Can I put a small log cabin / giant birdhouse in my front yard now without HOA approval?
2 Likes
Yes, small log cabin / giant birdhouse is allowed
No, not front yard - must be at least as set back as the existing house (hence JD’s strategy of moving the house)
No, doesn’t overrule any HOA rules, though a surprising number of older subdivisions have seen HOAs expire
Interestingly, moving houses used to be a very common way of making room for larger buildings in cities. Compare old Sanborn maps and you’ll find lots of examples.
1 Like
Or, you can just buy a really tiny house and build a really nice 1200 square footer in the back yard, then lease out the original house and live in the back of the property. I am guessing that the 1200 ft limit is indoor space. You can do a ton of decking and covered porches to extend the practical living area to live larger than 1200 ft would typically feel.
1 Like
Payton,
Do you know what the required analysis was on city utility capacities regarding missing middle 2.0?
In a hypothetical situation of a neighborhood nearly doubling in density and going from x number of bedrooms to 2x # of bedrooms on the same sewer / water lines, it could become necessary to upgrade pump stations, pipe diameters, etc. If there are existing neighborhoods that are nearly at capacity on sewer / water supply, it wouldn’t take many SFH > triplex conversions to reach a tipping point. In theory, the assessments of the new dwelling units should help fund the Cap Improvements, and maybe there is an additional permit fee when increasing density within an older neighborhood that has aging infrastructure.
I don’t know a ton about public utilities, but have an understanding based on some experience with a new subdivision in the exurbs. In our case, a regional pump station reached capacity and limited our future expansion capacity sans a big ($,$$$,$$$) overhaul. Thus our oversized pump station was moot.
1 Like
The new Biden-Harris Administration Housing Supply Action Plan that is very much in tune with what Raleigh just adopted.
First item: “Reward jurisdictions that have reformed zoning and land-use policies with higher scores in certain federal grant processes, for the first time at scale.”
Second item: “Deploy new financing mechanisms to build… manufactured housing… accessory dwelling units (ADUs), 2-4 unit properties, and smaller multifamily buildings.” (In CRE lingo, <50 units is “smaller.”)
As you may remember, the Triangle’s transit dreams have been thwarted multiple times by FTA’s formulas. But now US DOT will “reward jurisdictions that have put in place land-use policies to promote density and rural main street revitalization with higher scores in the grant process.”
The 2023 administration budget proposal includes a “Housing Supply Fund… reward those that have already made reforms by giving them additional funding to boost the affordability and maximize the benefits of their new policies. This funding would also support broader housing development activities, including environmental planning and mitigation, road infrastructure, and water or sewer infrastructure.”
I’m not aware of any specific analysis done, but evidence from elsewhere indicates that the water/sewer impact is quite literally marginal.
- Not every lot redevelops all at once
- Newer/smaller houses use a lot less drinking water than older/larger ones, especially for irrigation and because of low-flow plumbing
- Many of the near-suburban neighborhoods which will see redevelopment were built for larger populations but have seen population decline or plateau as kids move out & parents age
- Part of site plan review is a sewer capacity analysis, if the sewer pipe out front is insufficient the developer may have to send new lines around the block to one that will suffice (I know because I’m having to do this)
- The city is constantly replacing and upgrading water/sewer lines, all across the city, all the time
11 Likes
Was re-reading this last night, and hadn’t noticed this little provision which creates an optional inclusionary pathway:
“A development site utilizing this option in a residential zoning district shall contain no more than twelve (12) residential units; however, a development site may contain additional residential units provided a number of units equal to at least twenty percent (20%) of the residential units over twelve (12) established within the development site shall be affordable for households earning sixty percent (60%) of the Area Median Income or less for a period of no less than 30 years”
(There’s an equivalent bonus for RX/CX/OX/NX-3: they can go up to 5 stories with the same bonus percentage.)
This effectively creates a 15-unit floor; for 14 units, 14-12 = 2 x 20% = 0.4 affordable units.
4 Likes
Thank you!
Although I like the federal gov stepping in to reward communities that are reforming land use/zoning policies in theory, I more line with the principal that municipalities need to create locally financially sustainable avenues for funding capital improvement. That should not be hard in an area growing as fast as we are
1 Like
i guess thats easy peasy?
Yesterday I listened to a podcast on 99 percent invisible about Toronto and its missing middle housing that has both created a construction boom in the city’s center, but also has created extremely high housing costs and segregation.
The podcast goes through Toronto’s zoning history back to the early 20th century and how it was a backlash to immigration. I had no idea that Toronto was a textbook example of lacking missing middle housing, and that they are still struggling with it today. Here’s a link to the web story and the podcast itself. If you have 45 minutes, it’s worth a listen if this is a topic that you care about.
8 Likes
Love 99% Invisible, will definitely check this out.
3 Likes
A look at the impact of the SFH ban and other housing reforms in Minneapolis: How Important Was the Single-Family Housing Ban in Minneapolis?
1 Like
Single family housing ban- LOL it’s a single family ZONING ban, not single family HOUSING ban. Talk about misleading headlines
8 Likes
Planning vs. anti-planning.
2 Likes
a fun little video about 15 minute city concept tested in vancouver. Suburbs vs mixed vs downtown in a cycling and pedestrian test of the "15-minute city" - YouTube
2 Likes
Yay! I live in a 15 minute city.
2 minute walk to convenience store #1
3 minute walk to convenience store #2
5 minute walk to Publix
7 minute walk to Broughton High
6 minute walk to Wiley Elementary
14 minute walk to Raleigh Charter
6 minute bike to WakeMed Urgent Care
6 Likes
How bad is the health issue if you can ride your bike to urgent care?
1 Like
I didn’t make the rules. I’m just playing the game.
Also, I can think of a variety of health issues that I could have and still ride a bike.
5 Likes
There’s been different concepts of the 15 minute or 20 minute city. Some include 15-20 minutes via transit, bike, or walking. I don’t live in a 15 minute city by the concept of the video, but I do live in a 20 minute city including transit or bike. I’ll ride 30 minutes to get to Wegmans just to get in a little extra time for the exercise. I won’t do it everyday especially since I have closer grocery stores within 15 minutes, but I do it so that it counts towards my exercise goal per week.
Was sent an Instagram link today about a house that was built on a very small lot. Thought people may enjoy it here: Login • Instagram
1 Like
I’m familiar with that house and that story. Super cool.