AUSTIN | The Independent | 690 FEET | 58 FLOORS | Complete

[KevinFromTexas]

Maybe I'll friend him on Facebook. We have a mutual friend from the forum...

And Larry Speck. I still haven't found the plans yet for the UT System HQ.

[mklunder13]

I think this project is ridiculous. This city is digging its own grave developing this quick. It's out of control, property taxes are skyrocketing, as is cost of living, and businesses are starting to consider elsewhere due to this city becoming so expensive because of the uncontrolled development. San Antonio is doing it right, controlling the development and businesses see that as being attractive and also much cheaper. San Antonio is the up and coming city. Austin is just the childish little sibling who doesn't know how to control itself.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by mklunder13

I think this project is ridiculous. This city is digging its own grave developing this quick. It's out of control, property taxes are skyrocketing, as is cost of living, and businesses are starting to consider elsewhere due to this city becoming so expensive because of the uncontrolled development. San Antonio is doing it right, controlling the development and businesses see that as being attractive and also much cheaper. San Antonio is the up and coming city. Austin is just the childish little sibling who doesn't know how to control itself.

Wow! Welcome to the Austin SSP forum. I can tell you are going to be real popular in these threads.

[JoninATX]

Kevin Burn's, though I could of sworn I saw him several weeks ago walking on 5th. We past each other right by the Brownstone which is next door to The Monarch.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by midtownstarbucky

Hey, were you teasing us.... or are you about to post those pictures you took?

Sorry got busy after I sent the post then got sidetracked. I will do it when I wake up.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by mklunder13

I think this project is ridiculous. This city is digging its own grave developing this quick. It's out of control, property taxes are skyrocketing, as is cost of living, and businesses are starting to consider elsewhere due to this city becoming so expensive because of the uncontrolled development. San Antonio is doing it right, controlling the development and businesses see that as being attractive and also much cheaper. San Antonio is the up and coming city. Austin is just the childish little sibling who doesn't know how to control itself.

Haha your comment just confirms that you know nothing about this city and just how up and coming we really are. If you don't have anything nice to say then don't say anything at all and stick to the forum where your from.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by mklunder13

I think this project is ridiculous. This city is digging its own grave developing this quick. It's out of control, property taxes are skyrocketing, as is cost of living, and businesses are starting to consider elsewhere due to this city becoming so expensive because of the uncontrolled development. San Antonio is doing it right, controlling the development and businesses see that as being attractive and also much cheaper. San Antonio is the up and coming city. Austin is just the childish little sibling who doesn't know how to control itself.

Wrong. The development is the consequence of the population growth, not the other way around. The population growth is happening because of the job growth. One of the main motivators in migration are jobs, and right now Texas, and especially Austin, are major job growth areas. And you have it backwards, businesses are moving to Texas because of the low corporate taxes that our conservative government has made policy. This is evident when you think back to Rick Perry traveling to places like California and New York and declaring Texas as "open for business."

Austin is dealing with the population growth in the most responsible manner - that is by developing residential properties that are sustainable. They are without green thirsty lawns, broken sprinkler systems, backyard swimming pools and acres of paved land that previously recharged the aquifer. Not to mention the vertical urban growth is demanding little of the city's water utility system since these developments are being built in Austin in places that have already been developed for decades, and so don't require a new water pipe network to an area that used to be virgin land. The traffic issue is also eased by urban development since it offers people the option of taking public transit or non-car related methods, rather than wasting their life in traffic on the fringes of the city. People talk about how bad traffic is in Austin and downtown, but actually the areas where I dread it the most are when I have to travel outside of Austin and deal with I-35. Those communities outside of Austin or on the edge of the city, are the worst for traffic since they force people there to drive for every single errand. It doesn't matter if they're going to work, the grocery store or a road trip to Canada, they'll have to do it by car. One of my least favorite areas of Austin is along Slaughter Lane. It's an area that is brutally car oriented, and the traffic reflects that. The traffic near the intersections of William Cannon and I-35 or Slaughter and I-35 are just as bad as rush hour on Congress or South First just south of downtown, but they're actually worse when you realize the density levels in them is much lower than in downtown.

It's also funny to see you visit this thread and declare projects here as being ridiculous, while at the same time licking your chops about high rise proposals for San Antonio.

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by mklunder13

...businesses are starting to consider elsewhere due to this city becoming so expensive because of the uncontrolled development.

To paraphrase the great Yogi Berra, "Nobody is moving here anymore, it's growing too fast."

If business gets any better then business will take its business elsewhere.

I grew up in Santa Barbara mostly in the 1960s. California was paradise and we thought the growth was going to ruin it. The population has tripled and still it's a great state, very beautiful, home to the world's leading tech center in Silicon Valley, the nation's top performing city in San Francisco, the world's entertainment leader in Los Angeles, and people from all over the world still want to live and do business there. Growth changes the type of people and businesses that are attracted to a location, but growth doesn't beget the collapse of growth. Even with all the problems that unsustainable growth brings about, there are merely unique new challenges to address, and the strength of a region is determined, in part, by how it meets these challenges. Austin is something of a child still, partly because so many residents refuse to let it grow up. We have collective Peter Pan syndrome in this city, but thee is a lot of movement away from nostalgia and reactionary resistance to change. We'll be alright.

[pscajunguy]

Originally Posted by Tech House

To paraphrase the great Yogi Berra, "Nobody is moving here anymore, it's growing too fast."

If business gets any better then business will take its business elsewhere.

I grew up in Santa Barbara mostly in the 1960s. California was paradise and we thought the growth was going to ruin it. The population has tripled and still it's a great state, very beautiful, home to the world's leading tech center in Silicon Valley, the nation's top performing city in San Francisco, the world's entertainment leader in Los Angeles, and people from all over the world still want to live and do business there. Growth changes the type of people and businesses that are attracted to a location, but growth doesn't beget the collapse of growth. Even with all the problems that unsustainable growth brings about, there are merely unique new challenges to address, and the strength of a region is determined, in part, by how it meets these challenges. Austin is something of a child still, partly because so many residents refuse to let it grow up. We have collective Peter Pan syndrome in this city, but thee is a lot of movement away from nostalgia and reactionary resistance to change. We'll be alright.

I totally agree with you. The anti-growth people in San Francisco lost, years ago, in their efforts to prevent the "Manhattanization of San Francisco" and I don't see anyone complaining about that, today! San Francisco is doing just fine with their renewed explosive growth.
And Kevin, I agree with you totally about the reason that Austin is growing so successfully, except for one thing. Rick Perry. If it were up to him, he'd be transferring all that growth to College Station, because after all, he is STILL an Aggie at heart. I totally enjoyed him getting into that little spat with Jerry Brown which resulted in Jerry Brown calling all of his blathering nothing more than "a fart in the wind." I love seeing Austin competing with California, because even with all the problems they have, Jerry Brown is still pushing like hell for that Bullet Train to get built between San Francisco and LA, and now that Kamala Harris has been anointed to take over Barbara Boxer's Senate seat, you can be sure that Gavin Newsome will be the next Governor of California, and the Bullet Train will just get built faster! I'm looking forward to seeing the Austin-California competition just get even more intense, and I am sure that will continue, even with Greg Abbott as governor, not really just because Austin is in Texas, but rather that Austin is, well, Austin, and I don't think that California has a better rival to compete with than Austin. Not San Antonio, Houston, or Dallas, but Austin. So let the competition begin, in earnest! I think it's a win-win proposition, because NEITHER Jerry Brown nor Gavin Newsome would call Austin "a fart in the wind"!

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by mklunder13

I think this project is ridiculous. This city is digging its own grave developing this quick. It's out of control, property taxes are skyrocketing, as is cost of living, and businesses are starting to consider elsewhere due to this city becoming so expensive because of the uncontrolled development. San Antonio is doing it right, controlling the development and businesses see that as being attractive and also much cheaper. San Antonio is the up and coming city. Austin is just the childish little sibling who doesn't know how to control itself.

You obviously have never taken an economics class. The reason prices are so expensive, given supply and demand dynamics, is because we aren't building enough new units to keep up with demand.

San Antonio has some demand, but not that much in the core, and that's why they aren't getting crazy amounts of new units. Austin has too much demand with which developments cannot keep pace, hence skyrocketing prices.

I've lived in both cities for substantial amounts of time, fwiw, so I'm not talking out of my ass.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by pscajunguy

I totally agree with you. The anti-growth people in San Francisco lost, years ago, in their efforts to prevent the "Manhattanization of San Francisco" and I don't see anyone complaining about that, today! San Francisco is doing just fine with their renewed explosive growth.
And Kevin, I agree with you totally about the reason that Austin is growing so successfully, except for one thing. Rick Perry. If it were up to him, he'd be transferring all that growth to College Station, because after all, he is STILL an Aggie at heart. I totally enjoyed him getting into that little spat with Jerry Brown which resulted in Jerry Brown calling all of his blathering nothing more than "a fart in the wind." I love seeing Austin competing with California, because even with all the problems they have, Jerry Brown is still pushing like hell for that Bullet Train to get built between San Francisco and LA, and now that Kamala Harris has been anointed to take over Barbara Boxer's Senate seat, you can be sure that Gavin Newsome will be the next Governor of California, and the Bullet Train will just get built faster! I'm looking forward to seeing the Austin-California competition just get even more intense, and I am sure that will continue, even with Greg Abbott as governor, not really just because Austin is in Texas, but rather that Austin is, well, Austin, and I don't think that California has a better rival to compete with than Austin. Not San Antonio, Houston, or Dallas, but Austin. So let the competition begin, in earnest! I think it's a win-win proposition, because NEITHER Jerry Brown nor Gavin Newsome would call Austin "a fart in the wind"!

I agree with your comment about Rick Perry. I don't know that he's ever expressed interest in driving some of that growth toward College Station "Aggie land" - but you're probably right. One thing that is preventing that from happening, however, is that even with Texas A&M being there, they still don't have the local talent base to support a particular industry. The university itself is their biggest influence, but after that graduates have to leave to find any professional work. That's not the case in the major cities here, which is why their growth has been so intense. Austin is actually a city you can go to for education and have the convenience of being able to decide you don't want to leave it after you've finished your education. We're not the sleepy college town anymore that educates people and then sends them away to succeed elsewhere.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by pscajunguy

I totally agree with you. The anti-growth people in San Francisco lost, years ago, in their efforts to prevent the "Manhattanization of San Francisco" and I don't see anyone complaining about that, today! San Francisco is doing just fine with their renewed explosive growth.
And Kevin, I agree with you totally about the reason that Austin is growing so successfully, except for one thing. Rick Perry. If it were up to him, he'd be transferring all that growth to College Station, because after all, he is STILL an Aggie at heart. I totally enjoyed him getting into that little spat with Jerry Brown which resulted in Jerry Brown calling all of his blathering nothing more than "a fart in the wind." I love seeing Austin competing with California, because even with all the problems they have, Jerry Brown is still pushing like hell for that Bullet Train to get built between San Francisco and LA, and now that Kamala Harris has been anointed to take over Barbara Boxer's Senate seat, you can be sure that Gavin Newsome will be the next Governor of California, and the Bullet Train will just get built faster! I'm looking forward to seeing the Austin-California competition just get even more intense, and I am sure that will continue, even with Greg Abbott as governor, not really just because Austin is in Texas, but rather that Austin is, well, Austin, and I don't think that California has a better rival to compete with than Austin. Not San Antonio, Houston, or Dallas, but Austin. So let the competition begin, in earnest! I think it's a win-win proposition, because NEITHER Jerry Brown nor Gavin Newsome would call Austin "a fart in the wind"!

Greg Abbott is not the anti-Austin person that Perry was, and in fact is a UT alum who has lived most of his adult life in central Texas. He cut his political chops here and is very much pro-development. He will not be a road block.

[KevinFromTexas]

^You're probably right. One thing he said that signaled that was his comment about the city's tree cutting policy. Basically he said he supports letting people cut their trees if they want to. This will ultimately translate to allowing developers to mow down trees where ever they please to build their developments.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

^You're probably right. One thing he said that signaled that was his comment about the city's tree cutting policy. Basically he said he supports letting people cut their trees if they want to. This will ultimately translate to allowing developers to mow down trees where ever they please to build their developments.

He lives a few houses down from my aunt. A few years ago he deliberately ignored the city ordinance and cut down the heritage tree that was in his front yard. The neighborhood association was livid.

[KevinFromTexas]

Of course Abbott has good reason to be paranoid about trees, but I doubt that has much to do with it.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Of course Abbott has good reason to be paranoid about trees, but I doubt that has much to do with it.

No. From what I understand, it blocked the morning light from his study.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

No. From what I understand, it blocked the morning light from his study.

Did the oak tree fall on Abbott and cripple him before or after he had the "heritage" tree cut down in his yard? Is he angry at trees, or was it karma?

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by austlar1

Did the oak tree fall on Abbott and cripple him before or after he had the "heritage" tree cut down in his yard? Is he angry at trees, or was it karma?

This was only a few years ago, so he was definitely already disabled at that point.

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Greg Abbott is not the anti-Austin person that Perry was, and in fact is a UT alum who has lived most of his adult life in central Texas. He cut his political chops here and is very much pro-development. He will not be a road block.

Abbott's Facebook page has a recent quote in which he says that the state needs to restrict regulations that are implemented by cities. So, at least in this sense he will be at odds with Austin. I can see him going after the bag ban and any other unique environmental regulations we have. On the other hand, if he wants to "restrict regulations" then he probably wouldn't try to stop cities from enacting "freedom-increasing" measures, such as leniency for marijuana possession.

Regarding development, he might try to prevent Austin from enforcing and enacting regulations that restrict what can be built and where. I don't view this as a positive thing at all. Austin's environmental attributes are unique and likely not appreciated by gung-ho "growth uber alles" politicians and developers.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Tech House

Abbott's Facebook page has a recent quote in which he says that the state needs to restrict regulations that are implemented by cities. So, at least in this sense he will be at odds with Austin. I can see him going after the bag ban and any other unique environmental regulations we have. On the other hand, if he wants to "restrict regulations" then he probably wouldn't try to stop cities from enacting "freedom-increasing" measures, such as leniency for marijuana possession.

Regarding development, he might try to prevent Austin from enforcing and enacting regulations that restrict what can be built and where. I don't view this as a positive thing at all. Austin's environmental attributes are unique and likely not appreciated by gung-ho "growth uber alles" politicians and developers.

He's a social conservative. He'll be against anything to do with lesser sentencing or enforcement for pot on the city level. He's also against the paper bags stuff, LGBT protections/ordinances, etc. His position regarding city ordinances are not anti-Austin so much as they are anti-every large city in Texas.

What I meant was that he's not a foe of development (neither was, tbh, Perry) and in fact is probably the most pro-dense development governor Texas has ever had.