On March 18, Roanoke’s city council passed an ordinance that represents an about-face from its previous policy of single-family zoning in most neighborhoods. The ordinance is a response to a shortage of about 4,000 residential units in the city — a problem not unique to Roanoke during a time when a combination of factors such as high prices, high interest rates and elders staying in place rather than downsizing has made finding decent affordable housing impossible for many.
Creating new housing in the city’s existing footprint is a laudable goal and would be good for both our citizens and our economy. And it’s not without precedent. After World War II, apartment buildings went up all over town, and formerly single-family homes were divided into smaller units to accommodate returning GIs and their growing families.
But shortly after I bought my home in the city’s Raleigh Court neighborhood more than 30 years ago, the city passed an ordinance forbidding new conversions of single-family homes into apartments and encouraging reversion to original floor plans. Today, there are very few multifamily dwellings left in my neighborhood, and not only have our property values gone up, the houses seem to be better-maintained.
People are also reading…
This isn’t to say that people who live in multifamily dwellings make bad neighbors. In other parts of the country, home buyers think nothing of purchasing half a duplex, an apartment, or a town house, but in Roanoke — except in the most desirable areas — the push toward single-family homes has meant that in many older neighborhoods, multifamily dwellings tend to house those with lower incomes.
They are often owned by large realty corporations that have no investment in the community and don’t maintain them. These units can be nearly uninhabitable. Mopping mold off walls and placing furniture over holes in the floor are everyday chores for some residents.
According to census data, nearly half of all homes in Roanoke are not owner-occupied. Ensuring that these properties stay up to code is a huge and expensive job for the city. So does council just want more units, or more owner-occupied ones? Simply passing an ordinance doesn’t address that issue.
And what does “affordable” mean? Guidelines from the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development say that Americans should spend no more than 30% of their income on housing.
With an average local income of $51,000 in 2022, that would add up to about $1,400 per month. The average monthly cost of owning a home here at that time was $1,195 and renting was just a little over $900. But while employment and wages have risen since the pandemic, housing costs and other expenses, such as food and day care, have gone up even more.
Today, that amount would only get a one-bedroom in a very modest neighborhood. So before the city council encourages building more units, maybe they need to to figure out how people are going to pay for them. When new developments open, the news often appears on our Facebook feeds. The comments sections give an idea of how unaffordable these places really are.
And where will they be located? For a push toward more affordable housing to succeed, it needs to be in every part of the city, not just neighborhoods where residents don’t have the political clout to fight displacement and increased demands on infrastructure. Where people live in this city is entwined with a century and half of racism. Is there a plan to avoid even the appearance of more of the same, if builders are allowed to choose where these new homes will go?
Back in the 1980s, my mother moved to the Ballston neighborhood of Arlington, where developers were tearing down perfectly good single-family homes to put up densely packed town houses because it was more profitable.
If home prices keep going up, that could happen to any neighborhood here that isn’t protected by historic status, but it’s a sure bet it would happen faster in some places than it would in others. What protections will there be for homeowners whose properties are considered expendable?
If we’re smart, we’ll embrace this change rather than fighting it. With careful planning and fair practices, new housing stock would attract younger residents who will make sure our city will thrive in the future. It also would offer decent living conditions to those who can’t afford them now.
But it will take a sincere commitment from both our citizens and our leaders to work. Council has the will. Does it have the way?