Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-04-2017, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
12,867 posts, read 13,179,618 times
Reputation: 13815

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cBach View Post
link please?
My error - was reading it in my Saturday print edition:

CodeNext draft is 8 inches of California ideology
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-05-2017, 08:06 AM
 
2,602 posts, read 2,962,657 times
Reputation: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoPro View Post
My error - was reading it in my Saturday print edition:

CodeNext draft is 8 inches of California ideology
That's an amazingly uninformed and ignorant editorial, from someone who obviously has never even read it.

"We were shown an 8-inch-thick binder and told it represents only a part of the project. "

Uh, it's online. 2000 pages. That's not "8 inches" of text.



Heck the _very first sentence_ is wrong.

" the city of Austin is set to switch from a use-based to a form-based municipal building code"

Anyone who knows literally anything about it knows that they're switching to a hybrid, with 80% or more of the city retaining use based zoning.



There's plenty of issues with the current code next, but Dan Farcasiu knows nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2017, 09:00 AM
 
7,742 posts, read 15,044,929 times
Reputation: 4295
the op ed basically says nothing and provides no evidence or data for any of the points, especially the title which is a dogwhistle to any california sentiment.

Personally I would rather see the existing code just remove restrictions rather than have an entire replacement. Today's code is relatively understandable, it just is too limited in the following areas:

1) requires too much paved parked for commercial
2) disallows multifamily construction
3) has setbacks that are too large resulting in inefficient use of land

The #1 thing that will fix affordable housing is density. The only thing we need to fix density is to remove rules.

I would love to see a program where a multifamily developer could get reduced restrictions, in return giving one of the units to the original homeowners. The original homeowner gets to stay with taxes paid for by all the other owners for their lifetime + cash. When they transfer the property, the taxes return to normal. You would see an immediate conversion of single family homes to 4 or even 8 plexes. That density will drive local retail in the area as well as support mass transit. A 1000 sq ft house worth 400K becomes 8 1000 sq ft units worth 250K each. (or whatever the market will bear). The developer makes money, the cost of housing drops, and the original owner gets to stay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 12:05 PM
 
2,094 posts, read 1,913,079 times
Reputation: 3639
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99 View Post
Well you're not exactly that much different than those two cities overall, but I guess if it helps soothe your ego, sure.

I don't think you can really stop the growth it seems. The growth is the appeal to me and that it's shedding a lot of it's slacker past.

So three posts into your username and you chose this thread?
They aren't that much different- except for the sports. They just want to keep thinking they are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2017, 01:04 PM
 
2,134 posts, read 2,097,450 times
Reputation: 2585
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbsteel View Post
They aren't that much different- except for the sports. They just want to keep thinking they are.
Yep. It's absolutely pathetic and it shows just how untraveled they are. Many posters on here compare Downtown Austin to suburban DFW & Houston. How is that apples to apples? Anyways, there's so much migration between these 3 cities to the point that you have some of the same local bar & restaurant owners.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2017, 02:31 PM
 
56 posts, read 78,754 times
Reputation: 67
Here's what the city drafted back in 2011


ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/DowntownAu..._12-8-2011.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2017, 07:51 PM
 
7,742 posts, read 15,044,929 times
Reputation: 4295
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReggieFred View Post
The most important factor in controlling housing cost is the number of qualified customers bidding. Increasing density hardly helps in a market full of qualified people bidding up prices.
there are two factors, qualified customers AND supply. We cant decrease the # of qualified customers. but we can increase the supply. If you instantly brought 100K homes online prices would crash through the floor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2017, 11:55 PM
 
Location: Avery Ranch, Austin, TX
8,977 posts, read 17,454,123 times
Reputation: 4000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin97 View Post
there are two factors, qualified customers AND supply. We cant decrease the # of qualified customers. but we can increase the supply. If you instantly brought 100K homes online prices would crash through the floor.
A bit too simple, I reckon. 100k homes of $150k value(whatever that is) wouldn't affect much of the market in the $500k+ range(if any). What IS a $100k home, anyway???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2017, 09:08 PM
 
240 posts, read 270,288 times
Reputation: 236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin97 View Post
there are two factors, qualified customers AND supply. We cant decrease the # of qualified customers. but we can increase the supply. If you instantly brought 100K homes online prices would crash through the floor.
They are probably building close to 100 thousand homes (or at least 10s of thousands) in my neighborhood and the prices seem to be steadily pulling up with what the builders want to charge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2017, 10:29 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX
12,059 posts, read 13,790,915 times
Reputation: 7256
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10scoachrick View Post
A bit too simple, I reckon. 100k homes of $150k value(whatever that is) wouldn't affect much of the market in the $500k+ range(if any). What IS a $100k home, anyway???
I think Austin97 is referring to quantity not price. I.e. bringing 100,000 homes into the market.

Easier said than done...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top