City needs clear rules to protect old homes, structures

COLUMBIA CITY Council has wisely agreed to consider new development rules to protect historic homes and structures as well as preserve the character of older communities.

It’s important for the city to have adequate rules that not only preserve older structures and communities, but also give developers a clear understanding of what they can do with property they own or intend to purchase and develop.

While the council pledges to review development rules, neighborhood leaders understandably are concerned about their communities being left unprotected in the meantime. Their request for temporary protections is a reasonable one.

A meeting last week between developers, builders, preservationists, neighborhood leaders and real estate agents yielded elements of a short-term plan that might suffice. Developers would be required to post signs for 15 days on homes they want to tear down in historic downtown neighborhoods. A committee appointed by City Council would decide whether the home can be razed and what could be built in its place. The council will consider the temporary regulations on Wednesday.

Residents in communities such as Shandon and Heathwood complain they are being crowded by oversized homes on small lots. Mayor Bob Coble and City Council candidate Belinda Gergel called for temporary restrictions after developer Ben Arnold razed a historic home in Heathwood after promising neighbors and the Columbia Planning Commission he wouldn’t.

Mr. Arnold went before the planning commission with a request to divide the property where the home was located, agreeing to keep the old house. But Mr. Arnold later withdrew his request. The original zoning on the property allows nine lots and doesn’t require a public hearing or vote of City Council. A request to configure the lots differently would require a hearing.

Some understandably are disappointed that Mr. Arnold changed course. But it’s the city’s system that failed. There was no mechanism requiring public notification or review. Any permanent change the council makes must require public notice. While property owners’ rights must be protected, city rules must ensure projects that could change the character of a community are thoroughly and openly vetted.

This issue requires a balanced approach. While preserving neighborhoods is a priority, it’s also important to encourage responsible in-fill development that renews the city’s housing stock and cuts down on sprawl.

At its core, this issue is about the long-standing question of how much value the city places on historic preservation in general. The preservation debate has been ongoing as buildings — from the old jail to an old fire house to an old church — have been razed or are scheduled to be to make way for new development. In the past, various neighborhoods have called for moratoriums on home demolition, as churches or the school district have sought to raze homes to expand.

The city has 10 historic neighborhoods whose architecture is protected. Another five are on a slow-moving waiting list for the designation: Wales Garden, Cottontown, Hollywood/Rose Hill, Shandon and Heathwood.

If the city is serious about preservation, it must adopt effective rules. But those guidelines must not be so restrictive they stifle progress on justifiable projects.

The council must exercise due care and diligence in devising new rules that strike the right balance.

Subscriber Services