Yeah that was good. I also liked that they seem determined to limit the ability to build strip malls/any development with parking in front to a few areas. And allow for more pedestrain scaled mixed use in residential areas.
State of Missouri Legislature has expedited building permit reviews and single stair construction up to 6 floors (in-line Nashville and Texas’s approved laws) on the docket for the 2026 session.
Modular housing will save St. Louis!
St. Louis approves firm to build modular houses on city land
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/bus ... b9b99.html
“The company hopes to build 1,000 homes over the next three years, Turnbull said.
It takes about five to seven days to manufacture a 1,500-square-foot house at the company's warehouse and about two to three days to erect it on site. An additional five days are needed to complete finishes, Wales said.”
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
St. Louis approves firm to build modular houses on city land
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/bus ... b9b99.html
“The company hopes to build 1,000 homes over the next three years, Turnbull said.
It takes about five to seven days to manufacture a 1,500-square-foot house at the company's warehouse and about two to three days to erect it on site. An additional five days are needed to complete finishes, Wales said.”
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
^ I hope they can pull this off but in some respects the impact or success in my opinion is if homes can been built with quality construction but also quality materials. It seems like modular homes don't go anywhere of scale not because of the controlled conditions to build something good but almost a desire to build cheaply with cheap materials hoping that the product sells.
The other aspect not sure if being purposed here but seems like there would be some synergy if a company could be a one stop shop, buy the land, put in the housing, manage the permits & title and the act as direct broker. Real Estate like construction itself is lot of paper before someone steps into there new home or something even breaks ground. Yes, creates middle men jobs but simply makes things less affordable to own or build Having something of scale for affordable but high quality housing in urban cores would be a game changer for St. Louis and other cities.
The other aspect not sure if being purposed here but seems like there would be some synergy if a company could be a one stop shop, buy the land, put in the housing, manage the permits & title and the act as direct broker. Real Estate like construction itself is lot of paper before someone steps into there new home or something even breaks ground. Yes, creates middle men jobs but simply makes things less affordable to own or build Having something of scale for affordable but high quality housing in urban cores would be a game changer for St. Louis and other cities.
Not the biggest fan of the design. It would be nice if they somewhat resembled the architecture of the neighborhood. Also, I didn't see the square footage of the homes but they appear to be pretty small. 3.2M for 10 homes seems pretty expensive. Traditional infill with exterior materials that mainly consist of brick and stone can be built for 130 sq ft. - 150 sq ft. With that being said, I do like the idea of starting to fill in the north side with smaller cost effective homes.
- 9,538
Has MBS delivered a house in the region or anywhere yet?
I generally like the design, although I'm concerned about the sold balcony structures breaking up the established building line.
Name of the bill: 5770H.01I - APPLICATIONS FOR PROPERTY DEVELOPMENTSdbInSouthCity wrote:Bill number?
Single Stair Housing Up to 6 Floors, maximum permit review period, etc.
Missouri House - Commerce Committee took up a single stair housing bill. Bill was introduced by the rep from Parkville (Southern Platte County).
The first bit sounds like a poison pill to me. So no insulation requirements? Would that also nullify any historic regs? Need to see what "excessive" means.
And if a city doesn't deny a zoning variance within 30 days, it's granted?
HB2384
And if a city doesn't deny a zoning variance within 30 days, it's granted?
HB2384
https://house.mo.gov/Bill.aspx?bill=HB2 ... 026&code=RThis bill prohibits any county or municipality from enacting or
maintaining any ordinance, regulation, or other policy that
requires an owner, builder, or developer to implement green or
otherwise excessive building design and construction practices
for one- or two-family dwellings, condominiums, multiunit
townhouses, multiunit apartment buildings, or commercial or
industrial buildings, with the intent to improve sustainability,
energy efficiency, high-performance energy standards,
environmental responsiveness and other standards specified in the
bill, that threaten the affordability of the construction,
maintenance, repair or renovation.
The bill prohibits any county or municipality from enacting or
maintaining any ordinance, regulation, or other policy that
prohibits a building of less than six stories with a Group R-2
occupancy, or its equivalent, under certain conditions described
in the bill.
This bill requires a political subdivision to approve or deny an
application for a permit, license, variance, or any other kind of
prior approval related to construction within 30 calendar days.
If no response is received by the applicant within 30 days, the
request will be deemed approved and the applicant authorized to
proceed with construction.
If the request is approved, the political subdivision cannot
later impose additional requirements on the applicant related to
the request.
If the request is denied, the political subdivision must state
the reason for denial in writing to the applicant. Details that
are required to be included in the written denial are provided in
the bill.
A request can also be denied as incomplete. In this instance the
political subdivision must also state in writing why the request
is incomplete, with required details described in the bill. A
political subdivision will have twenty days to deny a request as
incomplete.
That first point you mention is related to KC specifically who adopted the 2021 Energy Code and then saw single family permits plummet to 0. The school districts also saw a 10-15% cost increase on average and some projects like HS football stadium concessions stands became prohibitively expensive. Believe this rule says that 2009 or 2013 are the default the City can require and builders can choose on their own to go higher.quincunx wrote:The first bit sounds like a poison pill to me. So no insulation requirements? Would that also nullify any historic regs? Need to see what "excessive" means.
And if a city doesn't deny a zoning variance within 30 days, it's granted?
HB2384
https://house.mo.gov/BillMobile.aspx?ye ... ill=HB2384This bill prohibits any county or municipality from enacting or
maintaining any ordinance, regulation, or other policy that
requires an owner, builder, or developer to implement green or
otherwise excessive building design and construction practices
for one- or two-family dwellings, condominiums, multiunit
townhouses, multiunit apartment buildings, or commercial or
industrial buildings, with the intent to improve sustainability,
energy efficiency, high-performance energy standards,
environmental responsiveness and other standards specified in the
bill, that threaten the affordability of the construction,
maintenance, repair or renovation.
The bill prohibits any county or municipality from enacting or
maintaining any ordinance, regulation, or other policy that
prohibits a building of less than six stories with a Group R-2
occupancy, or its equivalent, under certain conditions described
in the bill.
This bill requires a political subdivision to approve or deny an
application for a permit, license, variance, or any other kind of
prior approval related to construction within 30 calendar days.
If no response is received by the applicant within 30 days, the
request will be deemed approved and the applicant authorized to
proceed with construction.
If the request is approved, the political subdivision cannot
later impose additional requirements on the applicant related to
the request.
If the request is denied, the political subdivision must state
the reason for denial in writing to the applicant. Details that
are required to be included in the written denial are provided in
the bill.
A request can also be denied as incomplete. In this instance the
political subdivision must also state in writing why the request
is incomplete, with required details described in the bill. A
political subdivision will have twenty days to deny a request as
incomplete.
The last point you mention I believe is inaccurate. A city would have 30 days to review building permits and make a decision. If no decision within that time period, it defaults to approved.
Like you agree with the proposed? I don’t think you and I disagree on anything if that’s what you meanquincunx wrote:I don't see the disagreement.
No, that a zoning variance not denied within 30 days would be granted by default. Though now that I think about it, your building permit gets denied for a zoning violation and then you appeal, so maybe it's not the big deal I initially thought.
The specific issue that piece is targeting is a few cities (KC included) are understaffing the permit review department causing long lead times for inspections and permit reviews. The thought is that the City either needs to review in a timely manner or just approve them.quincunx wrote:No, that a zoning variance not denied within 30 days would be granted by default. Though now that I think about it, you get denied and then you appeal, so maybe it's not the big deal I initially thought.
Yeah, I get the intention, just wondering about possible unintended consequences.
"Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary" do the historic regs meet this?4. (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, no county or municipality shall enact, adopt, or maintain any ordinance, resolution, regulation, code, or policy that mandates an owner, builder, or developer to implement green or otherwise excessive building design and construction practices that threaten affordability in the construction, maintenance, repair, or renovation of one- or two-family dwellings, condominiums, or multiunit townhouses, multiunit apartment buildings, or commercial or industrial buildings including, but not limited to:
(a) Sustainable building standards or features;
(b) High-performance standards or features;
(c) Energy efficiency standards or features;
(d) Environmentally responsive standards or features;
(e) Standards or features exceeding standards or features defined in the 2009 35 International Residential Code (IRC);
(f) Standards established in the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC).
(2) An ordinance, resolution, regulation, code, or policy enacted, adopted, or maintained in violation of this subsection shall be null and void.
"Excessive" isn't defined, so "Your Honor ...."
Yes, my understanding is that a historic requirement is not covered by this. As you noted, it specifically is calling out energy codes.quincunx wrote:"Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary" do the historic regs meet this?4. (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, no county or municipality shall enact, adopt, or maintain any ordinance, resolution, regulation, code, or policy that mandates an owner, builder, or developer to implement green or otherwise excessive building design and construction practices that threaten affordability in the construction, maintenance, repair, or renovation of one- or two-family dwellings, condominiums, or multiunit townhouses, multiunit apartment buildings, or commercial or industrial buildings including, but not limited to:
(a) Sustainable building standards or features;
(b) High-performance standards or features;
(c) Energy efficiency standards or features;
(d) Environmentally responsive standards or features;
(e) Standards or features exceeding standards or features defined in the 2009 35 International Residential Code (IRC);
(f) Standards established in the 2009 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC).
(2) An ordinance, resolution, regulation, code, or policy enacted, adopted, or maintained in violation of this subsection shall be null and void.
"Excessive" isn't defined, so "Your Honor ...."
Either way, you can write to the bill’s author your comments.
But says "including, but not limited to" so it's broader unless there is a "provision of law to the contrary"
Hopefully this would end parking mandates.
Hopefully this would end parking mandates.
State law allows for the designation of historic districts, sites, and buildings and preservation requirements. This is the “provision of the law to the contrary” that you are looking for.quincunx wrote:But says "including, but not limited to" so it's broader unless there is a "provision of law to the contrary"
Provide feedback on these new draft "conceptual zoning districts" by March 6th, 2026
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ZOUP_Districts
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ZOUP_Districts
^reminder to fill out the survey.
