ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, March 7, 1996 TAG: 9603080049
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A11 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: NEAL C. WALL
WITH THE recent fires and the abundance of substandard housing in Roanoke, local government is forced to take some action to correct the problem. In the past, money has been allocated to redevelopment in the blighted areas through numerous programs, and yet the problem remains.
The idea now on the table is to inspect and bring up to standard rental units in the area. On the surface, and maybe a little deeper, this appears a good place to start - the thought being that pride of home ownership will take care of itself, and that renters cannot be expected to make capital improvements to their homes.
But what about the landlords? In blighted areas, people will and can pay only so much rent, especially when the area around the rental unit remains in disrepair. Therefore, the rate of return for being a landlord becomes less. Landlords are not endless sources of money. Landlords would like to see an increase in the quality of tenant.
For years, the Roanoke Valley has welcomed people to come live off our taxpayers, soliciting federal funds to bankroll our welfare city. With government cutbacks, more people will be forced to make it on their own, and in increasing numbers they cannot. Increasingly, landlords have delinquent rents with a system that cannot right the landlords' dilemma.
The proposal on the city's table will further exacerbate the landlords' problems, adding a higher vacancy rate to the equation. Translation: lost revenue. Landlords will fix up some homes, and refuse to fix up others, boarding them up. People will be displaced, adding to the homelessness problem. Landlords, as well as the poor homeless people helped by Legal Aid, will sue the city for damages. Legal fees will mount and all will lose.
I propose a real-estate assessment increase of 25 percent on all properties in the targeted area. People will complain across the board. The ``people's'' solution will be to allow an inspector to enter the dwelling unit, owner-occupied or rental. Improvements done without a permit would be ``grandfathered'' so long as they do not present an unsafe hazard, as discovering permit violations is not the purpose.
The purpose is to raise the housing standard and make all housing as safe as possible so that needless tragedies can be avoided. If the home or rental unit meets code, taxes will be reduced 30 percent and frozen for five years. If it does not meet code, people will be faced with increased taxes until which time it is brought up to code standards. The five-year clock starts ticking at the first inspection.
This proposal uniformly takes on the blighted or targeted areas, and does not single out landlords. It will also help homeowners by making them aware of unsafe conditions.
With a uniform program installed, the whole area will see marked improvement: Homeowners will feel safer in investing in the area and landlords, though still feeling put upon, will see the light to make improvements, raising rents to offset their expenses.
Some homeowners and landlords may be compelled to sell to others who are willing to accept the challenge of revitalizing the area. This proposal is simple: It enforces and pays for itself while allowing the building department ample time to react to its constituents' needs with its limited manpower.
Neal C. Wall is a Realtor in Roanoke.
LENGTH: Medium: 64 linesby CNB