods.
The moratorium will prevent real estate investors from tearing down older homes and building new, big ones while the council considers restricting the scale of houses in Atlanta’s neighborhoods. The infill-teardown trend has blazed across Atlanta and close-in suburbs during the “back to the city” craze of the past five years. Established communities changed almost overnight as 1,500-square-foot ranch homes and bungalows built in the 1950s were demolished and replaced with houses 6,000 square feet or larger.
“A lot of people move into Virginia-Highland to live in bungalows,” Virginia-Highland resident Andy Walden said. “So I know people who are upset with bigger homes being built.”
I’m probably going to show some of my political stripes right here, but let me just say a couple of things and ask a couple of questions.
1) Do you think that such a move will encourage or discourage people from moving back in to the city? That is, given that I can build a larger house, cheaper in some neighborhoods, why would I live in the place where I’m not allowed to build the type of house that I want?
2) If you don’t want people to build the type of house that they want then you can (a) either buy their house or (b) have joined a condo-board or some other neighborhood that has a strict covenant.
3) Neighborhoods, and cities, are fluid things, changing all the time. And you can remember the olden days when it used to be some way, but the fact is that they change the way that the market and, thus, the people want them to change. If you think it is so important that we preserve the character of a community, then do you also believe that we should make it so that no types of businesses can leave the neighborhood? Perhaps we ought to have banned Starbuck’s from Little 5? Me, I’m not so in to the idea of government mandating the character of a neighborhood – it wreaks of central planning to me and that doesn’t really work out so well in the long run. Neighborhoods change to meet the needs of their market. They need to be allowed to change. Neighborhod “management” strikes me as something far better than neighborhood “preservation.”
Now, of course, there are issues of tree management and daylight-protection for houses, but those can be challenged/answered on an individual permit-by-permit basis. Isn’t that what the whole point of getting a building permit and people being able to challenge it is?