Copasetic Conclusion to Concodia Controversy

Katherine Gregor does a nice job in this week's Developing Stories chronicling the negotiations surrounding the redevelopment of the former location of Concordia University. The setup is a familiar one - developers propose crappy project, neighbors get upset and protest. Here's the twist: the New Urbanist gurus at ROMA step in to mediate and they work out a project that everyone is happy with (at least the developers and the heads of the neighborhood associations - there are probably still some pissed neighbors). RG4N is trying to get Wal-Mart/Lincoln to agree to a similar process at NorthCross, but aren't having as much success, probably because Wal-Mart/Lincoln doesn't appear to need further approval from City Council.

There are clearly some problems with the PUD process, but the Concordia discord appears to have tuned up reasonably well. City Council should learn from what worked and include requirements in the revised PUD ordinance to mirror the positive aspects of this negotiation. Bring in mediators (preferably mediators devoted to New Urbanism). Require developers to provide attorneys for the neighborhood associations.

The result (shown above) looks like a good project. The streets connect with the neighborhood and extend the grid (compare the PSP plan, which turned its back on the community). Building heights step up nicely from the neighborhood to the highway. The project will conform to the new Design Standards with wide sidewalks and continuous street front retail. This should be a model for future development in Austin.

Image from ROMA

Contact the author of this article or email tips@austinist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Shawn Shillington in News on March 29, 2007 12:21 PM 0 Comments

Comments [rss]

M1EK

Dobie,

I've never been paid a dollar by anybody for blogging or commenting anywhere. Asshole.

Dobie Gillis

M1EK,

All over town, you can read M1EK write essentially the same thing. You gotta admit, he really works hard to earn his check as a paid Wal-Mart Blogger as he spreads disinformation about Northcross. I can hardly wait to see him apologize when the residents win and he has to get a real job.

AC

Making developers pay for neighborhood association attorneys is a bad idea. It increases the neighborhoods' incentive to contest relatively insignificant details, and reduces the cost of intransigence. Both sides need an incentive to be reasonable. Neighborhoods are quite capable of coming up with the resources to oppose projects when they really want to.

M1EK

Really important to distinguish further (you touched on this):

Concordia project: Developer needed approval to change zoning to allow for much more height/density than would have been allowed under pre-existing zoning. Neighbors operated in spirit of compromise; attempting to shift height around (and in many cases lessen height) but basically resigned to the project happening one way or another.

Northcross: Developer doesn't need any additional approvals; they're only building about 1/3 of the maximum allowed retail space they actually could build under current zoning. Neighbors have provided no room for negotiations, and have instead hysterically shrieked about one particular tenant, and threatened to sue everybody within range.