AUSTIN | Projects & Construction III - Page 119

pscajunguy · #**2361** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 2:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by toxteth o'grady

As much as I hate the free-wheeling, hapahazard aspect of Houston's lack of zoning, there are no incentives for developers to pull these kinds of shenanigans. If they announce they intend to build something 50 stories tall, they'll build it; they're not trying to see if they can get a variance for a tall building so they can flip the property.

Now all the buildings Austin is building are butt-ugly. There are only a couple of decent buildings in the pipeline. Many cities much smaller than Austin have incredibly better skylines. I agree that the planning commission is highly at fault. And the greedy land speculators. They are no friends of this city!

I don't think anybody in the rest of the country is impressed at all!

wwmiv · #**2362** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 2:15 AM**

You're kidding, right?

NYC_Longhorn · #**2363** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 2:20 AM**

That dude has to be kidding....

lzppjb · #**2364** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 3:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pscajunguy

Now all the buildings Austin is building are butt-ugly. There are only a couple of decent buildings in the pipeline. Many cities much smaller than Austin have incredibly better skylines. I agree that the planning commission is highly at fault. And the greedy land speculators. They are no friends of this city!

I don't think anybody in the rest of the country is impressed at all!

Somewhere a court is missing its fool.

ahealy · #**2365** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 5:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pscajunguy

Now all the buildings Austin is building are butt-ugly. There are only a couple of decent buildings in the pipeline. Many cities much smaller than Austin have incredibly better skylines. I agree that the planning commission is highly at fault. And the greedy land speculators. They are no friends of this city!

I don't think anybody in the rest of the country is impressed at all!

#fail

JoninATX · #**2366** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 11:43 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pscajunguy

Now all the buildings Austin is building are butt-ugly. There are only a couple of decent buildings in the pipeline. Many cities much smaller than Austin have incredibly better skylines. I agree that the planning commission is highly at fault. And the greedy land speculators. They are no friends of this city!

I don't think anybody in the rest of the country is impressed at all!

BevoLJ · #**2367** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 11:49 AM**

By all of his past post you would think the Hyatt was built right outside his bedroom window and it is the only building he can see in Austin.

AusTex · #**2368** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 1:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BevoLJ

By all of his past post you would think the Hyatt was built right outside his bedroom window and it is the only building he can see in Austin.

OH...here I go again. He must see only the stuccobuildings. Most of those are non-discript to ugly. The other buildings?.?.?....."ugly"....

MightyYoda · #**2369** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 4:27 PM**

I am pretty sure he was joking when he mentioned many smaller cities with a better skyline than Austin. The city needs to streamline its process for building downtown, but Austin has one one the best skylines for a city its size in the US. I've mentioned before that Charlotte is the only one IMO better, but Charlotte isn't really building much right now and by the time this boom ends, that may no longer be the case. Austin has a lot of fantastic looking skyscrapers, what we have needed the most is density.

eburress · #**2370** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 6:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MightyYoda

I am pretty sure he was joking when he mentioned many smaller cities with a better skyline than Austin. The city needs to streamline its process for building downtown, but Austin has one one the best skylines for a city its size in the US. I've mentioned before that Charlotte is the only one IMO better, but Charlotte isn't really building much right now and by the time this boom ends, that may no longer be the case. Austin has a lot of fantastic looking skyscrapers, what we have needed the most is density.

I agree. I think Austin has one of the best looking skylines in the US, period, regardless of city size.

ahealy · #**2371** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 9:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by eburress

I agree. I think Austin has one of the best looking skylines in the US, period, regardless of city size.

I agree

Even when it was really just frost, It looked like a city from the never ending story.
Our skyline will continue to get better.

The ATX · #**2372** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 9:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pscajunguy

Now all the buildings Austin is building are butt-ugly. There are only a couple of decent buildings in the pipeline. Many cities much smaller than Austin have incredibly better skylines. I agree that the planning commission is highly at fault. And the greedy land speculators. They are no friends of this city!

I don't think anybody in the rest of the country is impressed at all!

That is almost (but not quite) as awesome as post #2 in this Cincinnati thread:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=204142

Nickelplate · #**2373** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 10:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pscajunguy

Now all the buildings Austin is building are butt-ugly. There are only a couple of decent buildings in the pipeline. Many cities much smaller than Austin have incredibly better skylines. I agree that the planning commission is highly at fault. And the greedy land speculators. They are no friends of this city!

I don't think anybody in the rest of the country is impressed at all!

Ahh... ye olde drunk post. How we missed thee so!

LoneStarMike · #**2374** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 11:05 PM**

$350 million Fairmont hotel to start work in November
Project to help lure larger conventions, set new bar for luxury
Shonda Novak
Austin American Statesman
June 14, 2013

The ATX · #**2375** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 11:13 PM**

Damn that pay wall!

wwmiv · #**2376** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 11:19 PM**

I know, I'm angry about the paywall as well.

The ATX · #**2377** Posted **Jun 14, 2013, 11:30 PM**

Kevin, you briefly addressed this in a Austin thread somewhere recently. But what is SSP's policy of posting articles from pay news sites? I wouldn't mind spending $9.99 a month for AAS's digital access if I could post links to Statesman's premium content on SSP.

LoneStarMike · #**2378** Posted **Jun 15, 2013, 12:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

Kevin, you briefly addressed this in a Austin thread somewhere recently. But what is SSP's policy of posting articles from pay news sites? I wouldn't mind spending $9.99 a month for AAS's digital access if I could post links to Statesman's premium content on SSP.

He said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I would caution against posting the "paid for content" after that, but there's nothing illegal about rewording the information and posting it here. That's probably what I'll do [if] we get the paid subscription.

If all you did was post a link, I don't think that would benefit anyone unless you gave everyone your password.

actham · #**2379** Posted **Jun 15, 2013, 12:34 AM**

IBC is getting its crane this weekend.

KevinFromTexas · #**2380** Posted **Jun 15, 2013, 3:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

Kevin, you briefly addressed this in a Austin thread somewhere recently. But what is SSP's policy of posting articles from pay news sites? I wouldn't mind spending $9.99 a month for AAS's digital access if I could post links to Statesman's premium content on SSP.

Posting the link to the paid content would do no good since it would still require the password I'm sure.

The best thing to do is summarize the information here. Just don't copy and paste their content. They have a copyright on their content and written material, but they don't have a copyright on the information itself.