Ed Wendler Jr. on Austin development

Wendler's column in this morning's Statesman had something to irritate (or please) everyone. 

He proposes in jest a charter election to settle all development issues once and for all.  Some of his "ballot propositions" are spot on; some are just perplexing.

Proposition No. 2: Whereas the City of Austin has determined that democracy is the best form of government, and whereas democracy depends on individual participation, and whereas local control, the more localized the better, is democracy at its purest, and whereas neighborhood groups represent localized democracy, therefore, be it resolved that neighborhood groups will hold an election on every zoning case or building permit and it shall take six of seven votes of the City Council to overturn the neighborhood decision. And that includes remodeling permits for every house.

Yep.  Call this the "RG4N philosophy" of development.  All development rights belong to the "community." In practice, this means those with a vested interest in opposing change, since those without a vested interest don't have any incentive to participate.  Bad idea.

Austin's philosophy right now is to specify in advance, in excruciating detail, what's ok and what's not.  It's an inflexible and cumbersome system.   I suppose if Austin's neighborhoods had absolute control over development within their boundaries, the developer could just pay them off at the beginning, and save a lot of time and trouble.  (Seriously, there are some land-use experts who claim that this system would be more efficient.  But since getting neighbors to agree on controversial land-use issues is like herding cats, in practice this would mean no new development ever.)

Proposition No. 4: Whereas the City of Austin has determined that traffic congestion is a nuisance, and whereas local control is the truest form of democracy, and whereas traffic is caused by people from other neighborhoods, therefore, be it resolved that each neighborhood is given the right to police, barricade and collect tolls on the section of each arterial street or highway that runs through the neighborhood.

Yep.  Why the City allows neighborhoods to close off streets is mystifying.  Street closures impose huge costs on the rest of us who have to drive out of our way to get anywhere.  It's almost impossible to re-open them because of the political uproar.  Connectivity has to be gotten right at the beginning.  Austin screws this up more than any city I've seen.

I lived in an apartment complex in southwest Austin for a couple of years.  The quickest way from my apartment to William Cannon was through a neighborhood.  My only other option was getting on MoPac and driving about four extra miles.  The street around my apartment complex clearly could have connected to this neighborhood street, but there was a big barrier separating them, put there just to keep us scumbag renters out.  I still used the neighborhood street; I just had to get on a frontage road, loop around, and drive about two miles out of my way.  I muttered "assholes" every time I drove through.

Proposition No. 8: Whereas the City of Austin has determined that the area west of MoPac is environmentally fragile, and whereas the City of Austin has determined that the area east of U.S. 183 is farmland, therefore be it resolved that all the land between those two roads be zoned for four-story apartments. And that includes every parcel in all existing neighborhoods.

Huh?  The City's not trying to stick tall buildings inside neighborhoods.  Just the opposite -- remember the McMansion ordinance, Ed? 

Comments

[Scooby]

Austin screws this up more than any city I've seen.

Clearly you've never been to Houston (and its various enclaves, like Bellaire, West University Place, etc. In many places where they didn't screw things up in the first place, they've gone back and torn up ~20' sections of pavement and put up big ugly barricades to block off residential streets that connect to arterials & feeder roads.

As for "Prop. 2", I'd say that the ultimate in local control is letting the owner of each individual parcel decide what is best for his land. Neighborhood democracy is to far removed from idealized democracy- household democracy is democracy at its purest!

[AC]

I lived in Houston for a couple of years in the early 90s. It was pretty easy to get from point A to point B inside 610. Houston mostly has a grid layout inside 610, although the blocks are too long.

I spend a fair amount of time in downtown Houston, but I admit I don't get out to the neibhorhoods anymore. If Houston's started barricading neighborhoods, that's too bad.

Austin's still worse just going by the original street configuration.

[bittergradstudent]

The connectivity issue, to me, really is the worst part about living in South Austin--to this day, it is befudding to me that there is no way to get to MoPac between 290 and Barton Springs. That they haven't found a way to connect Barton Skyway to itself is one of the most confusing things that I have ever seen. Or have Oltorf go all the way over. It's crazy that Oltorf doesn't connect to MoPac.

Not to mention the rat warrens that the internal roads in South Austin are.

[AC]

I can think of three reasons why Barton Skyway will never be connected to Mopac: (1) it would require a bridge over the greenbelt, which would be expensive; (2) it would require a bridge over the greenbelt, a nonstarter environmentally; and (3) people from Barton Hills and Zilker would hang Council if effigy (if the councilmembers were lucky) if the city permitted Mopac refugees to cut through Barton Hills.

I think my neighborhood on the other side of South Lamar has the worst connectivity in the city. It will never change, though. Too many in the neighborhood like it that way.

[Shilli]

Wendler is a sprawl developer that writes self-serving trash like this every few months. He probably has a lot of time on his hands right now. I don't understand why the Statesman publishes it.