Written by Miles Garrod
Updated: 19 hours ago, Published: 21 hours ago
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/adn/FZF3YE4O5NBINFWVXC5NE2YPMI.jpg)
Zoning codes emerged in the early 20th century as a tool to reduce the impact of heavy industry and high-rise buildings on clean air and sunlight for residents of America's largest cities. In subsequent decades, this tool expanded into the practice of comprehensively classifying properties into detailed use stages in nearly every community across the country. With the advent of the automobile, everything could be placed further away, and the idea of ​​categorizing functions, and therefore people, into assigned districts felt like a clean, modern approach. I did. When it came to housing, it meant people could participate in the commerce of a city like Anchorage while still returning home with more space and a quiet rural feel that was previously impractical.
Founded in 1914, Anchorage has been shaped almost entirely by these 20th-century customs, and until recently, there hasn't been much reason to question them. We had enough land to send wave after wave of population into the former residential areas south of town, while maintaining a firm resolve that the existing neighborhoods would never grow. But now that the end of our land of convenience is near, members of Congress are rightly reconsidering that promise in the current HOME initiative.
Opponents of the initiative point to other areas designated as high density in previous zoning reviews and argue that further development in established neighborhoods is unnecessary. They want to focus new development on blighted, poorer areas that deserve a boost. But as local economies cool, the idea that development can simply be steered toward less attractive areas becomes less realistic. New development in blighted areas really only happens through government subsidies or economic booms like gentrification. The current zoning vision was negotiated during a historic boom when we believed we could channel a rich stream of development in the right direction and “level up” to Anchorage 2.0. I was there. Today's market is not capable of realizing this vision, and we should expect it won't until another boom arrives.
Otherwise, I wouldn't be so particular about it. Redeveloping the most attractive neighborhoods to more affluent buyers can be successful even with much lower overall market pressures. In the 2010s, market-rate apartment development continued in the South Addition and Bootleggers Cove even after it stopped in less prosperous areas. I joined a development that at the time was keen to deliver starter homes, but inevitably gravitated toward high-end buyers to make the development viable. These types of buyers are most satisfied with purchasing in areas that are already attractive, and by allowing more units in areas where market demand is highest, they can obtain more housing overall. There is a gender. Adding supply there will reduce purchasing pressure elsewhere, ease rent and price inflation, and keep starter homes available in third- and fourth-tier neighborhoods.
Rather than worrying that density will erode the character of our neighborhoods, we should fear that fewer people will bother to settle in Anchorage at all. If we continue to work on suppressing supply while technology like online vacation rentals drives up demand, basic economics ensure that the cost of buying in Anchorage will rise, even as population stagnates and real estate deteriorates.
Single-family home owners, think beyond your desire for predictability. We use zoning too much to extend our influence beyond our property lines and even beyond our own lifetimes.
Republicans, you should oppose the continuation of this technocratic control and bureaucracy that limits landlord freedom and impedes our ability to address our housing needs through private action. Democrats should recognize the obvious ways in which the “haves”, as large homeowner groups, use city ordinances to secure investment at the expense of the “have nots” and the public interest. be.
Whatever the politics, it would be foolish to preserve chic, bright suburban character in the heart of this emerging city. Anchorage is likely to remain for centuries to come, and it doesn't make sense to always set options for first-time visitors, especially in the most convenient central areas. Let's use Congress's HOME Initiative to identify the best ways to increase density in the neighborhoods we love.
It is absolutely right for councilors to take a more direct role in zoning and explore new avenues for the evolution of our cities. Our new mayor should similarly embrace zoning as a matter of fact, rather than assuming the wisdom of the status quo, full of 2008 ambition. People will come out of reality to predict doom, but we will be able to live the same way. Title 21 was cut in half in length and new fourplexes were added in every other corner.
Anchorage is a city of young people. If, like me, you want more room to mature, let Congress know at wwmas@muni.org. Please consider making your comments available during the May 21st or June 25th public hearing dates. Telephone testimony can be arranged by registering online 24 hours before the meeting. Thank you for your time.
Miles Garrod is an architect and lifelong Anchorage resident.
The opinions expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a wide range of viewpoints. To submit an article for consideration, please email commentary(at)adn.com. Submit submissions of less than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit from any web browser. Read our complete guidelines for letters and commentaries here.
