Austin | 318 Colorado | ~450 Feet | 40 Floors | Proposed

[AusTex]

Originally Posted by mercury6

not even a skyscraper forum is safe from NIMBYism. Build the tower, bring the housing density

Its about preserving History and Culture. Not, "Not In My Back Yard," thought. We all love skyscrapers on this forum.

[ahealy]

Guys. Once again, it's not NIMBYism. Reddit may be a better place for the pigeonholing--not here.
I encourage some of you to respond with insightful responses, rather than "NIMBY". If we're talking urbanism: we as urbanists/architecture enthusiasts should lobby for something that provides diversity to a neighborhood and should be open to the idea of any rippling effects a project may have on said neighborhood/culture.

It's so close for me, but this just feels wrong at the end of the day...and that is OK to say here. This is a forum about skyscrapers in Austin, not housing inventory.

[We vs us]

It’s gotta be said though that killing one tower won’t actually protect the Warehouse District for the long term. There are going to be plenty of other proposals, and a very good chance that they’re worse than what Hancock is proposing. There’s going to have to be a long game for Warehouse District preservationists, not just a one-and-done our-righteous-anger-will-prevail approach.

[AusTex]

Originally Posted by We vs us

It’s gotta be said though that killing one tower won’t actually protect the Warehouse District for the long term. There are going to be plenty of other proposals, and a very good chance that they’re worse than what Hancock is proposing. There’s going to have to be a long game for Warehouse District preservationists, not just a one-and-done our-righteous-anger-will-prevail approach.

I totally agree. West 6th Street also needs to be preserved as an Entertainment District from San Jacinto west to Shoal Creek. The Wearhouse District as a functioning "District" is gone. Preserve this block, alley to alley, since the rest is already fragmented to a degree. Keep the remaining pieces as we can. The market has already piecemealed most of it, and it is therefore ripe for development. But, again keep what we can. Put an overlay on the whole area that requires new development that is sensitive to clubs, bars, restaurants, and other nightlife type establishments on the street level where possible. Mimicking establishments that were once in The Low Rise Wearhouse District. The many levels of parking will act as sound proofing for the establishments. Lets build a New Wearhouse District.

"Keep the Vibe Alive."

[427MM]

If we had a real transfer of development rights option in Austin that could allow a land owner to sell the rights to build up to 15:1 FAR (or so) in exchange for keeping the buildings there could be magic here. Sadly, we’re so restrictive with our zoning we simply don’t have tools to allow us to be creative. Still wish it were legal to build the types of buildings we now want to save. During the discussion keep an eye out for folks who will do anything they can to prevent buildings such as these from being built in ~90% of Austin hoping to keep these the way they are. This is a tough case IMO. The area is amazing. So charming and a beacon for so many. Yet the land has wonderful entitlements, the city is desperate for housing and there is a group that wants to sink a ton of $$ into the site. Look forward to more conversation.

[Geckos_Rule]

Originally Posted by 427MM

During the discussion keep an eye out for folks who will do anything they can to prevent buildings such as these from being built in ~90% of Austin hoping to keep these the way they are. This is a tough case IMO. The area is amazing. So charming and a beacon for so many. Yet the land has wonderful entitlements, the city is desperate for housing and there is a group that wants to sink a ton of $$ into the site. Look forward to more conversation.

I think compared to many other proposed developments, we'll undoubtedly see this one change before it's all said and done. It's received more response (positive and negative) and press than most every other building being proposed in Austin, including 98 RR. Beyond just here, ABJ, and the other places that typically cover real estate news, this is getting traction on Instagram pages, tik toks, Eater, and multiple local news stories.

It does raise the same issue though, of "even if this isn't developed" or "even if the plans change to something that everyone likes," it won't necessarily prevent something nearby or in another neighborhood deserving of protection from doing the same thing. Ideally I suppose, Hanover will be able to work something out (perhaps akin to what they've done keeping OCH, but to an even greater extent with other spaces), and other developers in the future will know to follow suit. But, that might be wishful thinking where the ultimate goal is revenue-centric.

[sjk]

Oilcan Harry's made a post on Facebook about this today:

https://www.facebook.com/OilcanHarry...01689416546374

Concerning the redevelopment of Oilcan Harry’s:
We truly appreciate the overwhelming outreach of concern and support from our community. Ensuring our 4th street family has a safe space has always been our number one goal and it’s amazing to see it paid back, especially when our community feels threatened. Rest assured, our mission is to keep 4th street alive for a long time, and if we navigate these waters correctly, we will succeed. However, in our unique case, we need you to know a historical declaration is NOT the way to do it.
The full details of our 4th street block situation are complicated and not publicly well known, but we want everyone to understand that the designation of our building as historic will result in Oilcan Harry’s being forced out of the block in less than 10 years by individuals and factors outside of our control. The building would remain, but we will have been forced out and what fills the space would not be LGBTQ owned. The block's character would completely change. We are not ok with that, and we must consider our family's survival when planning for the future.
While it can be jolting to see Austin changing, especially when it hits so close to home, the reality is in our downtown location we must work with these changing forces if our community wants to continue to have 4th street as place to call home. We have been using our biggest tool, the remaining term on our current lease, as leverage to negotiate a deal that will keep the LGBTQIA+ community on the block for more than 25 years to come. We believe our landlord has found a good development partner in Hanover, and their desire is to keep 4th street as a safe space for our community. With that essential requirement in mind and met, we have come to a basic agreement on terms which will allow for our legacy business to continue on in a blend of historic and new. The effort to declare our building as historic would take away the only leverage tool we have, and so we ask that our community NOT oppose the application at the Landmark Commission on May 4th. Oilcan Harry’s has had its doors open on 4th for over 32 years, and we believe we have a path forward with Hanover, which will keep us and our community on 4th for another 25+ years.
We thank all of you again for your outreach and support. It means to world to our entire Oilcan Harry’s family.
Scott Neal
Managing Member
Oilcan Harry's

[The ATX]

That was a voice of reason. I think too many people are focused on the next HLC as the way to preserve the block. The HLC can't do anything to stop projects. The best they can do is initiate Historic Zoning, and they will do that. They already did it for the Iron Bear site. It will ultimately be up to the CC after it goes through the HLC and PC.

[Jdawgboy]

Okay, if this is the best way forward, I won't support historical designation. However, it isn't just OCH (which is wonderful that they feel this will ensure their security), but they aren't the only LGBTQ* business being affected. It would be so much better for Hanover to incorporate the other two as well because at the end of the day, we are still losing two establishments that will not be on or near 4th. Which means less options for what is the heart of the community in Austin. Options that I might add that not that long ago expanded on what we had before, now only to be lost again.. I think the goal should be to persuade Hanover to do what they can to incorporate all affected businesses. We don't need yet another restaurant space when there are empty boarded up restaurants in the area that should be filled. I'm specifically talking about the corner of 3rd and Colorado spot. Or if it has to be a restaurant, then why not an LGBTQ focused/owned restaurant. After all, it will be fronting the rainbow crosswalks and updated flag colors on the electrical box. Actually the street has other painted electrical boxes that build on the fact that 4th is the heart of the gay community in Austin. The street's second name Bettie Naylor. All of which should only solidify the district as extremely important and worth fighting for.

[H2O]

As I understand it, the other businesses are quite new and signed month to month leases with the full understanding that the property would be redeveloped soon. That probably means they got a deep rent discount and might not be viable at full market rate rent. Lease rates for new build shell construction are almost always going to be higher than older adaptive reuse as well, and they would probably have to pay for the majority of their tenant finish out.

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by H2O

As I understand it, the other businesses are quite new and signed month to month leases with the full understanding that the property would be redeveloped soon. That probably means they got a deep rent discount and might not be viable at full market rate rent. Lease rates for new build shell construction are almost always going to be higher than older adaptive reuse as well, and they would probably have to pay for the majority of their tenant finish out.

This is true. If I had to guess I'd say we'll see a revised effort to get them all in the base.

[Sigaven]

They really need a 2nd level to accomodate more nightclub space. Every good bar/club downtown has good patio space which will be nonexistent at the new Oil Cans with this new proposal. They should have space between the roof of the bars and the parking garage to allow for some rooftop outdoor space.

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

They really need a 2nd level to accomodate more nightclub space. Every good bar/club downtown has good patio space which will be nonexistent at the new Oil Cans with this new proposal. They should have space between the roof of the bars and the parking garage to allow for some rooftop outdoor space.

Agreed. I feel like the garage can be tinkered with to accommodate for that. A great example is 2nd Bar + Kitchen with that upstairs patio.

I thought I read they were doubling the outdoor space though....which confused the hell out of me. I wonder when we'll see the rest of the building. I feel like that's gonna make or break this with the public.

[Jdawgboy]

Anyone know what time this meeting is, I'm at City Hall now, gonna run errands but if its around 3 to 5pm time frame I'll go in.

[Urbannizer]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Anyone know what time this meeting is, I'm at City Hall now, gonna run errands but if its around 3 to 5pm time frame I'll go in.

The meeting begins at 6pm.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

The meeting begins at 6pm.

Okay.. Thanks

[Urbannizer]

HLC is recommending historical zoning, deciding on all structures or just 211-213 W 4th.

[chinchaaa]

can anyone explain why OCH seems to think they'll be forced out in a few years due to the historic designation? I don't understand that part

[H2O]

Originally Posted by chinchaaa

can anyone explain why OCH seems to think they'll be forced out in a few years due to the historic designation? I don't understand that part

The current owner / landlord wants to raise the rent because the market allows it and they need to pay their property taxes. If the property is not designated historic the current property owner will sell to Hanover and Hanover will cut a deal with OCH. Basically it is the new denser development subsidizing the beloved cultural asset. IMHO we should encourage such things and hope to get more of it in the future rather than fighting it.

Originally Posted by chinchaaa

can anyone explain why OCH seems to think they'll be forced out in a few years due to the historic designation? I don't understand that part

https://www.kut.org/austin/2022-05-0...rs-development

Rising property taxes not matter what will force them out he says, unless they can get that nice deal with the developer.

In my wild-guess opinion that HPL vote per se has basically zero effect on the future, right now it's just a kick-the-can vote for a month while forces assemble.