Public Notice: How Much Does Height Matter?

In a work session a couple of weeks ago, CM Chito Vela spoke of the importance of three- to five-story buildings, which he called the "sweet spot" for a lot of developments, and that's a key point. There's a lot of talk about the upper-end height limits – can we go to 75 feet, or 90 feet, to get the greatest density density density – but in fact, as Vela pointed out, those mid-rise buildings that can be built with lumber instead of steel are the most economical to build (and they're also the most sustainable).

As a measure of effective density, maximum building height is vastly overhyped. It's an easy shorthand, and it's an easy political rallying point, but in reality, it's not really a hill worth dying on for either side in the density debate: Most developments don't want to go anywhere near 120 feet, because very tall buildings are very expensive per square foot; and most neighborhoods and local businesses, to the extent they may be in danger from redevelopment, aren't going to fall prey to skyscrapers, but to three- to five-story blocks of mixed-use developments such as the rows of condo buildings that now line North and South Lamar, as indeed they line major arteries of major cities throughout the world.

In the wake of last week's Council actions to enable more mixed-use construction along transit corridors, social media may light up with comparisons of where buildings can now go to the full 90 allowable feet, but more important is the places where they can go to 45 or 65, and what they can do within that limit.

Seen in that light, what Council just passed was a mixed bag. Whatever you may think of affordability requirements – 10% of units? 12%? 15%? Take your pick, because staff admitted that they have no methodology to base a decision on – there are places they could have done more. Removing front setbacks in VMU for example, would allow storefronts right up to the sidewalk, and create more buildable space where greatest heights are allowed. (As the Hyde Park NCCD does along Guadalupe for instance; presumably the NCCD's more lenient standard will prevail where the two ordinances conflict.)

The major discordant note concerned whether a VMU property could get rezoned to VMU2 "by right" – administrative approval without the normal process of notice and protest rights for neighbors. Council voted yes, which may land this ordinance in the same legal hot water that killed the Land Development Code rewrite; Doug Becker, the same attorney who killed that one, has threatened the same lawsuit against this one. So perhaps this'll all go down the tubes as well, though you have to assume Council got solid legal advice on this point before plunging ahead. Surely, City Legal can't be wrong on this again, can they?

---

It made for a long night: It was after midnight when Mayor Steve Adler gavelled the meeting to a close, and according to the online transcript on the city website (compiled from uncorrected Speech-to-Text), here's how the meeting ended. Cheers.

ALL RIGHT, WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING HERE AT 12:22.

GOOD WORK TODAY.

SWEET DREAMS. .

I WAS 18.

MOMMA HAD SETTLED DOWN.

SHE EVEN BOUGHT A HAT.

---

Project Connect staff did their much-­anticipated the Drag with traffic analysis presentation Tuesday evening, June 14, confirming that their preferred alternative is a car-free transit mall with either a shared bike/bus lane, or with dedicated bike lanes, and buses running on the rail guideway. Those are options C1 and C2; option B – which would leave one lane of auto traffic each way, but overall would carry slightly fewer total people per hour according to staff calculations – is out of the picture unless someone revives it from above.

As for the promised "traffic planning strategies around the Drag," the gist of it is that Guadalupe and West Campus would be eliminated as a north-south through-route for cars and trucks. There would be a slightly upgraded route on Nueces and San Antonio Streets between 29th St. and MLK, but planners said that they saw this as primarily for local traffic, and not as a replacement for the current Guadalupe. Auto traffic would be invited to use Lamar, I-35, or MoPac. Or possibly Red River, if that ever opens up again – transportation staff have been notably mum on that. They stressed that converting Nueces to two-way traffic was already in the plans even without Project Connect; they hope to get that work done at the end of this year, over UT's winter break.

There's one last meeting in the current round of outreach: a presentation on what the subway stations will look like and how they'll function, this coming Wednes­day, June 22 at 5:30pm. Register, or see the public engagement library of earlier reports, at projectconnect.com/get-involved.