Austin | 500 S. Congress | Multiple Towers | Up to 650 Feet | Proposed

[gillynova]

My friends tried going to Ego's yesterday and it was FULL. Even had lines outside the door

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by gillynova

My friends tried going to Ego's yesterday and it was FULL. Even had lines outside the door

my friends and I plan to go soon. Many decades singing karaoke and playing pool on their crappy tables.

This one, like the Horseshoe Lounge, will hurt.

I really hope they find another spot to keep it going in a new location.

I never understood why Hut's wouldn't sell their "brand" to someone to keep it going. And no, the airport is not really "Hut's".

Heard a rumor that Hyde Park B&G probably wont last, and has no intention of selling name/menu.

[obemearg]

Originally Posted by urbancore

I really hope they find another spot to keep it going in a new location.

Via: https://austin.eater.com/2024/8/5/24...eventual-close

The bar is supposed to eventually reopen in the new mixed-use development taking over the South Congress address

[The ATX]

This got taller - it's 750' now. The South side of the river has a good chance to boom like Rainey whenever that next boom starts.

https://x.com/TheATX1/status/1852756867434353054

[AusTex]

I moved into Bouldin and was criticized for my poor choice 30+ years ago. I have been wondering when immediately South of the River would start to get the recognition as part of Central....Uhm....Downtown. Albeit, South River.

Rainey was a no-brainer to grow. Why not South River? Why all the limitations and the lag? Too close to houses/neighborhoods yet it is very separate. Lack of imagination and future thought/planning/acceptance? What's the problem? South River could be the Most Vibrant Neighborhood/District in the whole City of Austin if the powers that be worked together to Create It.

[papertowelroll]

Originally Posted by AusTex

I moved into Bouldin and was criticized for my poor choice 30+ years ago. I have been wondering when immediately South of the River would start to get the recognition as part of Central....Uhm....Downtown. Albeit, South River.

Rainey was a no-brainer to grow. Why not South River? Why all the limitations and the lag? Too close to houses/neighborhoods yet it is very separate. Lack of imagination and future thought/planning/acceptance? What's the problem? South River could be the Most Vibrant Neighborhood/District in the whole City of Austin if the powers that be worked together to Create It.

I think opposition from the nearby neighborhoods is the main limiting factor. I will say that transportation is really lacking there. Barton Springs, Riverside, and the the three bridges to downtown are all undersized for supporting heavy development over there. I don't think the current version of project connect will solve that either.

[Urbannizer]

Originally Posted by The ATX

This got taller - it's 750' now. The South side of the river has a good chance to boom like Rainey whenever that next boom starts.

https://x.com/TheATX1/status/1852756867434353054

I suspect the renderings to change given the new height, but details can be found here. See page 102

https://issuu.com/lakeflato/docs/urban_planning_design

[migol24]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

I suspect the renderings to change given the new height, but details can be found here. See page 102

https://issuu.com/lakeflato/docs/urban_planning_design

Boo! Dead link.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by migol24

Boo! Dead link.

It just went dead during the past couple days. The renderings were old anyway.

[LiveattheOasis]

Curious if there's any further news on this, 311-315 S. Congress, and 200 E. Riverside.

Feels like our next big downtown projects will all be in this area over the next 5-7 years.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by LiveattheOasis

Curious if there's any further news on this, 311-315 S. Congress, and 200 E. Riverside.

Feels like our next big downtown projects will all be in this area over the next 5-7 years.

500 S. Congress - This is years away from being approved let alone happening. The PUD ZC was last updated in October and has been waiting for an update from the developer. The PUD ZC change still needs to go to the PC then CC to be approved. There will be South of the river NIMBYs opposing this, so that will add some delay. After the PUD is approved, site plans for individual buildings will need to be filed. At best, I'm guessing it'll be at least four years before anything starts.

311-315 S. Congress - The PUD zoning case was approved, but no site plan was filed. So this is at least a couple years away from happening.

200 E. Riverside - This still needs CC approval, and that could take some time due to NA dislike; then site plans need to be filed. So at best, I'd say this is at least three years away from any of the towers happening.

[The ATX]

The PUD ZC request had a lot of updates this week. The most significant one is that the City pushed back on the 750 feet building height. The developers then reduced their maximum height request to 650 feet. The current plans are to divide the site into two height limits - one for 650 feet and the other for 500 feet.

[Lobotomizer]

That's still massive height for south of the river!

[The ATX]

I should add that the City wants to limit the height to 500 feet to match what they are allowing for the 200 E. Riverside PUD. The developer is attempting a compromise with 650 feet AND reducing the area on the site for 650'.

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by The ATX

I should add that the City wants to limit the height to 500 feet to match what they are allowing for the 200 E. Riverside PUD. The developer is attempting a compromise with 650 feet AND reducing the area on the site for 650'.

I don't get it. Once you're at 500 feet, what is it about 250 more that is such a concern?

[wwmiv]

There’s still opposition to many in Bouldin Creek and Travis Heights to skyscrapers south of the river in their vicinity. My opinion doesn’t matter, but I’d like to see a stepping down in height from the Statesman site to the edge of the neighborhood to create a transition zone. 650’ and 500’ would accomplish this for these lots. Provided we get 250’ and 100’ closer to the residential areas.

Five bucks says this is all orchestrated behind the scenes to build political support for the eventual compromise.

To put 750’ towers in perspective here, consider this:

• the nearest residential lot is 800’ away (206 Bonniview)
• from that same lot, the closest Statesman tower is 1400’ away
• from that same lot, towers along the edge of the river in downtown range from ~1800’ (in Rainey) to ~4100’ (the Sail)

That’s an appreciable difference. Having a stair step approach protects people’s privacy on the street level in residential neighborhoods by obstructing sight lines from as many balconies as possible while also adding as much density as possible.

It’s a necessary compromise to protect existing investment and tax receipts in high functioning neighborhoods.

[The ATX]

This is on Tuesday's (06/24) PC meeting agenda. PC Staff recommends approval with no height limits. Instead they suggest that a 24:1 FAR should be used. That's CBD zoning, and the developer's previous 750' height request is back in play. I suspect the recent court decision concerning the Statesman tract was the reason for the change.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

To put 750’ towers in perspective here, consider this:

• the nearest residential lot is 800’ away (206 Bonniview)
• from that same lot, the closest Statesman tower is 1400’ away
• from that same lot, towers along the edge of the river in downtown range from ~1800’ (in Rainey) to ~4100’ (the Sail)

That’s an appreciable difference. Having a stair step approach protects people’s privacy on the street level in residential neighborhoods by obstructing sight lines from as many balconies as possible while also adding as much density as possible.

So we're worried about a 750' tower 800+ feet away, but a SF house next to you can be 32 feet tall 5 feet away.

I'd be way more concerned about next door neighbors peering into my backyard than I am about people so far away.

[IluvATX]

These “houses” are already on a hill, separated by woods and Bouldin creek, and that hideous building with the external staircases which I never figured out what that was. Any opposition must be solely based on views of downtown. Plus there’s only like 5 houses in the area as the rest is condos or apartments. There won’t be noise from this distance and traffic is and was always bad on Riverside. Does it state anywhere what their opposition is exactly? Just curious.

[Bblasa]

Rezoning was approved? So updated site plans would be next?