North Lamar/Burnet Development Thread - Page 3

AusTxDevelopment · #41 Posted **Jan 31, 2019, 4:25 PM**

My favorite green roof in Austin, Dimensional Funds parking garage.

ahealy · #42 Posted **Jan 31, 2019, 4:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azul

Green roofs are really, really heavy and designers/owners seem to forget about that sometimes. By the time the project gets off the ground and into the engineering phases it'll usually be the first item on the chopping block for VE as the owner ends up realizing that green roofs require a fairly substantial increase in structural material costs for seemingly little gain. I'm a little more optimistic they keep some green roofs or gardens since they might be able to find ways to implement them in their treatments.

Exactly. I just wish they weren't so lazy in the design process.

urbancore · #43 Posted **Jan 31, 2019, 5:07 PM**

If you imagine the first rendering without the trees, each building has a bunch of surface parking.

Suburbs are for low density, not cities. This is just another “car centric” office park. I thought when they originally talked about this project it was going to be mixed use.

Needless to say, if this moves forward as planned, home prices in Hyde Park will push ever higher.

eskimo33 · #44 Posted **Jan 31, 2019, 5:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AusTxDevelopment

My favorite green roof in Austin, Dimensional Funds parking garage.

I think I am in love with that green roof....
You could throw one hell of a concert up there.

austlar1 · #45 Posted **Jan 31, 2019, 7:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahealy

Idk...My mom worked at ASH in in mid 90's and it needs as much TLC as it can get! This render seems totally appropriate to me. It doesn't need fro-yo shops and a tapas bar to work. Green roofs look amazing, but they never seem to actually happen. Have y'all ever noticed that? I feel like we've seen so so many projects that get pitched with like a green wall or green roof and then it's just like a few monkey grass plantings and they're done ....not holding my breath.

I agree, but I hope that there will be at least three straight through streets open to auto and foot traffic that transit between Guadalupe and Lamar. There are so many trees in the renderings that it is hard to tell, but I think that might be part of the plan.

atxsnail · #46 Posted **Mar 13, 2019, 4:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by atxsnail

i'm guessing it's probably just a staging area for the under-construction Crestview Station apartments.

the site plan filing for Lamar Station is listed as "inactive." the plan did not meet the minimum height of 2-stories for a building in the Lamar/Justin TOD. that sounds like a very expensive surprise for the developer unless there is some waiver process.

The city updated its response as follows:

The proposed site plan does not meet the minimum height (2-stories) for a property in the Corridor Mixed Use Subdistrict (Section 4.2.9.B). Please note that Alternative Equivalent Compliance is not available for modification of Section 4.2.9.

U1: Comment Cleared. Response correctly notes that the height minimum applies in the TOD Mixed Use Subdistrict and NOT in the Corridor Mixed Use Subdistrict.

The project seems to be moving forward now...

jbssfelix · #47 Posted **Mar 14, 2019, 2:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by atxsnail

The city updated its response as follows:

The proposed site plan does not meet the minimum height (2-stories) for a property in the Corridor Mixed Use Subdistrict (Section 4.2.9.B). Please note that Alternative Equivalent Compliance is not available for modification of Section 4.2.9.

U1: Comment Cleared. Response correctly notes that the height minimum applies in the TOD Mixed Use Subdistrict and NOT in the Corridor Mixed Use Subdistrict.

The project seems to be moving forward now...

Novacek · #48 Posted **Mar 14, 2019, 5:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by atxsnail

The city updated its response as follows:

The proposed site plan does not meet the minimum height (2-stories) for a property in the Corridor Mixed Use Subdistrict (Section 4.2.9.B). Please note that Alternative Equivalent Compliance is not available for modification of Section 4.2.9.

U1: Comment Cleared. Response correctly notes that the height minimum applies in the TOD Mixed Use Subdistrict and NOT in the Corridor Mixed Use Subdistrict.

The project seems to be moving forward now...

Just shows how crappily-implemented the Crestview TOD was. Not only is it weirdly shaped and doesn't apply to half the properties in walking distance, for a bunch it does apply to it doesn't require any density.

_Matt · #49 Posted **Mar 17, 2019, 7:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Novacek

Just shows how crappily-implemented the Crestview TOD was. Not only is it weirdly shaped and doesn't apply to half the properties in walking distance, for a bunch it does apply to it doesn't require any density.

Your definition of walking distance must be more than the standard 1/4 mile, because nearly all properties within 1/4 mile walk are either high density residential or active frontage TOD zoned. In fact, the project in question is 0.4 miles from the rail station.

NYC2ATX · #50 Posted **Mar 17, 2019, 9:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Matt

Your definition of walking distance must be more than the standard 1/4 mile, because nearly all properties within 1/4 mile walk are either high density residential or active frontage TOD zoned. In fact, the project in question is 0.4 miles from the rail station.

Had to do a little backtracking to get the gist on this project, but I didn't realize that it's actually a really small lot, and the worst possible scenario, parking in front, seems to have been avoided. Honestly this is probably the biggest blight on that stretch, where there could instead be an active pedestrian experience all the way to Morrow Street.

Novacek · #51 Posted **Mar 18, 2019, 1:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Matt

Your definition of walking distance must be more than the standard 1/4 mile, because nearly all properties within 1/4 mile walk are either high density residential or active frontage TOD zoned. In fact, the project in question is 0.4 miles from the rail station.

CapMetro uses 1/2 mile for higher quality transit/rail stations.

That seems to be pretty common for US transit agencies.

Come on, you can't look at the Crestview TOD and claim it's not grotesquely shaped.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/npzd/Austi...in_regplan.pdf (first page)

Even within 1/4 mile, there's a chunk of residential properties that not only weren't upzoned, they were actively _downzoned_ (McMansion) during the construction of the rail.

_Matt · #52 Posted **Mar 28, 2019, 5:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Novacek

CapMetro uses 1/2 mile for higher quality transit/rail stations.

That seems to be pretty common for US transit agencies.

Come on, you can't look at the Crestview TOD and claim it's not grotesquely shaped.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/npzd/Austi...in_regplan.pdf (first page)

Even within 1/4 mile, there's a chunk of residential properties that not only weren't upzoned, they were actively _downzoned_ (McMansion) during the construction of the rail.

Yeah, that's a good map to see how misshapen it is. Apparently bringing established residential into the fold is off limits, even for new transportation projects?

Maybe code next next will fix it.

atxsnail · #53 Posted **Mar 28, 2019, 5:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Matt

Yeah, that's a good map to see how misshapen it is. Apparently bringing established residential into the fold is off limits, even for new transportation projects?

Maybe code next next will fix it.

whatever happens with Code Cronk and its impact on the nearby areas, it probably wouldn't touch the Lamar Justin TOD. This TOD will live or die by what happens next with the Austin Energy parcel on Ryan Drive, adjacent to the train station.

Hopefully something really good gets built to make up for the lost potential of the original Midtown Commons. It would also probably apply a good bit of development pressure for some of the nearby derelict buildings. I'm glad enough of a urban-friendly council will be around to combat CM Pool's natural tendency to keep this project as small as possible. RFP coming Aug 31 of this year.

_Matt · #54 Posted **Mar 28, 2019, 8:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by atxsnail

whatever happens with Code Cronk and its impact on the nearby areas, it probably wouldn't touch the Lamar Justin TOD. This TOD will live or die by what happens next with the Austin Energy parcel on Ryan Drive, adjacent to the train station.

Hopefully something really good gets built to make up for the lost potential of the original Midtown Commons. It would also probably apply a good bit of development pressure for some of the nearby derelict buildings. I'm glad enough of a urban-friendly council will be around to combat CM Pool's natural tendency to keep this project as small as possible. RFP coming Aug 31 of this year.

Glad to hear that property is in play.

I could see the nearby residential being upzoned (in one form or another) in 20-30 years when it takes 45 minutes to drive downtown (vs. 15 by train).

jbssfelix · #55 Posted **Apr 1, 2019, 3:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Matt

I could see the nearby residential being upzoned (in one form or another)

Crestview NA would like to have a word with you about that....

KevinFromTexas · #56 Posted **Apr 11, 2019, 4:41 PM**

Site plan for a 5-story residential at the Triangle - 5629 North Lamar.

Map - this is going at the large vacant lot at North Lamar and Koenig Lane next to the KFC.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/56...!4d-97.7259052

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...SS_PLAN_02.pdf

jbssfelix · #57 Posted **Apr 11, 2019, 5:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Site plan for a 5-story residential at the Triangle - 5629 North Lamar.

Map - this is going at the large vacant lot at North Lamar and Koenig Lane next to the KFC.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/56...!4d-97.7259052

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...SS_PLAN_02.pdf

That underground detention pond is quite interesting!

Also, I'm glad that there's a lot of bike parking (both inside and racks outside), but I'm not sure who actually plans on biking in/out of there and onto Lamar or Koenig...I guess they could all ride the sidewalk from Guad, but still.

Sigaven · #58 Posted **Apr 11, 2019, 10:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Site plan for a 5-story residential at the Triangle - 5629 North Lamar.

Map - this is going at the large vacant lot at North Lamar and Koenig Lane next to the KFC.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/56...!4d-97.7259052

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...SS_PLAN_02.pdf

This is pretty far north of the Triangle but i suppose it is a triangle on N. Lamar...

atxsnail · #59 Posted **Apr 12, 2019, 1:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaven

This is pretty far north of the Triangle but i suppose it is a triangle on N. Lamar...

I guess we have our answer on how they were going to treat the pedestrian island/right turn lane issue. I'm glad they could recover a bit of land. I'd be happier if they could just do away with these style of turn lanes altogether within city limits. This was covered fairly recently in Towers: https://austin.towers.net/aura-north...to-north-loop/

Looking at the rest of Trinsic's portfolio, this might be their most interesting project. Everything else I see in Texas is a pretty generic Texas donut with only housing - including the one on Riverside. This one at least has a unique shape as well as ground-level retail.

Urbannizer · #60 Posted **Apr 30, 2019, 12:32 AM**

Human & Health Sevices Expansion