Austin | Downtown Home2 Suites | ? Feet | ? Floors | Proposed

[The ATX]

I started a thread for this project because it will probably be a high-rise. But I'm not expecting much more than something similar to its Hotel Indigo and Hyatt House neighbors. Here's the site from the CVC filing:





From Streetview:




The CVC filing:

https://www.austintexas.gov/devrevie...erRSN=11538417

[austlar1]

Wow! This hotel project would be just across 7th St. from the Sally and a half a block distance from The Arch. I can't imagine very many travelers are going to find that an appealing location. I guess most won't know any of these details until they arrive for check in. Why do I have a sneaking suspicion that there will soon be an organized effort by business and real estate interests to relocate these homeless facilities? If it comes to pass, that should be quite a political battle.

[Geckos_Rule]

Originally Posted by austlar1

Wow! This hotel project would be just across 7th St. from the Sally and a half a block distance from The Arch. I can't imagine very many travelers are going to find that an appealing location. I guess most won't know any of these details until they arrive for check in. Why do I have a sneaking suspicion that there will soon be an organized effort by business and real estate interests to relocate these homeless facilities? If it comes to pass, that should be quite a political battle.

Although I don't want to get into a huge political debate here, I feel like the ARCH should be moved... it's just too valuable of land when there are centrally located areas all around that would be better suited. Moving the arch would singlehandedly jumpstart development in that area.

[The ATX]

I think the long abandoned home depot on St John's & I-35 might be a good place for it. That area has a lot of homeless people already.

[Tech House]

Yeah, the ARCH is a negative energy vortex that sucks the life out of several prime blocks of downtown, but homeless activists delight in this because they want to put homelessness front-and-center, all up in everyone's faces where we can't just ignore it. I kind of get their reasoning but I think it achieves the precise opposite of what is intended. My 'compassion' has never been elevated by any of the hundreds of times that I've driven through that clusterfuck of human catastrophe. There is suffering, we get it. No homeless person is helped by being resented. The ARCH concentrates drug addicts and dealers into a central area where they can do their business. I know this as fact, because I've known people who had to spend a night or two there. Even inside the facility, there's rampant and open drug use and dealing. It's a failure of an institution.

On the other hand, there's a huge Salvation Army men's facility on Congress just south of Ben White, which has a few hundred residents who are given an opportunity to transform their lives, and the men I've met from that program are stellar individuals. Even with a few hundred men sleeping there every night, there's not the slightest hint of a street scene of dealers or psychotics, nobody's drooling on themselves, and it has no net negative impact on its surroundings. Unfortunately it's strictly religious, but maybe that's what some people need. The point is, the ARCH blows and needs to GTFO, and my fellow "compassionate liberals" need to pull their heads out of their asses long enough to admit to absolute defeat in their mission, unless their mission is to wreck lives, property value, and public safety. We really shouldn't have a single homeless facility in the first place, it should be widely distributed so that it's not a concentrated mecca for miscreants.

[austlar1]

The Arch and Caritas across the street both do manage to help a few higher functioning homeless non-addicts or recovering addicts find permanent housing through programs they operate. Other than that, The Arch is just a mess. Sadly the Salvation Army next door also has problems controlling the more illicit activities of people using the facility. It is not run in the same manner as the really excellent 6 month residential program the Salvation Army runs on South Congress. I would love to see The Arch and the downtown Sally relocate. It seems unfair to dump all of these facilities in a single location, so finding new locations would be a huge challenge. Fort Worth more or less moved all of its homeless facilities to the same area near downtown on East Lancaster. It certainly cleaned up the homeless problem downtown, but the result is a highly visible homeless population of several hundred people roaming around a semi-deserted neighborhood in a state of abject despair.

[Nickelplate]

Put them on a train to Santa Monica like most other cities do.

[We vs us]

I'm always in a quandary about ARCH. Everyone has to have a place to go and the homeless obviously need support services, but that area definitely radiates a sense of disorder and even danger. We hear this from guests pretty often.

As the area continues to get built up with hotels and entertainment venues, as well as whatever the Episcopals do with Block 87, that sense of danger will only increase, and the pressure to move ARCH and the Salvation Army is going to get stronger. Sadly for everyone they serve, IMO it's only a matter of time before all of it gets relocated.

[KevinFromTexas]

Put it in the Capitol complex. That should get results.

Anyway, I get the idea that maybe moving the ARCH and Salvation Army out of downtown might be the thing to do, but really homeless people aren't going to choose to live in just one location. They'll be everywhere. Wherever those facilities move to, it should be centrally located and with public transit nearby, otherwise it will mostly be inaccessible to many.

[lzppjb]

Homeless have personally caused my family stress and damages. I'm all for cracking down and moving them out.

They created a dumping ground on our South Congress property a few years ago. The lot was full of needles and excrement and who knows what else. The trailer that was there, they torched it. The city required us to remove it and clean up the place ($$$$), but they rarely did anything to get the homeless off our property.

After the torching, and us hiring a guy to completely scrape the top layer of soil off the property, they left. Hopefully never to return.

[jordan]

Originally Posted by The ATX

I think the long abandoned home depot on St John's & I-35 might be a good place for it. That area has a lot of homeless people already.

No. I grew up in that neighborhood and my family and friend's are still there.

Just a bit of history: St. John's was actually developed around 1932, a small subdivision for African American's it has a lot of rich history.

Just my opinion, It's not a good look for downtown.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by jordan

No. I grew up in that neighborhood and my family and friend's are still there.

Just a bit of history: St. John's was actually developed around 1932, a small subdivision for African American's it has a lot of rich history.

Just my opinion, It's not a good look for downtown.

That's always going to be the problem with re-locating of homeless shelters. Nobody is ever going to want one in their neighborhood.

[lzppjb]

Round them up. If they are mentally ill, try to get them help. If they are just drunks/druggies or those young adults who think they're gypsies, make them move along. Ignoring them makes them flock here. Having ordinances that don't allow them, and actually having police enforce them, makes them want to find somewhere else to panhandle.

[the Genral]

I have a possible solution...relocate them to the former One Two East site.

[MichaelB]

My appologies this perpetuates the "homeless" tangent. But it does address the neighborhood impact.

I live downtown and my neigborhood feels very unsafe at times because of the huge homeless population.
I don't like it. I'm always conflcited on this subject.
However, I can't suggest a better place. And you would hate it if it was your hood. And business parks/districts will balk just a loud.

I doubt ARCH/SA are going anywhere.
Businesses finally moving in around those facilities may help force solutions for the woefully inadequate programs we have. We've had a "no man zone" of vacant property that could absorb the population in the day. But that is going away. The face of the problem will only get more acute. It would be really amzing if the Church that owns the property accross from both built a highrise that included a facility for the homeless on the bottom levels facing ARCH/SA. That would be putting their Faith up front!

As for other real solutions. A healthy discussion on that (in another thread, of course) is welcome. Hopefully a useful and compassonate solution. Not just human storage units for the unfortunate and a healthy dose of "move along" for the next person to deal with it.

Here's hoping you've never had someone homeless in your family. It's frighenting. And , btw, the homeless do not fit into 2 neat categories.
There but for the grace of God ya'll. really.

Oh, and unless someone on here wants to volunteer their neighborhood as a solution, seems silly to offer anyone elses.....
Especailly knowing how many on here would balk at a "NIMBY" opposing it.
Sadly funny really.

[jordan]

Originally Posted by The ATX

That's always going to be the problem with re-locating of homeless shelters. Nobody is ever going to want one in their neighborhood.

Yeah. You are right with that statement.

[Geckos_Rule]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

My appologies this perpetuates the "homeless" tangent. But it does address the neighborhood impact.

I live downtown and my neigborhood feels very unsafe at times because of the huge homeless population.
I don't like it. I'm always conflcited on this subject.
However, I can't suggest a better place. And you would hate it if it was your hood. And business parks/districts will balk just a loud.

I doubt ARCH/SA are going anywhere.
Businesses finally moving in around those facilities may help force solutions for the woefully inadequate programs we have. We've had a "no man zone" of vacant property that could absorb the population in the day. But that is going away. The face of the problem will only get more acute. It would be really amzing if the Church that owns the property accross from both built a highrise that included a facility for the homeless on the bottom levels facing ARCH/SA. That would be putting their Faith up front!

As for other real solutions. A healthy discussion on that (in another thread, of course) is welcome. Hopefully a useful and compassonate solution. Not just human storage units for the unfortunate and a healthy dose of "move along" for the next person to deal with it.

Here's hoping you've never had someone homeless in your family. It's frighenting. And , btw, the homeless do not fit into 2 neat categories.
There but for the grace of God ya'll. really.

Oh, and unless someone on here wants to volunteer their neighborhood as a solution, seems silly to offer anyone elses.....
Especailly knowing how many on here would balk at a "NIMBY" opposing it.
Sadly funny really.

I agree with you fully. The only reason I would say it deserves to be moved, is that the land that the ARCH is on, would be extremely valuable (save for the fact that it's right near a bunch of homeless people, which is kind of a problem that would solve itself by selling their own land).

So, if the city were to sell the ARCH, they could very easily use these profits to build another centrally located location (just not directly downtown), that is larger, and better maintained.

I see this issue to be somewhat similar to the Texas School for the Deaf. No one dislikes TSD, but the land is so valuable where it is, that it almost doesn't make sense to stay. You can sell the land, and put that money directly back into building new facilities and paying for better upkeep.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by Geckos_Rule

I agree with you fully. The only reason I would say it deserves to be moved, is that the land that the ARCH is on, would be extremely valuable (save for the fact that it's right near a bunch of homeless people, which is kind of a problem that would solve itself by selling their own land).

So, if the city were to sell the ARCH, they could very easily use these profits to build another centrally located location (just not directly downtown), that is larger, and better maintained.

I see this issue to be somewhat similar to the Texas School for the Deaf. No one dislikes TSD, but the land is so valuable where it is, that it almost doesn't make sense to stay. You can sell the land, and put that money directly back into building new facilities and paying for better upkeep.

Still does not solve the problem about where exactly to move The Arch or even the downtown Sally. Central Austin is so gentrified today that any convenient close to the center location would be difficult if not impossible to secure without a major political battle.

[The ATX]

Since this project thread turned into a homeless shelter discussion...

APD issued a warning today for people out at night in this area due to robberies:


http://www.statesman.com/news/news/c...geting-/nsmYt/

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Since this project thread turned into a homeless shelter discussion...

APD issued a warning today for people out at night in this area due to robberies:


http://www.statesman.com/news/news/c...geting-/nsmYt/

You could add a second lighter color shade a block out around the darker box since there have been crime problems even on 6th as well as Red River, though to a lesser extent. Still, there are 2 sides of a coin. It's not just a concern about the homeless but a concern for the homeless that some people in the community don't take into account. A lot of the crimes committed are against the homeless themselves, sometimes by non-homeless persons. Let's face it, having 2 major entertainment districts bordering to the south and east isn't helping them. The environment in that area can be downright scary whether your homeless or not. I think those facts should be carefully considered if there was to be a decision to move the facilities.

I'm not putting forth any suggestions other than what some on here have already stated in that managment of the facilities should be improved.

This is an issue the city will have to address sooner or later and there are no easy solutions.