I can do without the suburban buildings along the greenbelt. Sure they look neat there, and aren't something you really find anywhere else in Texas, but then again, neither is the landscape, which I'd rather see left alone. Besides, working there has to suck. It's a horrible location. Just imagine the holidays with Barton Creek Mall traffic, and traffic on Mopac heading towards Zilker. Not to mention just everyday normal Austin congestion. And people wonder why traffic is bad there. It isn't the trees, people.
By the way, just curious, does anyone here ever go hiking on the greenbelt or any of the other natural areas around Austin? If you haven't, I highly recommend it. Believe me, it'll make you appreciate, even more, how special our city is. It makes you realize how unique this place is. I cringe at the idea of having people develop all that land just because they never saw it in person and don't realize how unique it is.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Scottolini
But that land is not the greenbelt. I understand not wanting development in the greenbelt; that would be absurd. Are we not to have development near the greenbelt either? That's the same kind of logic as the Save Town Lake people had, or the OWANA people complaining about high-rises downtown being too close to their neighborhoods.
|
That's different though. The land around downtown isn't environmentally sensitive. This isn't a nimby issue, since you never hear from residents in the hills complaining about the development in West Austin, it's an environmental issue. That land sits on top of an aquifer which replenishes our waterways and provides drinking water.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Scottolini
That being said, why was this land not purchased by some person, organization, or governmental authority if it is such a travesty for it to have built upon? That was only built a couple of years ago. Maybe SOS should stop filing stupid lawsuits, or doing petition drives for stupid causes, and raise money to buy sensitive land instead.
|
Well, roadways like Mopac and Loop 360 are only about 25 to 30 years old. I suppose the relatively short life of those has something to do with it. I do agree that if they were so important that they should have been protected. Of course just like with everything else, money and public concern is an issue. You might have one of those things involved with it, but rarely both at the same time.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hookem
Honestly, if the city was going to buy any land, I wish they would have bought the old pecan groves on Barton Springs Rd. They could have leased it back to the restaurants and trailer parks, but preserved the wooded feel in one of Austin's most distinctive areas. We've already got 1 or 2 condo buildings destroying that area, eventually all that land will probably be sold for a "better financial use". It's gonna be terrible for those condo owners when the amenity that was the Barton Springs "restauarant row" disappears because it's not the most financially profitable use...
Honestly, I'm not really that concerned about stuff going up right along 360 or 360 & Mopac, especially if that prevents them from going out farther into the hill country, or destroying places like Barton Springs Rd.
|
While I do miss the trees, honestly, I had only ever been to that place once. Believe me, we're better off without a trailer park within a stone's throw from downtown. As for the restaurants, as long as there's residents in the area and Austinites that still patronize the place, they'll be around for a long time. I think if their ultimate fate was to be bulldozed for condos, that it would have happened with the ones that are being built there already. If anything, having new condos in the area will make those restaurants even more popular, and thus, profitable.
Prev
Had to be the first one to use the banaride on such a great day.
Linear Mode
