What the fuck is wrong with you, Austin?

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

12 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

Gotta love the hot takes from people with skin in the residential real estate investment game.  You need a toe study?  I can get you a toe study, believe me. There are ways, Dude. 

[MissingInAction 25019]

2 hours ago, texasdago said:

I figured it was because we had an angry Kasey Studdard roaming the streets of Austin.

I just peed a little.

[Samson's Wig 3191]

1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

lol. Not what I'm saying at all, but the all too common references to unnamed studies are about as compelling as "I heard from my best friend's uncle's barber that . .  ."  

I've already agreed that adding housing should help, simple economics certainly say so. It makes sense that legitimate studies would show this.  But this isn't that simple of a problem, and adding housing by allowing developers to build more shitty condos on small lots that will be bought up by investors and used as short-term rentals will do absolutely nothing of benefit to the common person, or housing costs in general.  Only a fool or someone with skin in the real estate game would claim otherwise.

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, We’reTexas said:

But to the extent your ideal case study is a city that has decreased housing prices in a reasonably short period of time to allow middle class affordability, well, we live in a country where housing zoning and regulations have largely been established by local control (ie, NIMBYs). Do you expect that to have ever happened? Have you followed California’s and New York’s efforts to address this at the state level?

So, you're agreeing that it doesn't happen?

[We’reTexas 1473]

[Guest]

1 hour ago, We’reTexas said:

But to the extent your ideal case study is a city that has decreased housing prices in a reasonably short period of time to allow middle class affordability, well, we live in a country where housing zoning and regulations have largely been established by local control (ie, NIMBYs). Do you expect that to have ever happened? Have you followed California’s and New York’s efforts to address this at the state level?

 

34 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

So, you're agreeing that it doesn't happen?

 

32 minutes ago, We’reTexas said:

I'll pencil you in for a "no, it hasn't happened."

[ChickenSandwich 9829]

20 hours ago, We’reTexas said:

 

You keep stating this, but virtually every study done on the topic finds that building more housing, and in particularly increasing density, puts downward pressure on housing prices. But to the extent your ideal case study is a city that has decreased housing prices in a reasonably short period of time to allow middle class affordability, well, we live in a country where housing zoning and regulations have largely been established by local control (ie, NIMBYs). Do you expect that to have ever happened? Have you followed California’s and New York’s efforts to address this at the state level?

LOL.  Links?

The most recent studies in Chicago and Minneapolis (Upzone adopters) show that “rents and home prices have actually increased and developers will build to profit.  They then conclude “it is still not a reason to not upzone/not build supply”

Density creates scarcity. A larger and larger group of people in the same size space sharing the same resources. 
 

In Austin, the contrast between putting condos downtown, and allowing multi family in Tarrytown etc vs the gigantic apartment complexes under construction at Wells Branch/Mopac, off 290 towards manor, near 183A/Avery Ranch etc which will literally house hundreds of more families for a fraction of the price, is night and day. 
 

All of these developments are also seeing a support economy develop around them. Restaurants, gas stations, dry cleaners and groceries, creating more jobs.

These are simply a better use of funds and land to build sprawl than forcing multi family properties in expensive neighborhoods.
 

Use technology, WFH and other solutions to tackle transportation issues which gives a much better ROI serving the people with their tax dollars. 
 

Austin likes to address housing like we are NYC and there is no dirt that has not already been molested. 
 

 

“A new study of zoning changes in Chicago finds that they led to higher, not lower, local home prices, while having no discernible impact on local housing supply.”

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-31/zoning-reform-isn-t-a-silver-bullet-for-u-s-housing

Edited October 13, 2023 by ChickenSandwich

[We’reTexas 1473]

1 hour ago, ChickenSandwich said:

LOL.  Links?

The most recent studies in Chicago and Minneapolis (Upzone adopters) show that “rents and home prices have actually increased and developers will build to profit.  They then conclude “it is still not a reason to not upzone/not build supply”

Density creates scarcity. A larger and larger group of people in the same size space sharing the same resources. 
 

In Austin, the contrast between putting condos downtown, and allowing multi family in Tarrytown etc vs the gigantic apartment complexes under construction at Wells Branch/Mopac, off 290 towards manor, near 183A/Avery Ranch etc which will literally house hundreds of more families for a fraction of the price, is night and day. 
 

All of these developments are also seeing a support economy develop around them. Restaurants, gas stations, dry cleaners and groceries, creating more jobs.

These are simply a better use of funds and land to build sprawl than forcing multi family properties in expensive neighborhoods.
 

Use technology, WFH and other solutions to tackle transportation issues which gives a much better ROI serving the people with their tax dollars. 
 

Austin likes to address housing like we are NYC and there is no dirt that has not already been molested. 
 

 

“A new study of zoning changes in Chicago finds that they led to higher, not lower, local home prices, while having no discernible impact on local housing supply.”

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-31/zoning-reform-isn-t-a-silver-bullet-for-u-s-housing

Oh hey Minneapolis. And Houston. It’s a strawman to say that people expect upzoning to decrease home prices in the short term. As I and others have said, HCOL areas are fucked for a generation, and the only hope is to build enough to alleviate price increases and hope incomes keep up. Simply upzoning itself will not generate housing overnight as there will still remain many significant obstacles to development. We upzoned California with SB9, for example, but people still use regulatory mechanisms like CEQA to block development. As @Bozo_Casanova explained, you can only rely on sprawl to a point. I live in a place where we are well past that point, and the result is dire. Faced with the choice of doing nothing or doing something that will help in the long term, I support the latter. It’s like supporting efforts to combat climate change. Oh wait. 

 

[MonkeyDoughnut 10230]

22 minutes ago, We’reTexas said:

 

 

smaller homes/households = smaller emissions, makes sense

[texasdago 7569]

1 hour ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

smaller homes/households = smaller emissions, makes sense

Not to mention smaller homes with fewer large St. Augustine lawns = less water use.

[dcar00 14159]

On 10/11/2023 at 3:03 PM, Brisketexan said:

Yeah....I gotta tell ya....when we have a housing cost problem that is driven in large part by limited supply (this isn't a controversial take, most everyone who has looked at the issue agrees), I find it hard to understanding a take that "yeah....but ADDING supply won't help."

It won't SOLVE the crisis in and of itself.  But geez.  We need more housing to that supply isn't so tight.  Adding housing in Waco or some shit doesn't help us here.  So, change the rules to allow more housing to be built right here in River City.

why not just tear down the old as shit apartment complexes off far west and mopac(or anywhere in Austin for that matter) and build 10- or 12 story complexes? better yet use the huge parking lots on said apartment complexes and build over the parking lot while having covered parking on the bottom.  4 or 5 of those solves the housing problem if people are just looking for a small place to live.  you could have 1000s of extra "places to live".

The streets in residential neighborhoods can't handle the traffic or number of cars that will be parked there. none of these people that will live in 6 units on a single family lot are not going to have cars.  In fact there will probably 12 cars for each.  no one is riding the rail/train.  the whole thing is idiotic,  just make more housing where there is already multiunit housing.

[TKthunder2 4985]

Anything will be better than buying old hotels.

Still one of the only benefit of the train was that it would connect cheap city owned land to the city center which could be developed for high density/affordable housing.

But I bet they’ll even fuck that up.

[ChickenSandwich 9829]

Austin’s office market is exploding. But no one is moving in.
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/10/15/downtown-austin-real-estate-doom-loop/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNjk3NTE1MjAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNjk4ODk3NTk5LCJpYXQiOjE2OTc1MTUyMDAsImp0aSI6Ijg1OTRiMWVmLTllNDQtNGY5My04MGRiLWE0MjUyZGRiMzE5NyIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9idXNpbmVzcy8yMDIzLzEwLzE1L2Rvd250b3duLWF1c3Rpbi1yZWFsLWVzdGF0ZS1kb29tLWxvb3AvIn0.OuwRw_pdzgbnhpwkAbBGCJe-9MLAy0Bv2beoGiRGB-g
 

 

[ztejas 43414]

I don't think that guy and I have the same definition of "disaster".

[Homercles 10205]

Oh boy that’s a personal gripe of mine…commercial real estate prices collapsing + tax breaks being threatened = let’s enforce blanket policies to require folks in the office regardless of personal or professional circumstance.  

Meanwhile residential RE still a scarce resource…but we can’t be bothered to consider converting empty offices into some form of residential facility due to cost, zoning laws or sheer willpower by rich business owners/executives to force a square peg in a round hole.  

So now I waste an hour round trip in my car 3x a week, to waste 20 minutes looking for an open hotel cube, to waste a few hours slowly getting more frustrated listening to loud ass talkers on conference calls that aren’t even in my org, to realizing the handful of folks in my org I actually want to talk to aren’t even coming in today, and finally saying screw this…just to go home and get actual work done while doing laundry.  

[Deej 76756]

So, they are going to demo and rebuild the convention center to the tune of more than a billion and a half dollars, and be without a convention center for four years?

WTF?

https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2023/10/council-considers-timeline-partnerships-ahead-of-vote-on-1-2b-contracts-for-convention-center/

[Eskimohorn 5630]

You keep stating this, but virtually every study done on the topic finds that building more housing, and in particularly increasing density, puts downward pressure on housing prices. But to the extent your ideal case study is a city that has decreased housing prices in a reasonably short period of time to allow middle class affordability, well, we live in a country where housing zoning and regulations have largely been established by local control (ie, NIMBYs). Do you expect that to have ever happened? Have you followed California’s and New York’s efforts to address this at the state level?

Austin real estate skyrocketed amidst a new construction boom then stabilized following an increase in interest rates, an AIRBNB slowdown, a crypto crash and banking crisis.

The housing market is no longer a housing market. Investors are content in housing tourists, making these extra homes for themselves, and/or simply sitting on these homes.

New construction simply drives up value and will do so until there is a change in the global economy. What we do here in Austin is a blip. Making it easier to profit off land will compound our affordability crisis.

[Ghost of LL 15531]

25 minutes ago, Homercles said:

Oh boy that’s a personal gripe of mine…commercial real estate prices collapsing + tax breaks being threatened = let’s enforce blanket policies to require folks in the office regardless of personal or professional circumstance.  

Meanwhile residential RE still a scarce resource…but we can’t be bothered to consider converting empty offices into some form of residential facility due to cost, zoning laws or sheer willpower by rich business owners/executives to force a square peg in a round hole.  

It really is virtually impossible to convert office space to residential, for a number of reasons.  I mean, look around your office, and you'll probably notice a few.

In your home, you want pretty much every room to have natural light.  But an office building of any size has massive amounts of interior space.  So unless you've got an odd sized or shaped office building, you're going to have to pretty much sell off an entire floor or half a floor to an individual apartment.  

And then there are practicalities.  Offices aren't built with the types of firebreaks you need for residential construction.  The elevator banks and staircases are typically in a spot that isn't ideal (or even practical) for residential.  And they don't have water connections sufficient to support a residential use.

[crash_davis 23103]

4 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

 

Austin real estate skyrocketed amidst a new construction boom then stabilized following an increase in interest rates, an AIRBNB slowdown, a crypto crash and banking crisis.

The housing market is no longer a housing market. Investors are content in housing tourists, making these extra homes for themselves, and/or simply sitting on these homes.

New construction simply drives up value and will do so until there is a change in the global economy. What we do here in Austin is a blip. Making it easier to profit off land will compound our affordability crisis.

 

Realtors will tell you otherwise. Prices are falling, houses are sitting much, much longer on the market. Some of it is interest rates, some of it is a surplus in supply. There are a shitton of new construction homes in Brentwood and Crestview which have been sitting unsold for a couple of months.

[Guest]

Outline of proposed zoning changes:

https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=417432

 

[Homercles 10205]

12 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

It really is virtually impossible to convert office space to residential, for a number of reasons.  I mean, look around your office, and you'll probably notice a few.

In your home, you want pretty much every room to have natural light.  But an office building of any size has massive amounts of interior space.  So unless you've got an odd sized or shaped office building, you're going to have to pretty much sell off an entire floor or half a floor to an individual apartment.  

And then there are practicalities.  Offices aren't built with the types of firebreaks you need for residential construction.  The elevator banks and staircases are typically in a spot that isn't ideal (or even practical) for residential.  And they don't have water connections sufficient to support a residential use.

All those things make complete sense to me.  

I’m still going to bitch about it. Got to, this America man /RIP Snot Boogie

[texasdago 7569]

1 hour ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Austin’s office market is exploding. But no one is moving in.
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/10/15/downtown-austin-real-estate-doom-loop/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNjk3NTE1MjAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNjk4ODk3NTk5LCJpYXQiOjE2OTc1MTUyMDAsImp0aSI6Ijg1OTRiMWVmLTllNDQtNGY5My04MGRiLWE0MjUyZGRiMzE5NyIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9idXNpbmVzcy8yMDIzLzEwLzE1L2Rvd250b3duLWF1c3Rpbi1yZWFsLWVzdGF0ZS1kb29tLWxvb3AvIn0.OuwRw_pdzgbnhpwkAbBGCJe-9MLAy0Bv2beoGiRGB-g
 

 

That guy is annoying, especially when you weave in music that should be used for a documentary about climbing K12

I'm not a real estate expert but just because there are 120,000 units in the pipeline does not necessarily mean they will be built.  Remember the other "tallest building in Texas?"

https://austin.towers.net/austins-next-record-breaking-supertall-tower-announced-at-fifth-and-trinity/?pro=jude@towers.net

well... https://austin.towers.net/wilson-towers-downsized-downtown-austin-apartment-plan-moves-forward/?pro=jude@towers.net

The Conrad Hotel? https://austin.towers.net/its-not-looking-good-for-downtown-austins-conrad-hotel-tower-plan/?pro=jude@towers.net 

 

[PvilleStang 2875]

32 minutes ago, Deej said:

So, they are going to demo and rebuild the convention center to the tune of more than a billion and a half dollars, and be without a convention center for four years?

WTF?

https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2023/10/council-considers-timeline-partnerships-ahead-of-vote-on-1-2b-contracts-for-convention-center/

Saw that last night on the news.  Only thing I can say is it's approved by council (but would bet MK voted against it)...



Did anyone consider where they're going to host SXSW tech and gaming and such?  Boat show?!

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

14 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Outline of proposed zoning changes:

https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=417432

 

Here's a card for the public comments on this

Edited October 18, 2023 by Bozo_Casanova

[Guest]

Yeah, yeah, same shit, different day. Show me all the affordable "missing middle" in the places that have built density. 

Is it these $700k spots in Crestview Station?:

These $1 million spots in Mueller?

 

Here's a bunch east of 183. There's some affordable given the location... and then tons priced out of reach of middle income:

 

I love the idea of allowing and fast-tracking the permitting process for ADUs, and tiny homes. I think that's smart and minimally disruptive. Have a spot that you can rent out to a person or couple or have a family member move in. Great, but right now, it seems cumbersome to even do that. For example, a person in our neighborhood wants to create an ADU, but first must demolish a shed in the backyard. She told me the city is requiring tree surveys, to completely fence the yard (including the front, where nothing is happening), have it all inspected, etc. That's not even to build the ADU. It's just get rid of the shed.

Three units on one lot and allowing for much smaller lots? If you want to start from scratch, then sure, have at it. Changing things after the fact? Err... no thanks. Maybe I see things differently because the lots in my neighborhood are relatively small (I'm less than 1/5th an acre). Having three units next door would be insane.

Seems like a bigger difference would be to regulate AirBNBs in the city. 

[Nicole44 22059]

Traffic sucks. We don’t even have a loop. Lubbock we two and we’d agree Lubbock has a host of problems. But this is all fun and games until we run out of water. Campus is barely recognizable. Tall buildings everywhere. We aren’t meant to be over a couple hundred thousand. Like 500,000 max. The burbs are barely affordable. Jmo.

[Eskimohorn 5630]

Realtors will tell you otherwise. Prices are falling, houses are sitting much, much longer on the market. Some of it is interest rates, some of it is a surplus in supply. There are a shitton of new construction homes in Brentwood and Crestview which have been sitting unsold for a couple of months.

Interest rates, crypto crash, airbnb slowdown have softened the global housing market. What we’re seeing is less profiteers and less buyers able to finance.

War in Ukraine and Middle East will also dampen cash investors.

What we are not seeing is an increase surplus for middle and low income residents.

[dcar00 14159]

1 hour ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Outline of proposed zoning changes:

https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=417432

 

yep. nothing about required  number or vehicle spaces or anything.  these people are morons.  they think renters are going to use the bike lanes or rail and not have one car per person. Idiots, the lot of them.  They aren't solving any problem with this abject stupidity.

[swraith 346]

25 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

yep. nothing about required  number or vehicle spaces or anything.  these people are morons.  they think renters are going to use the bike lanes or rail and not have one car per person. Idiots, the lot of them.  They aren't solving any problem with this abject stupidity.

I think you hit 3 spots on the above bingo card with this post.

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

1 hour ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Is it these $700k spots in Crestview Station?:

 

1 hour ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

These $1 million spots in Mueller?

Mueller and Crestview are not sufficient to meet the need for new missing middle housing stock. That said, at the time of construction and now, they are and were lower priced than equivalent housing stock in equally affluent communities nearby and they are (and pay close attention to this part) the ONLY SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF NEW HOUSING AND PROGRAMATICALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING in Central Austin, and significantly that affordable housing is mixed evenly into Mueller, to the point that there are people who make $50k/yr living literally across the street from people who make $1M+ per year. 

In point of fact 25% of the housing across all types (including SF) in Mueller is reserved for people making <80% of the median family income and another 10% or so that is market rate affordable for 80-120% of MFI, and on top of that there are two whole apartment complexes that are market rate affordable at 100% of MFI (including one focused on seniors) and another one is in the pipeline.  So if your point is that Mueller and Crestview aren't enough to address the middle class housing shortage by themselves without more housing in the rest of Central Austin, that's 100% true. But they are doing more than their own part. 

1 hour ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Yeah, yeah, same shit, different day. Show me all the affordable "missing middle" in the places that have built density. 

Who gives a fuck about density? I'm not an urbanist, go shake your fist at a cloud. 

Edited October 18, 2023 by Bozo_Casanova

[dcar00 14159]

1 hour ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Yeah, yeah, same shit, different day. Show me all the affordable "missing middle" in the places that have built density. 

Is it these $700k spots in Crestview Station?:

These $1 million spots in Mueller?

 

Here's a bunch east of 183. There's some affordable given the location... and then tons priced out of reach of middle income:

 

I love the idea of allowing and fast-tracking the permitting process for ADUs, and tiny homes. I think that's smart and minimally disruptive. Have a spot that you can rent out to a person or couple or have a family member move in. Great, but right now, it seems cumbersome to even do that. For example, a person in our neighborhood wants to create an ADU, but first must demolish a shed in the backyard. She told me the city is requiring tree surveys, to completely fence the yard (including the front, where nothing is happening), have it all inspected, etc. That's not even to build the ADU. It's just get rid of the shed.

Three units on one lot and allowing for much smaller lots? If you want to start from scratch, then sure, have at it. Changing things after the fact? Err... no thanks. Maybe I see things differently because the lots in my neighborhood are relatively small (I'm less than 1/5th an acre). Having three units next door would be insane.

Seems like a bigger difference would be to regulate AirBNBs in the city. 

It is going to be hilarious when the people that were worried about trees start saying "yeah trees aren't that important anymore".  agree on the AirBNB.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 

Mueller and Crestview are not sufficient to meet the need for new missing middle housing stock. That said, at the time of construction and now, they are and were lower priced than equivalent housing stock in equally affluent communities nearby and they are (and pay close attention to this part) the ONLY SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF NEW HOUSING AND PROGRAMATICALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING in Central Austin, and significantly that affordable housing is mixed evenly into Mueller, to the point that there are people who make $50k/yr living literally across the street from people who make $1M+ per year. 

In point of fact 25% of the housing across all types (including SF) in Mueller is reserved for people making <80% of the median family income and another 10% or so that is market rate affordable for 80-120% of MFI, and on top of that there are two whole apartment complexes that are market rate affordable at 100% of MFI (including one focused on seniors) and another one is in the pipeline.  So if your point is that Mueller and Crestview aren't enough to address the middle class housing shortage by themselves without more housing in the rest of Central Austin, that's 100% true. But they are doing more than their own part. 

Who gives a fuck about density? I'm not an urbanist, go shake your fist at a cloud. 

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

[MAUFRAIS 6620]

Mueller residents want to make the nice parts of town as terrible as their shithole so that it doesn’t feel so fake.

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

2 hours ago, MAUFRAIS said:

Mueller residents want to make the nice parts of town as terrible as their shithole so that it doesn’t feel so fake.

Exactly! 10-12 bars, great parks, pools, movie theater, two groceries, doctors, dentists, and barber shops all within walking distance, buried utilities, shared power infrastructure with a children's hospital, the emergency command center and the energy utility itself, and free range kids are everywhere.
It's a hellscape!

Edited October 18, 2023 by Bozo_Casanova

[PvilleStang 2875]

11 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

and free range kids are everywhere.

Sounds like a TxTow wet dream...

[Brisketexan 105082]

2 hours ago, MAUFRAIS said:

Mueller residents want to make the nice parts of town as terrible as their shithole so that it doesn’t feel so fake.

WTF?  I've known quite a few folks who live/have lived in Mueller.  I've spent some time over there.  "Shithole" is not the description that leaps to mind.  Where the hell did that come from?

[South Austin 52457]

13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

WTF?  I've known quite a few folks who live/have lived in Mueller.  I've spent some time over there.  "Shithole" is not the description that leaps to mind.  Where the hell did that come from?

He's still upset he got rocks in his bag trick-or-treating in Mueller last year.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, MAUFRAIS said:

Mueller residents want to make the nice parts of town as terrible as their shithole so that it doesn’t feel so fake.

Mueller seems great, and it's a good testament to what you can do starting from a blank slate. I'd love to be able to walk/bike to parks/restaurants/stores without having to deal with busy highways or main streets. But the issues are 1) it's expensive AF and 2) that sort of investment won't be made and result won't be attained by making it the wild west of letting three units on a lot. Trying to shoehorn some idea of Mueller into existing land use is impossible.

45 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Exactly! 10-12 bars, great parks, pools, movie theater, two groceries, doctors, dentists, and barber shops all within walking distance, buried utilities, shared power infrastructure with a children's hospital, the emergency command center and the energy utility itself, and free range kids are everywhere.
It's a hellscape!

Found the guy that lives at Mueller.

In all honesty, seems quite nice if you're good with being so close to neighbors. Lot of perks.

[ballrific 215]

if someone makes $1mil+/yr and lives in Mueller, to each their own…or something something…

[Deej 76756]

40 minutes ago, PvilleStang said:

Sounds like a TxTow wet dream...

It is, and it's right next to I-35.

[royiv 9271]

It's interesting to follow the discussion on lot sizes. When my wife and I moved back to TX from AZ, we moved from a 10k sf lot in a central Phoenix area to a 2,500 sf lot in central Houston. I think you would have a hard time convincing us to go back. We absolutely love having a very low maintenance yard and we've found living so close to your neighbors to be a major plus. Our little block is very tight knit. We keep an eye on each other's houses, put Amazon packages in each other's garages so they don't get porch pirated, etc. We socialize a lot more with our neighbors than we ever have before and a it's not unusual for an impromptu happy hour to break out in someone's driveway in the cooler months. I know it's not for everyone, but I love the density.

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

23 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

But the issues are 1) it's expensive AF and 2) that sort of investment won't be made and result won't be attained by making it the wild west of letting three units on a lot. Trying to shoehorn some idea of Mueller into existing land use is impossible.

It's less expensive than equivilent options, but either way simply allowing the kind of missing middle housing that developed on it's own on about half of Hyde Park and near-in South Austin prior to the 1984 code made it illegal is not the same thing as trying to shoehorn Mueller into Allandale.

26 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

In all honesty, seems quite nice if you're good with being so close to neighbors. Lot of perks.

It's been great for us, particularly to raise kids. Trick or Treating here is epic and there is always an eye out, because of the closeness. Both of my girls got first jobs here at 14 and walked to work, and could walk home at night without me getting worried, because people I knew were on every block.

Incidentally - Leslie Pool bought a place in Mueller last year and plans to move here after her term is up in D7, as did another previous opponent of missing middle housing Ann Kitchen. I don't know either of them personally, but one of the speculations about Leslie Pool's surprise heel turn on allowing missing middle in SF1-3 is that she spent a lot of time over here and saw the benefit both in terms of quality of life and economic diversity of allowing lots of different types of housing to coexist, in other words that compatibility is maybe less of a QOL issue that the current code treats it as. 

[texasdago 7569]

Yeah the thing about Mueller is that it definitely has a lot of cool features and amenities but as someone who looks at it through a walkable/Italian lens (can't help it) my beef is these areas would have been better served with some commercial mixed in and by commercial I mean neighborhood restaurants, corner stores, local watering hole, etc.  They could have mixed them into the big grid of residential.  Imagine taking those residences and at the end of every X blocks or whatever you have a pizzeria or a wine bar or a place to grab overpriced groceries a la Blue Bottle?  To me, that would have drastically improved that area.  

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

9 minutes ago, texasdago said:

Yeah the thing about Mueller is that it definitely has a lot of cool features and amenities but as someone who looks at it through a walkable/Italian lens (can't help it) my beef is these areas would have been better served with some commercial mixed in and by commercial I mean neighborhood restaurants, corner stores, local watering hole, etc.  They could have mixed them into the big grid of residential.  Imagine taking those residences and at the end of every X blocks or whatever you have a pizzeria or a wine bar or a place to grab overpriced groceries a la Blue Bottle?  To me, that would have drastically improved that area.  

I completely agree - I understand that it was 1999 and they were and are taking baby steps in terms of what people (and crucially homebuilders) are willing to risk for an idea. Fundamentally it's more about what developers are willing to risk than what the neighbors want, for example, HEB was unwilling to face the store at the sidewalk on Berkman with gas and parking in the back. Opposition also comes from strange quarters. Around 2015 or so, the neighborhood association passed a resolution asking council to max out the density as allowed under the plan.
Amazingly, the pushback came from our own city council rep, Kathy Tovo. 

Edited October 18, 2023 by Bozo_Casanova

[Samson's Wig 3191]

I'm pretty sure I saw in a brochure somewhere that new transplants to Austin are required to first rent in Mueller.  And get a dog. And a paddle board. Isn't that the rule?  Maybe I misunderstood. 

 

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It's less expensive than equivilent options,

You keep saying this. What do you mean?

Leslie Pool's house is appraised at a cool $1.08 million. And it makes me laugh that Five Stone is listed on there to protest her property taxes.

[tbone_ 14113]

Yeah the thing about Mueller is that it definitely has a lot of cool features and amenities but as someone who looks at it through a walkable/Italian lens (can't help it) my beef is these areas would have been better served with some commercial mixed in and by commercial I mean neighborhood restaurants, corner stores, local watering hole, etc.  They could have mixed them into the big grid of residential.  Imagine taking those residences and at the end of every X blocks or whatever you have a pizzeria or a wine bar or a place to grab overpriced groceries a la Blue Bottle?  To me, that would have drastically improved that area.  

The push back on your plan, which is cool btw, is from the retailers. If they would sign up for those types of spaces, developers would develop them.

As a residential developer, who sometimes does mixed use, I can tell you first hand it is very challenging to get retailers in to individual spaces like you are talking about. They all want a sea of parking and as much synergistic traffic generating adjacent uses as possible.

Retail developers, which I am clearly not, may have a different take.

[Guest]

48 minutes ago, tbone_ said:

They all want a sea of parking and as much synergistic traffic generating adjacent uses as possible.

Retail developers, which I am clearly not, may have a different take.

God the way retail uses parking lots should be criminal. There's having parking... and then there is whatever we've decided is ideal in Texas where we build a sea of concrete that is never... never filled. Fry's in NW Austin is a prime example.

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

42 minutes ago, tbone_ said:

As a residential developer, who sometimes does mixed use, I can tell you first hand it is very challenging to get retailers in to individual spaces like you are talking about. They all want a sea of parking and as much synergistic traffic generating adjacent uses as possible.

Amen to that. 
 

 

52 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

You keep saying this. What do you mean?

Well first, Mueller is 25% affordable below 80% of MFI, and that's across all housing types. Secondly, the rules create the opportunity for about 10% of the mf winds up being market rate affordable between 80-120%. But I don't think that's what you are tlaking about, so let's stick to the other 2/3.
Admittedly it's difficult to talk about equivilents when literally every single unit of housing in mueller is in violation of Austin's code everywhere else in the city for one or more reasons, but, I'll give you a couple examples picked at random. It's also hard because there's very little inventory in Mueller, because Mueller is extremely popular place to live. That said, when you compare either the new contruction on EM Franklin just south or the same SF + bed/bath + condition in French Place Mueller is usually cheaper and when you compare it to renovations or new construction in Hyde Park (especially Hyde Park, which is probably the closest real comp to Mueller in that it's a lot of mixed types of housing, renters and smallish lots) Mueller is always less pricy.