Orgy of Irrational Destruction: Is it okay to tear down your own house?

"This is the most serious threat to the character of neighborhoods since urban renewal." -- Richard Moe, President National Trust for Historic Preservation

'Teardowns' have critics torn up

By Haya El Nasser, USA TODAY, June 28, 2006

Preservationists have long been opposed to knocking down older houses to put up big modern ones in their place. Now that the pace of "teardowns" has intensified, they're declaring an all-out war.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation has identified 300 communities in 33 states that are experiencing a rash of teardowns, a jump from 100 communities in 20 states four years ago.

Homes are being demolished in places as diverse as Darien, Conn.; Brookline, Mass.; Newbury, N.H.; Saddle River, N.J.; Cincinnati; Arlington, Va.; Tempe, Ariz.; and Sherman Oaks, Calif., according to the trust's research.

"Everywhere I go in the country, literally, this is happening," says Richard Moe, president of the trust. "This is the most serious threat to the character of neighborhoods since urban renewal."

Moe is launching the trust's anti-teardowns campaign in San Francisco today with harsh words. He calls the demolition of older and historic homes a "teardown cancer" and an "orgy of irrational destruction."

Campaigns against teardowns win little sympathy from advocates of property rights.

"These preservationists are in effect trying to run other people's lives based on their aesthetic sensibilities," says Roger Pilon, vice president for legal affairs at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, D.C. "Whose property is it anyway? To have property is to be able to use it in the way you want, provided you're not violating the rights of others."

Teardowns have become popular with home buyers who want to be in city neighborhoods or close-in suburbs to avoid long commutes and be near public transportation. Urban neighborhoods and nearby suburbs that are pedestrian-friendly and on train and subway lines often have houses that are small and have old kitchens and bathrooms.

Today's buyers who want large homes and modern amenities often are willing to buy old houses for their location, demolish them and build large ones in their place. In neighborhoods across the USA, mini-mansions tower over modest 1950s bungalows.

According to the National Trust:

• More than 1,000 houses were demolished in the Dallas suburbs of Highland Park and University Park. In most cases, new houses range from 6,000 to 10,000 square feet.

• In Denver, 1920s and '30s bungalows are being replaced with houses three times as big in at least a dozen historic neighborhoods. There have been more than 800 teardowns since 2003.

This year, the National Trust placed the Village of Kenilworth, a suburb north of Chicago founded in the late 1800s, on its list of 11 Most Endangered Historic Places. Almost 50 of the town's early-20th-century homes were torn down, most of them replaced by "hulking McMansions," Moe says. The town has no ordinance prohibiting teardowns but is considering requiring delays in demolitions to give neighbors time to protest before homes are razed, he says.

Ashland, Ore., adopted a demolition ordinance. It requires owners to show how they will dispose of debris and why it's not financially feasible to refurbish houses rather than tear them down, says Derek Severson, the city's associate planner. "If neighbors are concerned, they can call a public hearing," he says.

Most houses that are torn down are not officially historic, but replacing them with huge houses destroys the character of old neighborhoods, Moe says.

"There is so much outrage in communities over this practice," he says. "People think they don't have tools to deal with it." The trust has issued an online guide to help cities and residents oppose teardowns. Some of the tools: set-back requirements to limit the size of a home, design standards and zoning revisions.

Robert Lang, director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech, and Karen Danielsen, a planning consultant, have argued that teardowns can be an antidote to sprawl because new homes are built in developed areas rather than on farmland miles from job centers.

Now the two are devising a kit for cities that don't want to change zoning laws but want to placate residents who oppose teardowns. They suggest homeowners draft covenants that set size and design standards for their neighborhood. When the covenant is signed by a homeowner, it applies to the house no matter who the next owner is.

"The covenants are voluntary, but once volunteered, they would lock that neighborhood up," Lang says.