Demolition controversy continues

Some neighborhood activists have claimed the residential demolition issue is the next street fee.

By that they mean a controversy the City Council will have a hard time resolving because it pits impassioned citizens against powerful special-interest groups upset neighbors and historic preservation advocates on one side, and developers on the other.

But now it seems the two issues have something else in common: last-minute changes to proposals being considered by the council.

The Bureau of Development Services has proposed several code changes in response to growing neighbor outrage over the increasing number of older homes being torn down and replaced with one or more new houses. The council had a hearing on the proposal on Dec. 17 that was continued to Feb. 12 because so many people had signed up to testify.

But BDS now wants to amend its original proposal to address complaints raised at the first hearing. And like the shifting street fee proposals, many of the original critics are not satisfied with the new changes, either.

The original proposal included a mandatory 35-day delay on all demolitions and increased neighborhood notification requirements. But BDS also wanted to end an existing 120-day delay automatically granted to neighborhood associations who request it. That change was opposed by preservationists and United Neighborhoods for Reform, a grassroots organization that formed over the summer around the demolition issue.

Among other things, UNR wants the council to appoint a citywide task force to consider a wider range of demolition-related issues, including limiting the size of the replacement homes to maintain neighborhood character.

The new BDS proposal would still end the existing 120-day delay. However, it would allow a 60-day delay to be added to the mandatory 35-day delay if anyone requests it stretching the total potential delay to 95 days.

The new proposal also would require that whoever requests the delay pay a $1,318 fee, submit a plan for saving the property, and prove they have the financial means to carry it out.

United Neighborhoods for Reform met Sunday evening to review the amendments. According to co-founder Al Ellis, the group reluctantly agreed to accept the 90-day delay and requirement for a plan showing how the property can be saved.

Read more here:
Demolition controversy continues