Will Mueller really be "mixed use"?

My expectations for Mueller were set by statements like this one from the City of Austin's RMMA redevelopment page:

A fundamental principal [sic] of the RMMA development is the creation of a higher intensity mixed-use community that will not depend solely upon automobiles for its transit needs. Residences and employment facilities will be developed within walking distance of one another, along with shops, open space, and future transit facilities. It is expected that many people will choose to live in the new community because of the level of convenience and the ability to avoid heavy traffic.

The key phrase there is "walking distance."  I like the idea of stepping out my front door and walking to the neighborhood bar or restaurant.  A lot of other people must like this idea, too, because that's how Mueller's been marketed since the start.

I can see that narrow lots are a prerequisite to having a walkable "village."  If you chop the standard suburban lot in two, you can put the same number of people on half the amount of land and cut the walking time in half.  What would have been a twenty-minute walk (a car trip, more likely) becomes a ten-minute stroll.   

It's not enough just to lay out a bunch of narrow lots, though.  Exploiting the density requires actually putting the retail near the residential.  Otherwise, you haven't shortened the walk.  A twenty-minute walk is a twenty-minute walk, whether you're walking past 45'-wide lots or 90'-wide lots.

This is my main concern about Mueller.  I'm beginning to worry that many of the single-family homeowners will still be a car-drive away from the nearest retail, even after Mueller is built out.

Take the homes near the red dot.  It is over 4,000 feet on a line from the red dot to to the blue dot (Town Center).  It is well over a mile over the street grid.  That is a long way.  Your typical homeowner isn't going to make that walk, at least not very often.

It's not clear that these homeowners will have a closer alternative.  The plan calls for some mixed use at the southern edge (green dot).  This conceivably could include retail, including restaurants and cafes.  But the Catellus rep told me that that ultimately depends on the specific development.  It may have retail if it's developed as apartments, but it won't if it's developed as condos. 

There don't seem to be any other good options for homeowners in the southern third of the development.  The map there is basically all yellow (residential). If retail gets shut out of the mixed-use development around the green dot, I think these homeowners will be getting in and out of their cars more than we'd expect for urban "villagers."

Comments

[Jim Howard]

I live in Anderson Mill, which is an early mixed use development. We have a good mix of housing types, from low cost apartments and duplexes to luxery homes. We have good sidewalks on both sides of all streets, hike and bike trails throughout, and a number of parks, pools, and playing fields. We have HEB based strip centers on two sides, and a bunch of retail on the Highway 620 side. The only thing I'd do differently is put the retail in the center of things, rather than the edges.

We have the situation you are concerned about, where the walk to retail is a bit long for many of us.

[M1EK]

Jim,

Anderson Mill isn't "mixed use" by any definition of the term of which I'm aware. In common usage, it necessitates multiple uses on the same lot (could be a decently large lot of course) - not just in the same subdivision.

AC,

I think the only way to make this work is to just say "rentable retail use required on the bottom floor of apartments" and make sure there's apartments scattered throughout which orient towards the street rather than to the interior. Anything else is too easy to backslide on.

[ccosart]

My understanding that some of the yellow will be multi-family, but it's not determined where. So theoretically the first floor retail could go there.

But I share your worries that there won't end up being enough retail walking distance for most residents.

[Prentiss Riddle]

I think you've got an interesting point here. To put it in comparable terms, how many people east of Berkman walk to Target for their shopping? Although to be fair, with sidewalks and no need to cross Cameron Road, a walk within Mueller may be considerably more pedestrian-friendly.

My guess is that, with 2007 construction costs being as high as they are, retailers for the Mueller "Town Center" will feel the need for a pretty high concentration of potential customers before they invest. That's the only argument I can think of for the plan I've heard to put off construction of the Town Center until Phase 3 of residential construction or later. What's more, if the speculation I've heard is correct, the multifamily housing at the south end of Mueller may happen in phase 2, so it could be locked in as retail-free before a critical mass of Mueller residents has a chance to develop.

If the nature of the multifamily development is largely dependent on what sorts of proposals Catellus receives from potential developers, maybe one way to influence it would be to find a restaurant or retailer eager enough to join the development effort from the outset. Maybe we could get (say) Austin Java or somebody of that sort to declare an interest in an early presence at Mueller?

One issue is that a restaurant might not be interested in the south location without any adjacent office space to bring in a lunchtime crowd. If the southern part of Mueller is exclusively residential, a lone restaurant could expect a morning coffee rush and some evening diners but not a lot of traffic at noon.

Another peculiarity of the sequence I've heard -- again from speaking to individuals at Catellus events rather than an official statement -- is that live/work space will only happen in phase 3 or later. It seems to me that I hear a lot of interest around town in live/work properties. Maybe if it were possible to prove that interest to commercial developers, some live/work units could go into the southern area as well?

[Shilli]

My initial impression had been that all along the major roads (all the area shaded slightly darker yellow - both "Row Houses/Shop Houses" and "Muller Houses") would be VMU with either street front retail or at least a configuration that could easily shift between residential, office and retail space. The most recent information seems to indicate that instead this is going to be segregated residential. It looks like office and retail space will be included only in the dark orange areas. If that is the case, this entire development looks a lot more like a standard suburban development.

[M1EK]

Shilli,

Yep, many of us are beginning to get that sinking feeling. It's starting to look like just a typical suburban Virginia "dense but still not walkable" condo/townhouse development.

[Helena Marriott]

People in countries and cities NOT built around the automobile regularly walk one mile or more to get to shops, restaurants and transportation. It is the QUALITY of the walk that is important. A mile in the suburbs is utterly painful. No trees, no shops, often no sidewalks...people probably think you're too poor to afford a car if you try to walk to your local HEB. A mile at Mueller could potentially be a pleasant walk, like walking the row-house-lined streets of NY or SF. And maybe people who live there won't get as fat as us suburbanites. Personally, I think this could be the best thing that ever happens to Austin and I hope we get a chance to buy there. (Although I do agree that the house designs could be much better.)

[Prentiss Riddle]

These issues got put on the table, sort of, in this week's Mueller commission meeting:

http://www.aprendizdetodo.com/austin/?item=20070323