|
|
|
More long-form pieces coming soon, I promise! My boss is currently running for New York City Council so have been a bit busier than usual these past few months, but I should have something on Kirkwood's citywide speed study out at some point next week, so stay tuned! Until then: quick hits!
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Last week's Council Meeting was full of important stuff; here's a brief recap:
- The Council hosted its public hearing on tweaks to the city's floor area ratio (FAR) requirements. Last week I noted that I was sympathetic to those in opposition (the change comes with a million strings attached so I don't expect it to change much) but still though the Council should approve of the change. CM Luetzow professed concerns that I think fall in the uncanny valley between the two, stating that she worried that the slightly larger homes facilitated by the change would be more expensive and thus the bill could backfire and reduce the number of starter homes in Kirkwood. That is a fundamental misunderstanding of the economics of the situation that I see repeated frequently. The larger homes are simply a symptom of Kirkwood's growing unaffordability, not the cause. When demand for living in Kirkwood grows but the number of homes in Kirkwood is held the same by our zoning, richer families replace poorer ones and bigger homes replace smaller ones. I agree this is a bad dynamic, but in order to circumvent it, you have to let people respond to the increased demand and actually build more homes. You can even just make it easier to build granny flats above their garages (by making ADUs a permitted use rather than a special use) and ensure the new homes we do get will be small if that's what you want! But FAR limits don't help at all, they just further distort the market.
- You know how I said the Council gave first reading approval for outdoor dining at Napoli Kirkwood in the James, contingent on the restaurant installing a stanchion to separate the dining area from the public plaza? Well, the folks from Napoli showed up to the second (final) reading (vote) on the bill last night and asked the Council to reconsider, citing the $18k cost of installing such a fence. The Council, led by CM Rheinnecker, obliged and unanimously rescinded the requirement. Good on everyone involved for keeping a level head, remaining flexible, and helping to promote economic growth in Kirkwood. There's still time to be the pro-business, pro-economic growth Council, especially if they start taking affirmative action rather than just waiting for issues to be brought to them.
- After much delay, the Council finally approved a substitute version of the bill streamlining the applicability of ARB/Landmarks Commission review. As far as I can tell the tweaks made to the bill's text are relatively minor: a few clarifications, a procedure for cases where ARB and Landmarks are in conflict, etc. Overall, I'm very pleased to see this thing finally get done. An abundance agenda for solar panels, pools, decks, and fences is sure to be popular, now we just need one for homes!
- The packet for next week's Park's Board meeting includes the minutes from last month's meeting. I just want to add that I completely agree with Mr. Watkins: Fillmore Park should absolutely have a public restroom and we should find a way to make it happen!
|
|
|
|
That's it for this week! Thursday night concert at Station Plaza tonight from 6:30-9! Have a great weekend, everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
