steiner ranch residents oppose apartments (Austin, Howe: section 8, HOA fees, house)

[CarnivalGal]

There is onnly a very limited amount of space on Quinlan Park to add an entrance / exit. Currently there is an entrance to Canyon Glen, which is already a nightmare for those folks because it is right across the street from the school. There is also the entrance to the new Randall's center and an entrance to the shopping center where The Market is. To add another means it will literally be about 40 feet from one of the existing ones. Either you will create a safety hazard or you would have to have stoplights every 30 feet. Neither of which is very feasible. This is also why the Randall's shopping center exit is left turn only - because traffic studies showed that a light wasn't practical. 620 on the other hand has FAR more real estate to create an entrance (with a light). Or they could use the same entrance on 620 that the Randall's center does - that already has a (new) light.

[Trainwreck20]

I don't know much about this proposed development, and all the issues seem to be already thoroughly discussed (or under discussion), but a couple of questions:
- If this is zoned multi-purpose, then what is being requested for approval? Why is a variance needed? Or is it more of a simple plan approval?
- I understand issues with being 'regulated' by a body that you cannot vote for, but the alternative (and the reason that ETJs exist) is that the county has no power to zone at all. Yes, Austin was 'chastised' by the legislature some years back for aggressive ETJ expansion, but part of that was because of the aggressive expansion of surrounding cities (RR, in particular) which were trying to make sure Austin was blocked. It is all political games, and in the end, I would much rather be governed by a city council than a county government of ANY sort. I have seen time and time again how poorly run a county gov't can be....
- Angus Valley (a neighborhood in north Austin) successfully managed to block or dissuade Riata apartments from cutting an exit road into their neighborhood. Not sure what all was involved (Riata was built sometime in the mid- to late- 90s, I think), but it can be done. OTOH, those were tiny streets in Anugs Valley that they were connecting to.

[mark311]

This reminds me of what we are dealing with in regards to the new Schlitterbahn proposed for the Cedar Park/Round Rock border. I don't blame the residents of Steiner Ranch for being apprehensive about anything going in that will greatly increase traffic when they already deal with a great amount.

Both projects are being pushed along by developers who are ignoring the real traffic implications. Whether it was planned or not, it still sounds like something worth protesting if they don't have an "acceptable" plan to handle the increased traffic. Maybe the original plan didn't adequately account for the issues regarding entering/exiting the neighborhood and modifications need to be made to help preserve the traffic integrity of the neighborhood.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by mark311

This reminds me of what we are dealing with in regards to the new Schlitterbahn proposed for the Cedar Park/Round Rock border. I don't blame the residents of Steiner Ranch for being apprehensive about anything going in that will greatly increase traffic when they already deal with a great amount.

Both projects are being pushed along by developers who are ignoring the real traffic implications. Whether it was planned or not, it still sounds like something worth protesting if they don't have an "acceptable" plan to handle the increased traffic. Maybe the original plan didn't adequately account for the issues regarding entering/exiting the neighborhood and modifications need to be made to help preserve the traffic integrity of the neighborhood.

They should stop all the single family homes in that case.

[mark311]

Originally Posted by Austin97

They should stop all the single family homes in that case.

I'm not sure what your underlying point is. Are you saying that they should not be able to protest this for whatever reason that they choose? I don't care what their exact reasons are for protesting, but what's wrong with protesting? If their reasons aren't valid then they'll have to live with the apartments being there anyway.

Maybe they don't like the height of the apartments or the way that the parking is setup. Who cares why they're protesting it? Is this just a thread created to try to infer that Steiner Ranch residents are too stuck up to live with apartment dwellers? If so, still, who cares?

I agree with them. Apartments tend to bring down property values and can definitely bring more crime with them because more often than not the residents are short term. Apartment residents also don't positively contribute to the community/neighborhood the same way that homeowners do. You can add renters of single-family homes to that as well. If that's what you want to hear then I said it. I don't even understand what people are arguing about in this thread. Apartments bring renters and renters aren't as good for a neighborhood as homeowners are. This isn't a secret. Single-family homes being sold are a lot different than apartments.

*Edit* - Thinking about this a bit more, they should scrap the apartment idea and build Schlitterbahn there instead.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by mark311

I'm not sure what your underlying point is. Are you saying that they should not be able to protest this for whatever reason that they choose? I don't care what their exact reasons are for protesting, but what's wrong with protesting? If their reasons aren't valid then they'll have to live with the apartments being there anyway.

Maybe they don't like the height of the apartments or the way that the parking is setup. Who cares why they're protesting it? Is this just a thread created to try to infer that Steiner Ranch residents are too stuck up to live with apartment dwellers? If so, still, who cares?

I agree with them. Apartments tend to bring down property values and can definitely bring more crime with them because more often than not the residents are short term. Apartment residents also don't positively contribute to the community/neighborhood the same way that homeowners do. You can add renters of single-family homes to that as well. If that's what you want to hear then I said it. I don't even understand what people are arguing about in this thread. Apartments bring renters and renters aren't as good for a neighborhood as homeowners are. This isn't a secret. Single-family homes being sold are a lot different than apartments.

*Edit* - Thinking about this a bit more, they should scrap the apartment idea and build Schlitterbahn there instead.

Thank you for articulating the point that the steiner ranch residents are pretending doesnt exist.

People can protest anything they want. Black people, gays, jews, poor people etc.

[mark311]

Originally Posted by Austin97

Thank you for articulating the point that the steiner ranch residents are pretending doesnt exist.

People can protest anything they want. Black people, gays, poor people etc.

.....and renters. This is about renters vs. homeowners.

There is a rental house a couple doors down from me. There have been four different sets of tenants in the past 5 years. All of them were wealthier than my family (at least they drove nicer vehicles) and none of them maintained their yards. They didn't get to know the rest of the neighbors and were each gone in about a year. Renters in general don't help to enhance a neighborhood because they don't take pride in ownership (with a few exceptions of course). I don't care how much money they have.

It's unfortunate that they have to pretend that a point doesn't exist for fear that someone will try to imply that their point is something different than what it actually is. When someone owns something, they take care of it. When someone rents or leases something, they don't take care of it. Owning a part of Steiner Ranch is a lot different than renting a part of Steiner Ranch.

[CarnivalGal]

Originally Posted by Austin97

They should stop all the single family homes in that case.

Why? The exact number of single family homes was planned out 25 years ago. The roads and infrastructure were created based on that number. They were not based upon 800 additional residences, which have only been in the plans since 2000. I guarantee you that if the developer were trying to build 800 (or even 100) additional single-family homes, people would be just as upset.

[Adamson865]

Originally Posted by mark311

When someone rents or leases something, they don't take care of it.

Wow. Generalize much?

There are good renters and poor renters, those who take care of their properties and return them to the landlord in better condition than they got it, and those who don't care.

There are also good homeowners and poor homeowners - those who take care of their properties, and those who move in a bunch of junker cars, fourteen relatives, and blast music all night long.

I've lived next to all of those examples in my life.

By the way - after I moved to Austin and rented an apartment, I tried to get involved in my neighborhood association - and was told that as a renter, I wasn't welcome. They next time they wanted my signature on some silly petition to save a shrub or something, I reminded them that they said I wasn't welcome.

[Trainwreck20]

By the way - after I moved to Austin and rented an apartment, I tried to get involved in my neighborhood association - and was told that as a renter, I wasn't welcome. They next time they wanted my signature on some silly petition to save a shrub or something, I reminded them that they said I wasn't welcome.

That reminds me of when I rented a house in north Austin for five years, lasting longer than many of the owners in the area. There was an owner who wanted me to complain to the police about a dog barking, but (long story) I didn't find it was an issue at all. He got mad and told me I should just move, since I was just a renter. I actually got to know two of my neighbors pretty well, although I haven't talked to them in years now. One still lives there, I think, so I should get off my arse and say 'hi' next time I am up that way.

Anyway, as I understand it, mixed use residences actually prop up the value of an area over time, as opposed to hurting it. I can't imagine the people looking to rent out there are going to be the criminal sort (I could tell you about some place I lived off of lamar/183 years ago!). I have a co-worker who lives in Steiner, and when I asked him about it, his only (marginal) concern was traffic, but he was not up in arms over it. I asked him about his property value effect, and he snorted and said he couldn't afford to live in the apartments that were already out there .