So if your problem with the ZNA is their attempt to craft a draft that they then put out for neighborhood comments, please send them any particular comments you have about their proposal. Please go beyond it is “all NIMBY” or I just don’t like, of it doesn’t provide such and such, to specific changes you would recommend to the ZNA proposal to address your concerns. Believe me they can handle more than tweeter feeds!
And I make no apology for my “long winded response” It could have been longer, tried to keep it short but some issues cannot be dealt with through comments suitable for short email messages. Critical thinking requires much more than that!
As far as the “fake New” this is what you posted “First, a proposal for zoning was made to the city by the ZNA without much input and in the name of the entire neighborhood”.
The facts are very different,
First the draft was to the PC/ZAP as they requested
Second there has been considerable input to the draft ZNA proposal, it was the result of the many staff generated meetings where ZNA folks participated. Meeting with our Council member and comments from presentations at the ZNA quarterly meeting. So there has been a lot of input to this proposal. And while my review of the proposal has raised some concerns, which I have shared with them, I appreciate all the time and energy that the ZNA zoning committee has put into this very through and will written document. It is not perfect but does give an opportunity as a “straw man’ to provide specific comments, which is unto itself a value to the neighborhood.
Finally the draft represents the position of ZNA and they never portray it as it represents the entire neighborhood. Which leads me to another question. You have said that FOZ will be having a vote through an online poll on FOZ’s position on CodeNEXT. I am looking forward to seeing what FOZ does to address the 1,500 pages of code in more than sound bits? But if you think it is appropriate for a vote on the FOZ position on CodeNEXT, are you then personally supportive of the entire community having the right to vote on the entire resultant code that comes out of this process? What is good for the goose is good for the gander?
Since you seem to be for allowing a vote of the membership of the FOZ folks on the FOZ recommendation on CodeNEXT and understand the need to more time for democracy that “moves slower” are you then in support of putting the entire CodeNEXT question to the voter’s of Austin, it surely would slow down the rush to get this done but certainly would be much more democratic, don’t you agree?
As I stated when I first saw this abomination, the problem is the complexity of the code. The city paid these consultants major bucks, like over $6 million, to create this monster. Private citizens get nothing, no payment whatsoever, to muddle thru all that crap in order to make changes. They could save money by paying me $5.9 million and I’ll rewrite that sucker boiled down to a couple hundred easy to understand pages max - with a streamlined categorization system to boot! Otherwise, they can take those dead trees and stick them where the sun don’t shine because who has time to do all that work for free?
Our family purchased a vintage homestead that was over the impervious cover. We worked with the seller, who had owned the property since the 1980s, to try and get the ZNA support for a variance to allow the property to stay over the impervious cover limit, as it had been for DECADES.
The ZNA EXCOM did not help, and a member of the EXCOM worked actively against us.
To get inline with the impervious cover we had to tear down part of our house, remove our driveway and live in an unfinished house with a newborn. Thanks ZNA EXCOM!
Reducing impervious cover is a VERY BAD IDEA. It will not just affect developers, it will harm young families and others too.
Jeff - I find this statement very offensive. I actively attend all of the ZNA quarterly meetings for the express purpose of having an opportunity to learn about the ZNA actions and provide input when asked. Yes- in the last year, as new CodeNext drafts have been released, ZNA has discussed the topic at the quarterly meetings.
However - Not once was it made clear that the ZNA Zoning committee was putting together a “draft” response document specifically regarding Version 3; nor was there any opportunity in the most recent ZNA meeting to offer “comments” . And there was definitely not outreach to the wider community (via Nextdoor or other similar avenues) to let current residents in our neighborhood know that this “draft” would be submitted to a key City of Austin board.
I think you don’t understand how offensive it is for a group like the ZNA Zoning committee to create such a document with so little input from the folks that actually live in our area.
No. I think professionals that have degrees in city and urban planning should come up with the code. I think input should be given by the neighborhoods and home owners that are affected. But ultimately, the code needs to be written by professionals and should serve the city as a whole - not just certain “powerful” neighborhoods.
Again these are my personal opinions. Anyone who would like to propose items that the Friends of Zilker should vote on is welcome to do so by starting a threat in the “Proposed FoZ Positions” category. If a board member approves it, then it will go out to a member wide vote.
Oh and fun fact, you can put polls directly in these messages, should you chose! Was proper input solicited from Zilker’s residents prior to submitting a proposal to the PC/ZAP at the City of Austin?
What part of “draft” do you not understand? Send in your comments and then complain if what you wanted is not addressed. But complain to the staff not ZNA since you can send in your comments, to ZNA’s draft of any other thing in CodeNEXT that you do not like!
As for top down “zoning via fiat”, I have not heard any complaints from FOZ folks on the top down city staff process which started over 20 years ago with “smart growth” which is now “new urbanism” and which has always been a top down process with lip service to community desires.
So can we all agree that democracy is best and having the community vote on the final outcome is the best way to ensure that ALL voices are heard (at the ballot box!) So can FOZ take a vote to endorse putting the CodeNEXT final product to vote of the whole community? If you think CodeNEXT is not what you want, then support a vote on the whole CodeNEXT results. IF you like it and enough agree with you then it will pass, but if not then It won’t!
Jeff, I’m not going to indulge your magical-thinking fantasies while you willfully ignore the very salient points raised by everyone, but particularly Mary and Felicity. It’s entirely moot to discuss hypotheticals when the plain reality is that the city council will not recommend CodeNEXT be put to a public vote - and btw this recommendation is mandatory for any ballot referendum - given that the city attorney has already stated that COA would be inviting multiple lawsuits if they did so. One should also note that the city would be all but certain to lose any such lawsuits, not to mention risking the very real likelihood of the state legislature entirely preempting municipal regulation in this area, much like they did with Uber and Lyft.
Okay, now you’re just being obtuse - as I’m sure you know, no one here has agreed with you here!
You’re also being stunningly hypocritical: on the one hand supporting a “community vote,” and right on the other arguing that it was perfectly fine that the Zilker community wasn’t allowed to offer its own feedback to the NA that ostensibly supports its interests before said NA submitted a draft ordinance to the city ostensibly “on behalf of Zilker.”
“ZNA PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
to replace current SF-2, SF-3, SF-4A&B, SF-5, SF-6, and some multifamily districts;
a simplified alternative to CodeNext 3 Division 23-4D-2 Residential House-Scale Zones R2A-E, R3A-D, R4A-B”
If it is a DRAFT it should not have been sent to the Planning Commission on April 6.
Will the ZNA VOTE on this before testimony is given at the planning commission? Will the VOTE totals be made public? Can members vote from home so we don’t have to drag our little children to a meeting?
If CodeNEXT version 1 and version 2 were “drafts” since they were not the final project (Version 3) then they should not have been released to the public? Why did you not complain about the city releasing these “drafts”
Jeff Jack- I’m sensing that peoples frustration is that its a false equivalency to compare the feedback opportunity of the ZNA Zoning to CodeNext as a whole. CodeNext has had hundreds of meetings and opportunity for feedback over the past 4 years, too much in fact as its lead to fatigue, while the ZNA proposal had no meaningful outreach or input in its creation. Its unclear to me who is even on the zoning committee since you have moved on to the ANC- the authors are not listed and the most recent excom minutes that have been posted from September 2017 have no mention of this zoning draft. I don’t mean to place blame but this can be a learning experience for the future to better engage with people and have a more representative document as a result.
All - That being said I did send in robust comments given the limited opportunity. Its not clear what the process is for incorporating comments, but in an effort for transparency I also posted publically in the yahoo ZNA group.
For those that have been censored from the group, attached is a link to my pdf comments and here is what I posted:
Below is my full message to the ZNA Zoning Committee when sending in comments:
To whom it may concern on the ZNA Zoning Committee,
Thank you for giving an opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed zoning.
As I have mentioned on other correspondence It would have been preferred to have a real public process with input from a diverse cross-section of the neighborhood, prior to submitting this proposed zoning to the Planning Commission on April 6th.
I do believe that we all want a livable Zilker but I am concerned that may of your suggestions that lean towards just allowing larger single family homes with more parking requirements will negatively affect affordability and make environmental concerns worse not better. We are an urban neighborhood and attempts to downzone Zilker to suburban standards will simply push development out and result in more sprawl in our region.
Nonetheless, I hope that you take this feedback from myself and hopefully others that aren’t on the ZNA Zoning Committee into consideration. I am going to make attempts to get as many neighbors involved as possible even with the compressed timeframe allowed.
So who has not agree that democracy is best? Those who like an authoritarian top down approach (which you presumed is what the ZNA preferres) to CodeNEXT?’’ Democracy is when you want it to go to a vote of similar likeminded folks but it is not what you want when you are not sure the majority of folks agree with you on the desired outcome for CodeNEXT? So do you support putting the final product of CodeNEXT to a vote of the people? A simple answer please.
The city council has 10 days after certification of the petition initiative (valid 20,000 signatures or the 32,000 signatures turned in) to either 1 vote to adopt the ordinance or 2 put it on the next general election ballot (November 2018). They can decide not to do either and then the applicant can take them to court. The city has been taken to court on such initiatives before and in the cases I know about, the courts have ordered that the city put the issue to the voters. So if the city does not do this and the courts do rule in favor of the petition, then we will all have a vote on it.
I think I remember you being in favor of Uber and Lyft being put to a vote once the City Council vote against letting them operate in the city under less strict rules, is my memory correct, then if that was ok for the uber and lyft initiative why not for the CodeNEXT initiative that will be far more impactful for the future of our city than any TNC?
@jjack2 your questions have been asked and answered numerous times by numerous people. I’m guessing your strategy here is to create so much noise here that nobody can wade through it and discover what has and continues to be done in the unsuspecting names of the residents of Zilker.
I’ll answer if you do: why do you think the city council should ignore the advice of the outside counsel – one of the state’s leading experts on municipal law, no less – and put CodeNEXT to a public vote regardless? (see below) And why are you falsely conflating representative democracy with direct democracy? Are you aware that one of the bedrock bases of the American political system is electing officials to public office who will represent your interests? And that the solution to politicians espousing views you disagree with is voting them out of office, not usurping their power entirely?
Why do you think Austin citizens can make an informed vote about a document that’s over 1500 pages total? Are you not aware that any such vote could (or would) be heavily influenced by propaganda pumped out by extreme partisans? Do you similarly think, for instance, that something similar in size to “Obamacare” would’ve been better decided by the American people? If so, why do you think the vote would’ve been a “mandate” on anything other than the respective sides’ abilities to effectively pump out this propaganda?
Even if you rationally think Austin’s previous at-large Council was too broadly in favor of “pro-developer” / new urbanist, why don’t you believe the current one is an improvement and/or would be able to make an informed vote about CodeNEXT? Are you seriously arguing that “pro-preservationist” CMs like Kitchen, Tovo and Pool would somehow vote against their constituents’ best interests? If so, have you told them? If, say, five CMs and the mayor end up voting in favor of approving CodeNEXT’s final draft, do you seriously think the collective will of the 50% of Austinites they represent should be subverted by one side that’s heavily partisan in one direction or the other?
To be clear, since neighborhood association input into the entire process has essentially been ignored, my suggestion was to send your comments to both the NA and city staff. But if you would rather just send them to ZNA that is fine with me!
Jeff
PS I have had enough of some folks making incorrect assumption about what I mean, distorting what I have posted and general using any and every opportunity to distract from a civil conversation. So whenever I see a post from these folks I will just do what I do with junk mail!
Thanks for all those who have had to endure this harangue against ZNA and anyone who supports the folks who have worked hard to ensure the continuation of Zilker’s wonderful quality of life.
Hope for a great Zilker turn out for the coming November elections! Let the people be heard!
