HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #301  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2019, 9:10 PM
freerover freerover is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,273
New ballot language

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #302  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2019, 9:19 PM
We vs us We vs us is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,588
Blech. That's terrible in about 5 different ways. I didn't see the original version that got chopped, but this is Very Not Good.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #303  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2019, 2:33 AM
MichaelB MichaelB is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North edge of Downtown
Posts: 3,208
I would never vote for that language. It's three issues rolled into one. Always dangerous.
This is just one big mess.

$ spent on arts and preservation: Says "continue" so are the current rates 15%

Limit $ spent on Convention center : Does anyone know the current rates? Is it 34%?

Limit Convention center spending without public vote.
where does the $20Mill figure come from?

And btw.... the money the city will spend on an election could all be put to better use for the arts and preservation....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #304  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2019, 4:49 AM
MichaelB MichaelB is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North edge of Downtown
Posts: 3,208
Question :
Has the council picked a plan?
I'm being told by someone from "Unconventional Austin" that they have.
A 1.3 billion plan.

Anyone have facts on this before I go back at them?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #305  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2019, 4:53 AM
MichaelB MichaelB is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North edge of Downtown
Posts: 3,208
Actually found article dated May 24 says they did indeed pick the most expansive and expensive plan.... Guess I was busy!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #306  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2019, 3:43 PM
freerover freerover is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,273
Anyone know what's going on with the PHAM PAC supporting the convention center? I don't see website or anything for it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #307  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2019, 9:00 PM
freerover freerover is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,273
Early Voting starts Monday. You can go to all the Fiesta and Randals locations to vote. Here is the full list: http://bit.ly/2BdYIut


Vote NO on city Prop B.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #308  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2019, 2:11 AM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is offline
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,735
So it's the last sentence that is the sticking point I take it? About this proposition making it to where voters have to approve any convention center expansion?
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #309  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2019, 2:44 PM
freerover freerover is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jdawgboy View Post
So it's the last sentence that is the sticking point I take it? About this proposition making it to where voters have to approve any convention center expansion?
It's all terrible. It attempts to gut the existing convention center budget and use hotel taxes in a way that we aren't allowed under state law by moving it to cultural and historical pet projects of the movement leaders. That means another state lawsuit.

It also hurts musicians because raising the overall hotel tax is the only way to get more money to them because we already allocate the max under state law and prop B doesn't change that.

I know some of you guys are excited about the prospect of new tall buildings on those lots but the convention center is a good investment for the city and the plan UT outlined would greatly improve the downtown street network. Please tell your fiends and family to vote AGAINST.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #310  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2019, 3:15 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by freerover View Post
It's all terrible. It attempts to gut the existing convention center budget and use hotel taxes in a way that we aren't allowed under state law by moving it to cultural and historical pet projects of the movement leaders. That means another state lawsuit.

It also hurts musicians because raising the overall hotel tax is the only way to get more money to them because we already allocate the max under state law and prop B doesn't change that.

I know some of you guys are excited about the prospect of new tall buildings on those lots but the convention center is a good investment for the city and the plan UT outlined would greatly improve the downtown street network. Please tell your fiends and family to vote AGAINST.
The worst case is that it passes, the other uses are held to be illegal, but then the cap on spending for the CC is still in place.



No on A (both A's) and B!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #311  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2019, 3:29 PM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is offline
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,735
Thanks for explaining in detail. I will inform my friends and family.

Anyone have the wording for Prop A to post on here?
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #312  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2019, 3:35 PM
freerover freerover is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
The worst case is that it passes, the other uses are held to be illegal, but then the cap on spending for the CC is still in place.



No on A (both A's) and B!
I'm voting for the Expo Center out of selfish interest in the area. It's frustrating that they don't have a plan for it but just want the money but what are you going to do. I'm not super crazy about the value of the arena but I really like expanding and improving the expo building. It's nice for a metro to have a cheaper alternative to the downtown convention center. It reminds me of NRG Arena and NRG Center.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #313  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2019, 3:38 PM
freerover freerover is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jdawgboy View Post
Thanks for explaining in detail. I will inform my friends and family.

Anyone have the wording for Prop A to post on here?
City Prop A or County? I'll just update the elections thread with everything.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #314  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2020, 8:38 PM
freerover freerover is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,273
Council will go into executive session at their next meeting to discuss real estate related to the convention center expansion. This could involve the Railyard property, PF chang lot or both.

Last edited by freerover; Mar 3, 2020 at 9:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #315  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2020, 9:30 PM
We vs us We vs us is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by freerover View Post
Council will go into executive session at their next meeting to discuss real estate related to the convention center expansion. This could involve the Railyard property, PF chang, lot or both.

Ooooo juicy!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #316  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2020, 3:28 AM
We vs us We vs us is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,588
Per reporting at KXAN, ACC will be presenting a lot of new material to the city council during the regular meeting on Sept 17. Using Gensler and another consulting firm, ACC has revised/narrowed its options for expansion greatly, and developed two very specific proposals to put in front of council.

The reporting from KXAN is here: https://www.kxan.com/news/local/aust...nter-expansion

The PDF is here, and while the juiciest stuff starts on page 130, almost all of it is worth skimming.

https://www.kxan.com/wp-content/uplo...nsion-memo.pdf

As the report indicates, the western expansion is still the only feasible way to go, but notes that private development has not paused while the city has determined which way to go, and that resultantly the available western footprint has reduced slightly.

Lots of juicy tidbits:
-- there is another hotel planned next to the new Marriott in the half block north, where Michelada's is. No room count or operator noted at this time

-- Block 16 is doable (and presumably a go) no matter which option the city chooses.

-- The Block 16 developers have been quite active with the ACC expansion, and have been trying to assemble the rest of the parcels on the western expansion side to help facilitate the whole thing.

-- the easternmost Railyard tract is still considered part of the expansion footprint, and neither of the ACC development scenarios assumes a tower will be built there. Is Karlin completely out of the picture? regardless, the master plan says this: "As this master plan update nears completion, a partnershiphas been struck with all land owners between Second Street, Trinity Street, Fourth Street and San Jacinto. This is an important step in moving forward with the West expansion."

-- the Gensler planning assumes the Blue Line will be built down Trinity, and for either of its scenarios to work, needs the Blue Line to stay on the surface. Also, "Trinity Street between Second and Fourth Streets should be developed as a multi-modal transit hub for the convention district and southeast part of downtown, accommodating rail, busses and taxi services."

-- in both scenarios, the city greatly reduces the ACC footprint; claws black several parcels for towers/private development; and assembles the equivalent of a subterranean superblock straddling Trinity -- in one case reserving the space for freight/back of house support and in the other reserving it for a below grade exhibit hall.

-- The two options are titled either "Halls Up" or "Halls Down." Halls Up puts new exhibit halls on multiple levels above street level (up to 8 floors). Halls Down builds a huge exhibit hall below grade, straddling Trinity.

-- Both have pluses and minuses, but in both cases, the ACC footprint will shrink dramatically, and will make room for several more towers in that part of downtown.






Reply With Quote
     
     
  #317  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2020, 1:47 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by We vs us View Post

-- the Gensler planning assumes the Blue Line will be built down Trinity, and for either of its scenarios to work, needs the Blue Line to stay on the surface. Also, "Trinity Street between Second and Fourth Streets should be developed as a multi-modal transit hub for the convention district and southeast part of downtown, accommodating rail, busses and taxi services."
That's very, very concerning. It makes the impression that not all the people in the room are talking to each other.

The tunnel idea was floated how many months ago (a year?). Basically committed to this spring, and firmly selected a couple months ago.

It's the "committed" (pending vote) transit plan for the next several decades.

Technically we haven't heard how deep the downtown transit tunnels are going to be, but I can't imagine it would accommodate the full underground exhibit hall of the "halls down" plan. Seems like the service-only cross connections of "Halls up" would be more feasible to accommodate.


Update: reading through it more, they mention "halls up" in the executive summary (the section at the end) but the main document seems entirely focused on the halls down scenario?

Can we get a refund on however much we paid them for this? Seems like they did a shitty, shitty job of talking to stakeholders. Or, you know, anyone at all (still talks about the now-delayed ABIA expansion, etc.)

Last edited by Novacek; Aug 21, 2020 at 2:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #318  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2020, 3:52 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,510
The September 17 city council meeting has an item (95) on acquiring block 16 for the expansion.

Authorizes negotiation and 6.3M in ernest money (purchase prices presumably much higher).

https://www.austintexas.gov/departme...200917-reg.htm
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #319  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2020, 6:36 PM
freerover freerover is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
The September 17 city council meeting has an item (95) on acquiring block 16 for the expansion.

Authorizes negotiation and 6.3M in ernest money (purchase prices presumably much higher).

https://www.austintexas.gov/departme...200917-reg.htm
That's great news.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #320  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2020, 10:54 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Austin <------------> Birmingham?
Posts: 57,326
Will that still include the possibilty of the Block 16 tower happening? I was starting to come around to the idea of the design of it, though, the overhang still bugs me.
__________________
Conform or be cast out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:52 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.