HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #181  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2016, 9:33 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is online now
I'm here for no one.
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: My side of the fence
Posts: 6,827
Developer's are seeking approval for a large mixed use PUD where Hooters and all that surface parking is currently located. The tallest building(s) would be 195'. That's decent height for south of the river.

Austin Environmental Commission: http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=267433

Community Impact: https://communityimpact.com/austin/c...vironmentally/

One member of the Environmental Commission - Mary Ann Neely - that will decide if the PUD is approved seems rather anti-development:

“I’m tired of these PUDs that want a whole lot of space, but do very little to give our city something special,” Neely said. “These aren’t special. I’m tired of PUDs coming up that don’t make Austin a better place.”

She apparently doesn't like dense or urban development downtown. Just about anything would be better than that huge parking lot and a Hooters.
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/

Last edited by The ATX; Dec 9, 2016 at 10:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #182  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2016, 3:54 AM
drummer drummer is offline
德克萨斯人 y'all
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Asia by way of Texas
Posts: 2,436
"Something special" is a pretty subjective way of describing anything, by the way...perhaps lots of people think that PUDs often provide something special - namely more places to live, shop, eat, work, etc., that don't push folks out to the suburbs and choke freeways and neighborhood roads even more than they already are...perhaps they should consider the environmental impact of not providing more dense development in the core.
__________________
人无完人
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #183  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2016, 4:19 AM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is offline
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 4,543
Was skimming over the PDF file and right at the beginning something caught my eye. Why in the world is that block even considered part of the Bouldin Creek Neighborhood planning area? It isn't in the neighborhood, it's not event right up against it. How many blocks do neighborhood planning areas go beyond their actual boundaries? 1-2-3 or more?

If we were talking about the southwest corner of S.1st and Barton Creek where Wataburger is, then it would be right up against the neighborhood. I just don't see the reasoning behind it other than blocking redevelopment of the site which should be high density.
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #184  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2016, 6:29 AM
drummer drummer is offline
德克萨斯人 y'all
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Asia by way of Texas
Posts: 2,436
^ Good point. I didn't catch that. It truly is a severely underutilized location at present. Perhaps the neighborhood thinks that Hooters and a large surface lot is a better source of "something special" for the community.
__________________
人无完人
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #185  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2016, 7:33 AM
corvairkeith's Avatar
corvairkeith corvairkeith is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 872
Hey, that Hooters is the "heart and soul of South Austin" ever since we lost the Taco Cabana on South Lamar and Riverside.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #186  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2016, 7:48 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
eastbound and down
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: down the street from the taco trailer
Posts: 46,530
Ha. Suburban housewives like Hooters more than PUDs. There, I said it.

Anyway, yes, we need that parking lot there. Where else are the grackles and pigeons going to fight over stray french fries?
__________________
Blue Leader, this is Troll Fighter
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #187  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2016, 8:53 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is online now
I'm here for no one.
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: My side of the fence
Posts: 6,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by drummer View Post
"Something special" is a pretty subjective way of describing anything, by the way...perhaps lots of people think that PUDs often provide something special - namely more places to live, shop, eat, work, etc., that don't push folks out to the suburbs and choke freeways and neighborhood roads even more than they already are...perhaps they should consider the environmental impact of not providing more dense development in the core.
You obviously don't belong on any City of Austin commission responsible for urban planning.
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #188  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2016, 11:57 AM
drummer drummer is offline
德克萨斯人 y'all
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Asia by way of Texas
Posts: 2,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by The ATX View Post
You obviously don't belong on any City of Austin commission responsible for urban planning.
Hey, if they would let me conference in through Skype and accommodate a 13 to 14 hour time difference, I'm all in!
__________________
人无完人
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #189  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2016, 8:48 PM
Sigaven Sigaven is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
Ha. Suburban housewives like Hooters more than PUDs. There, I said it.

Anyway, yes, we need that parking lot there. Where else are the grackles and pigeons going to fight over stray french fries?
They can just join the rest of their friends over at HEB Hancock, they're missing out on the party.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #190  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2017, 6:26 PM
deerhoof deerhoof is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 238
Redevelopment partner selected to shape future of sprawling Statesman property

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/ne...489&j=76993721
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #191  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2017, 9:10 PM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is offline
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 4,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by deerhoof View Post
Redevelopment partner selected to shape future of sprawling Statesman property

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/ne...489&j=76993721
It's great that Austin based companies are being chosen for projects such as this but Endeavor really needs to push the envelope with architectural design.
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #192  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2017, 10:02 PM
futures futures is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jdawgboy View Post
It's great that Austin based companies are being chosen for projects such as this but Endeavor really needs to push the envelope with architectural design.
100% agreed. Such a prominent location deserves high quality architecture. If they want to stick with an Austin architect, then Michael Hsu should be a front runner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #193  
Old Posted Jan 7, 2017, 9:39 AM
NYC2ATX's Avatar
NYC2ATX NYC2ATX is offline
Yank in Tex
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: TXpatriate
Posts: 2,014
If it's Endeavor, I'm sure it's gonna be pretty good. I've been consistently impressed with the projects, planning and designs they've put out in the past.
__________________
"Also, to be frank, I like dense cities best and care about them most." from The Death And Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs.

BUILD IT. BUILD EVERYTHING. BUILD IT ALL.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #194  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2017, 1:09 AM
JoninATX JoninATX is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 2,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYC2ATX View Post
If it's Endeavor, I'm sure it's gonna be pretty good. I've been consistently impressed with the projects, planning and designs they've put out in the past.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #195  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2017, 8:16 AM
drummer drummer is offline
德克萨斯人 y'all
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Asia by way of Texas
Posts: 2,436
I'm excited for the potential of this site. I trust (hope) that such a prominent location that would be a significant statement from any firm will yield something quality.

I especially like this point from the article:
Quote:
Most of the property is not in a Capitol View Corridor, which restricts building heights to preserve views of the Texas Capitol Building.
__________________
人无完人
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #196  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2017, 7:28 PM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is offline
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 4,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by drummer View Post
I'm excited for the potential of this site. I trust (hope) that such a prominent location that would be a significant statement from any firm will yield something quality.

I especially like this point from the article:
The only thing is it doesn't look like the tallest portion will be over 400 feet going by the South Shore Central overlay. I guess that could change but it seems like the city doesn't want anything over 400 feet south of the river.
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #197  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2017, 11:13 PM
drummer drummer is offline
德克萨斯人 y'all
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Asia by way of Texas
Posts: 2,436
Or in the rest of the city for that matter, haha. I'm okay with 400 feet as the max south of the river. I want to see more height north of the river, especially utilizing areas without the CVC restrictions.
__________________
人无完人
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #198  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2017, 7:54 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio
Posts: 3,575
Whether the tallest portion can be 400' or not doesn't mean it will be 400'. After all, if we can only get 400' towers generally north of the river, I doubt we'll get any that tall in an untested part of downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #199  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2017, 8:45 PM
Syndic's Avatar
Syndic Syndic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by futures View Post
100% agreed. Such a prominent location deserves high quality architecture. If they want to stick with an Austin architect, then Michael Hsu should be a front runner.
Perhaps it is high quality but can we really say that Michael Hsu "pushes the envelope" architecturally?

Sorry, I mean, I guess people like that stuff, but personally I favor architecture that's more classic/traditional-looking and/or curvy. Here are some examples of things I'd like to see in Austin:













__________________
Anti-Leslie Pool. Death to I-35!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #200  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2017, 8:51 PM
_Matt _Matt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 351
Those are nice, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Traditional style is built to be compatible with nearby existing character. Austin doesn't have much (if any) of that traditional style. South Shore area is a clean slate, architecturally. There's very little existing neighborhood character to match.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:27 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.