Three Towers; 1,000+ homes; Downtown Rainey District

[We vs us]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Again, a massive investment in high capacity transit literally in the neighborhood, which passed last year.

Cool cool, a transit stop.

A single rail station -- while awesome -- won't ameliorate the traffic. The largest cities, with much more extensive transit systems than Austin is building, still need grids that connect, and strategies for dealing with car traffic.

I'm sorry to be such a pessimist but I don't think we've quite reckoned with what a boom in Rainey -- as opposed to quarantine in Rainey -- is going to look like, or how dense we're actually building (Which is good! it's great! but we have to get faster at solving these evolving challenges because the market is going to overwhelm us).

[chinchaaa]

Originally Posted by We vs us

Cool cool, a transit stop.

A single rail station -- while awesome -- won't ameliorate the traffic. The largest cities, with much more extensive transit systems than Austin is building, still need grids that connect, and strategies for dealing with car traffic.

I'm sorry to be such a pessimist but I don't think we've quite reckoned with what a boom in Rainey -- as opposed to quarantine in Rainey -- is going to look like, or how dense we're actually building (Which is good! it's great! but we have to get faster at solving these evolving challenges because the market is going to overwhelm us).

Good. Keep voting for expanded transit in this city and improved land use codes.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by We vs us

Cool cool, a transit stop.

A single rail station -- while awesome -- won't ameliorate the traffic. The largest cities, with much more extensive transit systems than Austin is building, still need grids that connect, and strategies for dealing with car traffic.

I'm sorry to be such a pessimist but I don't think we've quite reckoned with what a boom in Rainey -- as opposed to quarantine in Rainey -- is going to look like, or how dense we're actually building (Which is good! it's great! but we have to get faster at solving these evolving challenges because the market is going to overwhelm us).

Not just "a transit stop". a huge, multi-billion dollar investment in a transit system. So that many/most of those who live in Rainey can take transit to their work, and so that many/most of those who visit Rainey have a feasible option to take transit to there. And those that choose to drive instead can deal with traffic.

Plus it's not only the transit, but the bridge will provide a bike/pedestrian connection south.

You can't fix traffic. If you make it way easier to drive there, then that many more people will just drive.

[427MM]

A huge amount of these homes are to be built without parking though I know acting like a real city will scare some. I live downtown without a car but was forced to buy a parking spot because it came with the home--dumb. These towers will take years to build, any needed changes can be planned/worked on, but to vote no on these would be a huge loss for Austin. Sadly, I'm told CM Tovo is helping the downtown residents that are opposed.

[drummer]

Growing pains. It's scary to some to give up the "freedom" of a car. When I lived in China for the first several years I didn't own a car. We finally got a car for our family but still only used it when we were leaving the city proper for any reason. I put gas in it once per month on average.

Moving back to the States and living in the suburbs has been a huge change for us, and honestly we find ourselves missing the density, walkability, and convenience of Asia. Not all of our time there was in mega cities either, but we still made it work - even with kids! It's just a challenge for those who have never experienced it. It's understandable, but we have to make a transition at some point. Novacek is absolutely right on this point:

You can't fix traffic. If you make it way easier to drive there, then that many more people will just drive.

[ATX2030]

I just don't see the CoA giving up millions in future tax revenue. Skyscrapers, with their small footprints, generate huge amounts of money for the city coffers and that can't be dismissed.

[427MM]

Originally Posted by ATX2030

I just don't see the CoA giving up millions in future tax revenue. Skyscrapers, with their small footprints, generate huge amounts of money for the city coffers and that can't be dismissed.

NIMBYism is rooted in ignoring the greater good

[freerover]

Originally Posted by We vs us

Cool cool, a transit stop.

A single rail station -- while awesome -- won't ameliorate the traffic. The largest cities, with much more extensive transit systems than Austin is building, still need grids that connect, and strategies for dealing with car traffic.

I'm sorry to be such a pessimist but I don't think we've quite reckoned with what a boom in Rainey -- as opposed to quarantine in Rainey -- is going to look like, or how dense we're actually building (Which is good! it's great! but we have to get faster at solving these evolving challenges because the market is going to overwhelm us).

A transit stop? How extremely disingenuous.

[drummer]

Originally Posted by 427MM

NIMBYism is rooted in ignoring the greater good

[StoOgE]

Austin has a housing crisis. These are in the CBD. Mass transit is coming.

Build places for people to stay. Manhattan like density in the CBD sound like *exactly* where it should be. Sorry, live downtown and complain about density aint it.

[Syndic]

Rainey is fine. Build big buildings, hopefully without parking garages, and all will be well. I don't get all the hand-wringing about needing a plan. It's like a few blocks. What do you need a big comprehensive plan for? And what can you even do? It's fine. People who don't like it over there will easily be able to avoid it. We should ignore these peoples' criticisms.

[ohhey]

You guys are being way to hysterical about this. Rainey needs a lot of infrastructure work - more than a new transit station years down the line. The city has been dragging its feet on the issue for years. There's clearly room for a compromise here that would be for the betterment of all sides. Specifically, the city council can simultaneously approve the proposed density and funding for accelerated improvements to streets, sidewalks, trails, etc.

I'm pretty sure the Rainey neighborhood association is savvy enough to know you always start a negotiation asking for more than you really want/need.

[MichaelB]

SO how many of you experts on urbanism actually have invested in downtown Austin... live here... and experience the real time issues that come with lack of planning, transportation, homelessness, crowds, demonstrations, street closures. etc. ? Speaking of the greater good... if the first thing you say is its not affordable , then you should be the first to ask for affordable housing to be built at a greater than 5% rate, which is what is proposed on the new housing on Rainey. If you don't force most developers to benefit the city they profit from, they will only benefit themselves.

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by ohhey

You guys are being way to hysterical about this. Rainey needs a lot of infrastructure work - more than a new transit station years down the line. The city has been dragging its feet on the issue for years. There's clearly room for a compromise here that would be for the betterment of all sides. Specifically, the city council can simultaneously approve the proposed density and funding for accelerated improvements to streets, sidewalks, and trailsKeep the density.

I'm pretty sure the Rainey neighborhood association is savvy enough to know you always start a negotiation asking for more than you really want/need.

[Syndic]

Hahaha, I worked downtown for a few years. I saw everything. I can't imagine someone who chooses to live downtown is opposed to crowds, demonstrations, or street closures. Unless you're still attempting to get around by car?

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by Syndic

Hahaha, I worked downtown for a few years. I saw everything. I can't imagine someone who chooses to live downtown is opposed to crowds, demonstrations, or street closures. Unless you're still attempting to get around by car?

It not about 'Opposing" at all.Didn't say that. It's understanding the conversation is more than "build build build". And working downtown isn't the same as living/investing. You can walk away form the issues... or drive away. ;-)

[TexasPlaya]

Originally Posted by ohhey

You guys are being way to hysterical about this. Rainey needs a lot of infrastructure work - more than a new transit station years down the line. The city has been dragging its feet on the issue for years. There's clearly room for a compromise here that would be for the betterment of all sides. Specifically, the city council can simultaneously approve the proposed density and funding for accelerated improvements to streets, sidewalks, trails, etc.

I'm pretty sure the Rainey neighborhood association is savvy enough to know you always start a negotiation asking for more than you really want/need.

Originally Posted by MichaelB

It not about 'Opposing" at all.Didn't say that. It's understanding the conversation is more than "build build build". And working downtown isn't the same as living/investing. You can walk away form the issues... or drive away. ;-)

Yea I go to Rainey St about every other year now and the buildings are getting nicer but the environment and infrastructure isn't.

Texas builds first and worries about the side walks and traffic later.... which isn't without it's positives.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by TexasPlaya

Yea I go to Rainey St about every other year now and the buildings are getting nicer but the environment and infrastructure isn't.

Texas builds first and worries about the side walks and traffic later.... which isn't without it's positives.

We literally approved a 7 billion transit system that stops at Rainey. That’s not worrying about infrusture later. No one cares that you have car traffic. That’s not going away. If you don’t want car traffic, move to a small town.

[StoOgE]

That letter isn't a "negotiation tactic" its the same NIMBY BS we hear from every single neighborhood association in Austin whenever anything happens.

We have a housing crisis that is getting worse. There is one solution: build more housing.

If they had specific asks for infrastructure improvements I am all ears, but this feels like a "well, how can we possibly build here without the infrastructure" which is NIMY 101. Calling it "Manhattan like density" is just fear mongering.

It's just not right for *this* lcoation at *this* time. But, really it was *never* be right for this location and it will *never* be the right time.

[StoOgE]

Originally Posted by TexasPlaya

Yea I go to Rainey St about every other year now and the buildings are getting nicer but the environment and infrastructure isn't.

Texas builds first and worries about the side walks and traffic later.... which isn't without it's positives.

It's a neighborhood that is a thin strip of land bounded by the highway on one side and the lake on the other. It is a single (very pedestrian and bike friendly) North/West road that connects it to Caesar Chavez and its getting a light-rail stop.

What improvements would you suggest before its appropriate to add density to the CBD? I mean, auto traffic *is* bad but adding a bunch of pedestrian unfriendly multi-lane roads to a primarily residential area is going to result in worse problems and more complaints from the neighborhood association. I also assume the traffic jam starts in floor 12 of the parking garage and that's not really something the city can do something about.