Thoughts on McMansion Ordinance Impact (Dallas, Austin: low income, 2009, houses)

[FueledByBlueBell]

This link below is an overview, and there is an embedded link to another take on the situation. I find this to be very enlightening and an accurate portrayal of the challenges of living in central austin.

Btw, please no haters. I know that with kids we CAN live with a car port 3 beds and 2 bathrooms, but as some of you may know from previous posts I am potentially interested in the idea of renovating central (from Burnet/lamar/2222 to shoal creek/allentown/etc., south austin, or maybe just west of mopac) but only something in style with the neighborhood (both in look and perceived size) with 3-4 beds, a 2 car garage, 3.5 baths and an office as we work from home. We were thinking of some creative architecture and use of space, and a similar budget as named in one of these articles, but I'm learning that $500k-$550k for everything is pretty limiting (ok, more like pipe dream). I'd like to spend less, but trying to stay realistic.

Oh, I will go ahead and say it again- not looking for an oversized tuscan theme park.

What are your thoughts on these articles? Do you believe that the ordinance needs to be tweaked or not? Do you think the city would even re-evaluate or should I move on?

Austin McMansion Ordinance – Considering the Consequences « Roselind Hejl’s Austin Update

[BigDGeek]

I agree with Austin's McMansion ordinance and wish we had one in Dallas. I hate seeing perfectly good houses torn down to be replaced with houses twice the size with half the construction quality and barely room to squeeze between them.

Sorry!

However if a house is beyond repair, I think it is acceptable to tear it down and start over but only if the home you build in its place is in the same style and not too much larger than existing homes in the neighborhood. Sometimes houses fall into disrepair and eventually it would cost more to fix them than it would cost to build new. Say for example you bought a .25 acre lot with a 3-2 at 1900 sq ft on it and scraped the house off. I think it is fine to do that and build a 4-3 at 2200-2400 sq ft in its place, but not a 5-6 at 4000-5000 sq ft.

I am in the process of buying the same kind of house that developers in Dallas are tearing down and my biggest fear for my new neighborhood is McMansion Syndrome. I hope it never happens in my new neighborhood.

[TexasHorseLady]

Well, I saw what people were doing in the neighborhood that I own in before the ordinance - not people who lived there, mind, but people from out of state buying and remodeling or building atrocities that destroyed the entire feel of the neighborhood. I also saw people who bought in the neighborhood and remodeled, but kept the exterior and basic size (moderate add-ons) and did an outstanding job of updating while keeping the neighborhood feel.

The ordinance in question is to prevent the former while allowing for the latter, thus preserving what attracts people to the central neighborhoods in the first place. So, yes, I'd say, taking the long view, that the ordinance serves the population of Austin, even if it requires doing some serious thought and jumping through hoops and perhaps adjusting expectations to comply.

[BigDGeek]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Well, I saw what people were doing in the neighborhood that I own in before the ordinance - not people who lived there, mind, but people from out of state buying and remodeling or building atrocities that destroyed the entire feel of the neighborhood. I also saw people who bought in the neighborhood and remodeled, but kept the exterior and basic size (moderate add-ons) and did an outstanding job of updating while keeping the neighborhood feel.

The ordinance in question is to prevent the former while allowing for the latter, thus preserving what attracts people to the central neighborhoods in the first place. So, yes, I'd say, taking the long view, that the ordinance serves the population of Austin, even if it requires doing some serious thought and jumping through hoops and perhaps adjusting expectations to comply.

I completely agree. I wish Dallas would adopt something similar but I am not holding my breath, there is too much $$$$ to be made from higher property taxes. Dallas cannot grow, it can only densify and increase property values to raise more revenue.

I am buying a 52 year old house and it is rock solid, it breaks my heart when people tear down these quirky but very high quality houses to replace them with a "Tuscan theme park" as the first poster put it.

[mimimomx3]

I love the McMansion ordinance and see no reason to 'tweak' it. There are trade offs in life. When you live Central, you live in an old neighborhood with old houses that are small, have wierd plumbing and wiring stuff. BUT...you are closer to the action. When you live in the 'burbs, you get all the new bells and whistles, great rooms, 3 car garages, media rooms and offices. BUT....you have to commute. That's life.

I'm not hating on the OP because I do think they want to stay away from the Tuscan Theme Park. What s/he describes though, the 4-3.5, 2 car garage, office, I've seen all over central Austin lately. I would look off 2222 and Mopac.

[verybadgnome]

I'm not overly familiar with this issue but I didn't think there was anything in the COA ordinance specifying type of architecture. That is you could build something that met all of the setback, height, floor to area ratio, etc. but still looked totally out of place due to the designer architecture.

Also interesting to note is the areas that this affects:

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/zoning/do...Boundaries.pdf

I'm sure this could be expanded b/c I know of a few places just below Ben White that have gotten "the treatment."

[FueledByBlueBell]

I get the point too, but what happens is as describes in these articles- it costs a ton to hire a specialist who can design something that is compliant and they are very expensive, then upgrade the plumbing and infrastructure because we are dealing with an older house and eventually you at well over $500k-- so, basically, you need to have some serious cash (because again, as stated in the article, $500k isn't really going to get you close).

I guess the bottom line is that those of us who only make a couple of hundred thousand a year with kids need to stick to the low income housing in the 'burbs...

[BigDGeek]

Originally Posted by FuledbyBlueBell

I get the point too, but what happens is as describes in these articles- it costs a ton to hire a specialist who can design something that is compliant and they are very expensive, then upgrade the plumbing and infrastructure because we are dealing with an older house and eventually you at well over $500k-- so, basically, you need to have some serious cash (because again, as stated in the article, $500k isn't really going to get you close).

I guess the bottom line is that those of us who only make a couple of hundred thousand a year with kids need to stick to the low income housing in the 'burbs...

The McMansions in Dallas have a much bigger price tag; the lots cost about $350k-$400k in some neighborhoods, more than that in others; then you build a $1m-$1.5m house on them. $500k is a steal compared to that.

[DCDC1974]

I understand the issues with the ordinance being a problem as I was one of the staff members that wrote it back in 2006. Now as an independent consultant I've helped many clients navigate the process, but agree it needs to changed. There are significant staff problems, the RDCC is basically out of control, and most of the architects I deal with barely even understand it at this point. Plus, if you look around central Austin, what is the actual effect of this ordinance? Not much has changed. It is up to each owner to hire a quality contractor. Not an ordinance. The mayor wants density in central austin, but the McM Ordinance really acts against it by pushing folks who cannot remodel out to the burbs.

Originally Posted by FuledbyBlueBell

This link below is an overview, and there is an embedded link to another take on the situation. I find this to be very enlightening and an accurate portrayal of the challenges of living in central austin.

Btw, please no haters. I know that with kids we CAN live with a car port 3 beds and 2 bathrooms, but as some of you may know from previous posts I am potentially interested in the idea of renovating central (from Burnet/lamar/2222 to shoal creek/allentown/etc., south austin, or maybe just west of mopac) but only something in style with the neighborhood (both in look and perceived size) with 3-4 beds, a 2 car garage, 3.5 baths and an office as we work from home. We were thinking of some creative architecture and use of space, and a similar budget as named in one of these articles, but I'm learning that $500k-$550k for everything is pretty limiting (ok, more like pipe dream). I'd like to spend less, but trying to stay realistic.

Oh, I will go ahead and say it again- not looking for an oversized tuscan theme park.

What are your thoughts on these articles? Do you believe that the ordinance needs to be tweaked or not? Do you think the city would even re-evaluate or should I move on?

Austin McMansion Ordinance – Considering the Consequences « Roselind Hejl’s Austin Update

[FueledByBlueBell]

Well, that was kinda my point. You buy for around $360 (maaaybe) to $500k and then renovate-- which puts your total around $900-1m easily. Trust me, I'm from Dallas and it is much cheaper Austin; I'm low balling.

Plus, In D you have a lot to work with in the center of town. There are many huge lots with sprawling ranch style homes, and even cottege style that need way less than the homes here do. Dallas is easy.