zoning and mirco homes
Posted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 11:21 pm
Im my opinion, after transportation to the island the current zoning configuration is the second highest barrier to island economic growth. If people have their own cottage they will spend more time on the island. Time (hours) on island is the metric the island should be looking at to grow the economy and doing everything possible to maximize that.
I am wondering how we got to the zoned square footage specification in the first place. Iâ??ve been researching square footage requirements and all I find are recommendations and not scientific studies. I have an architectural textbook from the 1930s that recommends 250 ft.² for each adult. Given that the square footage requirements appear be quite arbitrary. Why not not let the people who actually own the property build and design house they want within the framework of standard construction practices. Would it not be smarter just to specify function rather than square footage? I have seen this in several townships in Michigan and it appears to have good results. For example why not specify that the minimum house is have four linear feet of countertop in the kitchen and a bathtub or shower, toilet and sink in a separate bathroom room thatâ??s it. Specify that the construction techniques are to comply with existing construction, electrical, plumbing and heating codes. Itâ??s a cottage after all. Thatâ??s all a lot of us want. I would rather have a small quality structure than to cut corners to meet some arbitrary square footage requirement that appears to be derived by the â??thatâ??s what everyone else is doing â?? standard. I have a plan for an efficient 320 ft.² cottage that is sustainable both maintenance wise and tax wise.
Looking at new tax code with its cap on deductibility of state/local income and property taxes it appears to me that it is going to provide a disincentive for people to build large houses as vacation properties on the island as they may not be able to duct the full amount of those taxes paid going forward. Yes they could rent it out to off set costs but thatâ??s not what everyone wants to do. An alternative is needed to ensure that if desired a vacation home can be constructed that allows the owner to remain under the cap. The solution is to be able to build smaller.
It is time to innovate with an eye to affordability and sustainability.
I am wondering how we got to the zoned square footage specification in the first place. Iâ??ve been researching square footage requirements and all I find are recommendations and not scientific studies. I have an architectural textbook from the 1930s that recommends 250 ft.² for each adult. Given that the square footage requirements appear be quite arbitrary. Why not not let the people who actually own the property build and design house they want within the framework of standard construction practices. Would it not be smarter just to specify function rather than square footage? I have seen this in several townships in Michigan and it appears to have good results. For example why not specify that the minimum house is have four linear feet of countertop in the kitchen and a bathtub or shower, toilet and sink in a separate bathroom room thatâ??s it. Specify that the construction techniques are to comply with existing construction, electrical, plumbing and heating codes. Itâ??s a cottage after all. Thatâ??s all a lot of us want. I would rather have a small quality structure than to cut corners to meet some arbitrary square footage requirement that appears to be derived by the â??thatâ??s what everyone else is doing â?? standard. I have a plan for an efficient 320 ft.² cottage that is sustainable both maintenance wise and tax wise.
Looking at new tax code with its cap on deductibility of state/local income and property taxes it appears to me that it is going to provide a disincentive for people to build large houses as vacation properties on the island as they may not be able to duct the full amount of those taxes paid going forward. Yes they could rent it out to off set costs but thatâ??s not what everyone wants to do. An alternative is needed to ensure that if desired a vacation home can be constructed that allows the owner to remain under the cap. The solution is to be able to build smaller.
It is time to innovate with an eye to affordability and sustainability.