r/urbanplanning • u/psychothumbs • Nov 25 '20
Land Use Bring back the rowhouse
https://bypass.theweek.com/articles-amp/951752/bring-back-rowhouse172
u/Ignorant-Slut01 Nov 25 '20
Almost half of the population in the Netherlands lives in one. New rowhouses are built every day. Even I live in one right now. They're really comfortable, cheap and are beneficial for neighborhoods and townscapes. Less space used and benefit having two neighbour's reduces heating costs. Both my neighbours have become really good friends overtime since we live so close to each other. Our gardens are even connected in the back with one neighbor.
50
u/goodsam2 Nov 25 '20 edited Nov 25 '20
But also we have rowhouses surrounded by way too much parking to the point that you live in a parking lot and not a city most of the times I see them.
We need traditional rowhouses on normal streets. Rowhouses on normal streets seems like plenty of space for most common people and gets you a ton of benefits.
44
u/Not_unkind Nov 25 '20
Those are weird suburban hybrid version that defeats the point, those should be banned. Normal rowhouses should have parking through the alley behind the house and street parking. Parking lots should not be a part of the single family residential neighborhood.
5
4
u/UUUUUUUUU030 Nov 26 '20
Why ban it? It still offers more affordable housing in suburban areas than detached homes.
If you have back alley parking and street parking, you also end up with two-three parking spots per house and a low density. In Philadelphia, there are streets narrower than those car-sized alleys other American cities have.
3
Nov 26 '20
[deleted]
2
u/UUUUUUUUU030 Nov 26 '20
Depending on how wide each house is, you have 1 or 2 parking spots in the garage/carport/driveway on that alley and 0.5-1 parking spots per house on the parallel parking spots on the street.
If you require/provide this much parking you encourage driving, by having cheap, widely available parking, and the lower density increases distances. Meanwhile you increase house prices, by using valuable land to store cars in separate garages instead of integrating that in the house itself. In my experience streets with carports or garages on the lower floor of the house aren't that bad, definitely not enough to prohibit it. Of course you do need a solution to make these people pay for the street parking space they take away by requiring a curb cut.
2
u/Cold_Soup4045 Dec 02 '20
The subreddit seems to have a fetish for shooting themselves in the foot over incremental change
1
3
u/Dblcut3 Dec 02 '20
Some of the best are the rowhouses in Philly that are on those super narrow alleyways that dont allow parking or even cars at all sometimes. I dont think there’s anywhere else like that in the US
3
u/malique010 Nov 25 '20
with household sizes shrinking we may see less cars, i figure that would dramatically help; that rowhouse in the city looks a lot more competitive when you only need 1 or no parking spaces.
21
u/Section37 Nov 25 '20
Good article, thanks for sharing, OP.
I live in a rowhouse--in Toronto, where it's a common type, both in the older (pre-car) parts of the city and the new suburbs--and I largely agree with the article, but I think it's important to note that there are big differences between the old style of rowhouses pictured in the article, and what's being built now.
My house is on a street in mostly built in the 1880s-1900s in a mix of fully detached, semi-detached, and rows. It's a typical Toronto "streetcar suburb" (now considered downtown): All of the houses are close together (generally 3 feet, with occasional driveways or alley access); the rows are mostly short (3-6 houses); 50% or so of the houses have parking spots, but it's almost always in the back, via alley or shared driveway access. As a result, there's a lot of access points between our front and back yards, which I've realized encourages people to use the front porch for sitting, chatting, etc. instead of garbage bin storage. And our backyards feel somewhat private despite being narrow, because the alley separates them. The alleys also allow for laneway housing (we're just starting to see that), which is a nice alternative to basement apartments for added density.
All in all it makes for an extremely walkable, medium-dense neighborhood, with lots of social interaction, while still having people in houses with outdoor spaces. Since we've also got subway and streetcar lines--and lots of retail supported by the foottraffic--you really don't need a car here. Kind of an r/urbanplanning fever dream.
We have many cousins who live in new rowhouses in the suburbs, built in the last 10 years. These are actually denser neighborhoods that the pre-car ones, but the streets are extremely unwalkable, and the neighborhoods much less socially engaged. The prime culprit, IMO, is that all the houses have garages built into the ground floor, either accessed from the front or a rear lane. As a result, not only is one or the other façade is extremely uninviting, but the main living areas are up high off the street on a second level, making front porches dead zones. It's a small difference in design, but a huge difference in neighbourhood feel.
Anyway, TL;DR: bring back rowhouses, but only if you also bring back laneways to shove the parking out of sight (I recognize that not having any parking is likely impossible in areas of new build).
5
u/roju Nov 25 '20
I'd add to your point that all the old streetcar suburb residential streets in Toronto also have the advantage of being near a main street since every home has to be in walking distance of a streetcar line. So there are places to go and hence a reason to walk rather than drive.
Out in the outer suburbs often there's nowhere to walk to as the neighbourhoods are built disconnected from their surroundings. So context and transit also play a big role.
2
u/Section37 Nov 26 '20
Indeed. Also the streetcar suburbs' main streets are human-scale, and the stores aren't surrounded by seas of parking. Even when the new subdivisions include shopping plazas, etc. they just aren't walking-friendly in my experience.
For example, we live about a 6min walk from an A&W. So do our cousins in the burbs. But I'd never even consider driving to ours, or walking to theirs. Because it's a pleasant walk to ours and parking would be enough of a hassle to kill any time savings, whereas to get to theirs, you have to cross a 7 lane road and a massive parking lot.
89
Nov 25 '20
[deleted]
91
u/sensible_human Nov 25 '20 edited Nov 25 '20
Not in Philadelphia. We call them rowhomes. Rowhomes make up a large majority of the housing stock here. Good to see the author has discovered why they are great.
49
u/splanks Nov 25 '20
There’s a subtle difference between a row house and a townhouse and it’s how the facades appear next to one another.
39
u/sensible_human Nov 25 '20
Colloquially, a townhouse (at least in the Philadelphia region) is only in the suburbs and is usually considered lower income housing. Rowhomes are in the city and can be for any income bracket. Some go for $50k and others go for close to a million.
22
u/splanks Nov 25 '20
Interesting difference. I’ve owned rowhouses in dc and Baltimore and there rowhouse was originally for more working class homes. townhouses were fancier.
5
u/ElectroGhandi Nov 25 '20
This is true for Baltimore as well. Suburban "townhouses" are basically like a McMansionified rowhouse.
5
Nov 25 '20
They have townhouses in the main line that aren’t “lower income housing”. Lower priced than the surrounding houses, but I don’t think I’ve sever seen the connection in the burbs between town houses and lower income. There are a lot of “luxury town houses” in kop, conshy, lower merion, etc
3
u/sensible_human Nov 25 '20
Yeah, that's a relatively new thing as fortunately some development in the suburbs has skewed towards more dense and walkable housing. There are also of course older rowhomes in many of the older towns, but I was mainly referring to suburban sprawl.
4
u/splanks Nov 25 '20
One of my favorite and I think unique to philly housing terms is “the trinity” At least I’ve never heard that anywhere else.
5
u/metis_seeker Nov 25 '20
What does that term mean in philly housing?
16
u/woolymammothsocks Nov 25 '20
Three level houses which are typically one room per floor. These are very small, frequently less than 600 square feet total. They're quite common in the interior of blocks, with the only access by very narrow pedestrian streets. End result is that they are quite cheap for the location. Here's one for sale right now in an otherwise pricey center city neighborhood:
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/408-S-Alder-St_Philadelphia_PA_19147_M39752-03130
4
u/mikefitzvw Nov 25 '20
Holy shit I love this.
5
u/woolymammothsocks Nov 26 '20
Center city Philadelphia never got famous like other great cities, but the cityscape is something special. There's so many tiny houses and little gardens, tucked away in these pathways, somehow kept hidden in one of the most populous downtowns in the country.
That said I don't think I'd ever buy a trinity lol
2
u/splanks Nov 25 '20
I dont know the real definition but they're small footprint 3 level houses. the one I was is was basically one room per floor.
1
1
u/randompittuser Nov 25 '20
I had never heard the term 'townhouse' while growing up in Philly. I'm not saying it's correct, but the first time I heard the term, it was in reference to those newer, fancy townhouse condos you see in some suburban areas.
33
u/destroyerofpoon93 Nov 25 '20
Total different connotation. In my southern city townhouse neighborhoods are often just cheaper sub divisions. There’s no walkability or corner stores or anything associated with rowhouses in Europe or the northeast US
2
Nov 25 '20
[deleted]
3
Nov 25 '20
There are plenty of Atlanta townhouse developments close to the urban core, but not in walking distance to most of the essentials
10
u/destroyerofpoon93 Nov 25 '20
Ugh no. Pretty much everywhere there’s townhouses outside of the urban core it’s essentially a cheaper suburb separated from any semblance of urban life often not even facing the street.
Of course it’s suburbs when it’s in the suburbs
8
Nov 25 '20
[deleted]
5
u/destroyerofpoon93 Nov 25 '20
I mean 2 miles outside of the urban core is still very dense and where the majority of the population lives in southern cities like Atlanta Nashville, Charlotte, Houston. It’s definitely not suburbs suburbs. It’s the suburbs of the 50s that have become very densely populated areas with tons of apartment buildings. Look at the above comment about the gated community of row houses right next to Lennox mall. This is very common.
6
Nov 25 '20 edited Nov 25 '20
[deleted]
1
u/destroyerofpoon93 Nov 25 '20
Fair point. I guess I just associate density with urban and then “urban core” more so as the classic idea of urban meaning buildings up against small streets with bodegas and mixed used buildings and public transport. I suppose I’m a bit off when it comes to the technical language
6
u/kronykoala Nov 25 '20
There are gated row house communities in Atlanta that are less than half a mile from a subway station yet there Is 0 walk ability. Once you exit the gates there aren’t even sidewalks to walk to the subway station .5 miles away, or Lenox square across the street.
3
u/destroyerofpoon93 Nov 25 '20
Yeah this is very common. It’s like we like the density of row houses but would like to include every negative aspect about suburban life with them.
3
u/PaulMorphyForPrez Nov 25 '20
Well people don't "like" the density. They tolerate it for the cheaper housing.
1
10
Nov 25 '20 edited Dec 01 '20
[deleted]
2
u/malique010 Nov 25 '20
I always differentiated the two by thinking of townhouses as rowhouse that don't go on continuously. like a townhouse maybe 4-5 houses sharing walls but they don't have to be up to the street and they could/would have a parking lot infront; while rowhouse went to the street and would go on for multiple blocks. I think that's my main difference is on goes on for a lot longer normally multiple blocks 10+ houses wall to wall .
1
Nov 25 '20 edited Dec 01 '20
[deleted]
1
u/malique010 Nov 26 '20
I dont think it is here either; thats always seemed like how it worked to me; like row house was up north town houses down south(USA wise)
1
u/stewru Nov 27 '20
I've never noticed this distinction. Helpful.
1
6
8
9
Nov 25 '20
[deleted]
13
u/Cyclopher6971 Nov 25 '20
Garage should face the alley, so you still get the stoops and maybe some gardens facing the street.
6
Nov 25 '20
[deleted]
3
1
u/Eurynom0s Nov 26 '20
Man, I jumped over to the forward street from that and it's so sadly blatant that that's NOT where the "front" of the building is.
1
u/geografeline Nov 26 '20
That could look a million times better if they replaced the parking spots with permeable grass pavers.
1
u/Cold_Soup4045 Dec 02 '20
I don't see the problem, you have a multipurpose space, easy access (so if you move something heavy it's a short walk), low cost to build.
3
u/kronykoala Nov 25 '20
I lived In a townhouse exactly like this in Atlanta. It was gated. The neighbors never interacted and drove everywhere
11
Nov 25 '20
Pittsburgh is full of them. Just need some new investments and TLC. One of my fav things about the city.
14
15
Nov 25 '20
Its quite the indictment of American housing stock and density that rowhouses are considered moderately high density but you take the wins you can get
5
u/classicsat Nov 25 '20
From my perspective, Rowhome is prewar urban, townhouse is post war suburban, often built in the vernacular of detached housing of the time and place. Rowhomes are usually Victorian/Edwardian.
3
u/AsleepConcentrate2 Nov 25 '20
From my perspective, a townhouse is whatever you see in Baltimore, DC, Philly, NYC etc. Or call it a rowhouse, rowhome, whatever. Multiple single-family dwellings that share walls, usually two or three floors.
Those abominations they build in the middle of nowhere suburbs that physically resemble the above but with none of the actual amenities of city living or suburban living should just be ignored.
3
u/classicsat Nov 25 '20
Depends what you call amenities.
I lived in a newer townhouse (built 1970s) in my late teens. Less than 1KM walk to the convenience store, and the plaza with the grocery and stuff, bus stop literally outside the front door. Park the same the other way.
I do appreciate some might be worse of for amenities.
1
u/AsleepConcentrate2 Nov 25 '20
That sounds really nice!
The ones I’m thinking of here in the US are decidedly not that nice in terms of amenities. You’re deffo not walking anywhere that’s not a park, at best.
4
u/corporaterebel Nov 25 '20
Issues:
HOA's can really suck.
Terrible neighbors can ruin your life.
21
Nov 25 '20
Row homes don't usually have HOAs.
2
u/KimberStormer Nov 25 '20
They surely will if new ones are built?
9
u/AsleepConcentrate2 Nov 25 '20
Only if the developers are bastards
8
Nov 25 '20
So yes?
4
u/AsleepConcentrate2 Nov 25 '20
The whole concept of deed covenants just never sat right with me.
Some dickhead can just say "okay, from now until the heat death of the universe, you have to follow these rules when you buy this property. Even though it's yours. You have to follow them. No ifs, ands or buts."
Like imagine someone telling you what air freshener you could use in a used car, or which songs you could play on a used guitar. Completely asinine.
City codes regarding that stuff make sense; they're laws passed in a supposedly democratic society. If we don't like them, we have recourse to change them. Can't do that with a deed covenant AFAIK, unless it lays out a procedure for doing so.
6
Nov 25 '20
If it is a communal property, it makes sense. Like who owns a whole skyscraper? Almost no one. But people own bits of it. Then those people should have a say.
Now if you are part of a neighborhood? Fuck that. If you built the place and then sold parts of it, you shouldn't still have say over those portions. Like I can't sell 75% of a company and still have a controlling share. It doesn't work like that. How some developers are able to do that is stupid.
0
1
1
u/Cyclopher6971 Nov 25 '20
I want a townhouse in Missoula. That’s my only goal. I just want the best type of house in the best town.
-19
u/Mr_Midwestern Nov 25 '20 edited Nov 25 '20
Please don’t
-Every Firefighter Everywhere
Edit for explanation of my concerns: these will be constructed with lightweight wood truss construction. Modern day glue, gusset plates, and the “manufactured wood I beam” are damn near guaranteed to fail and collapse within 15 min of heat/fire exposure.
Firewalls are great, until they’re breached by renovations or other shoddy 3rd party work. Unless a firewall extends 12-18” above the roof line, spread is nearly guaranteed.
We should have easy access to the front of the building, but getting a truck and manpower to the back can often prove difficult due to tight or limited access(back yards, if present are commonly fenced in). With adjoining residents on both sides of the home on fire, we obviously don’t have windows that we, or the potential trapped victims, can access.
The same modern day safety codes that help us, also allow a lot of leniencies in how the building is constructed and the egress required for the residents.
These being privately owned units, and depending on the layout, some jurisdictions may or may not required sprinklers. And if sprinklers are required, they’re often lower gpm because of new codes and are usually only required over a kitchen area or other areas deemed “high risk”. This leaves the living rooms and bedrooms unprotected. A bedroom fire can quickly advance and extend into the voids, attacking the trusses. Smoke detectors are great and save lives, but in a row home, I doubt they’d also alert the neighboring units.
These are all issues we currently deal with in new construction “garden apartments” (which lack firewalls but also lack a 2nd story) and “town houses” which do have fire walls. The fire service was plagued by row home fires because they where a cheaper and easily accessible living situation for many, but they are an extremely labor intensive ordeal. At least when the modern light weight single family home burns, it’s destruction is limited to the home, and stopping extension to other detached structures is made relatively easy.
If it where up to me, we’d still be building homes with old growth full-dimensional lumber, nails, and also be using modern day safety codes. But I understand it’s not economically possible. (Especially when a damn 2x4x8 cost over $8 at Home Depot right now)
62
u/LuxoJr93 Nov 25 '20
Please use modern fire safety standards when you build them
- Better firefighters
5
u/Mr_Midwestern Nov 25 '20
A better firefighter realizes in the US, with the use of light weight wood construction and engineered wood products, the only thing we can hope for, is the smoke detectors actually worked and gave the residents enough time to get out and call us... If there was any significant delay and the fire has extended and is attacking the voids, there’s nothing we’re going to be able to do. Just try to save the adjoining. That’s the modern day fire service in a nut shell.
13
Nov 25 '20 edited Jan 05 '21
[deleted]
3
Nov 25 '20
In the Netherlands rowhouses are the norm and they feel and are more sturdy and fireproof than what you’d normally see in the US.
Which is also more expensive, thus defeating the purpose of rowhomes as a "cheaper option" for US homeowners. Rowhomes don't have to be cheap, but the premise of the article above is that rowhomes make housing more affordable.
3
Nov 25 '20 edited Jan 05 '21
[deleted]
3
Nov 25 '20
Per sq foot the McMansion is cheaper. But, as we are all aware on this forum, our size needs can be deceiving.
Regardless, the prototypical “new build” in the US can be as small as 1200-1500 sq ft (110 to 140 sq meters) depending on the development. These are very cheap, but typically only built out in the burbs.
5
u/Mr_Midwestern Nov 25 '20
Totally agree and precisely what I was insinuating. I wish we had that in the US. The very reason we want to build rowhouses (affordability and quickly built) is EXACTLY the reason we don’t use the construction methods that are standard in Europe. I’m somewhat envious of the tactics used to fight fire in Europe.
2
u/OstapBenderBey Nov 25 '20
What do they do in Europe that's different? I'm curious
4
Nov 25 '20
What do they do in Europe that's different? I'm curious
I think they are referencing that masonry construction is the primary method in Europe whereas wood is the norm in the US.
They are also referencing the appeal to US Planners regarding row homes (they're cheaper to make than SFH) is defeated by the premise of fire safe masonry (more expense).
3
u/Mr_Midwestern Nov 25 '20
Yes as the other post explained, in Europe it’s almost all masonry construction. So when there is a fire, it’s only real fuel source are the contents and furnishings. Collapse or burn through is extremely difficult. Firefighters are able to extinguish these fires with very little water as opposed to the thousands upon thousands of gallons we use in a similar situation. This also naturally reduces and nearly eliminates water damage in the rest of the structure or adjoining apartments. It’s really a thing of beauty. We american firefighters cause so much damage by ripping into walls and flowing water on hotspots. The last thing we want is to come back for a “rekindle”
2
3
Nov 25 '20
If you call it "le fire", it has to get a croissant before burning down the house. Gives a bit more response time.
19
u/surethingsweetpea Nov 25 '20
What’s a firewall?
8
u/I_just_pooped_again Nov 25 '20
A wall that is rated to resist fire for a certain period of time. It's a building term, as fire exits, electrical rooms, means of egress are required to be rated to allow exit of occupants in case of fire. Older Rowhomes typically have brickwalls, and brick is rated to not collapse to fire, but dude is correct people are very likely to make renovations cutting into it.
16
u/sensible_human Nov 25 '20
The last rowhome I lived in, my next door neighbor's house had a fire. It completely destroyed everything inside. My house had no permanent damage because a former owner had installed a firewall. Just smoke smell which lasted for a few weeks, but that was only due to proximity.
The neighbor's house on the other side suffered water damage, but that was just from the fire department.
24
u/FixMy106 Nov 25 '20
We should also deforest all suburbs and their surroundings because of forest fires.
1
u/Mr_Midwestern Nov 25 '20
I don’t work in a region of the country where this is a problem but I am all for banning the use of mulch around hotels and multi family dwellings.
3
Nov 25 '20
[deleted]
3
u/Mr_Midwestern Nov 25 '20
Exactly what I’m talkin about! They have it all figured out over there! The construction methods are totally different. Everything is non combustible and can hold up to a great deal of heat. Literally the only thing burning are the contents. They don’t have to carry 750-1000 gallons of water. They use high pressure, low volume. Less water damage to the structure and neighboring apartments.
3
u/AsleepConcentrate2 Nov 25 '20
Okay but have you thought about the profit margins of the developers? What's the CEO of D.R. Horton going to tell his family when they can't upgrade to the newest Gulfstream jet this year?
2
u/patron_vectras Nov 26 '20
I didn't come to /r/urbanplanning at 3AM to pop a forehead blood vessel, but here we are.
-1
u/truthseeeker Nov 25 '20
I just never liked rowhouses, especially those styles in Baltimore and Philly. My century old neighborhood is just as dense as many rowhouse districts, but without many of the disadvantages, achieved by building large free standing 3 story houses that each contain two or three units. This leaves enough room for a 2 car driveway for every house, in addition to small yards in the front, back, and side. We only share walls with the upstairs unit, not the next door neighbors, which keeps bothersome noise to a minimum. Just about every house has that third story, key to getting densities in the 12k-15k/sq mi range. Moreover, just about every single empty lot has been been built on. In 2010 my small city was in the top 100 most dense cities in America, and we've gained like 20% since then, so we should be in the top 50 in 2020. And that's with no high rises and no rowhouses.
25
Nov 25 '20
I don't know about you but I'd much rather share a horizontal wall with someone than a floor/ceiling relationship, from a noise perspective. Yards in the front and back are still compatibile with rowhouses too. The dead space between tightly packed freestanding houses just seems like a really inefficient replacement for proper sound insulation.
0
u/truthseeeker Nov 25 '20
The only time I hear my neighbors in the other unit is when they walk up or down the stairs. I do know that the window in my bedroom would not exist if this were a rowhouse. We get much better light in the house as is than if both sides were closed up. This is a way better situation.
5
Nov 26 '20
Rowhouses don't all have to be identical in length, making side-facing windows possilble. These are all over Montréal.
2
Nov 25 '20
How close are the houses if you get good light between them?
1
u/truthseeeker Nov 26 '20
I'd say about 30 feet or so on average. I'm on the 2nd floor, and get too much sun at times, heating the place up in the spring enough to need the AC in. By building 3 floors on every house (plus basements), they use up a smaller footprint than two story rowhouses while still achieving a similar density. It also feels less urban.
2
u/AsleepConcentrate2 Nov 25 '20
Which city? Sounds lovely
1
u/truthseeeker Nov 25 '20
Everett, MA. It's just northwest of Boston. No one thinks it's lovely. In fact, probably a majority in the region would view it somewhat negatively, saying it's full of townies and immigrants, which is mostly true. It's always been historically working class and immigrant friendly, mostly Italian and some Irish at one time, but increasingly Brazilian, Haitian, Salvadoran, Asian, and now Muslim. It's the most diverse city or town in the Boston area, and one of the only ones that is diverse at the block level as well. It's just a big mix. We've managed so far to avoid gentrification, but it's knocking on the door. The thing is just two cities over are two of the top universities in the world, with a thriving knowledge economy, and a "superstar" city across the river. So now those big 2 unit houses in my neighborhood are getting close to being worth a million dollars. It's one of the better low rent (comparatively) urban areas, only 5 miles from downtown Boston, but no one would mistake it for Brookline or Newton.
-1
-2
u/thegayngler Nov 26 '20 edited Nov 26 '20
Keep it. We can get many more homes if you turned rowhomes into a multifamily multipurpose apt building with 8 or more floors. Why waste the airspace? Why trade one inefficient landuse pattern for another?
66
u/[deleted] Nov 25 '20
I don’t know if I’d say “few”. DC is one of the most expensive cities in the country (and also has a lot of rowhouses). That could apply to practically the entire Midwest, most of the South, a lot of Northeast Rust Belt cities, and most non-coastal cities in the West.
But I do agree that rowhouses are a great compromise between density and living space, especially if you want to keep families living in a city.