There is a duplex in there which is neat. Built in 2000. I think the owners live in. The lot was bought in 1987 (probably a SFH before) then Duplex added in 2000.
Here is a little summary of the homes in this requested NCOD for reference.
I pulled the Imaps data for all the homes in the proposed NCOD, & there are 119 total. One from 1932 on Woodburn. Then 102 homes were built between 1950 and 1955. First on Smedes last on Woodburn. I can see the 18ft height here.
After 1955, the “nub” house was built in 1965, then nothing happened until 1999.
Check out what showed up in 1999. This house is something. Sold for $1.4 Million in 2017. Is this post modern modernism? Its Modern, but not mid century modern or 2019 modern.
Then that duplex was built, and 3 SFhomes in 2002.
Followed by a tear down in 2017 with a pretty tall home coming in. Has a chateau feel to it.
In 2018 these two homes were built in a lots split. And in 2019 this lots is becoming a new home or two from a teardown. That is 14-16 homes since 2000 and 104 from before 1963. I was expecting a more radical change to prompt the NCOD request.
Interesting information, well researched and illustrated. Thanks for all that work @ADUsSomeday If you were enrolled in my class, you certainly earned an A+.
The “neat” duplex is a single family house designed and owned by a retired local architect. He has an affinity for Scandinavian design.
I’m pretty sure the “nub” that was included in the overlay is the Everett Case house. I think it may have been designed by the architect who designed the original Cameron Village. It served as his office away from the university where they would view game film, have meetings, etc. It has history that’s significant to many State fans, which is probably why it persists.
I think a NOCD needs to have a certain level of neighborhood buy in before the council will consider it. If the Apartment and Condo owners don’t want to be a part of it, they shouldn’t be forced to just because the buildings are old.
It wouldn’t surprise me at all if they designed and permitted it as a duplex in case they decided to rent it out in the future.
It’s an interesting thought though. If you designed your house so that when you were ready to “downsize” all you have to do is add a single interior wall in order to rent out a whole 2,000sf unit. You have income generation built in to your primary residence and you don’t have to move to make it happen. It might not even be an inconvenience if it was designed right.
I always thought Coach Case’s house was on Park Dr, right at the tight bend before Forrest Dr. But I was told this as a kid, and so the information certainly could be incorrect.
The thing that I find most curious in this whole NCOD thing is the delusion of permanency regarding housing stock. What’s being targeted is the rambling split-level ranch style which is now hitting the 50-year mark. They came in vogue when RTP was getting going and steamrollered over farmland instead of rebuilding older neighborhoods.
Now, those original owners are aging out and quite likely are looking to cash in on their investment. The problem is that it’s an uneven pattern, creating the patchwork of infill development like one sees in Anderson Heights. And, the opportunities to redevelop large scale ITB swaths like Whitaker Park are few and far between.
Great Britain may have had a good idea with their Green Belt plans to save farmland from development . But, conversely because of it, it’s one of the most expensive cities in the world to live in, requiring service and trade employees to live and commute into the City from some distance. The only saving grace there, one would suppose, is their well-developed rail infrastructure.
But, drawing a line against the tide won’t work in the long run.
I don’t even remotely blame the residents for wanting to keep the current feel and look of their neighborhoods. But with that being said, why would the city allow these NCOD’s to even happen? At least put expiration dates on them and make them renewable every 20 years or something like that. The city needs to retain the right to end these when it becomes apparent that they are not now a good thing for the city.
Then, there will be the historic preservation movement coming in to conserve the remains of 1950-1970 Classic Architecture for future generations. The horror!!
(Not to mention the accompanying Ken Burns documentary on PBS, ‘The Post-War Years’ with its breathless and rhapsodic voice-overs delivered in his inimitable pan-and-scan style.)
I grew up in North Ridge, and am very familiar with the overlay area of the so called “North Ridge West”. I don’t understand why these particular homes have organized into an NCOD. IMO, other than their proximity to North Ridge Elementary, there’s nothing particularly notable about this area. Tanbark, for many, is just a road used as a cut-through between Harps Mill and Hunting Ridge Roads.
I looked into every home in each NCOD and North Ridge West stood out because there have not even been teardowns. I think the newest home was 1989. So it is kind of a pre-emptive NCOD?
