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

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by airwx

Council member Houston has been getting pretty involved in this project.
http://austincouncilforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=567

"...negate and marginalize...." wow. This will enhance the neighborhood in many ways. It will add to the much need housing stock, replacing a much needed.....bingo parlor.

I can't take these people seriously. Houston should be ashamed of herself.

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

"...negate and marginalize...." wow. This will enhance the neighborhood in many ways. It will add to the much need housing stock, replacing a much needed.....bingo parlor.

I can't take these people seriously. Houston should be ashamed of herself.

This is what you get from the changing of how we vote for city council members. BS district politics. She should be interested in the best, informed decision on this regardless of whether some people like it or not. But instead, she appears to be pandering to the loud constituents in her district who will support/hinder her re-election.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by verybadgnome

The locals should look at the bright side, in that the 150-185' towers will act as a sound wall to block noise from IH-35.

Yeah really. We live a little less than 2 miles from I-35, and on clear calm nights, especially in winter, I can hear the 18-wheelers

Originally Posted by paul78701

This is what you get from the changing of how we vote for city council members. BS district politics. She should be interested in the best, informed decision on this regardless of whether some people like it or not. But instead, she appears to be pandering to the loud constituents in her district who will support/hinder her re-election.

I can see the district setup we have now also relying on politics for other reasons. Candidates could run on the platform of pointing to other districts and painting the type of development they have as being a negative. I could totally see fear tactics being used about dreaded vertical development. i could even see it getting uglier to where council member candidates accuse their opponents of being pro-development or being affiliated with developers, etc. It might not have gone that way already, but I wouldn't put it past anyone.

[KevinFromTexas]

And I'm posting this as reference since it lists the address. Projects listed on the city's website with I-35 addresses are notoriously difficult to locate their permit pages.

https://www.austintexas.gov/devrevie...erRSN=11268776

[beverett]

Here's some info on the developer of 12 Waller and the owner of that unit. He's a good friend of mine. I won't stoke the fire.

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/pr...weet-spot.html

[_Matt]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Yeah really. We live a little less than 2 miles from I-35, and on clear calm nights, especially in winter, I can hear the 18-wheelers



I can see the district setup we have now also relying on politics for other reasons. Candidates could run on the platform of pointing to other districts and painting the type of development they have as being a negative. I could totally see fear tactics being used about dreaded vertical development. i could even see it getting uglier to where council member candidates accuse their opponents of being pro-development or being affiliated with developers, etc. It might not have gone that way already, but I wouldn't put it past anyone.

Ultimately, you and I want the project to help the city overall, not because we want to improve their neighborhood, but because we believe in the prosperity of the city driven by a dense city core. What I would like to see is a city leader that can stand up make others believe this, and be proud of getting this type of development in their neighborhood. This has been a philosophical battle for years, long before 10-1. I'm not convinced districts caused it.

[KevinFromTexas]

That's the other thing. Politics is all about the smooching, it seems. So if the general consensus on something is that it is negative, even if it truly isn't, few politicians will be willing to put on their leader hat and speak up about the benefit of it. They'll just play it safe and go with status quo. I wish we would challenge our "leaders" to do more. I think of politicians not always as people with opinions on any number of subjects who should then act on them in their career, but also as researchers into how other places did something and what the outcome was, and how it might be implemented here with similar success. It doesn't always work out that way, however. I've sort of come to think of politics now as two sides guarding something they are firmly rooted in because of their views, and being seemingly unwilling to consider something different and refusing to explore the possibility that it might be a good idea. I don't know. I've sort of become cynical about it, I guess.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by _Matt

What I would like to see is a city leader that can stand up make others believe this, and be proud of getting this type of development in their neighborhood.

We had one - Mayor Will Wynn - who jump started the Downtown living idea. But I don't have much faith that we'll have another Urban cheerleader any time soon.

[_Matt]

Originally Posted by The ATX

We had one - Mayor Will Wynn - who jump started the Downtown living idea. But I don't have much faith that we'll have another Urban cheerleader any time soon.

That's right, he lived in Austin City Lofts, IIRC.

[SkyPie]

Chris Riley was also focused on creating a vibrant urban environment in and around downtown. Unfortunately he was beat by Tovo. Considering joining Friends of Austin Neighborhoods if you want to add our voice to likeminded citizens. I did. http://www.atxfriends.org/.

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by SkyPie

Chris Riley was also focused on creating a vibrant urban environment in and around downtown. Unfortunately he was beat by Tovo. Considering joining Friends of Austin Neighborhoods if you want to add our voice to likeminded citizens. I did. http://www.atxfriends.org/.

to this day I will never know or understand how Tovo beat Riley.

[drummer]

<<insert short political comment about not knowing how Trump is still in the GOP race also>>

So, about those two buildings over there across 35...

[Jdawgboy]

The 10-1 system is just not good for for a city like Austin. From the very beginning I said it would be a bad choice and would polarize the city into individual districts with no regard for the well-being and vitality of the city as a whole. I think the 8-3 system would have been much better in that there would be at least 2 other voices besides the mayor that are elected at large that would look at the bigger picture rather than a single district and would be leverage against the district council members.

I'm not saying that smart urbanism would win out every time with 8-3, but it would be more likely to prevail.

[The ATX]

The Austin Monitor does a nice job summing up the situation as it now stands with this project:

http://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2016/02/31626/

[drummer]

Originally Posted by The ATX

The Austin Monitor does a nice job summing up the situation as it now stands with this project:

http://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2016/02/31626/

It's amazing how perspective can change so much on either side of an issue...quotes below are from the article linked above.

For the project:

Alex Fleming, a resident of the Robertson Hill neighborhood, spoke in favor of the development, with the understanding that “change is inevitable.” He said he would rather see the amenities offered by this project than another development.

“We as east-siders can either choose to fight this change, or we can rally our voices together to embrace these changes to ensure positive impacts are implemented within our neighborhood,” said Fleming. “This site will be developed whether or not the neighbors agree.”

In opposition to the project (one of many possible quotes):

Houston’s post ends with, “This project will set a precedent for further development on the east side of the access road. It will be in fact a vertical barrier that will marginalize and negate the neighborhoods and communities that exist today in central east Austin.”

What gets me is that the latter quote doesn't take into consideration what this project is replacing (a nasty old bingo hall, etc., as opposed to houses of folks who've lived there for generations) and what will be added: a grocery store, pharmacy, etc., that will benefit the community and all of the folks who live within 200 feet. They can WALK to a grocery store and a pharmacy...that's pretty terrific, in my book. The senior housing and affordable housing is also a plus, of course.

Granted, there is always a need compromise with anything. Views will be affected, but wouldn't they still be affected at 150 feet? What's the difference? Made up traffic numbers that we've already discussed are way off?

That's why I love the "for" point of view, quoted above. Change is inevitable. The choice is to work with it to shape it into something that is best for everyone (with everyone compromising to a degree for the greater good) or face the reality that something will eventually be built there either way, be pissed off by the fact that your voice isn't heard at all, and still miss your view. I'd go for accepting that a great tract of land can be developed - one that happens to be right across the freeway from a booming central business district, is part of a booming east side district, and is part of one of the fastest growing metros in the country...

I completely understand that perspective changes for every single person, but this can absolutely be a win-win if everyone takes a breath before simply shouting.

[hereinaustin]

Would it be possible for the developer to buy the rest of the block (from 11th street to 12th street) and add a third building to make-up for the lost height + increase density further? A 185ft building plus two 150ft buildings. Not optimal, but they could easily make this pretty large project a little bigger. The demand will be there once the medical school and its associated projects start to open.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by hereinaustin

Would it be possible for the developer to buy the rest of the block (from 11th street to 12th street) and add a third building to make-up for the lost height + increase density further? A 185ft building plus two 150ft buildings. Not optimal, but they could easily make this pretty large project a little bigger. The demand will be there once the medical school and its associated projects start to open.

I think if they did that they'd be required to shorten the 185 as well, but I'd be fine with that as a trade-off. It won't happen though. I'm sure they already looked into it and the owners of that block aren't interested in selling.

[The ATX]

I don't think this particular rendering from Rhode Partners via BuildingATX has been posted. According to BuildingATX the project is being tweaked for the reduced height of one of the buildings.


http://buildingatx.com/2016/03/whats...st-renderings/

[resansom]

Originally Posted by The ATX

I don't think this particular rendering from Rhode Partners via BuildingATX has been posted. According to BuildingATX the project is being tweaked for the reduced height of one of the buildings.


http://buildingatx.com/2016/03/whats...st-renderings/

A lot of the Rhode Partners designs look similar - the Catherine, Seven, Rise - they aren't unattractive, but they give off that "wall of windows" impression, without a whole lot of individuality or variation. I can't decide if that's a good thing or a bad thing...

[wwmiv]

I love their designs, and they're great for what they are: pretty. generic. infill.

What's Rise? Where's that at?