Federal Courthouse, Austin Texas

[427MM]

There has been a debate here in Austin in recent days over what should happen to the old Intel shell located on the block directly west of Republic Square. Let’s hear the pros and cons and see if we can learn something new and have fun doing so.

This is the structure in question.


It is set to be razed February 25th to make way for a new Federal Courthouse. They have been on site drilling holes into the columns for the past few days if not longer. The issue really came to a head over the last week due to a series of articles which have run in the Austin American Statesman. If anyone has those articles, or links to, available please share. Remember, keep the gloves on people. We all have one thing in common here and that is a true love for this city. Now let's have some fun.

[JAM]

I'd like to see some mixed use high rise development here. More ground floor retail with condo's/apartments above. This might not be in a Cap Coor View so why not. More density downtown is going to bring the services it wants and needs like light rail and shopping. It sucks having to get in your car to go shopping when your already downtown. Why is a new federal court house needed anyway? Maybe the feds can make a profit, and build a nicer one somewhere else.

[sakyle04]

Someone on another thread suggested that the Federal Courthouse might be a good thing. Their reasoning was that the additional jobs (especially lawyers,etc...) might sell some of the high-priced condos in the area (with an implied overall increase in demand).

I like that gov't development brings permanent jobs and I think that the courthouse will help the area have a permanent buzz of pedestrians around it. I know that the Federal Courthouse in San Antonio is situated along the southern edge of downtown and people park in a lot across the street (which is always full) and walk straight in - there is nothing else to capture their attention.

If the Austin Fed Courthouse is in a neighborhood setting (surrounded by high-rises and retail) those people that drive in and out in SA might have lunch at a bistro or go shopping at the retail district in DT Austin.

[M1EK]

I'll summarize again: when Austin desperately wanted somebody, anybody, to take the shell off Intel's hands, the Feds did us a BIG favor by doing so, even though the cost to them to build there was significantly higher than it would have been on another site (one of many without a building on it back then). Since then, they've spent several years and many millions on designing the building for this site - they could recoup the money in the ideal scenario where a private developer buys it at a profit, but they could not get the time back; and then they'd still be stuck with a use people don't want but that ABSOLUTELY MUST BE DOWNTOWN.

You don't stab people in the back after they did you a big favor.

[JAM]

Originally Posted by sakyle04

I like that gov't development brings permanent jobs and I think that the courthouse will help the area have a permanent buzz of pedestrians around it. I know that the Federal Courthouse in San Antonio is situated along the southern edge of downtown and people park in a lot across the street (which is always full) and walk straight in - there is nothing else to capture their attention.

If the Austin Fed Courthouse is in a neighborhood setting (surrounded by high-rises and retail) those people that drive in and out in SA might have lunch at a bistro or go shopping at the retail district in DT Austin.

Good points. I'll have to throw in that downtown Austin already has tons of lawyers working here, and they could easily fill up all of the condos that are becoming available on the market. It's tough being in retail in downtown. Yeah, people may come down here once in a while, but it is not a real destination yet, except to eat and drink at night. Critical mass has to be reached for that to happen, and critical mass has not been reached.

[MichaelB]

First of all..... glad to see the civil tone of this debate!

So.... At this point I think it is too late to change directions. It is the Feds, the risks are too high for many a reason that has been pointed out in other threads.

However, I don't feel that the Feds did Austin a favor. Some of these same debates were happening when that site was chosen. Most folks knew then that area was to become the hotbed. I felt then, as I do now, that the NE quadrant, with it's blocks of still open space..... was a much better choice for the court house. It could have served as a catalyst for growth in a hard to develop area.

[Saddle Man]

Say it's moved to the ne side of downtown. In ten years (let's say that area is the new 'it' place because the Waller tunnel is built and a few view corridors are gone) there will people saying what a bad choice it was to put it there. It would only contribute to making that area of downtown that much harder to revitalize in the future. Government buildings don't usually have shops and whatnot in them. So putting a government building with more government buildings only serves to kill that area. If they are spread out accross downtown and next to mixed-use highrises, they help diversify the neighborhood they are in. As opposed to creating a government building ghetto on one end of downtown.
When it replaces the Intel shell it will contribute to the neighborhood. It will help the neighborhood be 'mixed-use'.

[Saddle Man]

What's happening to the old federal courthouse?

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

However, I don't feel that the Feds did Austin a favor.

Well, that's an interesting rewriting of history. When the Feds agreed to take this property, downtown wasn't redeveloping at all - the dot-com collapse had ground everything to a halt; the Plaza Lofts weren't selling; etc.

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by kingkirbythegreat

Say it's moved to the ne side of downtown. In ten years (let's say that area is the new 'it' place because the Waller tunnel is built and a few view corridors are gone) there will people saying what a bad choice it was to put it there. It would only contribute to making that area of downtown that much harder to revitalize in the future. Government buildings don't usually have shops and whatnot in them. So putting a government building with more government buildings only serves to kill that area. If they are spread out accross downtown and next to mixed-use highrises, they help diversify the neighborhood they are in. As opposed to creating a government building ghetto on one end of downtown.
When it replaces the Intel shell it will contribute to the neighborhood. It will help the neighborhood be 'mixed-use'.

Your points are all well taken. In the present, I don't disagree at all. Any choice is defined by it's time. My assumption is the NE quadrant will eventually grow, but (as has been discussed on other threads) the presence of three homeless centers in the area..... well, it might have been useful to have a catalyst....Besides, I think it would be great for federal judges to have to exit thier cars and step accross sleeping bags! Nice reality check!

Also, interested it what is to become of the old facility....

[sakyle04]

Say it's moved to the ne side of downtown. In ten years (let's say that area is the new 'it' place because the Waller tunnel is built and a few view corridors are gone) there will people saying what a bad choice it was to put it there. It would only contribute to making that area of downtown that much harder to revitalize in the future. Government buildings don't usually have shops and whatnot in them. So putting a government building with more government buildings only serves to kill that area. If they are spread out accross downtown and next to mixed-use highrises, they help diversify the neighborhood they are in. As opposed to creating a government building ghetto on one end of downtown.
When it replaces the Intel shell it will contribute to the neighborhood. It will help the neighborhood be 'mixed-use'.

I agree with that wholeheardtedly. This should create a healthy daytime pedestrian buzz in what is becoming a largely residential area. And, it keeps NE options open for further redevelopment down the line. I think that, over time, this will be a positive for DT Austin.

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by M1EK

Well, that's an interesting rewriting of history. When the Feds agreed to take this property, downtown wasn't redeveloping at all - the dot-com collapse had ground everything to a halt; the Plaza Lofts weren't selling; etc.

Sorry, I don't feel I am re-writing history... I am including the bigger picture. The same debates were taking place at that time..... Forgive me that I can not lay hands on articles of support at this time. Many folks saw, at the time, that this was not the best location for the courthouse. It was the best of the choices given. I know that will prompt you to ask "who".... and I can not site references, but perhaps others in here will recall the same debate. Sorry to offend by having a differnent recollections of the situation as a whole.

[MichaelB]

Clarification: I want to make sure I separate fact from opinion. It was simply my opinion that the courthouse... at one point in time, would/could have served us better in another location. I do not think it is wise to consider moving it now.... and I feel I could make a great agrument as to why it will work fine into its location/surrounding,etc.

The location that I and "others" at the time supported was not even a choice for the Feds. The Feds only selected 3 sites.... all on the west side of downtown: Intel, Hoffbrau restaurant site, Whole Foods site. Of those three, The Intel site was By far the best solution, and avoided a battle over local businesses! ( a quick google of Austin biz journal varifed those sites) By the way, the original time line for the feds to be complete was this year!

I will continue to look for other references, but again, only "as I recall", city officials and Mr. Doggett all tried to get a wider consideration of sites than just our already promising west end. Hope that info helps in any discussion.

M

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by JAM

This might not be in a Cap Coor View so why not.

Actually, according to the Capitol View Corridor map, half of the block, (eastern side), is within the corridor. The other half isn't. I just wanted to put that out there. It's not like we'd be seeing a 40 or 50-story tower there with or without the courthouse slated for that site. Perhaps not even a 20-story tower. The Intel Corp. office were only supposed to be 10 floors and about 140 feet. The federal courthouse so far has been said to be 135 feet and 7 floors.

[sakyle04]

Who's more annoying? Loft dwellers or jail bait?
John Kelso
Sunday, February 11, 2007

http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...1/11kelso.html

Who would you rather have as a downtown neighbor? A loft dweller in Gucci shoes carrying a man bag, or a bag man and his attorney?

Great choice, huh? It's like asking, "Would you prefer a scumbag, or, how about a scumbag?"

Still, the hot debate these days has been over what to do with that pile of concrete at Fifth and San Antonio streets known as the Intel shell.

I always thought Intel-henge (my name for it) should be preserved as a historic relic. After all, it really is the Alamo of the high-tech bust, a reminder of what happens when everything turns to poop after it becomes apparent that your company has no discernible product.

But preserving the Intel structure (if you can call something without walls or a ceiling a structure) wasn't one of the choices. Some people say the spot should be sold to private enterprise for more high-dollar condos, while others think it should be used for a federal courthouse.

So the big philosophical question is this: Who would you rather have as a downtown neighbor: a group of self-absorbed egocentric Wi-Fi weirdos on MySpace? Or a bunch of crooks whose space is fixing to be 6 feet by 9 feet with a toilet in the middle?

The old applause-o-meter would have a hard time discerning much of a difference on those two, huh?

See, here's the deal. Mayor Will Wynn wanted to delay the scheduled Feb. 25 implosion of the Intel pile o' concrete because developers offered to buy the property at Fifth and San Antonio streets for $13 million. The thinking here is that there's more money to be made off yet another downtown high-rise with a heated pool and elevated nostrils than there is off a big ugly gray concrete building with a metal detector and frisking.

On the other hand, the federal government has put the kibosh on Wynn's proposal and plans to go ahead with the implosion on schedule. The government says that a delay would cost the $65 million federal courthouse project too much money.

I'm kind of glad the courthouse won over condos. Are you getting the feeling that we have too many high-rise lofts downtown as it is? Has it ever occurred to these builders that some of these buildings might not fill up and we might run out of yuppies? What then? Are they going to turn one of these deals into the world's tallest Wal-Mart?

Let's face it. Condos attract a bad element. You know what drives me nuts? It's when I walk into one of these cappuccino joints downtown and everybody's got an iPod stuck in his ear. And suddenly I'm invisible. I mean, I could drop dead on the floor, and they wouldn't notice I was there unless they tripped over my corpse on their way to the men's room.

The solution? Carry a tiny pair of scissors and clip their little iPod wires. If they gripe, just say, "Hey, loft boy, I thought this dump was supposed to be wireless."

Another reason I favor the courthouse? At least the criminals will be headed up the river, so they won't be taking your table at Eddie V's. But the loft dwellers? We'd be stuck with them. Trust me. They ain't moving to Waco.

[Saddle Man]

I just don't think John Kelso is funny.

[TDoss]

I'm not a psychiatrist, but I think that John Kelso has some feelings of inadequacy/daddy issues or something that he needs to work out if he is that affected by people's individual housing choices.

- seriously, go back and read the article in it's entirety. It's weird.

The assertion that condos attract a bad element is nuts. Anyone who has spent 5 mintues walking around Vancouver or Portland can attest.

[TDoss]

Regarding the Poll - Get rid of the "Nothing, it should remain a shell" option

I think that the Skyscraper poll should be revised to include another choice...

THE CITY SHOULD GROUND LEASE THE PROPERTY TO A DEVELOPER

I think a ground lease would absolutely be the best decision.

[sakyle04]

I'm not a psychiatrist, but I think that John Kelso has some feelings of inadequacy/daddy issues or something that he needs to work out if he is that affected by people's individual housing choices.

That's funny.

I have to think that decades of being the "angry old man" on every issue has taken it's toll. Really, has there been any new development that he hasn't tried to twist with his folksy, fartsy, find-me-at-the-back-table-of-the-Alligator-Grill style criticism?

[arbeiter]

John Kelso is a retard.