AUSTIN | Misc. Discussions - No Politics

[wwmiv]

Okay, so I finally gathered my thoughts, smoked a bit, and put all my thoughts about how a stadium in that location (which would f*ing be amazing) could transform the area while expanding the street grid in a motor friendly, mass transit friendly, and pedestrian friendly manner.

Any stadium in that location would necessitate the development of multiple adjacent hotels, which always come with restaurants and bars (esp. when located next sports venues). Other adjacent parcels will likely see infill in the form of office and residential, but immediately adjacent parcels should be utilized as standalone park and event space and pedestrian fill over that the events the stadium would have would require. Of course, office space is likely to end up being closer to the stadium than residential, given that the noise factor is likely to disproportionately drive residential rents down relative to the same effect on office rents. I think if you look at other stadiums that spurred development, you end up seeing the same geographic pattern in adjacent parcels: closest are hotels, next are office, and then residential furthest out. I also think you'd end up seeing a diverse mix of heights and building types (VMU v. towers, etc.).

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

Something like this?

This is Houston Dynamo's BBVA stadium on the YMCA lot.

Great job! Is it close to actual scale? It looks really cool and I appreciate what you've done and the overall concept, but there is precisely zero possibility that this would ever happen. That location is the confluence of 3 or 4 of Austin's most vocally NIMBY neighborhoods, and quite frankly I would oppose it on the grounds that it would be extremely disruptive to the area around it. It would completely transform the character of the area. HOWEVER, I am envisioning a stadium that may be larger than what you're suggesting. If it were on a more "human scale" and not some behemoth that overwhelms everything within a quarter-mile radius then maybe... but this isn't going to happen, nuh uh, no way. I'm a YIMBY who lives in north Austin and even I'm already opposed to this, so I can easily imagine the level of opposition it would encounter among its NIMBY neighbors.

But totally cool mock-up!

EDIT --- If it had a friendly, open design, like a larger and fancier version of House Park, then maybe it would work. In fact, why not go ahead and make it the new House Park and it could be utilized for high school football and soccer games. OK, I'm about to change my mind. Damn, I confuse myself. But it would only work if it were fairly small, like maximum capacity of maybe 10,000 people, because that area already suffers from gridlock and there's no way to alleviate that without ripping out a lot of businesses and building new bridges. Ingress and egress would be a frickin' nightmare, and it would be flustercuck for anyone who happened to need to travel through there at the wrong time.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Tech House

It would completely transform the character of the area.

That would be a GOOD thing. This area is completely underutilized space that needs a COMPLETE overhaul.

[wwmiv]

Okay, so... totally bored and I've got nothing to do now that the semester is over.

Here's what I'd do:

First, I'd start with expanding and establishing the street and pedestrian grid:



Starting from east, ending at the west:

1. I'd reconstitute B.R. Reynolds as a one way street heading northbound.

2. I'd extend W. 2nd as a one way street heading westbound.

3. I'd extend Baylor Street as two-way with an at-grade crossing and signalized intersections at W. 3rd, Reserve, W. 2nd, and Cesar Chavez. W. 2nd and Baylor street would be designed to absorb the southbound flow from Lamar to Cesar Chavez that was eliminated from B.R. Reynolds.

4. I'd extend W. 3rd one way westbound between Baylor and Walsh at roughly the same level and visually integrated with the adjacent rail with a design that can accommodate sports and event related bus traffic. Signalized intersections at both Baylor and Walsh.

5. I'd extend Walsh street two way with signalized intersections at W. 3rd and Reserve, and an at-grade rail crossing, with access from west-bound Cesar Chavez only.

6. I'd extend Orchard Street as a pedestrian only underpass between 4th and Reserve Road, as well as two way vehicular between Cesar Chavez and Reserve with all intersections signalized.

7. A two way north/south street with a below grade rail passing with interior signalized intersections and a signalized intersection at W. 5th, but only accessible from west-bound Cesar Chavez with no controlling signalization.

8. Pressler: extend by two blocks, screw the city's abysmal current plan for extension.

9. Reserve road should be realigned as a straight two way street through the entire area.

10. W. 2nd should be extended again on the other side of the stadium.

11. Paul Street should be extended a block as well while that small stretch of W. 3rd should be torn up.

[wwmiv]

Then, I'd add in the stadium (smaller than Dynamo, but not by more than 20%) and two well designed parking garages to handle the attendant crowds:



The change to B.R. Reynolds help with ease of entry and exit from the eastern parking garage.

[wwmiv]

Then, let's consider other public uses:



1. the Lonestar rail station/amtrak station (the Amtrak office/building would be shifted eastward.

2. a public promenade / event space north of the stadium straddling the sides of the Lonestar station and W. 3rd with some large pedestrian (or two) overpass connecting the two sides). Most stadiums need some kind of pedestrian overflow area, this is perfect for that purpose.

3. some sort of high usage green space to the west of the stadium to compensate for the loss of green space elsewhere.

4. the Lance Armstrong bikeway remains and is integrated onto the stadium premises.

[wwmiv]

Now, let's consider attendant private development:

First, the hospitality demand generated by the venue. Hotels are normally designed as towers of some sort, so I've indicated that here by an extra layer where a potential tower would be over the base.

[wwmiv]

Then, let's get into office space and civic uses:



1. Office space (purple) is likely to end up being closer to the stadium than residential, so the next wave out from the stadium reflects that.

2. Civic space (teal): some kind of civic space (whether that be office, replacement of the YMCA, etc., idk idc).

3. The Amtrak office which needs to be moved regardless and would have to be if there's an expansion of the street grid (yellow) remains adjacent to the station itself.

[wwmiv]

Now, fill in with a variety of residential in the remaining new and redevelopable blocks:



and add a variety of types of retail:



I tried to keep the locations in sensible areas near green spaces and areas where there is pedestrian activity outside of games and events (I.E. closer to the residential and office). I also tried to match what types of retail typically are in what types of developments. You see purple (bars) in hotels, but not as much elsewhere. You see grocers (green) in office buildings, but hardly ever anywhere else. Restaurants (orange) and general retail (red) you tend to see everywhere.

The result is that you've now got yourself an active and vibrant section of town that is FAR AND AWAY better than what is there now.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Tech House

But it would only work if it were fairly small, like maximum capacity of maybe 10,000 people, because that area already suffers from gridlock and there's no way to alleviate that without ripping out a lot of businesses and building new bridges. Ingress and egress would be a frickin' nightmare, and it would be flustercuck for anyone who happened to need to travel through there at the wrong time.

Not a single bit of this is true in the way that I think you meant it.

a) the area does not already suffer from massive gridlock disproportionate from what you'd expect being in the city center along a very important stretch of road. In fact, that part of Cesar Chavez tends to run pretty smoothly.

b) Ingress and egress would be fine, provided that the design of the parking garages is intelligent. And let's just be totally honest: no matter where you put a stadium, it's going to be somewhat disruptive whether it is here or elsewhere, so that's a fallacious argument.

c) Um, and what business are there exactly? There's only a few: YMCA, the shelter, the fields, and amtrak. None of which are particularly the highest use for this land, ESPECIALLY given how much land it is, how central it is, and how perfectly suitable it is to extend the street grid in a vibrant manner.

d) who cares if we're building intersections and bridges in an area of town that massively needs infrastructure updates? Have you ever considered that expansion of the overall street grid might actually reduce traffic overall because you're adding additional capacity? That would be accomplished IFF you add more lane miles than would be needed to absorb the increase in non-game peak demand.

3) this part of town isn't just the nice green area you see alongside Cesar Chavez when you pass buy, it's also the decrepit buildings in between the tracks and 5th and 6th. A stadium here would reactivate this part of town that has seen development /slow/ during a time where we've seen it increase exponentially in other areas of downtown (inc. just on the other side of Lamar) DESPITE the fact that there are still many ripe parcels.

[paul78701]

Apparently this area is being referred to as Lamar Beach. There is a meeting about it tonight:
http://kxan.com/2015/12/15/new-beach...nity-feedback/

Here's more info about the master plan:
https://www.austintexas.gov/departme...ch-master-plan

It looks like there will be another meeting January 27th if anyone wants to put in their two cents. The draft master plan should be done in March.

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by paul78701

Apparently this area is being referred to as Lamar Beach. There is a meeting about it tonight:
http://kxan.com/2015/12/15/new-beach...nity-feedback/

Here's more info about the master plan:
https://www.austintexas.gov/departme...ch-master-plan

It looks like there will be another meeting January 27th if anyone wants to put in their two cents. The draft master plan should be done in March.

It looks like a large portion of this site is in a flood plain. This large feasibility study PDF document has already identified possible building sites for amenities:
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austin...ch-13-2015.pdf

It looks like none of those building sites could possibly fit a stadium of any kind.

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Na) the area does not already suffer from massive gridlock disproportionate from what you'd expect being in the city center along a very important stretch of road. In fact, that part of Cesar Chavez tends to run pretty smoothly.

As I was looking through your conceptual layout I found myself wishing I could have been there with you helping come up with ideas! It looks like a fun process. What software are you using? I might could get into that myself.

One thing you overlooked is the Pressler extension. Maybe you could reconfigure things to take that into account?

The gridlock that I referred to is Lamar, between 9th and... well, let's say Oltorf, although Lamar was plenty gridlocked south of Oltorf when I was doing deliveries on Saturday and there are many new developments yet to come on line there.

But the whole flustercuck between 9th and the bridge is horrible on Lamar, in my provincial opinion. Maybe i'm just being a weenie.

I agree with you about adding more transportation infrastructure in the area.
Just for the sake of discussion, I really like a lot of what you're imagining. It seems like an impossibility that such drastic change could occur, but Rainey happened even with Brigid Shea living there, so maybe I'm being too pessimistic about Austin's capacity to adapt to its own success.

Show us more! I'm putting in a personal request for the inclusion of the Pressler extension, and maybe you could add a bridge or somehow expand the existing Lamar bridge.

But, you see, this is where I get discouraged. Remember the uproar over the idea of making changes to the bridge? And how about the extreme opposition to the height variance for Riverside/Lamar (Taco Cabana, whatever that development is called)? And yet, maybe that illustrates the possibilities, because that was approved in spite of the opposition.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by paul78701

It looks like a large portion of this site is in a flood plain. This large feasibility study PDF document has already identified possible building sites for amenities:
http://assets.austintexas.gov/austin...ch-13-2015.pdf

It looks like none of those building sites could possibly fit a stadium of any kind.

Oh. Damn. Page 11 and 12 (page 13 and 14 of the .pdf) for any wondering have the relevant graphics. You're right. That's really too bad.

Originally Posted by Tech House

The gridlock that I referred to is Lamar, between 9th and... well, let's say Oltorf, although Lamar was plenty gridlocked south of Oltorf when I was doing deliveries on Saturday and there are many new developments yet to come on line there.

Ohhhh Lamar, Duh. I gotcha. That's unsolvable and there's no way around it.

[Tech House]

Here's a shot of the Lamar Beach area: http://assets.austintexas.gov/austin...ch-13-2015.pdf

I think it would be a great location for museums and other cultural amenities, rather than turning it into more urban grid. We don't have a great museum space such as is found in most cities of Austin's size. We need a museum of natural history and science, and a planetarium. These add far more to a city's cultural and civic success than a stadium.

[drummer]

This is one of the things I love about this site. I can come in with crazy ideas and you guys take it and run with it. Thanks, lzppjb and wwmiv, for putting all of that together! All of that far exceeded my expectations for bringing the question forward.

Looking at the Lamar Beach link, it seems like they're thinking more of building up the park land, which I'm all for in most cases. I do think that a stadium could be integrated into park land, of course (supposing it's not surrounded by surface lots like unmentioned stadiums in Arlington or Houston). The Dynamo stadium is a great example of a quality stadium in an urban setting. I think that even if we could get part of wwmiv's plan to become a reality, it'd be a win. Of course, it would receive a ton of pushback from some folks. My thoughts are perhaps a hybrid - maybe not extend the grid as far west, but perhaps add a couple of connecting cross streets for traffic (both pedestrian and otherwise). Implement the stadium with the park land (improved, of course, as right now it is very underutilized as wwmiv said). One extreme example of how this could work - the connection of various parks, museums, etc., in Chicago with Soldier Field right along Lake Michigan. I've been to that area a few times, and it's a fantastic example of an urban park with multiple (tons, actually) uses. Millennium Park offers a great performance venue, lots of art installations, etc., that work along with it - oh and by the way, the Chicago Bears' (Da Bears) stadium is there too. It can work.

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

That's unsolvable and there's no way around it.

That's almost comically depressing. Austin has so many irreconcilable transportation issues, I wonder if it's going to stifle growth at some point. I used to think that the traffic nightmare would force solutions to come about, but so far there seem to be none on the horizon other than the usual talk about ideas that the public isn't willing to fund.

So, what's that software you're using? And can you maybe cut out a street or two and add a grand public space with gardens surrounding a world class museum? Hell, while I'm at it I may as well just ask you to buy me a house in Travis Heights.

[lzppjb]

Originally Posted by Tech House

Here's a shot of the Lamar Beach area: http://assets.austintexas.gov/austin...ch-13-2015.pdf

I think it would be a great location for museums and other cultural amenities, rather than turning it into more urban grid. We don't have a great museum space such as is found in most cities of Austin's size. We need a museum of natural history and science, and a planetarium. These add far more to a city's cultural and civic success than a stadium.

I'm hoping they can find space in or around the future capitol mall that will extend up to Bob Bullock Museum.

[lzppjb]

wwmiv's pics are blocked here at work, but I can't wait to check them out. Sounds like quite the effort he put forth.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

wwmiv's pics are blocked here at work, but I can't wait to check them out. Sounds like quite the effort he put forth.

I was high gurl, I was high. Sounds like your work blocks imgur, gurl. Why your work gotta block imgur, gurl?

this was all a reference to Lady Bunny.