CodeNEXT4 (Austin, Round Rock, Cedar Park: wood floors, sales, transporting)

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

While those homes are in demand right now, I can't help but wonder what will happen when the younger generation winds up married with children and how alluring those homes will remain after they have a family they have to take care of. I dont deny that they are needed as singles with college debt cant afford a decked out house but if they build that stuff in every other neighborhood what will happen in the future if the demand for them declines?

if demand for them declines, then prices will drop and maybe they will be affordable. Central planning doesnt work. Let the market decide what it wants to do and people will be the happiest. So many people want to control the look and feel of their neighbors' houses.

Millenials want to live centrally, suburb master planned communities dont work for them. It doesnt matter that the baby boomers didnt plan for what millenials wanted. Millenials will build what they want and their children will do what they want.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by Austin97

if demand for them declines, then prices will drop and maybe they will be affordable. Central planning doesnt work. Let the market decide what it wants to do and people will be the happiest. So many people want to control the look and feel of their neighbors' houses.

Millenials want to live centrally, suburb master planned communities dont work for them. It doesnt matter that the baby boomers didnt plan for what millenials wanted. Millenials will build what they want and their children will do what they want.

I get this, the thing that worries me is that the only thing that makes these designs and the mass amount of these homes alluring is the demand by Millenials. I do agree that you technically have to provide what the market is looking for but if every neighborhood here became like that and suddenly the demand for them dropped unlike the current neighborhoods, these newer homes will have absolutely 0 charm to allure future post millennial potential affluent populations. They will however retain convenience but while they may or may not become more affordable we could end up seeing once great areas go down hill real fast. I think some control isnt exactly a bad thing because the market is only about now but I'm more worried about the future. Letting the market control everything may be just as bad as not preparing at all for changes in the market / demand.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be done but I do think it should be controlled and confined to certain areas.

[Trainwreck20]

Trying to plan what 'aesthetic' the next generation wants is a fools errand, though. If a person doesn't like the new house styles, they shouldn't buy one or build one like that. It they don't like their neighbors house looking like that - well, they should have bought that house, as well.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by Trainwreck20

Trying to plan what 'aesthetic' the next generation wants is a fools errand, though. If a person doesn't like the new house styles, they shouldn't buy one or build one like that. It they don't like their neighbors house looking like that - well, they should have bought that house, as well.

I get that as well it's just, if something were to happen where suddenly the demand for these styles of homes were to drop and intown Austin was built up with them, everywhere; as opposed to certain areas, dont you think that could be negatively impactful? I'm more so saying that, we should strive to keep the variety that's presently here while also providing for them and not making it 'the only thing we are providing'.

[Trainwreck20]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

I get that as well it's just, if something were to happen where suddenly the demand for these styles of homes were to drop and intown Austin was built up with them, everywhere; as opposed to certain areas, dont you think that could be negatively impactful? I'm more so saying that, we should strive to keep the variety that's presently here while also providing for them and not making it 'the only thing we are providing'.

Eh, we basically have the same homes everywhere already. 'We' don't need to do anything, let the market do what it will within very broad bounds. 'We' (the city of Austin?) aren't providing anything but options. Realistically, any changes triggered by the zoning code revisions will be very, very slow. The resistance is mainly due to the possibility that one of these will be on the same street or block as an existing homeowner who does not want change.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

I get that as well it's just, if something were to happen where suddenly the demand for these styles of homes were to drop and intown Austin was built up with them, everywhere; as opposed to certain areas, dont you think that could be negatively impactful? I'm more so saying that, we should strive to keep the variety that's presently here while also providing for them and not making it 'the only thing we are providing'.

No, you have a complete lack of understanding of a free market.

Even zoning dictating what can be built where is a problem except at the broadest level, like no toxic waste dump next to a home.

If you do put up barriers to the market to meet demand, dont complain about affordability.

[orlando-calrissian]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

I get that as well it's just, if something were to happen where suddenly the demand for these styles of homes were to drop and intown Austin was built up with them, everywhere; as opposed to certain areas, dont you think that could be negatively impactful? I'm more so saying that, we should strive to keep the variety that's presently here while also providing for them and not making it 'the only thing we are providing'.

Why not let the market decide what should be built? The central area of cities shouldn't be dominated by SFHs anyways.

If a homeowner wants to sell their property and the new owner wants to develop a multi-unit development on the lot, what's the problem? We shouldn't be preserving homes at the detriment of those who wish to live in the area, especially if it keeps home prices artificially high.

[ashbeeigh]

Originally Posted by orlando-calrissian

Why not let the market decide what should be built? The central area of cities shouldn't be dominated by SFHs anyways.

If a homeowner wants to sell their property and the new owner wants to develop a multi-unit development on the lot, what's the problem? We shouldn't be preserving homes at the detriment of those who wish to live in the area, especially if it keeps home prices artificially high.

Because if the market decides developers would buy all the land surrounding downtown and build “luxury” apartments and condos. This is about smart development and not forcing families who have lived in Austin for generations to be taxed out of their homes because I developed wants to put said “luxury” on their land. The land development code is broken and leaves out those that aren’t low income but not making six figures, which is a lot of people here.

[orlando-calrissian]

Originally Posted by ashbeeigh

Because if the market decides developers would buy all the land surrounding downtown and build “luxury” apartments and condos. This is about smart development and not forcing families who have lived in Austin for generations to be taxed out of their homes because I developed wants to put said “luxury” on their land. The land development code is broken and leaves out those that aren’t low income but not making six figures, which is a lot of people here.

Ok, well then that needs to be the stated reason for opposition, not preserving character. Generally I'm not interested in preserving character if it's just NIMBYs that don't want things to change just because. But I'm also not in favor of developers pricing everyone out of a neighborhood either.

[ashbeeigh]

Originally Posted by orlando-calrissian

Ok, well then that needs to be the stated reason for opposition, not preserving character. Generally I'm not interested in preserving character if it's just NIMBYs that don't want things to change just because. But I'm also not in favor of developers pricing everyone out of a neighborhood either.

Everyone has their specific reason for being for or against whatever land development code there is. Old Austin is worried about character and change in property value. Others are worried/affected by affordability. Both sides are valid. It’s a hard sell no matter what. I lived in 78723 for a big chunk of my time in Austin. I love that it feels residential and it’s diverse in its population. But, to be able to have the quality of life I have in far south Austin now, I’d have to pay to live in a mueller town home which rents for three times what I pay in the burbs. I don’t fault the current residents in their issue with the code, but, I’d also like to move back up that way and afford to live there. It’s a tough situation and there’s no easy solution.