Movement on McMansions
A city appointed task force has proposed new rules for new or remodeled homes on lots in 48 neighborhoods near downtown. Naturally, M1EK’s against it (check out the lively discussion from February and MJL had several other posts on the issue, including this one). KUT did a story yesterday about the proposed rules. There’s a hearing on Thursday at 6pm at City Hall downtown.
I don’t know about anyone else, but if I need more than 2,300 square feet for my shrine to Slayer. And if I can’t build on more than 40 percent of my lot, how am I going to hide the bodies?
“Naturally”?
I just want to make sure the only other family on my block isn’t forced to move out (or knock down the garage apartment in which their aunt lives). But in the minds of most of the neighborhood-nazis, that makes me an Evil Developer.
All in fun, M1EK.
I can’t immediately recall a city initiative that you supported (shoal creek, transit plans, McMansion ordinances, etc.), but I guess that’s why it’s the bake sale of bile and not puppies. ;)
I just don’t talk much about the ones I support – I supported car-free bike lanes on Shoal Creek, though; that’s an “initiative”.
Smart growth? All for it. Downtown development? Bring it on. Multifamily at varying intensities throughout the city? Yes, right now. Etc.
Smart growth is for the birds. I don’t know where the new urbanists grew up; probably not in the small towns they think they’re trying to emulate. In the small town I grew up in, everyone lived on acre lots (at least).
If inner-city density continues to rise, I’ll just punt and move out on to my land near Johnson City and commute into Austin. Good excuse to finally buy that F250 diesel 4×4.