Greenstein, Rosalind, and Yesim Sungu-Eryilmaz, eds. Recycling the City: The Use and Reuse of Urban Land. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 2004.
This book discusses the multitude of opportunities to reuse vacant land and the challenges of redevelopment from a local, state, and national perspective. Additionally the book presents the political, institutional, and policy perspectives on urban reuse.
McGovern, Stephen J (2006). "Philadelphia's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative: A Case Study of Mayoral Leadership, Bold Planning and Conflict." Housing Policy Debate. 17(3), 529-570.
Abstract:
"This article examines the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative (NTI), Mayor John F. Street's plan to revitalize Philadelphia's distressed neighborhoods by issuing $295 million in bonds to finance the acquisition of property, the demolition of derelict buildings, and the assembling of large tracts of land for housing redevelopment. Despite its resemblance to the discredited urban renewal programs of the past, this plan offered real potential for reducing blight by leveraging substantial private investment at a time when public subsidies for affordable housing and community development have been steadily diminishing.
However, NTI did not promote equitable development that might have fostered broader support for an inherently controversial plan. Moreover, Street's initial leadership in proposing this bold initiative was followed by a reluctance to promote NTI aggressively after it was adopted in 2002. The result was a watered‐down effort that achieved some goals but has fallen short of what might have been accomplished."
Kelly, James, Jr. "Refreshing the Heart of the City: Vacant Building Receivership as a Tool for Neighborhood Revitalization and Community Empowerment." Journal of Affordable Housing 13, no. 2 (2004): 28.
The article describes how receivership can be used as a tool to encourage the renovation of vacant buildings and empower community organizations to shape investment in neighborhoods. Baltimore's receivership strategies are highlighted.
Nasar, Jack, Victoria Morckel, and Jennifer Cowley. “Save that House! An Examination of Demolition Ordinance.” Paper to be presented at the annual conference for the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Salt Lake City, Utah, October 13-16, 2011.
Paper Abstract: To deter home demolitions or tear downs replaced with McMansions, communities may adopt demolition delay or moratorium ordinances. A delay ordinance delays a demolition but ultimately gives the property owner the right to demolish the structure. A moratorium stops or suspends all demolitions in the given area for a set period of time, perhaps, while the community considers a change in code or an update to a comprehensive plan. The property owners must demonstrate to the community why they should be permitted to demolish the building. Although tear-downs and demolitions happen regularly, there is little scholarly attention to them.
To learn more about these ordinances and their effectiveness, we e-mailed a survey to officials in 331 U.S. communities which had such ordinances (68.0 % had delay ordinances, 28.4 % had moratoriums, and 3.6% had both) and contact information. The survey had questions about the types of ordinances communities have to control demolitions, the length of the ordinances and what triggers enforcement of the ordinances, the number of applications for demolitions and actual demolitions that occurred in a set period, challenges to the ordinances, revisions to the ordinance, other regulations that control demolitions, as well as questions about background information on the participant and their community. Only 12.7% responded, possibly because participants had to do some detailed research.
Most of the ordinances were in states east of the Mississippi and most of them covered historic places, but approximately one third covered a broad community without any historic places or districts in it. As expected, demolition delay ordinances were more common than demolition moratoriums. We also found that the number of delay ordinances has been increasing over time. Delay ordinances on average suspended the demolition of a structure for six months. The length of the delay was not correlated at a statistically significant level with measures related to the number of demolitions before and after the ordinance. None of the communities that had data available on demolitions prior to and after passage of a delay ordinance experienced an increase in demolitions after the passage of the ordinance; 50 % reported a decrease in demolitions, and 50 % reported no change. Older ordinances were neither more nor less effective than newer ones. Tracking and collecting data from a larger sample of communities is necessary, as is further research on whether an ordinance is effective at raising community awareness about demolitions.
Qualitative data suggested other alternatives or variations for communities to consider, such as a demolition tax used by a community in Illinois, which reduced demolitions from 13 per year to nine per year, requiring a building permit before allowing a demolition to occur, or requiring fees to be paid for vacant buildings and having those fees increase each year the building is vacant.
Overall the verdict is still out. Some respondents had positive comments on the ordinances others were more skeptical. Context may affect the impact of the ordinances. An older declining community may see demolitions as a way to get rid of “eyesores,” whereas an area with high demand may experience demolitions as a way to upgrade structures. The increase in the number of ordinances highlights a need for better data on their effectiveness. For that, one would need a larger sample of places with each control. Thus, we hope that communities that adopt demolition regulations track the number of demolitions and applications per year prior to and after adopting the ordinance. We also believe that research might also do well to consider other measures.
References
Gale, D. (1991). The impacts of historic district designation: Planning policy implications. Journal of the American Planning Association, 57, 127-142.
Langdon, P. (1991). In elite communities, a torrent of teardowns. Planning, 57, 25–27.
Nasar, J. L., Evans-Cowley, J. S., & Mantero, V. (2007). McMansions: The extent and regulation of super-sized houses. Journal of Urban Design, 12, 339-358.
Szold, T. (2005). Mansionization and its discontents: Planners and the challenge of regulating monster homes. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71, 189-202.
Weber, R., Doussard, M., Dev Bhatta, S., & McGrath, D. (2006). Tearing the city down: Understanding demolition activity in gentrifying neighborhoods, Journal of Urban Affairs, 28, 19-41.
Porter, Douglas R., Patrick L. Phillips, and Terry J. Lassar. "Flexible Zoning: How It Works." 1- 200. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Land Institute, 1988.
This report by the Urban Land Institute focuses on the potential uses and advantages of flexible zoning over traditional zoning techniques. The research in the publication focuses on the successes and failures of flexible zoning by focusing on seven communities around the United States as case studies.
Mallach, Alan. "Meeting the Challenge of Distressed Property Investors in America's Neighborhoods." 1- 91. New York, NY: LISC, 2010.
Introduction: "The mortgage crisis that has gripped the United States since 2007 has resulted in property owners losing millions of properties through foreclosure, with a loss of hundreds of billions of dollars in individual and
community assets. Through the foreclosure process, the majority of these properties have been taken back by the mortgage lender and become 'real-estate-owned' or REO properties. For the first year or so after foreclosures took off in 2007, with lenders unprepared to deal with these properties and few buyers of any sort in the marketplace, REO properties often went begging. By the end of 2008, however, that was no longer
the case. Private property investors - from "mom & pop" investors buying one or two properties to Wall Street firms and consortia of foreign investors buying entire portfolios - had moved back into the market in large
numbers.
Since early 2009, the ranks of investors have steadily grown, while it has become less accurate to refer to them as 'REO investors'. Rather than waiting for properties to come into lenders' REO inventories, distressed
property investors - as they are more appropriately known - have been increasingly buying houses through short sales, buying non-performing mortgages, or bidding against foreclosing lenders at foreclosure sales.
Today, their presence is a major factor in the marketplace of nearly every metropolitan area experiencing large numbers of foreclosures. Their activities are having a powerful effect on neighborhoods generally and on the neighborhood stabilization efforts of cities and non-profit community development corporations (CDCs) in particular. Their effect, however, is a matter of considerable disagreement and even controversy. The purpose of this report is twofold: first, to offer insight into how distressed property investors operate, and how their activities affect the neighborhoods in which they are active; and second, to lay out potential actions by local governments and CDCs seeking to find ways to work more constructively and effectively with investors in their communities.
This report is based on the proposition that cities and CDCs have powerful tools with which to influence the behavior of distressed property investors, to motivate responsible behavior and discourage activities that do harm to residents and neighborhoods. Although these tools may be difficult to put into effect, they exist, and where used effectively, can contribute significantly to the health and vitality of the city's neighborhoods. To be most effective, those strategies must combine carrots and sticks - regulations that set minimum standards and effectively penalize bad behavior, and incentives that reward responsible, conscientious investors and landlords. As important, the most effective strategies will engage not only local government, but will grow from partnerships between local government, non-profit organizations, and the residents of the community. Especially in these days of municipal financial crisis, cities need to enlist their residents and their non-profit sector as partners if their efforts to address this issue are to succeed.
The report begins with an introduction to the different types of investors and their real estate strategies, followed by a more in-depth discussion of market conditions and investor activity in two contrasting locations, Phoenix, Arizona and New Haven, Connecticut. The third and fourth parts of the report explore regulatory strategies and incentives, or "carrots and sticks," respectively, which are available to local government and CDCs, identifying potentially useful ideas and good practices that have emerged in the United States and elsewhere, and offering specific recommendations for local action. The final section addresses the process of framing a strategy to deal with investors, and the important role that CDCs can play in a community's strategy."
Samsa, Matthew J. (2008). "Reclaiming Abandoned Properties: Using Public
Nuisance Suits and Land Banks to Pursue Economic Redevelopment,"
Cleveland State Law Review 56:189-232.
Excerpt from Report: "This Note examines the methods of attacking abandonment. The next section, Part II, describes the problems presented by abandoned and vacant housing. Part III examines the effectiveness of code enforcement and traditional tax foreclosure. Part IV analyzes privatized nuisance abatement suits and receiverships. Part V discusses land banks. Part VI argues that using broadly empowered privatized nuisance abatement suits for individual parcels and land banks for mass acquisitions is the most effective means of addressing abandoned property, and Part VII concludes with a brief review of the overall abandonment discussion.
7 items | 12 visits
Articles that discuss local practices, policies, and ordinances that prevent, abate, reclaim vacant and abandoned properties, code enforcement, housing/environmental courts, receivership/conservatorship, nuisance abatement, vacant property registration ordinances, etc.; current and recent vacant p...
Updated on Aug 05, 11
Created on May 10, 11
Category: Others
URL:
