Why would Code Refresh destroy our homes?

Neighbors ask: "Why would Code Refresh destroy our homes?"

In Jackson Ward, the average home is 1,800 square feet. In Randolph and Westwood, 1,300 - 1,400 square feet. Maymont's average home is 1,100 - 1,500 square feet, and in Swansboro, 1,300 - 1,550 square feet.

Church Hill 's average homes span 1,500 - 2,500 square feet; Carver's, 1,600 - 1,660.
The City Stadium neighborhood typically averages around 1,200 to 1,400 square feet. 
Bellevue ranges between roughly 950 to 3,500 square feet.

Does Code Refresh intend to demolish average/smaller Richmond homes to build LARGER duplexes that fill these lots?

Does Code Refresh intend to destroy our existing small ownership opportunities for permanent rentals?

Today, renting a 1,500 sq ft apartment falls between $1,700 - $2,400+ per month.

If Code Refresh *really* cares about AFFORDABLE HOUSING (or the environment!) it would keep additional units small, 500-800 square feet, and focus on RETROFITS.

About 60% of Richmond's housing is rentals. Shouldn't Richmond protect home ownership opportunities so families can achieve home ownership to pass on to future generations?

86% of renters WANT TO OWN A HOME.

Demolishing homes to create permanent rentals keeps the next generation from building wealth, weighing them down with permanent leases. Single-family rental households in Richmond grew 31% over the last 20 years, outpacing owner-occupied homes.

We already allow second units on every lot with ADUs, don't forget. We know the first thing developers are going to do, including the non-profit "affordable housing" developers, is knock down existing cottages (don't forget many neighborhoods' average homes are about 1,500 ft.) to build footprints twice as large just with two units. 

So the insults "green" and "affordable" YIMBYs hurl out as McMansionizing is actually what they intend to do: RentMcMansionize.

A new member added another layer of insight: by allowing duplexes, developers are tapping in to existing pipes without a mandatory infrastructure plan that would otherwise be required on new lots without infrastructure.

Is Code Refresh anti-ownership, anti-environmental? 
It's certainly not following Richmond 300.

Code Refresh must maintain today's unbuilt yard percentages to protect affordable housing and save Richmond's living, irreplaceable trees.

Code Refresh must maintain today's unbuilt yard percentages to protect affordable housing and save our living, irreplaceable trees.

Retrofits are Richmond's most powerful affordable housing tool - and they save trees.

Retrofits affordably modernize aging structures, keeping longtime residents in place instead of displacing them. They cut energy bills by 30% or more, directly lowering costs for low-income families. They improve health through better insulation and air quality. They cost far less than new construction. Retrofits don't destroy Richmond's irreplaceable trees.

Retrofits overwhelmingly preserve affordable housing AND our tree canopy. That's not a coincidence. That's smart, humane city-building.

WE NEED TREES EVERY SINGLE DAY, not just for Earth Month.

It's refreshing to hear planning and sustainability staff talk about trees, sunlight, and soil. (Last year, sustainability staff told us tall concrete was great because it puts neighbors in permanent shade and brings wind shear!)

But our lungs don't work on a calendar: Richmond needs every inch of tree canopy shading us in brutal summers, opening us to winter light, filtering our air, absorbing our stormwater 365 days a year.

Here's what's at stake:
- 2008: Richmond's tree canopy covered 42% of our land.
- 2018: 32%.
- Today: The average Richmond neighborhood has just 23% coverage.

Picture your block from above, only 23% trees. The rest? Concrete. No air filtration. No heat relief. No stormwater absorption. No food gardens. Just heat, flooding, and pollution.

We cannot afford to lose another inch.

Why do yards matter so much?
Because 85% of Richmond's trees are on private residential lots.

Not in parks. Not in tree wells along sidewalks. In yards, that Code Refresh is about to diminish.

Planners talk often about public tree wells, but they don't replace yard trees, and they can't. Public trees serve public space. They do not fulfill a private lot's obligation to its neighbors, just as a public park cannot substitute for private green space. That's not a technicality. That's the difference between a livable block and a heat island.

Tree funds don't work. Up to 50% of newly planted urban trees die within the first year. Ninety percent of tree funds fail. A mature, thriving tree is not a line item you can budget for. It took decades to grow. It cannot be replaced.

Reducing unbuilt lot percentages in Code Refresh is a direct attack on Richmond's health.

Eighty-five percent of our trees are in yards. 

Reduce those yard requirements, and you are choosing - in writing, in city code - to sacrifice the air quality, heat resilience, and livability of our neighborhoods. You are telling low-income residents that their block doesn't deserve shade. That their children don't deserve clean air. That their flooding doesn't matter.

Unacceptable.
Code Refresh must not only maintain today's unbuilt lot percentages, it must strengthen them. Every lot, including apartment buildings, should be required to support soil-based habitat, food-growing gardens, and tree canopy. Resilience isn't a luxury. It belongs to every neighbor, on every block.

Protect the trees we still have. Grow more. Code Refresh must protect Richmond, not destroy it.

Photos: Irreplaceable trees in Richmond's irreplaceable Bellevue and Frederick Douglass Court.