AUSTIN | Aloft Austin & Element Hotel Downtown | 328 FEET | 31 FLOORS | Complete

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by Hill Country

This passed on 1st reading just a few minutes ago. I thought it already passed on 1st reading but apparently not.
It was obvious that it passed only because the vote was for the setback.
Tovo said she would vote against it on 2nd reading because of the issues the Rep for the Hideout and Stephen F. Austin brought up. Morrison appeared to be against it as well for issues not related to the setback.
Parking was the main issue for the City Council. But it's clear the Rep for the two parties opposing it just doesn't want it built. The list of complaints make the project impossible to build. Plus Morrison would like to squeeze more "community benefits" out of the developers for their 23:1 FAR even though a city staffer said the ordinance for increases in FAR didn't apply to hotels in the same it does for other uses. The agreement to do Great Streets was all the developer was required do and that is part of their proposal.

Damn... I don't understand her at all.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

Damn... I don't understand her at all.

The bad thing about this is that because of the "valid petition" six votes were needed from the council tonight and two of the seven are obviously against the project going forward. But it wasn't clear if the six vote requirement was for all the voting or just for what took place tonight. I don't have a strong grasp of COA council procedures.

I don't know how this is determined, but the majority of ~20% valid petition against the project was from the Stephen F. Austin, and the developer said they flat out told him that too many hotels are being built and they don't want this one built. Their Rep didn't dispute that and focused his time on the complaints from the Hideout which seemed absurd. One of the Hideout owners spoke and spent a good part of his time promoting and praising the Hideout. Real publicity hound. Another lady spoke against because of the lack of windows on the south side and said people taking a picture of the Capitol from Congress and 6th would be distracted from taking the picture by the south wall of the Aloft. I could go on and on about the ridiculousness of the arguments against, but they have two of the council members in their pocket.

[The ATX]

Here's a screen shot from the Rep for the haters' presentation when he was saying this was the most intense development ever in Austin and was trying to show what monster this projects was:




Here are some of his complaints:



He also wants the developers to create a three (or five?) foot open space between Congress and the rear alley on the hotel's property between the buildings. The developer's Rep said that would be out of place because all of the buildings on Congress are adjacent and that the narrow space would be hideout for inappropriate activity and just accumulate trash.

[Digatisdi]

Originally Posted by Hill Country

The bad thing about this is that because of the "valid petition" six votes were needed from the council tonight and two of the seven are obviously against the project going forward. But it wasn't clear if the six vote requirement was for all the voting or just for what took place tonight. I don't have a strong grasp of COA council procedures. [...] One of the Hideout owners spoke and spent a good part of his time promoting and praising the Hideout. Real publicity hound.

Well I'm hoping that 2nd reading doesn't require the six votes

I'm not particularly sure how council works but at this point I'm leaning toward not going to the Hideout ever again out of spite.

[KevinFromTexas]

"I don't want it built" is not a valid reason and should hold no sway on a vote. I didn't want either of them as city council members either, but I didn't get my wish on that vote either.

They don't seem to really have a valid reason for being against the hotel. The height is appropriate for the neighborhood, the design is good, it's set back from the street, so it won't block the view of the Capitol. The windowless wall issue is bogus since the developers are following a city code requirement. The only "issue" is the parking, but didn't the city already remove the parking requirement in downtown?

I really get the feeling that the objection from the Stephen F. Austin rep has nothing to do with an oversupply of hotel rooms on the market, and is more of a position that they don't want new neighbors they feel wouldn't jive with "their crowd". I'm sorry, but you don't get to be located in the downtown of a major city and choose your neighbors and be picky of who you'd prefer to be in the neighborhood.

The "too many hotels" argument is BS since developers always do their market research before developing anything. There is no doubt there is a demand for more hotel rooms in downtown, and this hotel will offer something the others haven't so far.

[Spaceman]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

"I don't want it built" is not a valid reason and should hold no sway on a vote. I didn't want either of them as city council members either, but I didn't get my wish on that vote either.

They don't seem to really have a valid reason for being against the hotel. The height is appropriate for the neighborhood, the design is good, it's set back from the street, so it won't block the view of the Capitol. The windowless wall issue is bogus since the developers are following a city code requirement. The only "issue" is the parking, but didn't the city already remove the parking requirement in downtown?

I really get the feeling that the objection from the Stephen F. Austin rep has nothing to do with an oversupply of hotel rooms on the market, and is more of a position that they don't want new neighbors they feel wouldn't jive with "their crowd". I'm sorry, but you don't get to be located in the downtown of a major city and choose your neighbors and be picky of who you'd prefer to be in the neighborhood.

The "too many hotels" argument is BS since developers always do their market research before developing anything. There is no doubt there is a demand for more hotel rooms in downtown, and this hotel will offer something the others haven't so far.

Builders had better start pouring concrete before the election...tovo and kitchen are gonna sweep their races and the insanity will begin.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by Hill Country

Here's a screen shot from the Rep for the haters' presentation when he was saying this was the most intense development ever in Austin and was trying to show what monster this projects was:

There is no way the building shown in that image is 353 feet. The image is not accurately showing the hotel's scale. The stated height of the hotel is 353 feet, but it appears just as tall as the One American Center. There is no way. The One American Center is 401 feet tall to the mechanical penthouse roof (according to the original building elevations), and is 381 feet to the main roof and 371 feet to the 32nd floor. So the hotel's roof should appear shorter than One American Center's 32nd floor. The hotel shown here appears to be around 380 to 390 feet.

The image also seems to be altered a bit so that the buildings are more elongated. I wish Frost Bank Tower was that slim. The other buildings don't look right either. Bank of America Center especially looks taller than it should be there. Even The Austonian looks odd and so does Ashton.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by Digatisdi

Well I'm hoping that 2nd reading doesn't require the six votes

I'm not particularly sure how council works but at this point I'm leaning toward not going to the Hideout ever again out of spite.

I never heard of this "valid petition" nonsense before, and if the 2nd and 3rd readings now need 6 votes, this project is a Thanksgiving turkey on Saturday. It's over.

It's absurd that a nearby hotel that's afraid of competition and a publicity seeking neighbor can doom an awesome project that brings a lot of tax dollars into the city. Two minor players in the overall big picture of the city's economy should not have this kind of influence.

Both the developer's and the hater's Rep made statements indicating that they can't work together. The acrimony between them was obvious.

The fact that all of the city's boards/commission strongly supported this awesome project says a lot. The fact that two local businesses with obvious (not so) hidden agendas could doom this is beyond ridiculous.

[The ATX]

This is off topic...but Morrison literally spoke for hours about what she didn't like about Uber and Lyft. She ended up being the only "no" vote for legalizing their service. I swear, she is a classic anti-progress, pro-regulation bureaucrat.

[H2O]

A valid petition means that it cannot be approved on all three readings at once. It will draw out the process and give the opposition more time to argue, but in the end, it only needs a majority vote on each of three readings.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by H2O

A valid petition means that it cannot be approved on all three readings at once. It will draw out the process and give the opposition more time to argue, but in the end, it only needs a majority vote on each of three readings.

That's good. I also found out that the six vote requirement was only for the vote deciding whether or not to keep the Aloft discussion on the agenda last night or postpone it because of the delays due to the lengthy Uber/Lyft discussions.

[Digatisdi]

Originally Posted by H2O

A valid petition means that it cannot be approved on all three readings at once. It will draw out the process and give the opposition more time to argue, but in the end, it only needs a majority vote on each of three readings.

Originally Posted by Hill Country

That's good. I also found out that the six vote requirement was only for the vote deciding whether or not to keep the Aloft discussion on the agenda last night or postpone it because of the delays due to the lengthy Uber/Lyft discussions.

Oh good, that's reassuring. I wish they'd like put up a thing that has procedures laid out online--or maybe they do and I'm just too dense to find it

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by Digatisdi

Oh good, that's reassuring. I wish they'd like put up a thing that has procedures laid out online--or maybe they do and I'm just too dense to find it

Two votes against this project are assured for the 2nd and 3rd reading no matter what. But the other hang up in the way getting at least four votes is the parking. There is a conflict with the Great Streets requirement and the valet parking spots. So far they can only design three spots for valet parking (on 7th St.) without getting in the way of the Great Streets requirement. The concern was how a hotel with over 400 rooms could move cars in and out of three spots without causing traffic problems. The developer said he would show at next week's vote how another White Lodging hotel in Chicago does it with similar parking restraints.

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

There is no way the building shown in that image is 353 feet. The image is not accurately showing the hotel's scale. The stated height of the hotel is 353 feet, but it appears just as tall as the One American Center. There is no way. The One American Center is 401 feet tall to the mechanical penthouse roof (according to the original building elevations), and is 381 feet to the main roof and 371 feet to the 32nd floor. So the hotel's roof should appear shorter than One American Center's 32nd floor. The hotel shown here appears to be around 380 to 390 feet.

The image also seems to be altered a bit so that the buildings are more elongated. I wish Frost Bank Tower was that slim. The other buildings don't look right either. Bank of America Center especially looks taller than it should be there. Even The Austonian looks odd and so does Ashton.

Images from video often get compressed by 33% because TV screen pixels and computer screen pixels' shapes are off from each other by 33%. One is square while the other is rectangular. Here's the image adjusted by 33%. The roof doesn't come to the top of One American... just the first setback, so it looks accurate IMO.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

Images from video often get compressed by 33% because TV screen pixels and computer screen pixels' shapes are off from each other by 33%. One is square while the other is rectangular. Here's the image adjusted by 33%. The roof doesn't come to the top of One American... just the first setback, so it looks accurate IMO.

That's interesting. Thanks.

[KevinFromTexas]

Yes, but even with the compression, it is taller than the Bank of America Center than it should be. The hotel is 353 feet tall while the Bank of America Center is 336 feet tall. Just 17 feet. Basically the height of the Bank of America Center's mechanical penthouse (it's main roof is 320 feet). This shows the hotel to be 60 to 70 feet taller than the Bank of America Center. Even the Stephen F. Austin Hotel is 188 feet (mechanical) and 174 feet (main roof), and the new hotel appears easily more than twice as tall as it does, even though it shouldn't.

Unless they're planning it to be taller than the 353 feet we've already heard about, but I still counted 22 floors above the top of the Stephen F. Austin Hotel and then ~about another 11 or 12 more down to street level.

[The ATX]

We're about a week away from knowing the fate of the Aloft. The vote to approve on the 2nd and 3rd reading is scheduled for next Thursday, 11/06/14.

Item 74.
C14-2013-0158 - 7th and Congress Hotel - Approve second and third readings of an ordinance amending City Code Chapter 25-2 by rezoning property locally known as 619 and 621 Congress Avenue (Lady Bird Lake Watershed) from central business district (CBD) district zoning to central business district-central urban redevelopment (CBD-CURE) combining district zoning. First reading approved on October 16, 2014. Vote: 7-0. Owner: Finley Company (Tim Finley, VP). Applicant: Matt Frankiewicz. Agent: Armbrust & Brown, PLLC (Lynn Ann Carley). City Staff: Lee Heckman, 512-974-7604. A valid petition has been filed in opposition to this rezoning request.

http://austin.siretechnologies.com/s...doctype=agenda

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by Hill Country

We're about a week away from knowing the fate of the Aloft. The vote to approve on the 2nd and 3rd reading is scheduled for next Thursday, 11/06/14.

Item 74.
C14-2013-0158 - 7th and Congress Hotel - Approve second and third readings of an ordinance amending City Code Chapter 25-2 by rezoning property locally known as 619 and 621 Congress Avenue (Lady Bird Lake Watershed) from central business district (CBD) district zoning to central business district-central urban redevelopment (CBD-CURE) combining district zoning. First reading approved on October 16, 2014. Vote: 7-0. Owner: Finley Company (Tim Finley, VP). Applicant: Matt Frankiewicz. Agent: Armbrust & Brown, PLLC (Lynn Ann Carley). City Staff: Lee Heckman, 512-974-7604. A valid petition has been filed in opposition to this rezoning request.

http://austin.siretechnologies.com/s...doctype=agenda

I am getting scared with this one, y'all....

[H2O]

Originally Posted by ahealy

I am getting scared with this one, y'all....

Are you scared because you don't want to see it happen, or because Hallowe'en is coming? The vote on first reading was 7-0, which means even Morrison and Tovo voted for it.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by H2O

Are you scared because you don't want to see it happen, or because Hallowe'en is coming? The vote on first reading was 7-0, which means even Morrison and Tovo voted for it.

If you didn't read the previous posts, you missed that Tovo said she would be voting against it on the next reading. The first reading was only for the setback variance. She is against the project for reasons other than the setback which is why she said she would vote against it. Morrison didn't like the project either, and other council members didn't like the parking plan. But they only need four yes votes which is still somewhat positive.