AUSTIN | Project Updates Thread Part II

[IluvATX]

I agree with wwmiv on this one. This thing doesn’t belong in the CBD, let alone on east 6th.

[The ATX]

This is the side facing 6th St., and it will have retail on the ground floor. Right now there is only one retail store (an ice cream shop) on that block. I can't imagine trying to sleep in those apartments on weekends.

[Sigaven]

Boring as fuck! This project belongs literally anywhere else in any no-name neighborhood in any city, USA. This is sixth street, one of the most important and prominent in Austin. Sixth street deserves better than this boring generic crap.

[Werdman89]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Boring as fuck! This project belongs literally anywhere else in any no-name neighborhood in any city, USA. This is sixth street, one of the most important and prominent in Austin. Sixth street deserves better than this boring generic crap.

I would not describe that part of 6th as prominent. I'd go as far to say that area of 6th is blighted and we should be thankful for any investment in it, especially considering its strict zoning.

[Novacek]

That block is under two different CVCs. So I'm assuming that limits it to something not very CBD-like.

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Boring as fuck! This project belongs literally anywhere else in any no-name neighborhood in any city, USA. This is sixth street, one of the most important and prominent in Austin. Sixth street deserves better than this boring generic crap.

Louder for folks in the back!

[The ATX]

I'm in the back! It may not be the best looking mid-rise Apt. building, but there are no historical structures on the block and only one retail spot. This project will eliminate a surface lot, and provide a better street presence. The former state lottery commission building is ugly.

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by The ATX

I'm in the back! It may not be the best looking mid-rise Apt. building, but there are no historical structures on the block and only one retail spot. This project will eliminate a surface lot, and provide a better street presence. The former state lottery commission building is ugly.

We really deserve better. Replacing bad with bad still = bad. I'm happy to wait.

[The ATX]

I would be willing to wait longer too. But I find the current situation a much worse fit with the rest of historical 6th St. than the Grant proposal.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by The ATX

I'm in the back! It may not be the best looking mid-rise Apt. building, but there are no historical structures on the block and only one retail spot. This project will eliminate a surface lot, and provide a better street presence. The former state lottery commission building is ugly.

I would be fine with something new, provided it isn’t housing. My primary objection is to the fact that this is housing at all.

Housing creates a built-in constituency of people (renters, managers, business and property owners) predisposed to complaining about the noise to elected officials and bureaucrats from the bars. Better to not create that constituency at all. Most of the buildings on 6th are covered by a historical preservation law or society, but preserving Austin’s preeminent bar and live music district matters to our city’s identity.

[urbancore]

I’ve known people that live on 6th, in the condos across from the Driscoll and random rentals above the bars. They all loved it at the time.

I visited/partied in these homes a few times.

It is as bad/smelly/loud/obnoxious/drunken as you would think it would be and probably worse. Of course we didn’t care, we were part of the problem.

I think these apartments will look/smell nasty after the first 15 min they open. Management will turn over by the hour, as they will not be able to or want to deal with cops, hookers, drunks, addicts on an hourly basis.

This is a horrible idea and will not satisfy anyone.

[Bblasa]

Perhaps that is why this project is less than ideal? Maybe it will just be a tester to feel out the response before the big commits. If it fails there wasn’t significant investment lost

[IluvATX]

I remember this same discussion about the Millennium, Camden, or whatever it’s called now on Rainey. There was the “it’s better than what exists now” argument. Now it’s the black sheep of Rainey. I think waiting for a better development pays off in the long term.

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by IluvATX

I remember this same discussion about the Millennium, Camden, or whatever it’s called now on Rainey. There was the “it’s better than what exists now” argument. Now it’s the black sheep of Rainey. I think waiting for a better development pays off in the long term.

[The ATX]

It will most likely be redesigned (at least on the 6th St. facing side) based on some feedback from the HLC Architectural Review Committee and staff. It was on the 6/5 HLC meeting agenda. From one of the backup files.

COMMITTEE FEEDBACK
Push upper floors back as much as possible, keeping Sixth Street façades at one and two stories like the existing noncontributing building. Avoid the warehouse-style design references, as there are no warehouses on Sixth Street; fenestration should reflect the tall and narrow windows of surrounding contributing buildings, rather than large square openings. Further articulate bays in line with the design guidelines to reflect the continuation of patterns, textures, and massing of the surrounding historic district. Review relevant examples of successful historic district infill from CNU and other cities. Rework brick colors to better reflect the surrounding buildings.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Concur with Committee feedback. Grant the applicant’s request to postpone the public hearing to July 5 th, 2024, to allow them to attend the next meeting of the Architectural Review Committee.

[PolskaFly]

Oh, that's good. More housing is good, especially within Downtown. If it is redesigned to match the surrounding architecture and not be as bland then I think it should get the go ahead.

Hopefully Downtown gets enough people living here where any future City Council members can't just uproot everything that's been worked on to now for density.

[Jdawgboy]

I agree that this isn't the best sort of use. If they have to put residential in the area, the developer MUST sound proof the residences, no exceptions. Ultimately this is something I would rather not see on that block.

[davidberko]

I'm good with this proposal getting canceled. It's super lame. El crappo

[gillynova]

I lived at The Thompson on 5th and Brazos and tbh, it wasn't even loud there. Maybe because I was higher up but the only loud noise was the fire trucks

[Urbannizer]

1500 Rio Grande

https://austin.towers.net/downtown-a...gods-backyard/

Austin’s latest YIGBY project is now in the planning stages at a half-acre property owned by St. Martin’s Lutheran Church, which happens to be one of downtown’s most striking modernist buildings and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. What isn’t historic or striking is the overflow parking lot at 1500 Rio Grande Street, located one block west of the church building. The leadership of St. Martin’s has partnered with Austin-based developer DMA Companies to build an 83-unit affordable senior housing project, offering a mix of one- and two-bedroom units in a five-story building replacing the parking lot, designed by local architects Nelsen Partners.

This project, currently known only as 1500 Rio, would become the first income-restricted senior housing development inside downtown Austin since 1967, with approximately 72 of its 83 total units offered at rates affordable to seniors earning no more than 60 percent of the Austin area’s Median Family Income. At its meeting late last month, the city’s Planning Commission approved a rezoning for the tract, changing its office and single-family residential uses to downtown mixed-use zoning to allow the building’s construction with a maximum height of 60 feet — we would obviously like to see a taller project with more units built here, but in this specific case the height limit was requested by the developer.