In the quest for affordable housing a wave of code reform is sweeping America and Baltimore is no exception. A slate of bills under the title Housing Options and Opportunity Act introduced by the Mayor and council members are currently up for debate, all intended to loosen up restrictions and incentivize more housing.
 |
| Baltimore: neighborhoods: Rowhouses and landmarks (Photo: Philipsen) |
While one could argue that Baltimore is not in the same league as San Francisco, Seattle, San Diego or Denver where strong growth and exponentially rising housing assessments and rents have priced out all but the wealthy, and where deregulation in favor of more housing originated. Colorado's governor just signed a bill last week, that would require the state's larger cities to allow buildings with one exit up to five stories. Yet, in spite of Baltimore's more or less stagnant population, affordable housing is in short supply here as well. Mayor Scott has recently focused on filling up Baltimore's many vacant houses and growing the City back. He also sees zoning reform in the context of the racial past of exclusionary zoning.
The issue is the housing they want doesn’t exist in the numbers that we need, this bill directly addresses that challenge. (Mayor Brandon Scott)
Baltimore's efforts are aligned with the State's Housing for Jobs Act, which failed to pass in the last session and would have expedited housing development by requiring local jurisdictions to approve new housing projects in areas with housing gaps or near rail transit.
- Scott's Housing Opportunity Act would promote increased development of low-density multi-family dwellings, strike residential conversion standards for single-family into multi-family dwellings and amend certain permitted and conditional uses bulk and yard standards. (City Council Bill 25-0066)
- Update outdated building code requirements that mandate two staircases in all residential buildings over three stories. By allowing buildings up to six stories to be constructed with a single staircase, this bill is intended to reduce construction costs and allow more compact building types. (City Council Bill 25-0062)
- Move the Zoning Administrator from the Department of Housing and Community Development to the Department of Planning to ensure greater consistency and efficiency in how zoning laws are applied. (City Council Bill 25-0063)
- Make updates to our bulk and yard standards in residential zoning districts for more flexibility to improve and adapt properties. (City Council Bill 25-0064)
- Eliminate outdated parking minimums that require new buildings to include a certain number of off-street parking spaces, (City Council Bill 25-0065)
 |
| Mayor and council in lock step about housing regulations (Announcement in May 25) |
A 2018 bill addressing the permission of accessory dwelling units was withdrawn in 2020. ADU's are currently allowed in certain zoning districts.
“The bills being introduced today are the first modest step to correcting course, allowing not 20, 30 or 40, but just two, three or four dwellings where segregationists decided that only one could exist. Allowing not 20, 30 or 40 stories, but just four, five or six to become practically possible and affordable to construct in those places where we already say that building height is allowed. Allowing 5, 10, or 15 families’ housing needs to be met without making automobile storage a necessary condition. Allowing families to modestly expand their homes to create a little more square footage as the family expands.” (Councilman Ryan Dorsey)
All these bills make a lot of sense. They have been introduced in Council and are now before the respective committees for further consideration. Some public outreach is also planned. Here an assessment of what they do.
Bulk Relaxation- Curse or Blessing?The city controls bulk less through Floor Area Ratios (FAR) and more through lot area requirements, lot coverage and required setbacks. Those provisions are relaxed in the proposed bill. From my own experience I know that adaptive re-use (from factory to housing, for example) almost always runs into the issue of lot area requirements where the required lot area required for each unit could not be met where an industrial building almost filled a lot. This prohibits conversions or requires lengthy variance procedures. Importantly, the bulk relaxation will make it easier to divide existing large homes into two or more dwelling units. This can be a blessing or a curse. It would allow the owner of a large historic home to create an in-law apartment or a rental unit that would enable either aging in place for an elderly relative or provide for an additional income stream for those who are thin stretched to maintain large homes by themselves. On the other hand, it also enable developers to jam small and often low quality units into large rowhouses, for example to pack those houses with students. In those cases the benefit of filling a previous vacant home could be offset with nuisance housing. It would probably be wise to give the bulk bill a sunset provision and require a couple of years of careful monitoring that would show how well the bill works and whether it needs refinements.
Single Exit - Better Dwellings or a Death Trap?
The biggest proposed change may be allowing bigger single exit buildings. The current International Building code IBC limits those to three stories and four units for the residential use group R2. (The IBC, in spite of its name, is essentially the main US building model code which Baltimore adopted with some minor modifications). All larger multi-family buildings require two independent fire exits with the provision that either exit can be reached in a fire with a travel distance no bigger than 125'. On the face of it, it makes sense to provide a second choice should one egress be blocked.
Yet, in recent decades the fire safety standards were increased, including the sprinkler requirement for all residential uses and strict fire separation between units. In fact, fire deaths in sprinklered buildings are extremely rare. Still, the US has internationally one of the highest fire death rates, almost all in older non sprinklered buildings or buildings that have defective or lacking fire separations or that come from a time when the second egress could be a rickety fire escape on the exterior wall. The larger single exit bill would not apply to any previously permitted buildings but apply only to new construction.
 |
| A varied city block with a wide variety of building types here described as typical Charleston |
The two exit building requirement has shaped multifamily housing for decades and critics say, for the worse. By contrast, even tall single exit buildings are quite common in Europe and elsewhere, however, there they are made from steel and concrete, not wood. (Except recently we see more mass timber structures). The housing crisis has brought the issue into focus. Bills to relax the IBC are in discussion around the country. Two exit housing tends to be a boxy stretched out building with doubled-loaded corridors utilizing the maximum allowed travel distance between stairs for optimal efficiency. Lately the code relaxed the use of wood in construction and these multifamily buildings are now routinely 5 stories tall, usually four stories of wood framed housing sitting on a concrete deck over retail, parking or amenities. This building type has become so pervasive, that entire urban quarters have taken on a very uniform look. On the other hand, from a fire perspective, it is somewhat ironic that more wood and more single exit buildings should go hand in hand. Theoretically all the wood is clad by fire protective gypsum or cement board and structural walls, ceilings are fire-rated, plus, all units have sprinklers. However, this type of protection requires correct execution.
 |
| The two exit block filling apartment building, here shown single loaded wrapping a parking garage |
In the single exit buildings per Ryan Dorsey's bill, up to four units could be clustered around a stairway up to six stories high. This would allow a whole lot of different building shapes that are currently not possible, vastly increasing options for infill on vacant lots or gaps in existing neighborhoods. It would add new building types where we currently see practically only two types of new housing: The 5 story stick-built hotel like rectangle or the three story townhouse. Such clustered units could also be a lot more attractive because they could have a lot more windows and daylight than those with windows only on one side with the other backing to a dark corridor.
Parking
Even though the Baltimore City zoning reform enacted a few years back loosened certain parking requirements, minimum off-street parking was still on the books in many areas. Demanding parking is driving up the cost of housing or, especially if it results in parking garages. Avoiding it,once again, required lengthy variance procedures. Good urbanism imagines a less car centric city, fewer parking garages and the elimination of surface parking lots, all made possible by better transit and ample walkways and bike lanes.However, in almost any city parking is in short supply in older neighborhoods where curb space is the standard method of parking considered by existing residents as "theirs".
Zoning Administrator
Finally, the issue of moving the office of zoning administrator including the review of variances and the matter of enforcing compliance with zoning from the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to the Department of Planning (DP). Given that HCD is blamed for major delays in receiving construction permits and given that DP already conducts a site plan review that deals with zoning this makes sense, provided that the matter of enforcement is organized in such a manner, that inspections of projects under construction don't get any more complicated than they already are.
Protecting Existing Residents
One can see that most of the reforms can be seen from different angles. Existing residents are usually weary of developers skimping on parking and making the available spaces scarcer. Existing residents are also the ones who worry about taller buildings taking their views or sunlight or slumlords jamming too much into subdivided larger houses. Legislation certainly has to consider the needs of existing residents. The desire for more housing opportunities would backfire if existing residents would flee their neighborhoods due to the new construction rules, or, worse, would be displaced by gentrification. As for rising property values, homeowners would generally welcome those as long as the increases in property taxes are mitigated. Renters should benefit from a less tight housing market which tends to reduce rent cost. The Mayor knows he has some convincing to do.
"So I want to be very clear, this is not about pushing anyone out of their neighborhood, especially those who live in those enclaves of Black excellence. This is not about erasing what you’ve built. This isn’t something we’re trying to do to you. It’s something that we want to do with you.” (Mayor Scott)
All change is difficult. Investment and better housing in Baltimore is imperative, so is filling up the vacant houses. Older cities show that good urban design can be achieved by mixing scales, uses and building types. In Baltimore's own older neighborhoods such as Mount Vernon once can find variations in scale, setback and styles happily sitting next to each other. The more common pattern of endless rowhouses, duplexes or single family homes with essentially the same height, setback and design could definitely use some variation.
Klaus Philipsen, FAIA
Related articles on this blog:
No comments:
Post a Comment