What the fuck is wrong with you, Austin?

[Samson's Wig 3191]

5 minutes ago, We’reTexas said:

What US downtown meets your vision of “livable”, out of curiosity?

For some, no downtown is livable because they just prefer single-family housing, and by livable, I'm not talking about affordable (which is another discussion), but for those who enjoy urban living, there are plenty of great cities with great downtowns in America.  Austin just isn't one of them (at least not yet).  Based on personal experience, New York, Boston and Chicago come to mind immediately.  Toronto (while just across the border) is amazing for downtown living.  Downtown Chicago was primarily a business district for decades up until the last fifteen years or so, but the edges of it made for excellent livable areas even before the recent push for downtown residences.  Cities like Miami and San Diego provide a functional downtown living experience. There are tons of mid sized cities that provide great downtown living as well, such as Greenville or Burlington.   These places have the infrastructure and amenities (not just laundromats, but museums, art galleries, etc.) to make living downtown comfortable and functional, starting with transit systems but also including everything one might need within walking distance or a short transit ride.  Austin has places to eat and drink downtown and rows and rows of condos.  Living down there takes a lot of effort you don't have to put in many other major cities, and provides very little in terms of features.  The library stands out as something great for reason.  It's about all we have.   Downtown Austin is designed for tourists, not residents, and building more condos won't change that.

[texasdago 7568]

1 hour ago, Samson's Wig said:

Are these condos being built for anything more than vehicles for money laundering? 

Did you mean Sunny Isles Beach in Florida or 725 5th Avenue?

 

[Samson's Wig 3191]

Just now, texasdago said:

Did you mean Sunny Isles Beach in Florida or 725 5th Avenue?

 

[Orange&White 5522]

1 hour ago, Samson's Wig said:

Building more condos doesn't seem like a solution to anything other than satisfying more developers, short-term rental investors, and foreign money launderers.  More investment in things like the library appeals to me much more.  Make downtown a place people actually want to live, then build the condos.  We've put the cart way before the horse, and I don't see a single benefit to Austin residents and taxpayers.

So you want the city to use MORE taxes collected from citizens in the outer edges of town, in order to build MORE government owned stuff downtown, that uses more city taxes to run, and generates no property tax and removes more potential land for taxable uses, in order to lure more people to live downtown?

So like tax subsidies to lure people to the already most expensive place in town to live?

Makes perfect sense.

 

Edited February 8 by Orange&White

[PvilleStang 2875]

1 hour ago, Samson's Wig said:

Does anyone have evidence that a significant number of people live in those downtown condos?  I'm talking about human beings, not trust fund babies partying on daddy's dime, but actual functional working adults who contribute to our local economy and community and have a primary residence downtown?   We've got some friends who work downtown and have a condo for when they work late and don't want to drive home to the hill country, but I'm not counting that either.  I've lived in the downtown area of a number of major cities, within America and outside of it.  The downtown area is a genuine center of the city in these places, with jobs and the necessities of daily life (laundromats, grocery stores, hardware stores, etc.)   Like KaiserSoze, I used to live just across the river off Congress, but it was at a time when no one lived downtown at all (in the olden times before the birth of the highrises).    As far as residents go, it was a dead zone then, and it still feels like one now.  My wife worked downtown at the time and we liked that she could bike to work, but she seemed like the only one doing it.  We had to drive to actually run any basic errands at all.  Nothing about downtown Austin today seems attractive for a permanent residence unless you're a young person with disposable income, no responsibilities, and enjoy partying at nightclubs. South of the river is a slightly different story, of course. 

Are these condos being built for anything more than vehicles for money laundering?   I appreciate the notion of a livable downtown and think it's a great thing. I just don't see any evidence that we have one in this city.   We have built many residences but have done little else to make downtown an attractive place to live.  The jobs aren't even there in significant numbers.  Building more condos doesn't seem like a solution to anything other than satisfying more developers, short-term rental investors, and foreign money launderers.  More investment in things like the library appeals to me much more.  Make downtown a place people actually want to live, then build the condos.  We've put the cart way before the horse, and I don't see a single benefit to Austin residents and taxpayers.

I'm just going to throw this out there, but you could search for homesteads in the 78701 zipcode vs non-homesteads in the same area.  I'd bet you there's not a ton of HS exemptions.

[Samson's Wig 3191]

14 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

So you want the city to use MORE taxes collected from citizens in the outer edges of town, in order to build MORE government owned stuff downtown, that uses more city taxes to run, and generates no property tax and removes more potential land for taxable uses, in order to lure more people to live downtown?

So like tax subsidies to lure people to the already most expensive place in town to live?

Makes perfect sense.

 

No, but I can see how you might mistakenly pull that out of what I wrote.   There are many things missing from downtown Austin to make it a place people might actually want to live.  Most of these things are commercial and not government-owned or funded: Grocery, retail, etc., not to mention housing that attracts actual residents and not investors alone.  Building more condos for absolutely no one to live in is fucking stupid and benefits no one locally at all.  I also have seen no noticeable reduction in my local taxes since the building of all of these condos, have you?  Or are you a suburbanite with no actual skin in the game?  The city loves all that extra revenue, I guess so they can build more bike lanes for all those folks who don't live downtown to never use, but they sure as fuck aren't using it to offset what they charge the rest of us.  I might actually get behind that scenario.

Texas cities are some of the slowest in America to recover from white flight, in part because our state government ensures that white evangelicals in the burbs are made as comfortable as possible. Given how quickly our population is growing, we're going to have to get over it, and soon.

[Samson's Wig 3191]

28 minutes ago, PvilleStang said:

I'm just going to throw this out there, but you could search for homesteads in the 78701 zipcode vs non-homesteads in the same area.  I'd bet you there's not a ton of HS exemptions.

I'll bet it's fewer than 10%.  I'll take a look.

[We’reTexas 1473]

5 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

No, but I can see how you might mistakenly pull that out of what I wrote.   There are many things missing from downtown Austin to make it a place people might actually want to live.  Most of these things are commercial and not government-owned or funded: Grocery, retail, etc., not to mention housing that attracts actual residents and not investors alone.  Building more condos for absolutely no one to live in is fucking stupid and benefits no one locally at all.  I also have seen no noticeable reduction in my local taxes since the building of all of these condos, have you?  Or are you a suburbanite with no actual skin in the game?  The city loves all that extra revenue, I guess so they can build more bike lanes for all those folks who don't live downtown to never use, but they sure as fuck aren't using it to offset what they charge the rest of us.  I might actually get behind that scenario.

Texas cities are some of the slowest in America to recover from white flight, in part because our state government ensures that white evangelicals in the burbs are made as comfortable as possible. Given how quickly our population is growing, we're going to have to get over it, and soon.

I guess I still don’t understand what your argument is, besides some generalized aversion to condos. Downtown Austin has been a pretty impressive case of 2000’s mixed-use residential development, along the lines of River North in Chicago, Financial District in NYC, Little Italy in San Diego, etc, that relies on a demographic that seeks to be close to work, entertainment and public amenities such as parks and has a lesser reliance on cars: affluent singles/DINKs and downsizing empty nesters. Pied-à-terres can be annoying, I suppose, but they come with the territory. All of these neighborhood relied on luxury condos for residential development. You can of course argue Austin lags behind peer cities in some respects but it’s a little hyperbolic to suggest it’s a grocery and retail dead zone. 

[Deej 76755]

26 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

I also have seen no noticeable reduction in my local taxes since the building of all of these condos, have you?

[texasdago 7568]

I would be very curious to see a comparison of the CBD of Austin, Dallas, SA and Houston when it comes to residential units, eating establishments, bars, music venues.  Austin is not going to be Boston or Chicago (but Toronto is full of overpriced condos) but I think compared to peer cities in TX it wins.  Houston has more arts (symphony, opera) and a stadium.  San Antonio wins the drainage ditch category although Houston runs a close second.

Edited February 8 by texasdago

[Samson's Wig 3191]

1 hour ago, texasdago said:

I would be very curious to see a comparison of the CBD of Austin, Dallas, SA and Houston when it comes to residential units, eating establishments, bars, music venues.  Austin is not going to be Boston or Chicago (but Toronto is full of overpriced condos) but I think compared to peer cities in TX it wins.  Houston has more arts (symphony, opera) and a stadium.  San Antonio wins the drainage ditch category although Houston runs a close second.

I agree with you, but that's a bit like bragging about being the fittest guy in the buffet line at the Golden Corral. 

[texasdago 7568]

8 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

I agree with you, but that's a bit like bragging about being the fittest guy in the buffet line at the Golden Corral. 

I'll take the trajectory over the alternative. At least Austin is heading in the right direction. I'd rather look forward than keep bitching.

[Samson's Wig 3191]

1 hour ago, We’reTexas said:

I guess I still don’t understand what your argument is, besides some generalized aversion to condos. Downtown Austin has been a pretty impressive case of 2000’s mixed-use residential development, along the lines of River North in Chicago, Financial District in NYC, Little Italy in San Diego, etc, that relies on a demographic that seeks to be close to work, entertainment and public amenities such as parks and has a lesser reliance on cars: affluent singles/DINKs and downsizing empty nesters. Pied-à-terres can be annoying, I suppose, but they come with the territory. All of these neighborhood relied on luxury condos for residential development. You can of course argue Austin lags behind peer cities in some respects but it’s a little hyperbolic to suggest it’s a grocery and retail dead zone. 

Not really making an argument so much as trying to understand what Austin is trying to accomplish with its complete lack of direction downtown.  I don't hate condos, I owned and lived in them.  I wouldn't buy one in Austin if they were giving them away.  It is not a pleasant place to live for the demographic you just described. 

Downtown Austin is simply nowhere in the same stratosphere as any of those neighborhoods in terms of a functionally livable environment.  I  have actually lived in River North, the Financial District, and downtown Austin (albeit well before the boom).  Austin doesn't just lag behind these other locations, it's not even reasonable to compare them. Pied-à-terres are not the issue, as we clearly have way more than anyone wants to inhabit.  The issue is what surrounds them, and while not a complete dead zone it's damn close.  I don't know who we're trying to attract to downtown, but it isn't exactly filled with DINKs, affluent singles, or downsizing empty nesters.  There's a reason.  And those neighborhoods you mention did not start to revitalize by building condos and nothing else.  If I have a point at all, that's it.  We're doing it backward and I'm trying to understand why.  It's not working.

2 minutes ago, texasdago said:

I'll take the trajectory over the alternative. At least Austin is heading in the right direction. I'd rather look forward than keep bitching.

My concern is I don't think we're moving forward.  We have a bunch of dwellings with no one living in them full time, like a Chinese suburban development.

[Deej 76755]

17 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

I agree with you, but that's a bit like bragging about being the fittest guy in the buffet line at the Golden Corral. 

Elko?

[Deej 76755]

5 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

My concern is I don't think we're moving forward.  We have a bunch of dwellings with no one living in them full time, like a Chinese suburban development.

The Chinese probably own a lot of those empty units.

[BurntEyes 5958]

3 hours ago, We’reTexas said:

I guess I still don’t understand what your argument is, besides some generalized aversion to condos. Downtown Austin has been a pretty impressive case of 2000’s mixed-use residential development, along the lines of River North in Chicago, Financial District in NYC, Little Italy in San Diego, etc, that relies on a demographic that seeks to be close to work, entertainment and public amenities such as parks and has a lesser reliance on cars: affluent singles/DINKs and downsizing empty nesters. Pied-à-terres can be annoying, I suppose, but they come with the territory. All of these neighborhood relied on luxury condos for residential development. You can of course argue Austin lags behind peer cities in some respects but it’s a little hyperbolic to suggest it’s a grocery and retail dead zone. 

I spent 20+ years in West Campus and SOC. I lived in River North Chicago for 11. The comparison of day to day living between River North and downtown Austin is really night and day. While I could make a cold hike in winter to a Whole Foods in 15 or a 5 minute bike ride I could hit 3 other full grocery stores of 2 different companies, 4 CVS/Walgreens, 2-3 Royal blues found in downtown Austin in less time. There was a barber and non-starbucks coffee shop in my building, a 7-11 and 2 different dry cleaners less than 50 yards away. If I drove more than 90 miles for work, my company allowed me to rent a car, I say that because despite driving to meeting in the burb frequently, I drove less than 10k miles in 11 years. In the city I NEVER drove. Going outside downtown, took the L, going to my buddies house in Wisconsin, train (sub $10). 

As for food and bars...hah!! No man, not close. Even though Austin is a tourist town. Dive bar, Irish Bar, Club or pool hall, 10 minutes to walk to many options. 

It really is foolish to compare downtown Austin to River North or the Financial district in NYC. Just foolish. For the record my brother lived in Jersey City, there was a water taxi into the Finacial district, which of the areas in Manhattan is among the least livable, IMO. 

[HenryJames 66038]

1 hour ago, texasdago said:

I'd rather look forward than keep bitching.

[We’reTexas 1473]

51 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I spent 20+ years in West Campus and SOC. I lived in River North Chicago for 11. The comparison of day to day living between River North and downtown Austin is really night and day. While I could make a cold hike in winter to a Whole Foods in 15 or a 5 minute bike ride I could hit 3 other full grocery stores of 2 different companies, 4 CVS/Walgreens, 2-3 Royal blues found in downtown Austin in less time. There was a barber and non-starbucks coffee shop in my building, a 7-11 and 2 different dry cleaners less than 50 yards away. If I drove more than 90 miles for work, my company allowed me to rent a car, I say that because despite driving to meeting in the burb frequently, I drove less than 10k miles in 11 years. In the city I NEVER drove. Going outside downtown, took the L, going to my buddies house in Wisconsin, train (sub $10). 

As for food and bars...hah!! No man, not close. Even though Austin is a tourist town. Dive bar, Irish Bar, Club or pool hall, 10 minutes to walk to many options. 

It really is foolish to compare downtown Austin to River North or the Financial district in NYC. Just foolish. For the record my brother lived in Jersey City, there was a water taxi into the Finacial district, which of the areas in Manhattan is among the least livable, IMO. 

Cool? I, too, lived in other major American cities before living off west 6th in the early 2010s and had a blast all things considered, though it was a far cry from DC and NYC. My argument was that Austin’s downtown development was, and IMO still is, a good example of the downtown revitalization to diversify from commercial use that occurred in many cities beginning in the 2000s. Some cities failed to do this; San Francisco in particular, and I see the contrast every time I come back to Austin. 

[BurntEyes 5958]

30 minutes ago, We’reTexas said:

Cool? I, too, lived in other major American cities before living off west 6th in the early 2010s and had a blast all things considered, though it was a far cry from DC and NYC. My argument was that Austin’s downtown development was, and IMO still is, a good example of the downtown revitalization to diversify from commercial use that occurred in many cities beginning in the 2000s. Some cities failed to do this; San Francisco in particular, and I see the contrast every time I come back to Austin. 

Well, drawing a comparison of Austin to Chicago or NYC remains foolish. 

You say diversified from commercial use relative to DC, NYC or Chicago on the good side vs San Fran or others on the down. 

What's the owner occupation rate, living amenities per capital, portfolio investment of condos and utilization rates of Austin residents vs the good and bad locations. Those are the real measures of diversity vs commercial use. Airbnb, LLC owned or other non-resident owned vs owner occupied with long-term rental rates of condos is a real determining factor of commercial vs diverse use of the condos in downtown.

If there aren't multuple groceries stores, pharmacies and other less glamorous commercial properties within a relatively short walk or bike ride, and the bulk of the condos are not owner occupied or local resident long-term rentals... it's all commercial. Ultimately, those condos are essentially hotels or commercial investments not residential. 

It's fine to say it's better than a San Fran, and to discuss how it should be moving more towards a Chicago or NYC, but the question remains, is it doing that at this point. That Whole Foods and Trader Joe's are and have been the only thing close to a grocery store within walking distance of downtown for ages, I think saying it is not moving in that direction isn't a stretch logically. I'm happy to hear supporting evidence that it is, but that singular point leans towards it is not. I'll also throw out the question of how many bars in downtown do residents of Austin over the age of 30 actually frequent. I don't know the numbers, but I'll guess its not very high on average.

[SubliminalHorn 6786]

When is this city going to get some gotdamn museums? Even Fort Worth beats Austin in this category. Yeah the Bullock museum is cool and all but it’s almost a quarter century old

[royiv 9254]

10 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

When is this city going to get some gotdamn museums? Even Fort Worth beats Austin in this category. Yeah the Bullock museum is cool and all but it’s almost a quarter century old

Fort Worth has a lot of old money, which Austin does not have. I doubt you'll ever see Elon donating money to fund a world class museum. The Dells are just about the only thing Austin has when it comes to big time philanthropy and their giving is focused primarily on healthcare and children. 

[South Austin 52453]

15 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

When is this city going to get some gotdamn museums? Even Fort Worth beats Austin in this category. Yeah the Bullock museum is cool and all but it’s almost a quarter century old

Dude, have you not been to the Museum of Ice Cream in The Domain?

[Orange&White 5522]

1 hour ago, SubliminalHorn said:

When is this city going to get some gotdamn museums? Even Fort Worth beats Austin in this category. Yeah the Bullock museum is cool and all but it’s almost a quarter century old

Blanton, Ransom Center, Elizabet Ney, LBJ, there are more than just the Bullock.

[Deej 76755]

"At least they didn't rape her." - Art Acevedo

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/local/2024/02/09/former-austin-police-officer-sues-city-claims-gender-discrimination-lawsuit-harassment/72255794007/

[YGIFS 19449]

1 minute ago, Orange&White said:

Blanton, Ransom Center, Elizabet Ney, LBJ, there are more than just the Bullock.

Fair point and I love those places but to royiv’s point, we don’t a lotta legacy level donorship to non-ut or non-government museums.  Most of the museums we are talking about here receive public funds but are not directly tied to univerisities or the state.  The contemporary has made an admirable pivot and we love visiting both locations but that’s really about it.  Considering our new space industry; we should look first at a planetarium and then a higher level science museum 

[hornian 5210]

1 hour ago, SubliminalHorn said:

When is this city going to get some gotdamn museums? Even Fort Worth beats Austin in this category. Yeah the Bullock museum is cool and all but it’s almost a quarter century old

If/when Billionaire David Booth dies and his home/acreage off 2222 on Lake Austin becomes a sculpture garden, that will be the day: https://stories.usatodaynetwork.com/david-booth-art-collection/home/

[MAUFRAIS 6619]

Sit and contemplate the sculptures to distant bass thumps and the far off vision of a bachelorette party twerking on a tige.

[hornian 5210]

1 minute ago, MAUFRAIS said:

Sit and contemplate the sculptures to distant bass thumps and the far off vision of a bachelorette party twerking on a tige.

As God intended. 

[Samson's Wig 3191]

11 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

Well, drawing a comparison of Austin to Chicago or NYC remains foolish. 

You say diversified from commercial use relative to DC, NYC or Chicago on the good side vs San Fran or others on the down. 

What's the owner occupation rate, living amenities per capital, portfolio investment of condos and utilization rates of Austin residents vs the good and bad locations. Those are the real measures of diversity vs commercial use. Airbnb, LLC owned or other non-resident owned vs owner occupied with long-term rental rates of condos is a real determining factor of commercial vs diverse use of the condos in downtown.

If there aren't multuple groceries stores, pharmacies and other less glamorous commercial properties within a relatively short walk or bike ride, and the bulk of the condos are not owner occupied or local resident long-term rentals... it's all commercial. Ultimately, those condos are essentially hotels or commercial investments not residential. 

It's fine to say it's better than a San Fran, and to discuss how it should be moving more towards a Chicago or NYC, but the question remains, is it doing that at this point. That Whole Foods and Trader Joe's are and have been the only thing close to a grocery store within walking distance of downtown for ages, I think saying it is not moving in that direction isn't a stretch logically. I'm happy to hear supporting evidence that it is, but that singular point leans towards it is not. I'll also throw out the question of how many bars in downtown do residents of Austin over the age of 30 actually frequent. I don't know the numbers, but I'll guess its not very high on average.

Thank you for putting this more eloquently than I did.  How anyone can remotely try to compare what Austin has going on to any of those places is ridiculous.  

[Bolero88 277]

20 hours ago, Deej said:

It's just another thing to benefit the wealthy in this town. Those who can afford to pay the parking or live downtown, or close to downtown. 

Again, god forbid they have taken just half that money and funneled it into the decrepit libraries in the lower income parts of town.

What part of free parking don't you understand? Not to mention it is right next to a bus stop. 

[texasdago 7568]

12 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

Well, drawing a comparison of Austin to Chicago or NYC remains foolish. 

Yeah, that's a losing argument... but again I will say Austin is improving.  I definitely agree that downtown needs to "grow" when it comes to food/grocery options beyond Foxtrot and Royal Blue.  If you can run the gauntlet under 35, at least now Whole Foods and Target are nearby + Whole Foods on the west side and there's always Trader Joe's.  I would love to see HEB take a flyer on putting a store... even a smaller store... somewhere downtown.  Build it into the base of a high rise.  Would be amazing to have downtown.

 

 

[BurntEyes 5958]

3 hours ago, texasdago said:

Yeah, that's a losing argument... but again I will say Austin is improving.  I definitely agree that downtown needs to "grow" when it comes to food/grocery options beyond Foxtrot and Royal Blue.  If you can run the gauntlet under 35, at least now Whole Foods and Target are nearby + Whole Foods on the west side and there's always Trader Joe's.  I would love to see HEB take a flyer on putting a store... even a smaller store... somewhere downtown.  Build it into the base of a high rise.  Would be amazing to have downtown.

 

 

I can agree with this take completely. For the record, while I don't think I will ever move back to Austin (for the 3rd time), for complex personal reasons, I lived the bulk of my adult life there, and loved it for the most part.

I note that, as while I will likely never live there again, a part of me truly hopes and want to see the city I loved the most grow into adulthood. Past the hippyville, turned college and capital town, silicone Prarie, movie mecca pt2, tech companies destination, and tourist destination to a full on urban living metroplex. Including, usable reasonably priced mass transit options, life accommodating commercial business and long-term tenant owned condo complexes. 

That's why I visit this thread. For, likely silly, but never the less existing hope that things move the right way. I'll always love the time I spent in Austin. I hope 30-40 years from now there are people my age, that have been there that long, can say the same.

[texasdago 7568]

18 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

For, likely silly, but never the less existing hope that things move the right way. I'll always love the time I spent in Austin.

I'm on my second round living in Austin.  First round was during my college years... the best time for one to live in Austin.  Yeah, it was kick ass back then for sure but "round two" me will tell you the current Austin while more expensive - definitely more expensive - offers better food than it used to, dare I say more music options than before (the music scene/options are truly ridiculous), more places to go have fun at night (used to just be mostly 6th street and Red River a few places in west campus... now east Austin, west 6th, south Lamar/1st/congress, etc), more outdoor options (just look at the people paddleboarding on Town Lake and having a good time... nobody did that crap when I was in college), breweries, wineries, stuff in the hill country, a more vibrant downtown (I don't miss the surface lots)... I really enjoy it.  I do hope to get the F out of Texas eventually but, for now, I'm making the most of it... even at 109 degrees.

[Texas Jeff 1945]

What part of free parking don't you understand? Not to mention it is right next to a bus stop. 

It’s free for a hour, but after that it adds up. You can visit for free but it’s not a place you can spend hours for free with a car.

My neighborhood used to have a bus route that went right downtown, but it was cut during cap remap. The sales tax that funds the bus was not cut.

[hayden_horn 11362]

13 hours ago, MAUFRAIS said:

Sit and contemplate the sculptures to distant bass thumps and the far off vision of a bachelorette party twerking on a tige.

why did you stop i was almost there

[jimmyjazz 45888]

15 hours ago, royiv said:

The Dells are just about the only thing Austin has when it comes to big time philanthropy and their giving is focused primarily on healthcare and children. 

Tito B has a pretty strong philanthropic bent.  I have no idea if that extends to art.

[Bevo 13566]

13 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

I can agree with this take completely. For the record, while I don't think I will ever move back to Austin (for the 3rd time), for complex personal reasons, I lived the bulk of my adult life there, and loved it for the most part.

I note that, as while I will likely never live there again, a part of me truly hopes and want to see the city I loved the most grow into adulthood. Past the hippyville, turned college and capital town, silicone Prarie, movie mecca pt2, tech companies destination, and tourist destination to a full on urban living metroplex. Including, usable reasonably priced mass transit options, life accommodating commercial business and long-term tenant owned condo complexes. 

That's why I visit this thread. For, likely silly, but never the less existing hope that things move the right way. I'll always love the time I spent in Austin. I hope 30-40 years from now there are people my age, that have been there that long, can say the same.

 So where can I live that is like the old Austin if I don't want to live in a place that is like a far inferior version of New York?

[texasdago 7568]

4 hours ago, Bevo said:

 So where can I live that is like the old Austin if I don't want to live in a place that is like a far inferior version of New York?

People need to stop looking for the old Austin just like my mom needs to stop looking for the Rome of the 1960s.  That is just trying to chase the unattainable rather than living in the present.

Edited February 10 by texasdago

[South Austin 52453]

46 minutes ago, texasdago said:

People need to stop looking for the old Austin just like my mom needs to stop looking for the Rome of the 1960s.  That is just trying to chase the unattainable rather than living in the present.

Yep. You’re not going to find anything like “old Austin” in any decent sized town in America.  We’re a nation that’s interconnected like never before, and with that is a growing level of homogeneousness across growing areas that are losing their once local and unique sense of charm.

There’s still a lot about Austin that sets it apart from other metro areas, but wringing your hands over the loss of the town’s character in the [pick your decade] is just bitching about something that’s inevitable here or in any other city. 

[Bevo 13566]

1 hour ago, texasdago said:

People need to stop looking for the old Austin just like my mom needs to stop looking for the Rome of the 1960s.  That is just trying to chase the unattainable rather than living in the present.

 

9 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Yep. You’re not going to find anything like “old Austin” in any decent sized town in America.  We’re a nation that’s interconnected like never before, and with that is a growing level of homogeneousness across growing areas that are losing their once local and unique sense of charm.

There’s still a lot about Austin that sets it apart from other metro areas, but wringing your hands over the loss of the town’s character in the [pick your decade] is just bitching about something that’s inevitable here or in any other city. 

 

There are a lot of places in the world that are unique - New Orleans, San Francisco, Bruges, Amsterdam, Prague, Siena, Salzburg, Montreux ... We don't all have to be as homogenous as Houston.

Edited February 10 by Bevo

[South Austin 52453]

3 minutes ago, Bevo said:

There are a lot of places in the world that are unique - New Orleans, San Francisco, Bruges, Amsterdam, Prague, Siena, Salzburg, Montreux ... We don't all have to be as homogenous as Houston. Not that anyone cares, but I'll be moving within the next 10 years, because I moved back to Texas

My comments were directed at America. And yes, there are some exceptions, with New Orleans being one of them, as place I visit at least once a year.

San Francisco? Yes, it has unique terrain and has retained a lot of historical architecture. But it’s getting chained up. Take a walk around Haight-Ashbury. And Seattle? It’s Austin but on a larger scale (downtown condos that look all alike, skyrocketing rents displacing local eclectic neighborhoods, etc.).

[texasdago 7568]

12 minutes ago, Bevo said:

 

 

There are a lot of places in the world that are unique - New Orleans, San Francisco, Bruges, Amsterdam, Prague, Siena, Salzburg, Montreux ... We don't all have to be as homogenous as Houston.

I agree and disagree with this because places like SF, NY, Portland are very different than each other but at the same time, I agree about seeing chains and the same stores all over our country and that is why I prefer to traveling beyond our borders 

On a side note, you actually see fewer chains in Austin vs Houston 

Edited February 10 by texasdago

[Armybrat 40822]

I miss Old Frame Swtch.

[Bevo 13566]

4 minutes ago, texasdago said:

I agree and disagree with this because places like SF, NY, Portland are very different than each other but at the same time, I agree about seeing chains and the same stores all over our country and that is why I prefer to traveling beyond our borders 

On a side note, you actually see fewer chains in Austin vs Houston 

Chains are only part of it - parks, city planning, city beautification projects (like planting flowers between roads), architecture, zoos, museums, architectural reviews, cobblestone walking streets, music and entertainment, utilization of natural features such as rivers... And no, I can't tell any difference in the number of chains in Austin vs Houston until you get out to Pasadena, Katy, Spring, Cypress.. City to City they are pretty similar as far as percentage of chains.

[texasdago 7568]

5 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Chains are only part of it - parks, city planning, city beautification projects (like planting flowers between roads), architecture, zoos, museums, architectural reviews, cobblestone walking streets, music and entertainment, utilization of natural features such as rivers... And no, I can't tell any difference in the number of chains in Austin vs Houston until you get out to Pasadena, Katy, Spring, Cypress.. City to City they are pretty similar as far as percentage of chains.

You are preaching to the wrong person.  I would gladly pick Amsterdam or Copenhagen or Geneva or many Italian towns or other cities.  I know they're drastically better laid out and functional.  Every time we visit Amsterdam and stay outside the core tourist area I comment that I could absolutely live there.  I was amazed how happy I was in a smaller but exceedingly functional flat in Copenhagen.  We're addicted to big ass spaces and excess here.  It's absurd.

...and this thread is taking the wrong turn

For now, in Texas, I'll take Austin.

[honolulu horn 6158]

Honolulu is exceptionally different from other US cities. But it sucks, it's terrible, definitely don't move here. 

[royiv 9254]

1 hour ago, honolulu horn said:

Honolulu is exceptionally different from other US cities. But it sucks, it's terrible, definitely don't move here. 

Honolulu is the taint of Hawaii.

[YGIFS 19449]

dibs on 'Honolulu Taint' for alt.ukulele indie band name.  

Also-what the fuck are they doing to that office building on top of Ego's?  It gets weirder and weirder each week.  

[royiv 9254]

6 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

dibs on 'Honolulu Taint' for alt.ukulele indie band name.  

Also-what the fuck are they doing to that office building on top of Ego's?  It gets weirder and weirder each week.  

The Related Companies owns it and have submitted an application for a PUD.

[YGIFS 19449]

Shit, that's right.  Somebody else mentioned that on the downtown development thread, getting old and forgetful.  Still a head-scratcher to me to have PUD that close to the CBD.  I assume that other building to the west of Chevron is enveloped in the same district proposal, maybe even the old Threadgill's.  

Anecdotally, I have seen a metric fuckton more trash on the side of the roads lately.  Most I've seen since camping ban/Covid era.  But according to my Zilker Eagle newsletter, we're going to get the kiddie choo-choo about 9 years before we get our first ProjectConnect train.