Galveston City Council members will face a hard decision later this month if, as expected, they consider banning new duplexes and multifamily homes in single-family residential zoned districts and historic districts such as the East End, Silk Stocking and Lost Bayou.

The provision is among several changes proposed in city land-use development regulations that council members ultimately will have to vote up or down.

We predict council members will feel acute pressure to approve this ordinance because the council has been criticized by a bloc arguing it has done too much for tourists and not enough for the neighborhoods. That argument has gotten some traction among voters, as was seen in the outcomes of recent city council races.

While approving this ordinance might be an expedient way to blunt some of that criticism, we urge the council to look deeply at, and weigh carefully, the objective pros and cons the issue presents.

There are some clear upsides of the proposed ordinance. The clearest and most objective is that the ban would help keep parking from becoming a bigger problem than it already is, which is pretty bad, especially in the historic districts. Among the less objective arguments is that the rule would help maintain the integrity of Galveston’s oldest homes and preserve the charm of the historic neighborhoods.

The historic districts already have rules protecting the exterior integrity of historic houses, and charm is in the eye of the beholder. Some people might justifiably find charm in a neighborhood including young people and young families who couldn’t afford to live there were it not for multi-family housing.

Which gets to the downsides, of which there are several.

The ban could create a serious disincentive for people who otherwise might be willing to buy and maintain a historic house. Doing that already comes with a whole lot of disincentive, which is why historical properties all over Galveston are slowly returning to ashes and dust.

The ban also runs counter to the practice of battling development sprawl by encouraging population density. Residents who oppose development often note there’s a small, finite amount of land on the island, which is true and raises questions about the proposed ban.

Council members should consider whether a vote for the ban is also a vote for more multi-family housing on the West End.

Opponents of the ban have argued it would worsen a shortage of affordable housing on the island. That argument strikes us as obviously valid and as the most compelling argument against the ban.

Although it has been demonized, affordable housing is not a bad thing. It’s an essential thing because that’s where live people who do the jobs necessary to make a city tick.

Galveston is a vibrant, living city, rather than a sterile facsimile of a city, because it has a diverse population in terms of race, age and income, among a lot of other characteristics.

We know from experience that many of the most energetic and interesting people in Galveston live now, or began their residency, in an East End duplex or fourplex.

Council members need to ask themselves what effect this ban would have on those essential aspects that make the city a city.

• Michael A. Smith

Michael A. Smith: 409-683-5206;

(2) comments

Terrance Johnson

A quick look around these neighborhoods would reveal plenty of duplexes and multiple unit apartments already in existence. A better solution would be to require anyone wanting to add more units to an existing home, be able to provide adequate off street parking if space in front is inadequate for number of units.

George Croix

"....charm is in the eye of the beholder."
That's a fact.
My generation's idea of what's charming and worth the money to travel to go see is quite certainly different from so much of the younger ones - maybe overlapping with the closest, but the youngest now and those to come are going to prefer the latest Moody Gardens attractions or other active venues to looking at old homes.
It may well be that the same generational evolution applies to home ownership, as a modern home can be purchased and maintained with fewer bucks and with a lot fewer strings attached than one that must comply with specific dictates based on a past century(s).
It's also worth the thought time to decide what level of City services you are willing to be taxed to get in return for your exclusiveness after limiting new residents, or insisting that the main source of funding for the Island (along with 'government money), tourists, be considered less.
If you get what you ask for, be sure it's what you wanted....

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.