Navigating the Balance Between Density and Housing Solutions in a Competitive Cityscape
Shown Above: A Sketch of a Contemporary Single Family Home built on two lots in St. Louis' Tower Grove East neighborhood.
The debate surrounding side yards in urban areas is a nuanced one, offering both challenges and opportunities for city planners, developers, and residents alike. On one hand, side lots can be viewed as a consequence of urban decay, resulting from the demolition of condemned structures or the consequences of owner negligence. On the other hand, these side lots have the potential to serve as green spaces, community gardens, or pockets of tranquility amidst the urban hustle. This article explores the arguments against side lots, particularly how they may contribute to the de-densification of neighborhoods, while also considering the merits of these spaces in the context of evolving urban landscapes.
The Downside: De-Densification and Missed Development Opportunities
Side yards often emerge as a byproduct of urban decay, with vacant lots appearing in the aftermath of demolitions due to condemned status, structural instability, vacancy, or neglect. From a critical standpoint, these side lots can contribute to the de-densification of neighborhoods, as open spaces replace structures that once housed communities. In a time when urban areas are grappling with population decline and the allure of suburban living, the loss of density can be perceived as a setback for cities striving for vitality and vibrancy.
Missed development opportunities also come into focus when considering the finite nature of urban land. In rapidly changing rustbelt cities, where population loss to suburbs is a prevailing trend, each square foot of urban space becomes increasingly valuable. Side lots, if not strategically managed, might be viewed as lost potential for new developments that could contribute to the economic and social revival of urban areas.
The Upside: Resident Retention and Housing Diversity
While the arguments against side lots are compelling, there is a counter-narrative that emphasizes the potential benefits of these spaces. Some designers and community advocates argue that well-designed side yards can play a crucial role in enhancing the quality of life for residents and keep households in cities that may otherwise move to the suburbs.
In the quest for residents, cities must evolve to meet the diverse housing needs of various demographics. This includes acknowledging the unique challenges rustbelt cities and legacy cities encounter, where the existing housing supply in urban areas often falls short of the preferences and capabilities of potential homeowners. While some may possess the skills to rehabilitate century-old homes, not everyone can.
The tug-of-war between urban living and the allure of the suburbs is a defining narrative in many regions, especially in rustbelt and legacy cities. Cities are realizing the need to compete in the housing category to retain and attract residents. One challenge is that the existing housing supply in urban areas doesn't always cut it. In cities like St. Louis and Cincinnati, residents may move to suburban areas citing the desire for more space. And not just more space, but accessible entrances, single-level homes, primary bedrooms on the ground floor, and secure parking, are some reasons why households seek suburban living. Accompanied by this desire, is the suburbs' reputation for stronger schools and public safety. This makes the argument for diversified housing solutions even more important.
This article contends that embracing side lot-homes in certain neighborhoods could open up crucial conversations, presenting urban living as a viable and competitive choice for those seeking housing options in a dynamic and evolving urban landscape.
Shown Above: A Sketch of Ritz Park on South Grand Boulevard in St. Louis. The space was home to a theater, then parking lot, and is now a pocket park.
Proponents of side lots argue that transforming vacant spaces into community gardens, pocket parks, outdoor gathering areas, or extensions of private residences can contribute positively to the urban environment. Such initiatives not only address the concerns of de-densification but also promote community building, and well-being. Additionally, side lots can serve as a canvas for creative placemaking projects, injecting character and uniqueness into neighborhoods.
The debate over side yards in urban areas reflects the broader challenges and opportunities inherent in urban development. While concerns about de-densification and missed development potential are valid, the pro-side lot perspective highlights the potential for these spaces to become valuable community assets. The key lies in thoughtful planning, community involvement, and innovative urban design that transforms side lots into vibrant, purposeful spaces that contribute to the overall health and resilience of our cities.
Comments