AUSTIN | Avenir (Formerly Dorsey) | 170 Feet | 15 Floors | Complete

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

So basically the people complaining the most that this project would have changed the neighborhood have themselves changed the neighborhood the most.

Well said. I wanted to puke when I read about how the proposed development would "change the character of the historically African-American neighborhood." I'd be shocked if more than 3 black people were involved in opposing this, other than Ora H. I'm actually surprised that she was opposed to it, although my guess is that her opposition was based more on pleasing her gentrifier constituency, who are more likely to help fund her reelection, rather than on any ostensible nod to the history of the neighborhood.

And WTF anyway, it's on a fucking FREEWAY access road --- how is that such precious, quiet, neighborhood turf? I don't get this at all. Those last couple of renderings are beautiful, and it makes me very sad to think that our city is so small-minded that it can't rid itself of insanely cumbersome and irrational rules and regulations, which have already been christened as the worst in the nation by the consulting firm that the fucking city hired. Why hire consultants if you're just going to keep doing what you were always gonna do anyway? That seems to be how Austin works --- we're constantly paying millions for consultants and then we go ahead and do whatever we would have done without the consultants. And in many cases, we don't even need consultants --- we just need to pull our heads out of our asses and see how things work in other cities. It's almost always the case that for any situation Austin faces, we can find multiple cases of that same situation in other cities, and we can learn from them. But, no, we have to reinvent everything, except that our version of reinvention is "what we've been doing for the last 3 decades." Dumb, dumb, dumb.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by Tech House

Well said. I wanted to puke when I read about how the proposed development would "change the character of the historically African-American neighborhood." I'd be shocked if more than 3 black people were involved in opposing this, other than Ora H. I'm actually surprised that she was opposed to it, although my guess is that her opposition was based more on pleasing her gentrifier constituency, who are more likely to help fund her reelection, rather than on any ostensible nod to the history of the neighborhood.

And WTF anyway, it's on a fucking FREEWAY access road --- how is that such precious, quiet, neighborhood turf? I don't get this at all. Those last couple of renderings are beautiful, and it makes me very sad to think that our city is so small-minded that it can't rid itself of insanely cumbersome and irrational rules and regulations, which have already been christened as the worst in the nation by the consulting firm that the fucking city hired. Why hire consultants if you're just going to keep doing what you were always gonna do anyway? That seems to be how Austin works --- we're constantly paying millions for consultants and then we go ahead and do whatever we would have done without the consultants. And in many cases, we don't even need consultants --- we just need to pull our heads out of our asses and see how things work in other cities. It's almost always the case that for any situation Austin faces, we can find multiple cases of that same situation in other cities, and we can learn from them. But, no, we have to reinvent everything, except that our version of reinvention is "what we've been doing for the last 3 decades." Dumb, dumb, dumb.

You pretty much said what I think about how Austin works. Thank you!

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by Tech House

Well said. I wanted to puke when I read about how the proposed development would "change the character of the historically African-American neighborhood." I'd be shocked if more than 3 black people were involved in opposing this, other than Ora H. I'm actually surprised that she was opposed to it, although my guess is that her opposition was based more on pleasing her gentrifier constituency, who are more likely to help fund her reelection, rather than on any ostensible nod to the history of the neighborhood.

And WTF anyway, it's on a fucking FREEWAY access road --- how is that such precious, quiet, neighborhood turf? I don't get this at all. Those last couple of renderings are beautiful, and it makes me very sad to think that our city is so small-minded that it can't rid itself of insanely cumbersome and irrational rules and regulations, which have already been christened as the worst in the nation by the consulting firm that the fucking city hired. Why hire consultants if you're just going to keep doing what you were always gonna do anyway? That seems to be how Austin works --- we're constantly paying millions for consultants and then we go ahead and do whatever we would have done without the consultants. And in many cases, we don't even need consultants --- we just need to pull our heads out of our asses and see how things work in other cities. It's almost always the case that for any situation Austin faces, we can find multiple cases of that same situation in other cities, and we can learn from them. But, no, we have to reinvent everything, except that our version of reinvention is "what we've been doing for the last 3 decades." Dumb, dumb, dumb.

Yeah, I would say the greatest change to that neighborhood came more than 50 years ago when they built I-35 (since it was the catalyst for what we see there today). The character that is there now isn't the same it was a little more than half a century ago. I-35 is like the 800 pound gorilla there.

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by austlar1

You pretty much said what I think about how Austin works. Thank you!

Thanks for the support. I'm just now revisiting this thread for the first time since I wrote that little tirade, and as I re-read it I was feeling kind of embarrassed about it, so it's nice to know that I'm not alone in feeling that way. But I think I crossed the line of decency with my swearing and complete dismissal of all the GOOD things that happen in this city. Chalk it up to a familiar substance, commonly known as "ethanol", which was in my bloodstream at higher-than-advisable levels. There are rumors that ethanol can change a person's character and lead to behaviors that one would not otherwise expect of the imbiber.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by Tech House

Thanks for the support. I'm just now revisiting this thread for the first time since I wrote that little tirade, and as I re-read it I was feeling kind of embarrassed about it, so it's nice to know that I'm not alone in feeling that way. But I think I crossed the line of decency with my swearing and complete dismissal of all the GOOD things that happen in this city. Chalk it up to a familiar substance, commonly known as "ethanol", which was in my bloodstream at higher-than-advisable levels. There are rumors that ethanol can change a person's character and lead to behaviors that one would not otherwise expect of the imbiber.

This was a project I was really looking forward to, even in its scaled down version. It would have looked impressive on the east side of 35 in that location. Perhaps we'll get nothing there now for the foreseeable future.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by Tech House

Thanks for the support. I'm just now revisiting this thread for the first time since I wrote that little tirade, and as I re-read it I was feeling kind of embarrassed about it, so it's nice to know that I'm not alone in feeling that way. But I think I crossed the line of decency with my swearing and complete dismissal of all the GOOD things that happen in this city. Chalk it up to a familiar substance, commonly known as "ethanol", which was in my bloodstream at higher-than-advisable levels. There are rumors that ethanol can change a person's character and lead to behaviors that one would not otherwise expect of the imbiber.

Count me in as a fan of your posts I always look forward to your chime ins, and I agree with the majority of them, especially the ones I comprehend.

[drummer]

Something will happen on this piece of land eventually. It's too valuable due to its proximity to so many places (UT, Medical School, Capital Complex, Downtown, East Austin, etc). It may take a while, but eventually even those against the growth (most of whom are ironically - and hypocritically - part of the growth themselves as we've all discussed) will see a need for the a quality development on that spot eventually.

[We vs us]

Originally Posted by drummer

Something will happen on this piece of land eventually. It's too valuable due to its proximity to so many places (UT, Medical School, Capital Complex, Downtown, East Austin, etc). It may take a while, but eventually even those against the growth (most of whom are ironically - and hypocritically - part of the growth themselves as we've all discussed) will see a need for the a quality development on that spot eventually.

This.

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by drummer

Something will happen on this piece of land eventually. It's too valuable due to its proximity to so many places (UT, Medical School, Capital Complex, Downtown, East Austin, etc). It may take a while, but eventually even those against the growth (most of whom are ironically - and hypocritically - part of the growth themselves as we've all discussed) will see a need for the a quality development on that spot eventually.

That's an encouraging remark and it makes me realize that something even better could be built there. But then that opens the door to the likelihood that something more mediocre will be built there. Any future developer will be fully aware of the history that we've just witnessed for that parcel, so they'll scale down their vision, probably to the detriment of aesthetics and amenities so that it's just some sort of generic utilitarian VMU piece of crap like everything else that's being thrown up on the east side. But I'll *try* to be optimistic.

Originally Posted by the Genral

Count me in as a fan of your posts I always look forward to your chime ins, and I agree with the majority of them, especially the ones I comprehend.

Thanks. Likewise. Never hold back, I love your comments. The one about wishing that 405 Colorado had been proposed for One Two East was a gem!

[lovethecity]

http://kxan.com/2016/08/03/after-bre...t-development/ I thought this project was dead? Why is the city council supposed to discuss this further? "The controversial One Two East housing project is back! In April, council delayed discussions until August. If approved, the development will be built on the corner of Interstate 35 and East 12th Street."

[clubtokyo]

Sure doesn't appear dead to me.... maybe the city just wanted to make the east side folks think it was going to push back, and now they might allow it to proceed with a few changes?

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by lovethecity

http://kxan.com/2016/08/03/after-bre...t-development/ I thought this project was dead? Why is the city council supposed to discuss this further? "The controversial One Two East housing project is back! In April, council delayed discussions until August. If approved, the development will be built on the corner of Interstate 35 and East 12th Street."

That doesn't square with the developer's announcement that they were not moving forward with the project. I wish there was other information available. I think a discussion in the city council would be very useful at this point regardless of whether or not the developer intends to proceed.

[nixcity]

From what I understand they decided to not move forward with the variance. So we will probably get 2 15 story buildings with none of the amenities. Way to go NIMBYs.

[The ATX]

It's on the Planning Commission (not City Council) agenda for next week (8/9). This doesn't appear to be anything new, and staff recommends disapproval. Maybe this is just housekeeping and the city needs to finalize it's big fat NO for this project.

http://austintexas.gov/cityclerk/boa...tings/40_1.htm

[The ATX]

As expected, the Planning Commission officially killed this project as proposed on Tuesday just because a few NIMBYs screamed about it. But something substantial could still be built on the site. Anything would be better than an abandoned Safeway being used as a bingo parlor. This city needs to grow up.

[hereinaustin]

Originally Posted by The ATX

As expected, the Planning Commission officially killed this project as proposed on Tuesday just because a few NIMBYs screamed about it. But something substantial could still be built on the site. Anything would be better than an abandoned Safeway being used as a bingo parlor. This city needs to grow up.

I'll be honest, Houston (the city) is doing a better job with promoting dense development. It's time to cut the balls off the NIMBYs, but I'm not sure the new code will actually achieve this.

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by hereinaustin

It's time to cut the balls off the NIMBYs...

Originally Posted by The ATX

This city needs to grow up.

[MichaelB]

I'm trying to think of a great anacronym for non-property owners who are not grown up enough to understand property investment yet contiune to bitch about people who work to protect thier propery values.
It short circuts a discussion doesn't it?
Not useful is it?
Slinging out the NIMBY phrase is an equally cheap way of using blame and shame instead of looking at real issues to property value and investment vs development.
Shifting property use it a really difficlut issue that often has lead to genrification or destruction of neighborhoods. Many times, especially in the center city, these have been places that were either poor areas that could not afford to fight. Or areas that were invested in early by folks who were urban pioners or now find there investment threathened by "dense" building.

It is also short sighted to compare houston and Austin . They have such dramatically differnt growth patterns especially when it comes to size. So much of what is now "dense" in Houston were areat that were long considered urban wastelands OR were large older areas that were origianlly dense. ( with shitty suburban apartments now "sprawling" across blocks) WE just don't have that is Ausitin. This was a very small town well into the late 20th century. It presents a very unique circumstance.

Do we need to do better? Helll yes.... but lets not just slam those that have been in Austin and helped make it attaractive by investing decades ago ( i.e., NIMBYS... I guess ) Maybe it take even newer thinking? Maybe it can't be .... and shouldnt be on a Dallas Houston model ... please GOD!

[jbssfelix]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

I'm trying to think of a great anacronym for non-property owners who are not grown up enough to understand property investment yet contiune to bitch about people who work to protect thier propery values.
It short circuts a discussion doesn't it?
Not useful is it?
Slinging out the NIMBY phrase is an equally cheap way of using blame and shame instead of looking at real issues to property value and investment vs development.
Shifting property use it a really difficlut issue that often has lead to genrification or destruction of neighborhoods. Many times, especially in the center city, these have been places that were either poor areas that could not afford to fight. Or areas that were invested in early by folks who were urban pioners or now find there investment threathened by "dense" building.

It is also short sighted to compare houston and Austin . They have such dramatically differnt growth patterns especially when it comes to size. So much of what is now "dense" in Houston were areat that were long considered urban wastelands OR were large older areas that were origianlly dense. ( with shitty suburban apartments now "sprawling" across blocks) WE just don't have that is Ausitin. This was a very small town well into the late 20th century. It presents a very unique circumstance.

Do we need to do better? Helll yes.... but lets not just slam those that have been in Austin and helped make it attaractive by investing decades ago ( i.e., NIMBYS... I guess ) Maybe it take even newer thinking? Maybe it can't be .... and shouldnt be on a Dallas Houston model ... please GOD!

Explain to me how continued development in your "now gentrified" area from densification and urbanization somehow destroys your home value? Very few builders/developers are interested in the SFH that you've purchased, nor is that were the value lies. The $$ is in the land, and as development continues and the area continues to add value, your land/home value will also continue to rise accordingly. Having a mixed-use multi-story on the corner a block away from your SFH not only doesn't hurt your investment, it often adds to it by bringing walkability, retail options, and additional character to the neighborhood.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by jbssfelix

Explain to me how continued development in your "now gentrified" area from densification and urbanization somehow destroys your home value? Very few builders/developers are interested in the SFH that you've purchased, nor is that were the value lies. The $$ is in the land, and as development continues and the area continues to add value, your land/home value will also continue to rise accordingly. Having a mixed-use multi-story on the corner a block away from your SFH not only doesn't hurt your investment, it often adds to it by bringing walkability, retail options, and additional character to the neighborhood.

Amen to that!!