Proponents of the FAR, “neighborhood compatibility” or house size limits ordinance often will show people what they think their ordinance will do on an idealized model of a lot. Unfortunately, they conveniently omit important real-world details that would matter on any actual site.
To fix this we bring you three perspective drawings of how the proposed ordinance would prevent an ordinary homeowner from expanding their small, single-story home with a non-walkout basement. These drawings were done by a FairFAR member who studied the proposed standards in detail in order to understand the effect it would have on his family’s home. He’s not an architect, but an electrical engineer who spent over 40 hours working to develop the thousands of dollars worth of drawings must of us would need to pay an architect to do in order to expand their homes under the proposed ordinance. These three views show the interaction of the slope on a site, the existing setback and solar ordinances, and the new bulk plane regulations. Tip: You can click on a picture to get a larger view.
-
-
How the standards interact to create a distorted building envelope
-
-
Overhead view showing the only possible area for expansion
-
-
Possible home size as limited by the proposed ordinance on top of the current ordinances
-
-
Math view showing how small an expansion the proposed ordinance would allow
In the two diagrams at left, a front view and a perspective view, you can see how the trifecta of bulk planes, solar access and the slope of the actual lot combine to create an extremely distorted building envelope that is lopsided and off-center on the lot. In fact, it would be virtually impossible to expand the existing home under the proposed ordinance; it is far more likely that the homeowners will be forced to scrape their home to expand should the proposed ordinance pass. Consider, for a moment, what a misshapen horror of a building would result from an attempt to expand one’s own home into the tight spaces that the new regulations would mandate.
The top right and lower right diagrams illustrate how the ordinance drastically curtails another possible way to expand the home, this time by limiting the building coverage. Under the proposed ordinance, the homeowner would only be able to add about 500 sq. ft to the rear of their home (note diagrams currently reflect the planning board proposal and not the staff proposal), or put up a two-car detached garage. In the diagram on the lower left, you can see how the natural slope of the lot partially exposes the walls of the basement, making it count. Note that this home’s basement has no exterior doors; it can be accessed only by a narrow flight of stairs from inside the building; it is by no means a “walkout” basement. However, because of the fact the lot is on a natural slope, about 25% of the basement square footage will count toward the home’s overall size limit (FAR).
City Fails to Consider Sloped Lots in the Direction that Matters (i.e., side-to-side)
One last point: Consider how the city’s analysis of the interaction between the slope of a lot and their proposed bulk plane standard differs from what actually is the case in the real world. In the real world example above the direction of the slope is primarily across the the lot from side to side, but the city makes a simplifying assumption in their diagrams–that the slope will be along the front-to-back axis of the property (see the diagram to the right, which comes directly from the proposed ordinance council is being asked to vote upon). Of course, the city has “analyzed” slope only in the directions that would actually work for their proposed ordinance–and they haven’t done their homework to see how it will work in the real world, in situations outside their idealized models.
