(A really interesting discussion as we head into council elections. - promoted by Karl-Thomas Musselman)
The city council voted 6-0 (McCracken off the dais) on Thursday to approve on first reading the initial zoning of a tract described as follows by Austin Contrarian:
The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department wants to sell off a tract abutting the UT Intramural Fields (the Game Warden Academy site). The tract borders Hyde Park, with 51st Street running along the northern border and Rowena Street along the eastern border. 50th Street dead-ends in the center of the tract's eastern boundary[...]
Hyde Park's planning team negotiated a deal with the developer which basically boiled down to "no access at all from our neighborhood to your project, and we'll not fight you at city council".
Here's the problem: they even opposed bicycle/pedestrian access via 50th St. There's going to be a locked gate which allows fire/EMS access, but bikes/pedestrians? Nope.
Their defense is that people might park on a neighborhood street and walk into the complex - and that said neighborhood street is "too narrow". Left unsaid is the implication that it's not too narrow for the people who currently live there since nobody has suggested simply banning on-street parking on that street for everybody.
In other words, it's too narrow for THEM, not for US.
Note that the developer did not seek any variances from city code for parking. They are going to provide as many spaces as the city says they need. It's the opinion of the neighborhood association that it's not enough spaces, despite this being an area with extraordinarily high usage of transportation modes other than the single-occupant-motor-vehicle. Of course, the leadership of the neighborhood association doesn't qualify - they're disproportionately old-school drive-everywhere types.
Note that the developer DOES have to seek a variance in order to enforce this term of their agreement with HPNA because city code prescribes "subdivision connectivity" in cases like this. Bike/ped connectivity is a fallback position; the standard is supposed to be a fully-connected street grid, even for cars.
Note also that the street is public; the entire city pays for it. Far too many people think that the street in front of their house belongs to them - or at least, to them and their immediate neighbors. Got news for you, sport: it doesn't.
Again from AC:
The Planning Commission, to its credit, not only approved the zoning, but recommended that the Council require pedestrian and bicyle access.
That's the Planning Commission that once housed both Cid Galindo and Robin Cravey. I doubt very much whether they would have voted any differently on this issue were they still serving on the board.
This is precisely the kind of stuff neighborhood associations try to pull all the time in this city - and they almost always get away with it. And if you can define how, exactly, making it more difficult for somebody living in new, cheaper than median, housing in Hyde Park to get by with fewer cars than average is progressive, I'd darn well like to hear it.
As I said at the beginning, the current council, lambasted by some for being insufficiently prostrate before the ANC crowd, approved this disaster over the objections of the Planning Commission (on first reading, anyways). But if this somehow isn't quite enough reactionary thinking dressed up as progressivism for your tastes, you're going to want to vote for the so-called progressives Laura Morrison, Jennifer Kim, and Jason Meeker. Their vision of progressivism is all about keeping things even SAFER for Old Austin's Old Money.
Similar coverage at The Austinist. |
