http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/ The Latest in Retail, Entertainment, and Development in Raleigh Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:31:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.3.1
http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/comment-page-1/#comment-23999 Wed, 07 Oct 2009 14:09:40 +0000 http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/#comment-23999 May I weigh in on this? We’ve owned 14 homes in different parts of the country. One was a “starter ranch” with a nice lot & great neighborhood. Full basement, 3 bed/1 bath, 12-1500sf. As family came along, this would not have worked very long. The common practice was to raise the roof & double the square footage. The PC should be limiting the FOOTPRINT to 30%, but allow families the option of adding 1 floor to a 1 story structure, without changing the footprint. Thereby giving homeowners the opportunity of staying in the house/neighborhood if their needs change.
]]>
http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/comment-page-1/#comment-23997 Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:47:43 +0000 http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/#comment-23997 Let me add one more item on my wish list: Corporate relocations to downtown. I think that we need to take a fresh look at how we can attract major companies to our city’s core. I do not mean 1-2 HUGE companies, but a wide variety, from 100 to 2000+ people. It is crucial to our downtown’s future as a place to live, work and play.
]]>
http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/comment-page-1/#comment-23989 Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:10 +0000 http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/#comment-23989 None of these issues seem like a big deal. They are certainly not enough to throw out the whole council and start fresh.
Plus I wouldn’t agree on about half of them. The water restrictions did not go far enough. Many older houses were getting replaced with mcmansions that detracted from the rest of the neighborhood, and I would consider 30% a reasonable cap for replacements. Beyond that point, I think the council should approve whatever it is, and if it’s architecturally solid then it should get approved.
]]>
http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/comment-page-1/#comment-23966 Tue, 06 Oct 2009 21:04:45 +0000 http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/#comment-23966 Dana,
I apologize for not taking the servers into consideration into your timing as well as the fact that you may have a life outside of this blog. I read way too much into when the entry posted.
And I agree, requiring folks to go to the Planning Commission does open up a huge can of worms when one tries to define “what fits in.” My intent was not (NOT) to create Cary II out of Raleigh. When I first moved to this area I was shown many houses in Cary. A very fine town, but just not what I wanted, so I am now located near Sanderson High School.
However, just because somebody owns a lot, they do not have the right to put anything there…. The other folks in that neighborhood have the right to not be drowned out by a monstrosity. By that, I do not mean “no modernist architecture” or any other specific mode. I was referring to size, and height. I do not think it is unreasonable to restrict how high a structure can be in relation to what existed there originally. If the house next door used to be able to be hit with sunlight, then it should still be able to receive sunlight….
But you are absolutely right – we don’t need a PC PC, so to speak, limiting architecture to the fad du jour… I should have been more specific in my comments.
]]>
http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/comment-page-1/#comment-23964
Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:15:29 +0000 http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/#comment-23964
Tim,
Thanks for your thoughts. You should know that in the last 5 weeks I have been incredibly busy working on many projects. The rate of posting here has slowed to just bare essentials, and Dreamhost’s servers have been quite spotty, especially this week. I did not intend to post this editorial so late, but that’s how it happened.
I have suggested to several council members that watering every day before Noon would be more effective and save more water in the long run than alternate day watering…deaf ears.
You do realize that your argument against houses that “don’t fit” suggests that no modernists houses should be built in Raleigh. What is “fit”? Homogeneity? That’s for Cary. This is Raleigh, where we have diversity that is celebrated. Get approval from whom? The Planning Commission? What if we have a planning commission that only allows the architectural fad du jour? What if we have a PC that categorically hates modernist houses? What about a PC that insists that all new houses be brick with beige trim? These distinct possibilities are OK if you think that slapping percentage size increase restrictions that ignore the full setting are OK.
Only certain bums need to be thrown out. We as a people should not have to “suck it up” an put up representatives who cannot solve problems any better than this council has in the last two years.
]]>
http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/comment-page-1/#comment-23961 Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:13:21 +0000 http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/#comment-23961 I can appreciate your speaking up for those things you believe in, but I have one question: Why post this particular entry today, rather than last week? Had you posted it last week, you would have allowed for debate on the items you find so important. That is much better than effectively stating “throw the bums out” on election day.
Garbage Disposals: Few would disagree with your stance on the garbage disposal fiasco. It would have been nice to have some real justification behind the Council’s decision vs. whatever old wives tales they used.
Water Restrictions: So, we rebounded from the drought, so why NOT let folks go back to wasting water like there was an unending supply? The Council left some of the restrictions in place to keep the wasteful habits from being relearned. Do you have information that other methods of water conservation work better and are equally enforceable? Give that info to the Council, and work on getting it changed. But I cannot fault the City Council for working towards trying to avoid the issues we had.
Water Rates: There are fixed and incremental costs to supplying water. Unfortunately, the fixed portion is a huge chunk of those costs. People cut by consumption by 7%, and should be commended for it. The costs to the City for supplying that 93% did not drop much from supplying the 100% that had been used. Revenue had to be replaced. Hopefully, those variable costs were reviewed closely to find savings prior to the rate increase. But, again, I cannot fault the City for ensuring the funds were available for vital infrastructure.
House Replacement Law: I live in a townhouse, with no plans of rebuilding or moving, so what I know of the law is what is in the entry above… The City has a right, and the responsibility, to make sure significant changes to a homeowner’s property are properly approved. Want to build a McMansion on a tiny lot? Get approval. Want to add on to a small house? If it’s a significant change, get approval. Over the dozen or so years I’ve lived in the Triangle, I have read of more complaints of homeowners tearing down moderate or small sized homes and replacing them with very large home that don’t fit the neighborhood than complaints of restrictions the City has for rebuilding or renovating. There are bound to be situations where larger houses will fit nicely into the neighborhood where the homeowner will need to get approval now. Fine – just do it. Check out Shelley Rd. and Wimbledon Dr. near Six Forks to see some nice examples of that. But I would hate to see those same new houses plopped into the tiny single lots where 750-1,000 square foot bungalows sit now on Oberlin near Glenwood.
See? Debate is not too painful.
]]>
http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/comment-page-1/#comment-23946 Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:16:23 +0000 http://www.gogoraleigh.com/2009/10/06/impetuous-council-needs-unrestricted-renovation/#comment-23946 While I do see the need for high standards in architecture, I totally object the crazy restrictions some city leaders wish to put in place when it comes to size and height. Sure, it doesn’t make sense to build a 40-story building next to a single story home, but I have seen a ton of new homes next to smaller, older structure and there was nothing overwhelming.
Yes, we need some good urban guidelines, but they have to make sense to the average resident. The opinions of a few should not be the deciding factor, regardless of how loud those voices are. There may be some exceptions, so we may have to look at it case-to-case, but for most areas in Raleigh the city leaders should be more willing to listen more to those who actually invest their money in rebuilding their home.
]]>