Consequences of Neighborhood Governance
February 18th, 2012 | View Post

I found this parody slogan on the web and thought it was perfectly appropriate to my message
It has long been my belief that the City of Austin places an undue burden on its citizens when it comes to developing commercial land. The costs are outrageous and many of the city's policies ignore basic individual property rights, one of the fundamental tenants of our entire democracy. What most people don't seem to understand is that these developmental burdens don't necessarily prevent commercial growth, they just ensure such growth is dominated by corporate interests.

Firstly, let me state that I am NOT opposed to local regulations - at all. I think they are protective, generally well-intended, and necessary for society to function. But there is a line of reason that the City of Austin crossed long ago and is increasingly aiming to further surpass. Anyone who has spent any time trying to develop in the City of Austin knows that developers are notoriously at the mercy of city staff and neighborhood groups. No matter how many concessions are made, there always seems to be something else holding up development. This becomes a huge financial burden.

The problem stems from a mentality of collectivism gone awry. For whatever reason, Austin communities regularly feel entitled to dictate the specifics of new projects. They are willing to spare no expense when it comes to the already cumbersome design process, meanwhile enjoying the convenience of not having to pay the bills required to accomplish this. And the city allows it to happen. There often appears to be an engrained mentality that if the development exceeds a single-family bungalow, the developer(s) must be in cahoots with local officials and be extremely deep-pocketed. But in my development experience, this is rarely the case.

This would be a more understanding, perhaps even forgivable point of view if Austin took a more lenient attitude to zoning and development. But the unbelievably complicated set of City Ordinances in Chapter 25 (better known as the Land Development Code) make it virtually impossible to negatively impact neighboring properties. An application for a small commercial project will be reviewed by literally dozens of city staff and will likely take a minimum of a year to get city approval, assuming the application gets approved at all.

In my personal opinion, commercial development projects (and residential projects for that matter) should be governed on a case by case basis where common sense is applied to a common community goal. It's not hard to comprehend why we might want to prevent people from building a chemical supply store in the middle of a neighborhood, or a strip club next to an elementary school, but Austin's approach is to design a black and white playbook for any scenario, and this just doesn't work. Moreover it creates a hugely disproportionate fee to valuation ratio. This essentially means that a one-hundred thousand dollar project is subjected to the same level of scrutiny [and consequently cost] that a one million dollar project would be. This makes smaller projects very costly.

I strongly believe that this mentality will be the undoing of Austin within the next ten to fifteen years. I won't go into all of the details in this post, but the "Keep Austin Weird" mentality is a fading notion of the past; it is a marketing tool for the city, and increasingly just a hoax. Unless one is backed by huge corporate coffers, it is virtually impossible to surmount the sea of local development bureaucracy, and that makes it damn hard for 'weird' people to develop their visions.

The irony is that the very people in Austin who likely reject corporatism are the ones on the front-line demanding more costly and impassible bureaucratic regulations. Which brings me to my most recent experience on the subject.

2200 Tillery Street

I've sat on the East MLK Combined Neighborhood Planning Contact Team since 2007. It was a group I helped to reboot after it sat defunct for almost six years. Like all other planning contact teams, the contact team is responsible for creating a long-term vision of a planning area. It also oversees future land use cases (one half of Austin's zoning maze), and helps dictate Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs). The group has absolutely no legal authority and its rulings are never binding. But curiously, it is codified by the City (§25-1-805), and developers seeking to change future land use tables are still required to seek approval from the team.

For the past five or so months our team has heard and debated arguments over a commercial piece of property located at 2200 Tillery St. We have met with Richard Crank, the property's representative, at least two times since October of 2011. We have also met with representatives of the JJ Seabrook Neighborhood Association on several different occasions.

At our January meeting we heard again from the president of the JJ Seabrook Neighborhood Association. And once again the contact team was asked to support a measure that would postpone the planning commission hearing for another month. This would be the third consecutive postponement of the hearing and would bring the property owner(s) to the seventh month they have had their property tied up with City of Austin business.

The property is currently zoned commercially and has a future land designation of mixed-use. The previous property owner defaulted and the mortgage company now owns the property; the mortgage company wishes to sell the property. The property is not particularly viable in its current configuration, not because it's a useless building, but because the city's parking space calculator inhibits the type of use most suited for the structure. As an aside, street parking is not factored into these calculations despite it being overwhelmingly abundant in the area. The owner feels it would be difficult to sell the property for its current use, but a number of city ordinances prevent the owner from using the building for what it was originally intended.

I have asked on several occasions since October what the JJ Seabrook neighborhood association would ultimately like to see happen to the property. Unfortunately the only consistent response I receive is with respect to mixed-use and/or residential development. I even received an email from someone in the neighborhood association on September 28th, 2011 that stated, "I think that the bank/mortgage holder should demolish the building and devide [sic] the land into 4 lots (at least 10,000 sq ft--quarter acre--) to build single family detached homes." Sufficed to say I quickly wrote back the many reasons why this would not occur. Unfortunately the amount of money that would be required (especially within the city's complicated guidelines) would be financially devastating to the owner, and thus not reasonable.

Although my position on the matter has been consistent since October, I once again presented an economic case at our January hearing. According to TCAD, the property is valued at $834,857. At a 2.3% tax rate, this means the property owner pays over $19,000 a year in taxes alone. In the seven months that the property has been tied up in the Austin bureaucracy, they've paid over $11,000 in taxes - for a property they can't currently do anything with! This figure does not even factor the few thousand dollars of filing fees they've had to pay the City of Austin nor whatever fees their engineers and lawyers are collecting for handling the case (possibly tens of thousands of dollars).

But it does not stop there. Richard Crank has been completely transparent about the owner's intentions, has met with multiple neighborhood bodies numerous times, and has been willing to restrict a dozen uses from the property with a conditional zoning overlay. He has even been willing to enter into a private contract with the neighborhood outlining specifically desired improvements and limitations.

My argument is that unless the neighborhood association has a specific compromise that they're willing to consider, it is not fair for them to continue delaying the process while the property owner is left to front the bill. Thus far the immediate neighborhood has rejected my position. It was even suggested to me by a JJ Seabrook representative (after I presented my economic argument) that I should not be defending or sympathizing with the mortgage company.

I abhor banking and mortgage companies; I speak and write against them regularly. However, this should not, and legally does not change the fact that they have just as many rights to fair case management and expediency as everybody else. In fact, I am often left surprised that the City of Austin has not been hit with a class action suit for allowing this type of negligent behavior to hold up property cases.

I will be very curious to see what happens, but even more curious to try and learn what the total cost of doing business with the City of Austin works out to be for this developer. My guess is that they lose over $50,000 to the Austin bureaucracy (or more than 6% of their current valuation).

So my problem with the entire system is simple. There is far too much power granted to neighborhood associations and similar groups to raise problems that may not even exist while private entities are left to front the bill. In some cases the neighborhood groups do not even represent the true intentions of a community. Rather they represent the desires of a fractional segment of that community. Incidentally, the segment that is very vocal and interested in regulating everything not belonging to them. I know for a fact that our contact team in no way represents the greater community. We are essentially a group of twelve relatively young white people debating cases for a community of more than 17,000 people, most whom are minorities.

But my intent is not to condemn neighborhood associations (nor our own contact team); I participate in many and believe they serve a very good purpose. Rather my intent is to condemn a city that grants neighborhood groups the power to stop development while simultaneously forcing the developer to conform to thousands of regulations, all of which have already been designated by the community in the first place, and all while paying a premium to do so!

One of these systems has to give and until it does, I don't see how the problem is going to get any better. My personal preference is a simple five-fold approach:
  • Work to ensure that neighborhood associations are strong and well-represented
  • Get rid of the one-size-fits-all development regulations, codes, and fees; every development is different and has unique challenges and obstacles
  • Have a single individual case worker for each commercial development and require them to serve a the liaison between the active parties
  • Have a legal appellate process set in place for cases that cannot be resolved
  • Require that all development projects have a fixed time in which business is resolved
So then coming full circle, why would I tie this into corporatism? Because as the problems that I've described continue to worsen (and they are definitely worsening), the ability of small businesses to develop anything on their own trends towards being impossible. The average business cannot simply float tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of a year while attempting to stay financially afloat and be expected to meet the minute demands of community activists. A community might see a few light poles as nice-to-have, but the developer of a $200,000 project is required to see them as 10% of his or her budget. It is simply not possible to fulfill these demands, especially with the regulatory oversight costs (read: C.Y.A.) required by the city. This essentially means that as Austin continues to mature, more and more corporate interests will be served as they're the only ones with the time and money required to overcome these hurdles.

If the residents of Austin desire to see corporate interests take over the skyline, that's fine by me (though I personally don't support it). I only ask that the city stop toting itself as "weird", because in my opinion, there's nothing worse than turning a way of life into marketing ploy for corporate America.
Ron Paul Photoshopping
February 13th, 2012 | View Post
I was messing around in Photoshop and thought I'd put this together. I posted it to Reddit as well as Facebook and wound up having a number of lengthy (albeit productive) arguments with people on the subject matter.

My take is the following: if you believe in killing other people for some greater good, that's fine. Just have the balls to say it. Promoting some long-term agenda for these wars while conveniently ignoring the fact that war results in innocent people dying is cowardice.

Ron Paul 2012

One does not simply...
February 11th, 2012 | View Post
I made this little ditty for Evan on our ski trip after his difficulty on the platter lift at Vail.

One does not simply ride the T-bar on a fucking snowboard

Bill Burr at the Paramount
January 22nd, 2012 | View Post

Bill Burr on the Paramount marquee
If you like standup and have either never heard of Bill Burr, or never taken the time to see him, look him up. I met the guy a couple of years ago while living out in Los Angeles. He had a podcast he'd been working on and wanted to get it going up on iTunes so I did a bunch of work for him. I put a little custom program together for him over a weekend and started hosting what he calls his "Monday Morning Podcast".

I looked up the traffic on it a couple of weeks later and was blown away to see that we were already up to several terabytes of transfer in less than a month!

Anyway, he's on tour right now and performed at the Paramount in downtown Austin the other night. He was able to get me 6 guest-list tickets and it was awesome.

Here's a clip of his I came across on YouTube:

Why Do I Archive?
January 19th, 2012 | View Post

The back of my childhood house in Manalapan, NJ - August of 1981 (that's me standing next to it)

The back of my childhood house in Manalapan, NJ - June of 2006 (notice the addition over the back room my dad built)
I've had a number of people ask me over the years why I am so interested in collecting and cataloging my life. And second to that is why I am so interested in making it all public. The best I can offer these people is that it brings me great pleasure to see how things change over time, and I am not in any way ashamed or embarrassed to share my life with anyone who is interested to learn about it.

Having spent many years now working in data collection, data aggregation, and various social medias, is that most people really seem to enjoy looking back into their past. In fact, the entirety of the new Facebook model "Timeline" is based on this idea. Obviously there are unbelievable financial incentives for getting people to post an entire history of themselves to Facebook, but that's never really been my goal with this sort of thing.

The reality of the situation for those of us born prior to the late 90s is that there is simply no good way to view our family photos given that nothing was digitized. I've noticed over the years how photo albums are getting corrupted, pictures are fading, and a myriad of other chemical processes are eating away at the photos that I do have. That idea alone has provided me with a significant incentive to have my entire print collection scanned and cataloged on my site as I'd hate to not be able to share that data with future generations.

15 Terabytes: New Servers Up and Running!
January 16th, 2012 | View Post

Installing one of my new 3TB drives into the Synology RS-411
I've been waiting years for this little treat, but the new installation finally has a huge disk array available for consumption. In all, there is about 15 terabytes of usable space. For the time being I've only dedicated a few TB specifically to this site, but it's very easy to scale it now. Of course I do still have a business to run, so that does take some priority.

In addition to the new disk space has come all sorts of redundancy, which quite frankly is much more important to me. Not that a disk failure wouldn't still be a huge pain in the ass, but at least I am no longer worried about data loss. There would have to be a pretty cataclysmic failure at this point to lose anything. Many thanks to Dave G. for all of his help in picking out equipment and helping to get things setup. Hopefully his Amazon coffers are a bit better padded now. Over the coming weeks I'll be working on solidifying the new site layout and getting everything online that I want to. It will be several more months before I have all of my new content fully displayed, but I'll get there. Hopefully I can start keeping things updated at a much more rapid pace from here on out.

I'll post some pictures of the new setup just as soon as I have some time.
Newly Created Albums

Recent Blog Posts
Smoothie Recipe - The Don Julio
A Mobile
9/11 Memorial
Dan Carlin - War Remains
My Dog Food Recipe
Corrected the Blog Dating
Updates and Changes
No Small Parts - The Ladies of Seinfeld
The Ladies of Seinfeld - Kimberley Kates
The Ladies of Seinfeld - Lynn Clark

Blog Categories
Axel Lane ( 22 )
Blog Entry ( 273 )
Campaign 2014 ( 36 )
Facebook x-post ( 5 )
Movie Reviews ( 7 )
Music ( 26 )
New Zealand ( 28 )
No Small Parts ( 3 )
School Work ( 31 )
Site Pages ( 11 )
Software ( 17 )
Stories ( 35 )
World Travels ( 17 )

Blog Archives
Recent Posts
September 2022 ( 3 )
August 2022 ( 3 )
July 2022 ( 2 )
June 2022 ( 5 )
May 2022 ( 2 )
April 2022 ( 3 )
March 2022
February 2022 ( 3 )
November 2021
August 2021
July 2021
April 2021 ( 2 )
August 2019
March 2019
September 2018
August 2018 ( 3 )
July 2018 ( 2 )
September 2017
August 2017 ( 10 )
July 2017 ( 5 )
December 2016
November 2016
July 2016 ( 3 )
November 2015
October 2015
March 2015 ( 3 )
January 2015
October 2014
September 2014 ( 4 )
August 2014 ( 5 )
July 2014 ( 8 )
June 2014 ( 8 )
May 2014 ( 2 )
April 2014 ( 3 )
February 2014
January 2014 ( 4 )
December 2013 ( 4 )
November 2013 ( 2 )
September 2013
August 2013 ( 3 )
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013 ( 2 )
March 2013 ( 2 )
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012 ( 4 )
October 2012 ( 2 )
September 2012 ( 4 )
August 2012
July 2012 ( 8 )
June 2012
May 2012 ( 6 )
April 2012 ( 7 )
March 2012 ( 4 )
February 2012 ( 5 )
January 2012 ( 4 )
December 2011 ( 5 )
November 2011 ( 2 )
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011 ( 5 )
July 2011 ( 6 )
June 2011 ( 2 )
May 2011 ( 3 )
April 2011 ( 3 )
March 2011 ( 2 )
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010 ( 2 )
November 2010 ( 2 )
September 2010
August 2010
June 2010
March 2010
February 2010 ( 3 )
November 2009
June 2009
May 2009 ( 3 )
April 2009
March 2009 ( 2 )
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
May 2008 ( 2 )
March 2008
January 2008
December 2007
July 2007 ( 2 )
June 2007
May 2007 ( 2 )
December 2006 ( 2 )
October 2006 ( 3 )
July 2006
May 2006 ( 2 )
April 2006
December 2005
October 2005
September 2005 ( 5 )
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005 ( 3 )
May 2005
April 2005
December 2004
November 2004 ( 6 )
May 2004
February 2004 ( 4 )
January 2004
December 2003 ( 10 )
November 2003 ( 5 )
August 2003
July 2003 ( 15 )
June 2003
September 2002
August 2002
May 2002
April 2002
December 2001 ( 2 )
July 2001
April 2001 ( 3 )
February 2001 ( 5 )
November 2000
September 2000
May 2000 ( 2 )
March 2000 ( 2 )
December 1999
November 1999 ( 3 )
October 1999 ( 5 )
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999 ( 8 )
June 1999 ( 2 )
May 1999 ( 3 )
April 1999
March 1999
December 1998 ( 2 )
November 1998 ( 2 )
October 1998 ( 3 )
September 1998
July 1998 ( 2 )
June 1998
April 1998
March 1998
November 1997
October 1997 ( 2 )
May 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
November 1995
September 1995 ( 2 )
July 1994
Complete Listing