Austin needs a new housing paradime (Clarksville: 2014, apartment, condos)

[rangergrit]

There is a housing option that meets a lot of needs for "non-sprawl", but also gives "space" to those who don't want condo/apartment living.

The key is totally separate housing with no common walls, but dense. It's called "zero lot line". One wall of your house is on the property line. That wall has no windows, so your neighbor has privacy.

Lot sizes can be very small, and I think it works best in smaller size houses like 1500-2000 sqft. Typically 10 lots per acre.

When I moved to Austin, I looked for something like that. None found.

It's not right for everybody, especially with many children, since the yards are small. But I think it's right for Austin.

I hope some builder also agrees.

disclaimer: maybe Texas or Austin law prohibits this.

[CptnRn]

Paradigm not paradime

Paradigm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In science and epistemology (the theory of knowledge), a paradigm /ˈpærədaɪm/ is a distinct concept or thought pattern.

Yes, I have heard of "zero lot line" subdivisions, they make a lot of sense. Sadly, most home buyers want the "castle in the middle of the kingdom" paradigm.

I don't know if the Austin housing ordinances prohibit the concept, but I do know the zoning ordinances require a minimum of 5' between a housing structure and the side property lines. Which results in a 10" separation between houses, 10' is pretty much the minimum if you want to reducing the threat of fires spreading from house to house.

I'm not sure how zero lot line housing increases density, as it appears most such designs make the opposite side yard larger and still have a front and back yard. And changing from 5' setback - house - 5' setback, isn't really any more dense than "0' setback _house_ 10' setback.



If you really want to increase density you need to go to a design such as we see in Mueller, where houses have much less front and back yards and may even have zero lot lines and duplexes in some cases.

[austin-steve]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

Paradigm not paradime

Paradigm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, I have heard of "zero lot line" subdivisions, they make a lot of sense. Sadly, most home buyers want the "castle in the middle of the kingdom" paradigm.

I don't know if the Austin housing ordinances prohibit the concept, but I do know the zoning ordinances require a minimum of 5' between a housing structure and the side property lines.

There are some of these in Texas Oaks off Slaughter, built in the 1980s I think, with one side of the home on a lot line. Also, Olympic Heights has very dense detached fee-simple homes, and places like Independence have detached condos very densely placed.

Steve

[hts]

Seems to me you have 3 options:

Option 1. Stay in Austin and accept the housing options available;
Option 2: Move to another city that has the housing option you seek;
Option 3: Remain in Austin and find a way to become part of the solution you desire.

[rangergrit]

hts, why such a hostile response?

My post was your option 3.

[capcat]

Originally Posted by austin-steve

There are some of these in Texas Oaks off Slaughter, built in the 1980s I think, with one side of the home on a lot line.
Steve

I remember when zero lot lines was a topic in Austin. The 80's sounds about right. From what I remember of that, I'm surprised there is only the one area that you can think of, and I'm sure you know Austin well. I'd have thought there were more.

[Komeht]

We need lots of different housing options that are currently illegal under the city zoning in the vast majority of the city. Setbacks will prevent some of them, but it's a lot more than that - minimum lot size, FAR restrictions, impervious cover restrictions, parking requirements, etc. all contribute towards a highly regulated state of affairs that permits one kind of housing only - SF Detached on a big yard.

None of the most beloved Austin neighborhoods developed under this kind of zoning, nor could they have. Hyde Park, Rosedale, Travis Heights, Clarksville, Old East Austin, Bouldin Creek - none of them would be remotely legal under todays code. Yet these are the most loved Austin neighborhoods.

It's insane that we Love something so much we are protecting the city from ever building them again (excepting places that have been exempted altogether from the restrictive zoning such as Mueller).

[petro]

If Mueller doesn't have zero lot lines, I'd say it's pretty close to it. I'm assuming they got a special variance to build this way.

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by petro

If Mueller doesn't have zero lot lines, I'd say it's pretty close to it. I'm assuming they got a special variance to build this way.

Mueller is a special case - it's a PUD and exempt from city zoning. They can build on tiny lots, they can build attached housing and houses that have virtually no setbacks and the impervious cover restrictions are far far less limiting than for the rest of Austin. In other words, Mueller can develop in a way that is illegal elsewhere.

[petro]

All good points, Komeht. Also, just noticed the CptnRn's comment about Mueller. Missed that before.