Wednesday, October 15, 2014

How Much Space Is Enough?

It all started more than a year ago with a misinterpretation of the Schedule of Bulk and Area Regulations in the zoning code, but the notion of establishing a minimum size for apartments in the city had great appeal, particularly to Alderman John Friedman, who chairs the Legal Committee. Last night, at the informal Common Council meeting, a resolution to introduce a law that would amend the zoning code to establish a minimum size for dwelling units was introduced. The statement of legislative findings reads as follows:
The Common Council of the City of Hudson finds that it is in the public interest as well as the health safety and welfare of residents of the City of Hudson to determine an appropriate minimum square footage for dwelling units constructed within the City which is to be used for human habitation. The Council finds that a minimum of 350 square feet for studio apartments and 500 square feet for larger dwelling units are necessary to mitigate any negative health, safety and welfare impacts of living in smaller, more constricted size apartments.
Meanwhile, Matthew Frederick has his own opinion about the wisdom and necessity of such a move, which he articulates on his blog Hudson Urbanism: "How to make it more difficult for the poor to afford an apartment."
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK
Posted by at

6 comments:

  1. Chris HoppeOctober 16, 2014 at 12:17 PM

    The New York State Building Code specifies minimum room areas and dimensions to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. The City of Hudson does not need to change their zoning code to do the same. It is has been demonstrated that they are unable to correctly interpret the code they already have. Let the market decide what size apartments are needed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. victorinhudsonOctober 16, 2014 at 2:15 PM

      I'm with Chris Hoppe on this. Let the market determine what is and is not acceptable within the existing state fire code.

      Delete
    2. VincentOctober 16, 2014 at 7:49 PM

      agreed

      Delete
    3. Jeffrey PerryOctober 16, 2014 at 10:52 PM

      Agreed

      Delete
  2. Ron SwansonOctober 17, 2014 at 1:45 PM

    But...but...but isn't that capitalism (gasp!)?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Steve DunnOctober 18, 2014 at 11:31 AM

    Long article about Seattle Micro-housing linked below. In a back and forth between myself and Alderman John Friedman on this issue at a Legal Committee session, he threw another aspect of the matter into the mix not to my knowledge mentioned before (the debate on apartment size has mostly been about what is "humane," versus affordable housing supply, and just why a 350 square foot studio is OK, but a 350 square foot 1 bedroom apartment is not), when he alluded to something about "density" policy in Hudson. I wanted to ask him to elaborate, but unfortunately he concluded it was not in the public interest to continue the conversation further with me, and terminated it. To the extent Mr. Friedman meant to suggest that high density is bad, I beg to differ. Density is good. It is one of the keys to making the city pedestrian friendly, and supporting local businesses, who actually sell things to locals, and support the tax base, and potentially would mitigate the needs for more parking. Indeed, high density in Hudson is one of its charms. Without it, I would still be living in California.

    As long as the zoning code requires one off street parking space per unit, the minimum apartment size requirement will have only a marginal impact in any event on what actually is built in Hudson. In my opinion, it remains however an unwise policy, that is not adequately supported by real empirical data, as opposed to surmises and a priori assumptions.

    Anyway, here is the link:

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/10/seattle-micro-housing-boom-111874.html#.VEKERCjnzTS

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)