Austin | 500 S. Congress | 5 Towers | Up to 575 Feet | Floors | Proposed

[lonewolf]

Originally Posted by DougRockstead

I have to admit that I am a little shocked with everyone crying about how the School for the Deaf needs to sell their land so we can build a big building.
We aren't talking about a restaurant or bar. We are talking about a school that was started in 1856 and a campus built over 40 years ago.

This is real Texas history. Let's not forget about what this city is and how it came to be in our pursuit of progress.
I think the school for the Deaf is perfectly fine where it is and we can just build around it.

please be serious doug

nobody is crying. the alternative use case for this lot is not TSFTD vs "a big building" nor is it the schools land to begin with.

it's been a great location for decades but the calculus just isn't there anymore for a 68 acre campus that serves 500 students in my opinion.

68 acres is easily
-15 acre park
-1000+ condos
-amphitheater
-dozens of jobs and 100+ jobs
-museum
-5 thru streets between first and congress which would go a long way towards decongesting barton springs road
-tens of millions of dollars in generated sales and property tax per year

vs

a property tax free campus that serves 500+ kids (that can easily be relocated) and doesn't interact with the city or residents very much

[Urbannizer]

The campus can be redeveloped at the current site while allowing new development. No need to displace the disabled out of a central location.

[The ATX]

I think a thin strip of retail buildings along S. Congress would be beneficial to the school and the City. That's if the State allows the school to keep 100% of the development revenue.

[Sigaven]

I would also love to see the site redeveloped with a solution that allows the school to stay but on a smaller, more urban footprint, while allowing more density, housing, and retail to fill up the site. We need more east-west connectivityin this city and I would love to see Nellie, James, and Gibson streets connected over to 1st. I've long dreamed of a hyper-urban development with some pedestrian-only streets and dense housing, shopping, restaurants, pocket parks, maybe even a theater or museum in this area, make it a new amenity for the city. Right now it's wasted space adjacent to one of our most cherished streets. Plus it could help spur development to bridge the sort of dead zone on 1st between Auditorium Shores and Elizabeth st.

[Urbannizer]

https://austin.towers.net/gaining-50...ngress-avenue/

If you’re familiar with 500 South Congress, it’s obviously got Ego’s on it, right? Which will most likely be the only thing that remains, and gets relocated somewhere else in the development — we think it is a mainstay and staple of the neighborhood.

[Bblasa]

They are doing a bunch of underground parking, perfect area to build a basement bar! It’s really not that hard to find places for unique Austin spots to be brought back. It’s also super easy to design somthing new to still look old or “Austin weird” . Fingers crossed! The article hits on the big point of keeping prices affordable in these new developments. It’s a shame we couldn’t find money somewhere like the hotel occupancy taxes or somthing to create a fund to help with rents for old Austin style businesses that would like to remain in new developments without jeopardizing their business model.

[FrankLloydLeft]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

https://austin.towers.net/gaining-50...ngress-avenue/

This is great news in my opinion!

I am curious what they'll actually do in terms of layout so it keeps that seedy flavor to it, but I think places like Mama Dearest are proof of concept that you can bake in the dank to a new dive bar.

Otherwise would love to see a comically large Egos with windows and maybe a patio anchoring this space and really stand as an unofficial landmark for Austins changes.

[H2O]

Originally Posted by Bblasa

They are doing a bunch of underground parking, perfect area to build a basement bar! It’s really not that hard to find places for unique Austin spots to be brought back. It’s also super easy to design somthing new to still look old or “Austin weird” . Fingers crossed! The article hits on the big point of keeping prices affordable in these new developments. It’s a shame we couldn’t find money somewhere like the hotel occupancy taxes or somthing to create a fund to help with rents for old Austin style businesses that would like to remain in new developments without jeopardizing their business model.

https://www.austinedc.org/cultural-trust

[Werdman89]

Please join me in voicing your support for this project here:
https://speakupaustin.org/t7287

There is also a Zoom meeting tonight, and in-person meeting March 18th, and another Zoom meeting March 20th. You can find the info in the right-hand column in that link.

[Geckos_Rule]

Originally Posted by DougRockstead

I have to admit that I am a little shocked with everyone crying about how the School for the Deaf needs to sell their land so we can build a big building.
We aren't talking about a restaurant or bar. We are talking about a school that was started in 1856 and a campus built over 40 years ago.

This is real Texas history. Let's not forget about what this city is and how it came to be in our pursuit of progress.
I think the school for the Deaf is perfectly fine where it is and we can just build around it.

Beyond what anyone else is saying, it's a bit disingenuous to say the school being started in 1856 is a reason that they can't move. No one (that I am aware of) is pitching the idea of shutting the school down entirely to sell the land. In any situation I know of and that would have any reasonable chance of happening, it would either involve selling a portion of the land that currently sits totally unused, or otherwise relocating to completely new facilities funded via this sale -- similar to what Concordia University successfully did.

But the fact that the school itself is Texas history and worth preserving doesn't automatically equate to the need to every building on campus being historic. If it did, there should be just as much of a reason to preserve the Frank Erwin Center, which is also well over 40 years old and is part of a historic school founded in the 1800's.

[Geckos_Rule]

Back on the topic at hand, I really hope that in this or whatever development ends up being realized here keeps the grocery store space.

25,000 sq ft isn't huge for a grocery store, but IIRC, that's about the same size as both the Whole Foods and the Target at Plaza Saltillo (individually, not combined), and about double the size of the downtown Trader Joes.

It's pretty tough to imagine Whole Foods having any interest in opening something here, given how close the flagship location and Plaza Saltillo locations are, and the relative lack of locations anywhere else in central Austin. Same with Trader Joes' Seaholm location, as well as HEB, given that this spot is extremely close to the new Soco/Oltorf spot, and is still within 10-12 minutes of their locations on Lake Austin blvd, 7th Street, and Riverside.

IMO, there are four potential things this could end up as (ranked by how much I'd want them):

1. A Central Market, which is obviously still owned by HEB but serves a different purpose and customer base. I'm probably biased because I love CM, but it's not too easy to get to either the 38th or S Lamar locations from downtown.

2. An Aldi, of which there are plenty in Dallas/Houston but none in Austin. I'm not too familiar with them, but I believe they are typically a smaller footprint (about this size) compared to HEB and others.

3. Eataly, given the fact that it's shown in the video (though it could be a placeholder), and are usually right around this size (the ones in Dallas being even larger). They also seem to regularly go for more central locations within larger developments. And, it also seems to fit in terms of the market, both because Austin lacks the amount of Italian specialty places that many other cities have (CM being the closest thing), and because they are typically pretty fancy which fits for what's likely to be pretty expensive rent.

4. Some other store I'm not as familiar with, some new concept from an existing store (e.g., a sort of HEB equivalent of whole foods 365), or just a Target or some other psuedo-grocery/general purpose store.

[Nickelplate]

Originally Posted by Geckos_Rule

Beyond what anyone else is saying, it's a bit disingenuous to say the school being started in 1856 is a reason that they can't move. No one (that I am aware of) is pitching the idea of shutting the school down entirely to sell the land. In any situation I know of and that would have any reasonable chance of happening, it would either involve selling a portion of the land that currently sits totally unused, or otherwise relocating to completely new facilities funded via this sale -- similar to what Concordia University successfully did.

But the fact that the school itself is Texas history and worth preserving doesn't automatically equate to the need to every building on campus being historic. If it did, there should be just as much of a reason to preserve the Frank Erwin Center, which is also well over 40 years old and is part of a historic school founded in the 1800's.

My son went to school here for 15 years and graduated in 2021. I understand the challenges of the deaf. Besides this being an iconic school in the Deaf community and a cultural beacon nationwide. It is also a historical place in Texas History older than than the Capital building. The Deaf have been persecuted and this is their place of refuge for over 150 years. They will never give it up nor should they. There are plenty of places to build generic housing other than this sacred plot of land.

[Geckos_Rule]

Originally Posted by Nickelplate

My son went to school here for 15 years and graduated in 2021. I understand the challenges of the deaf. Besides this being an iconic school in the Deaf community and a cultural beacon nationwide. It is also a historical place in Texas History older than than the Capital building. The Deaf have been persecuted and this is their place of refuge for over 150 years. They will never give it up nor should they. There are plenty of places to build generic housing other than this sacred plot of land.

Are you saying that the land itself is older than the Capital building, and that's why it's historic? Because the oldest still-standing buildings on the campus were built in 1925 and 1928, and everything else was from between the 50's and 80's. TSD's own master plan speaks several times about how functionally none of what the school was in the 19th century (when it operated as an asylum) is around today.

If you mean the school itself has been on the same plot of land, then the capital is still older, as it was originally built 3 years prior to TSD's founding (just torn down and replaced by a new building).

Either way, I've yet to see any proposals that didn't involve the full approval of TSD administration as part of it, as would be expected. If the school never wants to do anything with the acres of unused land, no one has been looking to force them into it.

[drummer]

^ Thanks for sharing your perspective, Nickelplate. I have a son with physical disabilities and a rare disease - while I can't speak to any experiences with hearing-impairments, I can appreciate the unique challenges and opportunities there.

[chinchaaa]

No one is saying close the school. So dramatic.

[Nickelplate]

@Geckos_Rule
I just grabbed your quote to spew my insider opinion. I appreciate your knowledge and research of the school. But it really is a mute point as the school is a crucial fixture of the deaf community currently. Why would we hamper its existence? This is an asset to the community and should be enhanced. It was in the 90's. Problem is, it is controlled by the state and that is filled with red tape and money delegation.
@Drummer
Thanks for the support! It really is a challenge but one we can all overcome with R/D and education.
@Chinchaa
Never agreed or liked anything you have contributed to this forum.

[Lobotomizer]

Originally Posted by Nickelplate

@Chinchaa
Never agreed or liked anything you have contributed to this forum.

Snap! Crackle! and Pop! Those words cut deep. Are you sure this brutality was warranted?