AUSTIN | Project Updates Thread Part II

[lonewolf]

is there going to be one level of underground parking?

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by lonewolf

is there going to be one level of underground parking?

Yes.

[427MM]

Wish HEB would build this responsibly on their other urban Austin sites.

[Urbannizer]

701 Rio Grande

[Echostatic]

Should've been taller, but still a very nice street presence and with underground parking a very good looking building overall.

[The ATX]

The HLC has demo on its agenda at next week's meeting for these two properties at 14th & Lavaca:




There have been a couple of marketing visions for the site:

[drummer]

Not a huge fan of either, but the darker one would stand out more among our buildings, even if only at that height, simply due to contrast.

[The ATX]

Now they are going to move that house on the hill next to the Tyndall. It was going to be offices for the 10-story "backyard tower" that is going block Tyndall views.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/public-searc...n=12742327&t_selected_propertyrsn=443228

[enragedcamel]

Do you guys think we'll ever get a 1200+ footer in Austin?

[kingkirbythe....]

It could happen, but don’t hold your breath.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by enragedcamel

Do you guys think we'll ever get a 1200+ footer in Austin?

I didn't think we'd ever get an 800ft tower, so...

[migol24]

How many blocks are not in the CVC restrictions? I assumed we had ran out a long time ago and there were only a handful where 1000 footers could rise.

[drummer]

Remind me - if I-35 gets lowered, are those CVCs cancelled? Would that open up more lots for greater height?

[427MM]

Originally Posted by drummer

Remind me - if I-35 gets lowered, are those CVCs cancelled? Would that open up more lots for greater height?

State and City would have to remove them. If either does not then they remain. Good news is the state holds a lot of land that needs to be redeveloped that are under these CVCs. Structured parking garages that could become redundant once the mall with all of its underground parking opens (and we get rail). And, with Kathie Tovo termed out perhaps a future council will see the value in making land easier to develop (better for walkability, transit supportive density and tax base!).

[kingkirbythe....]

Swede Hill Infill Could Stretch Austin’s ‘Innovation District’ East Across I-35

https://austin.towers.net/swede-hill-inf...ns-innovation-district-east-across-i-35/

A portfolio of two adjacent office properties recently offered for sale against the I-35 frontage road near the Swede Hill area of East Austin reminds us once again of the ample opportunities for downtown-adjacent infill development near the highway in this area — and as the so-called Innovation District begins taking shape directly across the interstate around the former Brackenridge hospital complex and its adjacent social anchor of Waterloo Park, it’s easy to dream of how a modified I-35 might finally reconnect the developments on either side.

[valhalla]

Originally Posted by drummer

Remind me - if I-35 gets lowered, are those CVCs cancelled? Would that open up more lots for greater height?

No there are currently several CVCs which are partially or fully blocked by buildings, but are still in effect. There was an effort a while back to remove those ones but it failed. CVCS are both a city and STATE law--meaning that even if you got tathy kovo on your side you would still have to get both the house and senate of the texas legislature to vote to remove them.

Simply put, we'll all be dead long before that happens. People in lubbock and amarillo and beaumont don't give a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 about Austin urbanism and aren't going to like their state reps helping increase the density of austin, turning it farther blue. Add in Democratic NIMBYS and NIMBYS in general from all sides of the political spectrum--never going to happen.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by valhalla

No there are currently several CVCs which are partially or fully blocked by buildings, but are still in effect. There was an effort a while back to remove those ones but it failed. CVCS are both a city and STATE law--meaning that even if you got tathy kovo on your side you would still have to get both the house and senate of the texas legislature to vote to remove them.

Simply put, we'll all be dead long before that happens. People in lubbock and amarillo and beaumont don't give a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 about Austin urbanism and aren't going to like their state reps helping increase the density of austin, turning it farther blue. Add in Democratic NIMBYS and NIMBYS in general from all sides of the political spectrum--never going to happen.

Just to clarify a little more:

Some CVCs are both city and state.
Some CVCs are either city OR state.
Some CVCs are both city and state, but they define them slightly differently.

So, no, in some cases we do not need the state legislature to get involved.

[valhalla]

For further clarification: As of 2020, state law defines 30 Capitol View Corridors in Austin, while municipal code defines 26 protected corridors, 21 of which are identical to state-defined corridors and five of which differ slightly from five of the state corridors.

So my original points still stand. Removing almost any CVC is going to take action from the state legislature. Plus I was responding to someone asking about the corridors extending to I-35 which are all covered by both city and state.

Even if/once I-35 gets buried, those corridors are likely to remain in force because they preserve East Austin's view of the capitol. East Austin is already trying to add more CVCS not less. Thus, any attempt to remove the I-35 CVCs will be seen as discriminatory or racist toward the residents in that part of town. I almost kind of agree. I mean CVCs might be one of the dumber ideas invented by mankind, but as long as they exist, everyone should have an equal chance to see the capitol from their local laundromat/strip mall/random bush (all of which are things CVCs lead to).

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by valhalla

For further clarification: As of 2020, state law defines 30 Capitol View Corridors in Austin, while municipal code defines 26 protected corridors, 21 of which are identical to state-defined corridors and five of which differ slightly from five of the state corridors.

So my original points still stand. Removing almost any CVC is going to take action from the state legislature. Plus I was responding to someone asking about the corridors extending to I-35 which are all covered by both city and state.

Even if/once I-35 gets buried, those corridors are likely to remain in force because they preserve East Austin's view of the capitol. East Austin is already trying to add more CVCS not less. Thus, any attempt to remove the I-35 CVCs will be seen as discriminatory or racist toward the residents in that part of town. I almost kind of agree. I mean CVCs might be one of the dumber ideas invented by mankind, but as long as they exist, everyone should have an equal chance to see the capitol from their local laundromat/strip mall/random bush (all of which are things CVCs lead to).

I haven't looked at the CVC map in a while, but I believe that some (not all) of those CVCs still stop at I-35 (and are much wider than most other CVCs). So they aren't currently doing anything to protect anyone's view on the east side.

I'm all for protecting some views from the east side also, but the CVCs that stop at I-35 are simply protecting the views of people passing through on the highway. When you take into account the wide swath of land they cover, it seems to me that those specific CVCs were a giant mistake and should have never been implemented. IMHO the CVCs should be used to help add to the sense of place at prominent areas of the city. I-35 isn't exactly high on the list of prominent areas that people care about.

[atxsnail]

Originally Posted by paul78701

I'm all for protecting some views from the east side also, but the CVCs that stop at I-35 are simply protecting the views of people passing through on the highway. When you take into account the wide swath of land they cover, it seems to me that those specific CVCs were a giant mistake and should have never been implemented. IMHO the CVCs should be used to help add to the sense of place at prominent areas of the city. I-35 isn't exactly high on the list of prominent areas that people care about.

The view from I-35 is probably first on the list of favorite CVCs for a certain subset of stupid people who live in Austin on a part-time basis about every 2 years.

Our idiot district maps result in a disproportionate number of representatives coming from places where the interaction with the highway is the ONLY thing anyone could possibly care about.

I may hold a minority view, but CVCs are basically all dumb. They effectively work as a tax on all Austinites and Texans due to the limitations they impose on development of properties in certain parts of Austin. They have also artificially inflated the value of certain blocks to the benefit of a few lucky (and mostly private) landowners.

Here's my crackpot alternative idea: surely a trade with a few tower developers for a set of publicly accessible and permanently affordable observation decks in return for CVC removal would better serve the public interest.