I just posted this to the ANC list in response to what we can do to protect the aquifer if we can’t stop Hayes County from building tons of homes over it.

---

Well obviously the answer is not going to be easy or popular. Otherwise the aquaifer would be completely protected and we’d be done talking about this. I do have 3 places where I think ANC could switch course and be a major force for positive change, however. I am aware these would be nigh impossible to implement due to their unpopularity. Nonetheless.

The top reason people cite for moving to places like Hayes County is more house for less money. So obviously in Austin we need more houses to lower prices, and we need them to be bigger. This will sop up demand in places like Hayes if people can live where they want (inside the Austin City Limits) in a reasonably (their definition not ours) sized house.

1. Repealing the McMansion ordinance addresses the size issue. There are other ways to deal with issues of large houses blocking out light from people’s windows (I can send this out if anyone’s interested). Every time we don’t let people build a 2500 square foot house in central Austin they seem to go out and build a 3500 square foot house over the aquifer. We need to couch this in terms of what’s more important - how close your neighbor is to you or Austin’s water supply?

2. Allow automatic density doubling. This addresses supply. If a lot currently has a single-family house allow a duplex. If a lot currently has a duplex automatically allow a four-plex. Remove all restrictions on vertical mixed use on our arterial roads.

3. Encourage developers to overbuild office buildings. 803 Barton Springs ran afoul of the waterfront planning commission, but at some point we need to ask what’s more important. The view from the water, or the water that fills Lady Bird Lake itself. ANC should have pushed to have the developer match the height of the buildings on either side to have extra space to lease to employers lowering prices for companies moving downtown and getting cars out of West Austin and off the aquifer.

All of these issues are ones that ANC and SOS are intimately involved in. I don’t expect anyone to change their views on this, but I think it does explain why there’s little hope for stopping development over the aquifer. We can’t stop Hayes County from building. The only thing we can do is provide so much supply in Travis County that there’s no demand.

So Julie mentioned today that Texas’ drought could potentially last until 2020. Which brings up the question - what are we going to do about HOAs? Most HOAs have structures in place that involve penalties for letting grass brown or die, and provisions against replacing turf with - well, anything.

The CCR (Covenents, Conditions, and Restrictions) that govern neighborhoods generally require a quorum so large to overturn that it is nearly impossible. And that appears to be intentional.

I’m fascinated to see what will happen over the next few years. I know that the state attempted to pass a bill allowing Home Owners to install solar panels against the wishes of their HOA (it failed to pass). It seems there’s potential for massive uproar here.

What do you think? Will there be change or will homeowners just water our drinking water away?

---

Comments

Anonymous

2011-09-30T16:17:06.000Z

Recent article about a hood in Hutto and their lack of water restrictions. Google around, it was interesting. I think it was in the statesmen. Man I hate HOAs.

Tim

2011-09-30T18:10:42.000Z

Yeah, I sympathize. The problem is HOAs are legally required to enforce this. So it only takes one bad egg neighbor threatening to sue to keep an HOA going with this stuff, and it’s nearly impossible to change the CCRs. That’s why the HOA board members in that article sound so schizoid. They are responsible for enforcing this no matter how stupid it seems. That’s why I think we’re going to need a state level fix.

Anonymous

2011-11-02T21:40:27.000Z

It’s pretty ridiculous…I wonder about this as well. My dad has received a few fines over the past few months and even a letter saying the HOA expected him to re-sod immediately. I’d like to think that reason and logic will kick in at some point, but I have no confidence that will happen at an HOA level. I think local governments will have to interevene.

Tim

2011-11-03T03:33:42.000Z

Unfortunately, the situation is setup where it’s nearly impossible for HOAs to stop enforcing these covenants. I think we’re going to have to have intervention at the state level to change things.

Etta

2011-11-09T08:45:24.000Z

I’m just breaking all the rules up here in North Austin. :)

Tim

2011-11-09T09:19:43.000Z

I dunno, what Facebook is doing with notes and RSS feeds anymore. I can’t figure out how to turn it off either…

Alejandro

2011-11-11T01:34:32.000Z

There’s things we can do to address this issue: We could just outright ban non-native grass within city limits. We could require that HOAs use only reclaimed water for watering purposes, or simply make it easier for people to reclaim their own grey water. We could also require xeriscaping in all new homes and buildings. The city simply has to get its act together and prioritize water conservation.

Tim

2011-11-11T01:44:14.000Z

I agree in those common sense solutions. But it’s my understanding that cities and counties can’t actually override HOAs. That has to happen at the state government level.

k kraft (http://www.loadedguntheory.com/blog/index.php/listblog/.html)

2011-11-22T19:39:16.000Z

our hoa is reasonable; no one is being asked to resod right at the moment. BUT there are people who no matter what, won’t water at all. too lazy to even get a hose out and hand water, too lazy to weed, mow- and these are the same people that never took care of their yards in the first place. these are the same people that cost other neighbors who do try by- eating up association’s fund just to get them to do the basics. these are homes now that are full of weeds, have their grass and weeds growing over sidewalks, dead and weedy flower beds. so they drag down the entire neighborhood and property values. they were simply asked for a plan to bring yards into compliance, in addition to weeding and edging as a minimum. yet we still have the same people that whine and use the drought as an excuse to look like white trash.

Tim (http://www.loadedguntheory.com/blog/index.php/listblog/.html)

2011-11-22T20:30:13.000Z

K - I definitely dealt with people who feel the way you do when I was on an HOA board. Unfortunately, HOAs have next to no power to change for positive or negative. Getting our board to be able to just put in some better guidelines for incredibly subjective things like “keeping lawn mowed and edged” were very difficult. Not because we couldn’t agree on the guidelines, but because HOAs are legally setup to be vague and incredibly hard to change.

Ultimately in a case like this year we legally would have been required to send out notices about dead grass (and sod replacement) or risk being sued by a homeowner, as changing our CCRs would have required 2/3 of the neighbors having time to attend a meeting and then lawyer fees to get them vetted and changed. It would have been at least a 2 year process.

Ultimately considering the board can only levy fines, put down liens, or foreclose we found we had little recourse in dealing with truly problematic neighbors. And as we said when dealing with a particular house - an HOA can do many things, but it can’t fix a lack of taste.

I’ve since moved, mainly because I had other things to do than inspect my yard with a microscope, and since moving out I’m far less angry and my grass looks better than it ever looked while I lived under an HOA. Not to mention that my neighborhood as a whole does.

I don’t believe HOAs have ever proven their benefit at keeping neighborhoods looking “nice”, but it’s definitely easy to see from talking to people that they keep a lot of marginal improvements from happening that could make your neighborhood better. Economics says when you increase regulation on adding flower beds, window boxes, or repainting a house, at least a few people who might otherwise spruce up the place are going to avoid it. At worse your neighborhood will look like it’s run by an HOA.

I have a lot of sympathy for people who don’t want to waste their lives watering grass. Unfortunately our housing is currently focused on giving everyone who wants a free-standing dwelling a large plot of weed strewn dirt that they’re expected to waste resources on. It’s not for everybody. Which is probably why non-HOA neighborhoods typically sell for double-digit percentages above HOA neighborhoods.

The market has spoken. “Nice” HOA controlled neighborhoods are quite simply worth less to the marketplace than non-HOA neighborhoods. And woe befall you if you become a “Not-Nice” HOA controlled neighborhood.

I’m in favor of doing away with HOAs entirely and requiring that people become involved in their civic process, as I see little point to thousands of undemocratic replications of city government.

Troy

2011-11-23T03:34:04.000Z

Unless code enforcement is going to expand by a factor of 100, most water wasters are ostensibly ratted out by their neighbors. If everyone is cheating in an HOA, there is no incentive to “tell” on ur neighbor. Even if the state supercedes portions of HOA rules (which it won’t since it will appear as an infringement in individual rights-think Kelo case), it will be virtually unenforceable. Exception would be to turn local water utilities, the police and fire into veritable water police.

Tim

2011-11-23T03:37:25.000Z

Water policing is actually pretty easy. The water utility knows how much water you’re using. The problem in my mind isn’t even that you could lose your house trying to obey city water laws. The issue is that ultimately even if neighborhoods want to make changes the way HOAs are setup is to make it as difficult and costly as possible.

Troy

2011-11-23T17:09:20.000Z

I have a better idea - just price water appropriately. make it so expensive that people start to consider how they utilize this precious resource

Tim

2011-11-23T21:45:24.000Z

I agree with that. But again, if they did that more than likely you’d tank the housing market because so many homeowners would be foreclosed on because they couldn’t afford their water bills and they couldn’t change the HOA CCRs.

Troy

2011-11-23T22:17:03.000Z

I wonder what % of TX homeowners are in HOAs.

Tim

2011-11-24T00:18:49.000Z

It’s somewhat hard to say, but pretty much all new housing since 2000 is in an HOA, so based on this 40-50% wouldn’t be a bad guess: http://www.dallasindicators.org/Housing/HighQualityHousing/Ageofthehousingstock/tabid/990/language/en-US/Default.aspx

Troy

2011-11-24T00:31:11.000Z

I find that hard to believe. I will ask my land use friends.

Race #8 was miserable. Hot and still. Race #10 felt a bit better.

Race

Time

Min/Mile

2

27:57

9:01

4

26:15

8:28

6

25:42

8:17

8

27:13

8:47

10

26:50

8:39

So I’ve been wanting something to replace the music in our house for quite some time. We bought wireless speakers several years ago that are fantastic for parties and having kids (moving to another room? just pick up the speaker and go). The problem has been getting a stereo that works with them. And with an iPod. And with CDs, and it’s been a mess. So here’s what we’ve tried that we decided didn’t work quite how we wanted.

• Having all mp3s on Playstation 3. Clunky interface. No control via iPod/Android.
• Streaming to Playstation 3 using UPNP - too slow. No control via iPod/Android. Needs separate dedicated music server.
• Dedicated music server hooked directly to wireless speakers. Cost for new system. Energy usage.
• Stereo with iPod dock. No android support. iPod docks stop working.

So I began playing with my router and noticed I could put PHP on it. I decided to setup a web server to play with and in doing so, noticed that DD-WRT/OpenWRT had sound support. Puzzled, I looked it up and turns out I could plug this:

into the USB port on the back of my router and have sound. Intrigued I tried plugging in a USB hub and a USB hard drive with the sound card, and was able to get all my MP3s on the router with sound output.

I started writing my own interface, but found out there was already a program called MPD (Music Playlist Daemon) compiled for the router that had iPhone and Android control apps. So now Julie and I can walk around our house, pull out our phones and start, stop or change the music. And it’s all running off a router that was always on anyway. No music stopping because Tim has to reboot his computer.

Here’s the partlist if you’re interested in replicating it yourself:

• USB Sound Card
• Netgear WNR3500L
• USB Hub
• USB Hard Drive
• Wireless Speakers (any should work)

So I’ve been thinking a lot about libertarianism. It’s constantly paraded as “more freedom”. But the more I think about it the more it seems that it appeals to those who’ve become disenchanted with Democracy. It reminds me of the Russians constantly trying to revive the communist party because they felt it worked better. Ultimately if private companies provided all the functions of government, if they built our roads, provided our electricity, and removed our sewage we would have less control. Our democracy would disappear and we would have one or two choices. Perhaps this disillusionment with government and popularity of libertarianism goes hand in hand with our indoor TV culture. It’s too hard to get out and make a difference.

It’s much easier to just have a choice of two horrible Internet providers and pick one. Rather than have the government be the Internet provider and have to make decisions about infrastructure spending democratically, you can pick from one of two equally bad private entities.

The choice becomes easy, but you no longer have any Democratic control. We should strive to make our government more effecient, not to privatize it. Because privatizing it just the first step to corporate totalitarianism.

---

Comments

Robert

2011-06-16T17:55:40.000Z

You keep going on about democracy. You DO realize that’s not the system our government uses right? And I don’t see libertarianism promoted as “more freedom” (at least not by the people who aren’t trying to write a hit-piece). I tend to see it as less interferance. From what you write above, you don’t want the choice of two horrible internet providers. You’d rather have the government be the sole provider. You realize having the government being the sole provider of services has nothing to do with either libertarianism or democracy?

Tim

2011-06-16T19:24:42.000Z

Unfortunately, the ultimate conclusion of libertarianism results in corporate feudalism. This so called “interference” (i.e. oversight) is there for your benefit… Since the corporation cannot and will not act in your best interest.

Tim

2011-06-16T19:26:33.000Z

Instead… perhaps we should strip the corporations of their legal personhood? I’m quite confident that we would all be better off if we did.

Tamara

2011-06-16T20:10:46.000Z

congrats on winning stanley cup and MVP. LOL

Robert

2011-06-16T20:41:09.000Z

corporate personhood should go away. Interstate commerce should be specifically defined as applying to acts of commerce between two or more parties in different states. And the government should get out of the business of telling anyone who can get married to anyone else.

Tim

2011-06-16T21:20:36.000Z

Robert, you and I are in violent agreement!!

Tim

2011-06-16T21:21:58.000Z

States are an antiquated idea. Cities and economic regions are all that will matter in the future. Think how much stronger an economic engine Austin would be if it wasn’t constantly being interfered with by the state government.

Kathryn

2011-11-02T22:09:11.000Z

I agree- states are an antiquated idea; at the very least the notion that they hold a monopoly on power is incongruent with reality. Looking through history, the state has not had a very long or popular life, and those polities that resemble city-states always crumble… usually because of succession struggles, wars with the periphery or, ahem, economic woes. If it’s a period of neo-medievalism we’re entering, cities better become self-sustaining quick!

This post reminded me of one of the easiest ways we could encourage pedestrians in Austin. Neighborhoods love culdesacs. They keep cars away from your house and provide extra hard-scape for kids to play. The problem is that they also frequently create long impenetrable walls to pedestrians. In our previous neighborhood the developer had actually provided one of these sidewalks between two houses. No road went along with it. And it allowed pedestrians in the neighborhood to leave the neighborhood and walk to a bus stop. It could have been better. It could have been a walkway that went directly to the bus stop. But it was much better than the circuitous route that was almost twice as long to exit the neighborhood via the main road entrance.

So perhaps the City of Austin can setup a program to encourage people in the middle of blocks to give up some land for sidewalks. Perhaps have a trade where the city financially helps rebuild a homeowner’s fence in exchange for the land for the sidewalk. And maybe it wouldn’t even need that much. There are a lot of people in Austin who want it to be more walkable. The number of people willing to donate some land to the city in exchange for a sidewalk might be bigger than we think.

This one felt really good. And the time was much better.

Race

Time

Min/Mile

2

27:57

9:01

4

26:15

8:28

So I twittered after reading this chronicle article about my frustration that they interviewed Jason Sabo. He’d led the most unproductive group of parents who kept challenging the numbers, but were unwilling to even acknowledge or talk about any sort of compromise or fix for AISD’s facilities and budget problems. The group was known for labeling any potential solution as “trying to close ‘good’ schools”. So apparently Jason Sabo monitors twitter for mentions of his name:

tthomas48:
@mdahmus: Jason Sabo was one of the worst of that lot. He tried to change the facts rather than fix the problems.

texassabo Jason Sabo
@tthomas48 If “that lot” refers to several hundred concerned parents, thanks for the shout out! Bad #s are not facts. @saveatxschools

tthomas48 Tim Thomas
@texassabo Attacking the numbers was unproductive and rallying parents with unreleastic solutions is not something to be proud of.

@tthomas48 Next time we’ll be sure to embrace bad numbers and “realistic” solutions like closing good schools. #lovethesetwitterdebates

tthomas48 Tim Thomas
@texassabo Yeah no ones suggested any other solutions. Like perhaps redrawing boundaries or tweaking the transfer policies.

tthomas48 Tim Thomas
@texassabo Challlenging “bad” numbers sounds like you’re trying to help, but really you’re just trying to justify closing other’s schools.

@tthomas48 Really? Can’t remember ever thinking or saying that, but thanks anyway for the clarification. #blessthemindreaders

@texassabo Feel free to tell me. What is your goal in having #AISD correct their numbers?

Crickets…

Think this shows I’ve been futzing too much with technology over the last year and not pushing myself enough. A really slow start on a beautiful evening in the low eighties with a strong breeze.

Race

Time

Min/Mile

2

27:57

9:01

I’ve gotten educated about Kathie Tovo. I’ve read her interviews. I feel like I have a pretty good idea of where she stands on the issues. And I agree with her on quite a lot. But her stance on new development I think is going to stop Austin in its tracks. I know I’ve said Kathie Tovo was anti-development and that her stances will increase housing prices in Austin, pushing even more low-income residents out of the city proper, but I wanted to point out what she has actually said.

“The current TIA [Traffic Impact Analysis] is requirement is not sufficient. As our city becomes more dense, we do need more accurate TIAs and not just for very large projects, but also for medium-sized ones as well.”

Traffic Impact Analysis is one of the easiest ways that neighborhoods block new development projects. And it’s one of the most meaningless. You can do the traffic impact on Barton Springs for a new building on Barton Springs. But does anyone ever do the traffic impact on Barton Springs for a new housing development in Round Rock? Dense buildings in central Austin may mean more cars, but they could also mean more people taking transit, biking or walking. More sprawl in Round Rock means more cars in Austin, period.

“Just a few of the many policies that would help include greater use of city land for housing, support for nonprofit housing developers, and improving the development process for affordable projects. I also pledge to support additional money for affordable housing in the proposed 2012 bonds.”

Her views on affordable housing is entirely that it can be done with tax dollars. While I will support these bonds if she is elected, I don’t think this is what most people in Austin think of when they think of Austin becoming un-affordable. The big problem is that this could easily lead to hollowing out the center of Austin even more. If the only housing in Austin becomes subsidized for the poor, and housing for the extremely wealthy, then we won’t have made much progress. Central Austinites will still be able to get their tables bused, and their lawns mowed, but there won’t be a creative-class or middle-class in Austin any longer. We have to build new housing in Austin until prices go down. It’s always interesting to me that people bemoan the bust of the eighties. The bust of the eighties was GREAT for the growth of this city. It provided tons of cheap property, made the city very affordable and allowed for explosive growth in the ninties. We need new development and we needed it two decades ago. If you’re not a millionaire you can choose to preserve Austin’s neighborhoods, or you can choose to be able to live in Austin. Pick one.

“continued development pressure and higher rents assure us of future issues as the music scene tries to adapt to the changing real estate market. One needed change would be greater attention to sound design before permits are granted both for venues and for new residential development coming up around our entertainment districts.”

I do think she has a point here, although perhaps not the one she intended. Rich people tend to have a lot of political power and they’re already turning down the volume in our city. In the future they may stop new development of music venues and remodeling of existing ones by putting in sound design requirements that are prohibitively expensive. This isn’t predominantly coming from the apartment dwellers, though. It’s from the neighborhoods where the half-million dollar homes are. KGSR’s “Live at the Grove” was shut down by a homeowner just across the street, who bought into the neighborhood AFTER they started the concert series. It is now “Unplugged at the Grove”. Morrison and Tovo are two of the dominant politicians behind unplugging the music in Austin.

“I believe that the Residential Design and Compatibility Standards have reduced conflict in our central city neighborhoods. Although some feared that passage might stifle building in our city, that concern has not been borne out.”

Residential Design and Compatability Standards is known as the McMansion ordinance. She feels it has not stifled building in our city, yet I don’t drive through Central Austin and see tons of new duplexes, and four-plexes. I assume that most of the people I know who say they would like to live in Central Austin, actually would live there if they could afford it. So I’d say it has definitely stifled development, the only other option is that developers are lazy and uninterested in taking people’s money (which seems unlikely). The only places we’re seeing a lot of new development are in areas that are predominately populated by politically powerless minorities or in areas away from the neighborhoods like Lamar north of Barton Springs. Not to mention that it has created the trend of those bizarro tiny third stories on buildings (start looking for them, it’s an easy way to tell if a remodel happened before or after McMansion).

The Water Treatment Plant

I really think this is just a wedge issue for some suburban voters in far-West Austin and some SOS people. The water treatment plant is being built at 620 and 2222. It’s just a way to pickup votes and is not a particularly interesting debate. Shade voted for it. Since Tovo wasn’t in power she can say she wouldn’t have and pick up a lot of rich West Austinite votes. Considering this interesection already contains a fitness club, HEB, Target and Starbucks, it’s a bit hard to pretend that a Water Treatment Plant is somehow the development in the area that will break the camel’s back.

“The discussion of density must mature as our city grows. The question should be about what type of community we want to live in and what type of businesses, services, and housing we need to make that happen”

I think ultimately Tovo has made that decision. She wants to live in a ultra-wealthy suburban neighborhood in the inner city, without new aparments, but adding the occasional new store and light business condo development. I think that’s how the majority of Austinites would like to live. But ultimately there are too many of us and more moving here all the time. The only way towards a sustainable future is to build lots more new housing to try to lower prices and create the kind of concentration in the city that will allow the walkable, transit-oriented, eco-friendly future so many of us imagine. That’s why I’ll be voting for Randi Shade on June 18th. Join me.

---

Comments

Tim (http://www.loadedguntheory.com/blog/index.php/listblog/.html)

2011-05-30T16:07:26.000Z

Great stuff. I agree. Randi Shade is the right choice and everyone needs to get out and vote for her.

Tim (http://www.loadedguntheory.com/blog/index.php/listblog/.html)

2011-06-05T20:57:38.000Z

The comment above is from another person named Tim. I do not have a bizarre self-congratulatory monologue going on. Well, I might in my head, but no on the Internet.

MC (http://www.loadedguntheory.com/blog/index.php/listblog/.html)

2011-06-06T04:04:28.000Z

Wow. I won’t go point by point because I don’t have the time and I’m pretty sure from reading this that you have your mind made up. “Traffic Impact Analysis is one of the easiest ways that neighborhoods block new development projects.” No actually TIA’s almost never block projects because they are written to support projects. The traffic engineer is hired by the developer. And, there are fairly high traffic volume thresholds that have to be met before a TIA is even required. But occassionally information about the level of traffic causes the Planning Commission or City Council to turn down a project or require it to be scaled back. Occassionally. But what “killed” the project was the level of traffic being generated, not the TIA. It was either kill the project (or scale it back a little) or kill the neighborhood. We obviously come down on different sides of that equation. But this one is my favorite: “yet I don’t drive through Central Austin and see tons of new duplexes, and four-plexes. I assume that most of the people I know who say they would like to live in Central Austin, actually would live there if they could afford it. So I’d say it has definitely stifled development, the only other option is that developers are lazy and uninterested in taking people’s money (which seems unlikely).” I don’t know your definition of “tons” but by any definition there are “plenty.” Oh, and there is a little thing called the economic downturn. But if you stop to look at those duplexes and four plexes what you will find is that they are just as expensive and more often than not more expensive than the homes they tore down. Let me repeat that: each side of the duplex is as expensive as the house it tore down and usually more expensive. That may explain the reference to public money being used for affordable housing. Developers don’t build affordable housing in the Central City. They build $350 to $600 condos. The McMansion Ordinance does not prevent the construction of affordable housing and you won’t find a single person who knows even half of what they are talking about who will say so. If anything, the McMansion ordinance reduces the size of the structure and makes it less expensive.k Don’t vote for Kathy Tovo if you don’t want to. You don’t need a good reason. And, you certainly haven’t given any.

Tim (http://www.loadedguntheory.com/blog/index.php/listblog/.html)

2011-06-06T04:40:55.000Z

“But what “killed” the project was the level of traffic being generated, not the TIA. It was either kill the project (or scale it back a little) or kill the neighborhood. We obviously come down on different sides of that equation.” So you agree. Easily politicized and manipulated by neighborhood organizations, once the facts are presented at council. No regard for traffic in the neighborhood if those units are located in Round Rock. You’ve just re-stated what I said as a positive. I think it’s a negative. I’ve addressed your other comment here: http://www.loadedguntheory.com/blog/listpost/tim/Austin\_and\_Gentrification.html No one would pay half a million dollars for an equivalent single family home in favor of a duplex. They would pay more for a duplex over a single-family home that had been rented for 30 years, needed a new foundation, and needed to be completely ripped down to the studs. That’s the reality of most of the neighborhoods in Austin. But your view is ridiculous. How exactly are housing prices going to go down if the number of houses stay the same? We might never build enough new duplexes and four-plexes to lower prices, because new people are moving to Austin every day. But the one thing that is ensured is that not building new houses will continue to see the existing housing stock increase in value. Your view completely contradicts all logic. More people moving to Austin every day + no new houses = lower prices?

MC (http://www.loadedguntheory.com/blog/index.php/listblog/.html)

2011-06-06T19:26:42.000Z

Please, go visit some of the hundreds of condos that are being built downtown. Then report back and tell us just how affordable they are. Value/price is largely determined by location. New units in Central Austin are more expensive than the same units in “the suburbs.” If you want below market value units, it will take public funds. It always has. I don’t think either candidate is suggesting not building houses. There are currently hundreds of acres of property zoned Mixed Use that developers could build units on right now. Nothing is stopping them but the market. When the market comes back they are going to build expensive new units that will go for $300k or more. Who is to blame for that? The most affordable housing are the older apartments. Removing those and/or condo-izing them and replacing them with mixed use condo developments makes this housing stock less affordable. That is fact. But that is what is happening. The next most affordable housing in the central city are the older smaller homes that folks have lived in for 25-30 years. Their mortgage is paid off and that housing — whatever its market value — is affordable to the family in the home. Scraping that house and building a large new house or a huge duplex results in more expensive housing for someone else. A traffic impact analysis is a diagnostic tool. To say that “Traffic Impact Analysis is one of the easiest ways that neighborhoods block new development projects” is like saying that an X-ray of a pitcher’s broken arm is one of the easiest ways to ruin his season. Streets have carrying capacities and operating levels. When the traffic exceeds the streets operating level and certainly when it exceeds its carrying capacity, it becomes dangerous and the quality of life of those living on the street is degraded. Again, that is not my opinion, that is the opinion of traffic engineers and land planners. You can stick your head in the sand and say that you don’t want to know what impact on traffic that a development will have in which event, apparently, you should vote for Randi Shade. That is fine. If you feel that way, I think you should.