Three Towers; 1,000+ homes; Downtown Rainey District
 

This Thursday City Council hears items 34, 74 and 82 (82 & 84 N IH 35, 41 stories; 61 & 69 Rainey, 48 stories; 90 & 92 Rainey, 51 stories). A handful of motivated folks are doing everything they can to stop these towers from moving forward (some claiming this is more dense than Manhattan...). These are in Council Member Kathie Tovo’s district and historically she does not need much motivation to fight against development especially market-rate housing. These towers include over 1,000 homes of which more than 50 of them are income restricted (at the developer’s expense). The vote will likely come down to the two new council members, Fuentes and Kelly. Are they NIMBY-curious or do they recognize Austin’s desperate need for housing? We will likely have good insights on this later this week.

If you care about this and hope to see these towers/homes/urbanism move forward now is the time to stop being a spectator and to write your council member ([email protected]) You can also sign up in favor for one, two or three of these cases. To speak in favor of housing that will likely not be lived in by someone is rare—to fight housing to try to protect your view or to simply stop housing is common—hence the reason we’ll likely hear from a lot of folks saying “No!”. Sign up here https://cityofaustin.formstack.com/f...VAV9EF45tsDC3k

Could someone please share a photo of these three proposed developments? Sure would be a shame to end the years of work that have gone into these. If we can’t build housing densely downtown that sure doesn’t bode well for our future. It’s too bad that “Make housing difficult and inefficient” rings true for so many.

Down With The NIMBY
 

Pray for Drenner Group, hopefully they can pull it off

Saw this also. Not anything different than the above information, but it's making its rounds on the local news.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/aust...tin-this-week/

dyslexic me read 3 1000'+ Towers....heart skipped a few beats

Same. I was shook

reminder you can't build above 300' in the most densely populated corridor in austin. people who say you need skyscrapers for density are playing you for a fool.

austin is not an exception. look around at cities all over the world, the most dense neighborhoods are not filled with skyscrapers.

it's cars and garages that hurt density. not height limits.

Yeah, but I don't see New York developers groping for 6-story wood framed buildings. And while the density levels may be high in some foreign cities, it's likely the results you get when there are 11 people living in one dwelling. There are multiple factors at play there.

I don't think anyone would risk their reputation on calling the suburbs dense, at least, not in built form, but when you realize its mostly comprised of families with 4 or more people living in each housing unit, the numbers do add up. Compare that to the inner city sometimes that might be made up of only career minded folks who aren't married or have no kids - or DINKS, and also the retired crowd who wanted to stay in the city. Those people contribute to a lower urban density than what you might see in the suburbs. Part of that is affordability, but also a perception that cities aren't good for raising kids.

Agree but it’s all economics. Land there is too expensive to build smaller. Capitalism. The cause and solution.

email I received from Rainey neighborhood association a few weeks ago:

Neighbors - The Austin City Council will be making a decision on March 25 that has the potential of significantly affecting safety, security, and the standard of living in Rainey. The RNA has been watching this and working with City Council Member Tovo (Rainey’s representative) regarding a number of developments.

Over the last several years representatives of the RNA have worked with or made presentations before the Austin Transportation Department, the Austin Planning Commission, the Austin City Council, and various other city departments. All the while, the city continues to allow significant development with little or no improvements to our infrastructure, traffic mitigation issues, or safety.

As City Council considers approving further developments within Rainey that go beyond the current legal limit (FAR 15:1) please consider the following statistics:
The Rainey District CURRENTLY has (in about 1/10 of one square mile):
Four residential condo towers (with as many as over 30 stories)
Three apartment towers (with as many as over 30 stories)
Three residences under construction (with one having almost 50 stories)
Three hotels (Van Zandt, Homewood Suites, Holiday Inn)
Dozens of bars and restaurant
An active MACC, with plans for needed expansion

All of this currently exists with limited streets, no public transportation (and nothing inside the District planned), crowded streets on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturday nights with limited sidewalks, no street markings to guide safe street crossings, no bike lanes, concerns about emergency vehicle access (fire trucks, ambulances, etc.) and more.

The Point of This Article?
Before the City Council on March 25th is the request to approve three new residential towers whose density is two to three times the legal density limit of Manhattan (the densest city in the USA). FAR (floor to area ratio) is a measure of density. Under request is:
River Street Residence = 22:1 FAR
84 East Ave = 21:1 FAR
90-92 Rainey = 32:1 FAR

Manhattan, and the entire State of New York, has a legal limit of no more than a 12:1 FAR. Manhattan has extensive subway and bus access. They have wide streets with sidewalks, and many of them. Austin currently has a legal FAR limit of 15:1. Rainey itself is denser than Manhattan! Rainey has narrow streets, busy pedestrian traffic, a thriving MACC, many busy bars and restaurants, and already 13 residential or hotel towers.

Our Request of You!
If you share our concern, please send an email to our City Leaders. Here's a link where you can find emails of the various City Leaders as well as talking points and resources. https://raineyneighborhood.wixsite.c.../far-resources

We also suggest you consider sending your comments to:
Austin American Statesman and other print publications
Austin Planning Commission members
KXAN, KVUE, CBS, KUT or other media outlets

What Is the Specific "Ask"? We suggest the following:
Develop a comprehensive development plan for the Rainey District – thus far none has been done.
Approve NO development with a FAR greater than 15:1 (the current limit) until a comprehensive plan is completed and the plan suggests allowing FARs greater than 15:1. Ensure that the comprehensive development plan considers the street size, traffic lanes and emergency vehicle access for all buildings and residents within Rainey.

Please send your communications -- NO LATER THAN Tuesday, March 23. In the event you previously sent an email, THANK YOU and please send it again.

Together we can work to ensure a safe and friendly district for residents, workers, and visitors.

Rainey is a wonderful area to live in and visit so let’s make sure we grow in a way that is responsible and ensures everyone's safety!

Michael Abelson
President, RNA
with the approval and support of the RNA Board

I haven't talked to any Rainey residents about this, but I can't image there are that many who will buy the hyperbolic bullshit about it being denser than Manhattan.

not worth it

Until last year, you mean?

Just because you’re completely ignorant of the plans doesn’t mean they don’t exist already.

not worth it

They’re getting a light rail station. That’s the investment

Emailed Harper-Madison's office expressing my support. One of the buildings is Lake/Flato's first tower. I gotta think that one is going to be a darling to local leaders.

What the hell is anyone still doing living in the Rainey area if they don't like urbanism? :koko:

Speaker sign up ends tomorrow (Wed) at noon. https://www.austintexas.gov/edims/do....cfm?id=357005
Sending emails to council members is better done sooner rather than later.

So -- the flyer's a bunch of crapola, but in and amongst all that inflammatory bullshit there's a real point -- what the hell's the city's plan? Novacek, since you've got all the secret plans stashed under your bed somewhere, maybe you could share? Because the only one I've is seen is this one, and it's mostly just hemming and hawing and adding a roundabout and shutting down the street on weekends for partiers.

We all know better than anyone what's coming down the pike for Rainey. It's not just the three buildings before council right now . . . it's also Travis 1 and 2, it's the supertall, and possibly the supertall's companion, directly across from the Fairmont. Not to mention the three hotels along East Ave. that're brewing in the background. When all of that is finished out in the next 5-7 years, it'll be impossible to move if you're on Rainey.

I'm not suggesting voting against those buildings, but I'm definitely suggesting that the city get itself into problem solving mode PDQ.

It seems like the Bar and ride sharing traffic on Rainey and Rainey adjacent is the issue more than the height of buildings.

Again, a massive investment in high capacity transit literally in the neighborhood, which passed last year.

It's really unfortunate timing that all three of these are on one council agenda. It makes it easy to say "this is just too much". If they were separate, with a few meetings between each, they would probably all pass on consent.