Housing and the limitations on occupancy in the City of Kingston shall remain defined as it is in the Charter for the time being. The Laws & Rules Committee Thursday evening voted unanimously to table the issue until an undetermined date to allow the committee to study the issue closer.A majority of the Council had determined the move to table was necessary about a week prior to the meeting and felt the measure would only pit civic groups against each other at a time when there is already great turmoil in the management of some of our departments.
Ron Polacco asked permission to be the first motion and I had the pleasure of second. Opening the definition of occupancy to board member interpretation would only add to the daunting challenges facing the Planning and Zoning Boards and I for one wasn't comfortable with the unrestricted boarding house aspect of the proposed change.For those of you concerned with YOUR neighboring buildings allowing tens of unrelated persons without regulation, rest assured, we are looking out for your best interest.
2 comments:
This should have never even been on the table in the first place.
We are struggling out here to gentrify our troubled neighborhoods while the the council moves to deregulate housing restrictions? What gives?
We have out of town landlords dicing up homes in midtown with no concern for the impact it has on the parking, waste and foot traffic in these neighborhoods.
I'm glad to see some resemblance of stewardship from some of you, even if it did take a while.
Some of the boarding houses in the City of Kingston seem to be "okay" and some appear (from what I hear and have been hearing for a long time...) to be atrocious... So I'd say that until we (as a community) can get a grip on "what is" [Will someone please check out Elizabeth Manor, Washington Manor and Chiz' (sp?) place?] - we sure shouldn't be looking to allow any more places (such as these) to take root...
Just my opinion, yours may differ...
N.S.
Post a Comment