HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2015, 6:08 AM
lzppjb's Avatar
lzppjb lzppjb is offline
7th Gen Central Texan
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 3,144
Austin's canopy is a huge plus. I agree that it should be protected as much as possible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2015, 6:26 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: there and back again
Posts: 57,324
Seriously, I'm having to cut down what is admittedly a trash tree. It's a "Texas Wax Leaf Tree" - which is actually a Japanese native tree that took hold here and became rampant. They do make awesome shade trees, but I'm having to cut it down because I found out they're poisonous (potentially lethal) to dogs. So it has to go. But I'm really going to miss the shade. It sucks, too, because our neighbor lost their 60 foot sycamore to the drought a few years ago, so there's way more sun. We're thinking of replacing the tree with either a crepe myrtle or red bud. That side of the yard is very sunny, while the other side is very shade because of the Oaks.

That shade is appreciated in the warm months because it cools the air all around us. My sister's house in Del Valle has no trees, and it's like picnicking in hell in the summertime outside on the patio.
__________________
Donate to Donald Trump's campaign today!

Thou shall not indict
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2015, 2:33 PM
IluvATX IluvATX is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Anchorage-Austin-Anchorage-Austin and so forth...
Posts: 1,173
38th street? This is more metro.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2015, 4:46 PM
Tech House Tech House is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
One problem I see to dense development in the heart of Austin is the dense tree canopy we have. And of course I'd be against cutting down/moving these trees for development.
100% agree. I'm not suggesting that Tarrytown be replaced by Mueller West or a new Domain, but whenever land can be developed intensively it should be. Granny units need to be more readily accepted. Small apartments and townhomes can be built twixt trees without involving some remote REIT that doesn't care about Austin and only wants to build generic monoliths that maximize profit. So I'm dreaming, I know it ain't gonna go like this, but I do agree that Austin's canopy is one of its greatest assets. Whenever I'm in other cities, I almost always notice how few trees they have. We're blessed with an abundance of them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2015, 9:07 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: there and back again
Posts: 57,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by IluvATX View Post
38th street? This is more metro.
I believe we should treat this development like we did with Highland Mall, Mueller and the Domain. They're too big a project to dump into the metro development thread or the update thread.
__________________
Donate to Donald Trump's campaign today!

Thou shall not indict
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Apr 5, 2015, 7:16 PM
verybadgnome verybadgnome is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Holly neighborhood, Austin
Posts: 210
I just did a redfin query of SF homes in that area built within the last ten years and sold within the last year and the average price was $609k, or about twice the Austin median sold price. This just shows that the price of land is so high that it makes more economic sense to build denser with more attached homes, condos and apartments.

People have to remember that there is an incredible amount of space devoted to uses other than housing that diminish the supply of good available land in the core and drive up prices. All the parks, golf courses, cemeteries, floodplains, steep slopes, roads, sidewalks, brownfields, non-mixed use commercial, easements, pipelines, preserves, etc. are all precluded and then most of the remainder is SF neighborhoods. Then the SF neighborhoods will fight tooth and nail to prevent any MF from coming in ostensibly fearing traffic and noise, but really wanting to prevent "demographic change." The result is very low density - on a scale which takes in more than the Sunbelt states - which makes for bad transit and less housing options near workplaces.

Also in regards to that 3:1 ratio of MF to SF I quoted earlier, that is in spite of existing zoning and neighborhood groups stacked against it. If there was a truly free market in real estate development that ratio would be even higher. And if it was not harder to get a condo loan versus a SF home loan it would be higher still.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2015, 9:23 PM
_Matt _Matt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by mars-man View Post
This project as presented has its pros and cons, and I enjoy a good kvetch as much as anyone, but let's keep to the facts. Capital Metro's Bull Creek bus (No. 19) goes right alongside this tract on its way to/from downtown and Anderson/Northcross, with many transfer points along the route. Transit connectivity is not an issue.
That is a good point, thanks for point out that route!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2015, 10:14 PM
_Matt _Matt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 400
I realize you guys are speaking more generally about the canopy, but I don't know how applicable it is to this site. It appears to have been clear-cut at some point in the past, a very unfortunate treatment of the land. I used to help my grandfather clear land at his cattle ranch. We would take down cedar trees and destroy them like weeds. Oaks in the pasture were never touched and sometimes even cleaned up.

The adjacent neighborhoods have many more trees.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2015, 11:00 PM
drummer drummer is offline
World Traveler
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Austin metro area
Posts: 4,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Matt View Post
I realize you guys are speaking more generally about the canopy, but I don't know how applicable it is to this site. It appears to have been clear-cut at some point in the past, a very unfortunate treatment of the land. I used to help my grandfather clear land at his cattle ranch. We would take down cedar trees and destroy them like weeds. Oaks in the pasture were never touched and sometimes even cleaned up.

The adjacent neighborhoods have many more trees.

Many of those cedars that ranchers (at least those in Central Texas) clear out are invasive (i.e., not native to the region). They're also incredibly thirsty and deplete the water that would be otherwise helpful to native trees and plants. It's actually good to clear those out because they spread like weeds, too, and can kill off many native plants by essentially choking them. I've got a lot of family in the Hill Country and have helped on ranches all my life in clearing that crap out - I feel your pain, literally! Don't forget your gloves, haha (I've made that mistake before as a kid...no sympathy from my family - lesson learned after only one time and many blisters).

That said, I agree that one of the greatest things about Austin is that it's a city often in concert with beautiful, natural surroundings. It was certainly a blessing that many freeways were cancelled years ago, even if we suffer the traffic nightmare today - imagine the mindless development in and around Central Austin if we had all those freeways? Not to mention, we have one of the most beautiful city cores because these things kept it unique not only from a neighborhood perspective but also from an environmental one. Clear-cutting land and planting stick-trees is not only an eyesore but harmful to the land in the long run. The dense canopy in Central Austin is absolutely something worth protecting.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2015, 11:17 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: there and back again
Posts: 57,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Matt View Post
I realize you guys are speaking more generally about the canopy, but I don't know how applicable it is to this site. It appears to have been clear-cut at some point in the past, a very unfortunate treatment of the land. I used to help my grandfather clear land at his cattle ranch. We would take down cedar trees and destroy them like weeds. Oaks in the pasture were never touched and sometimes even cleaned up.

The adjacent neighborhoods have many more trees.

I think there's more trees along the creek simply because it's a good water source for them. And trees tend to grow in neighborhoods more because people pick them out at the plant nursery/garden store because they like them, and then plant them. Another major contributor is fence lines and power lines that act like highways for squirrels, rats and birds where they "plant" stuff after eating it. My neighborhood is totally forested now, but 50 years ago when my family first came here only a year or two after it was built, there was nothing except for the old growth Oaks, Elms and Pecans. All the other tree species were either planted by people or the wildlife along fence lines and power lines. And with the added human activity, a neighborhood is going to have more wildlife from things like food and water dishes people leave our for their pets. In a wide open natural piece of land, you're really only going to have tree species growing there that are indigenous to the region. There was a satellite imagery website that let you see photos of an area going back to the 50s, and there were almost no trees in our neighborhood except for the old growth stuff. It's weird and interesting to see how much humans can affect the natural environment, even within a neighborhood.
__________________
Donate to Donald Trump's campaign today!

Thou shall not indict
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Apr 7, 2015, 12:07 AM
_Matt _Matt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 400
Here's an interesting photo from 1964, before MoPac was built. The site for The Grove is the clearing in the center of the photo.

(click for big)

Source: TexasFreeways

Last edited by _Matt; Apr 8, 2015 at 8:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Apr 7, 2015, 12:21 AM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is offline
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,732
Some musings as I've been reading through. When it comes to density specifically taller buildings with smaller footprints, they not only are beneficial in keeping large amounts of trees from being cut out but because they have small footprints that leaves more ground that is not
covered over letting more rainfall to seep into the ground instead of washing away.

While Blueberry Juniper trees (also known as Mountain Cedar though they are not true cedar) are fairly recent newcomers to the region in the sense that a few thousand years ago they were not here, they naturally moved into this area over time therefore they are native. They are also an important part of the ecology for other native plants and animals including the endangered Golden Cheeked Warbler.


Another thing to note is that most of the origional old growth forests and woodland-prairies was cleared out as far back as the early 1800s. Other than a few areas like Kevin's and my neighborhood with stands of old growth Live Oaks very little of what the area looked like naturally before 1800 exists. For example nearly all the Blueberry Juniper trees are 2nd or 3rd growth. At one time there were much larger and taller stands that were cut down for wood. The reason why they pop up creating thick clumps so quickly is because the land was cleared of the original growth taking out the other trees and plants that lived together. Since the Blueberry Juniper is typically the first to grow back, there's nothing else to keep it from spreading rapidly creating dense clumps that choke everything else out that tries to grow. The old growth Juniper stands were not like that.

Anywho I'm not sure how I feel about this development just yet.
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)

Last edited by Jdawgboy; Apr 7, 2015 at 12:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Apr 7, 2015, 12:40 AM
lzppjb's Avatar
lzppjb lzppjb is offline
7th Gen Central Texan
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 3,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by drummer View Post
Many of those cedars that ranchers (at least those in Central Texas) clear out are invasive (i.e., not native to the region). They're also incredibly thirsty and deplete the water that would be otherwise helpful to native trees and plants. It's actually good to clear those out because they spread like weeds, too, and can kill off many native plants by essentially choking them. I've got a lot of family in the Hill Country and have helped on ranches all my life in clearing that crap out - I feel your pain, literally! Don't forget your gloves, haha (I've made that mistake before as a kid...no sympathy from my family - lesson learned after only one time and many blisters).

That said, I agree that one of the greatest things about Austin is that it's a city often in concert with beautiful, natural surroundings. It was certainly a blessing that many freeways were cancelled years ago, even if we suffer the traffic nightmare today - imagine the mindless development in and around Central Austin if we had all those freeways? Not to mention, we have one of the most beautiful city cores because these things kept it unique not only from a neighborhood perspective but also from an environmental one. Clear-cutting land and planting stick-trees is not only an eyesore but harmful to the land in the long run. The dense canopy in Central Austin is absolutely something worth protecting.
I linked to an article debunking most of the cedar myths a couple years ago on this site. They are indeed native. The problem is that we now put out all the wildfires, so the trees that were once relegated to hill sides are now spreading everywhere.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 2:21 PM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,263
From Community Impact:


Community compromise helps shape development
Construction could start on one of the largest undeveloped plots of Central Austin land by the end of the year.
by Jennifer Curington
April 22, 2015


Quote:
Based on the neighborhood feedback from a MileStone survey, Martin’s team created a map that showed where nearby residents preferred higher-density development within the project—mostly on the property’s west side along Bull Creek Road. The density decreases near Shoal Creek. The exact acreage of residential, retail, office and restaurant space is not established, according to developers.

Businesses within The Grove at Shoal Creek will be local, Martin said. The exact aesthetics of the neighborhood residences—a mixture of single-family homes, townhomes and apartments—has not yet been decided, he said. Instead, a design competition will be held among multiple architects to help determine the look of the new community, Martin said.
Image from article:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 4:32 PM
Digatisdi's Avatar
Digatisdi Digatisdi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Downtown Austin
Posts: 415
Hmm... One thing I'd like to see is a pedestrian/bike connection from that little cul-de-sac to Shoal Creek Boulevard. I guess that'd require some sort of easement from the State. I feel like I'd be much more sympathetic to this development if it had more pedestrian/bike connections to the west.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2015, 3:25 AM
drummer drummer is offline
World Traveler
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Austin metro area
Posts: 4,470
From that picture, it looks like a little mini-Mueller neighborhood.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2015, 8:31 PM
Digatisdi's Avatar
Digatisdi Digatisdi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Downtown Austin
Posts: 415
The Grove at Shoal Creek revised plans seek to address neighborhood concerns

It looks like more apartments, about the same level of townhomes, and less grid connectivity, but the key is impossible to read
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2015, 8:39 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver
Posts: 5,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digatisdi View Post
The Grove at Shoal Creek revised plans seek to address neighborhood concerns

It looks like more apartments, about the same level of townhomes, and less grid connectivity, but the key is impossible to read
This actually looks on the whole a better plan. It actually ends up being more dense, the street grid is spaced out a bit more which actually will help with traffic flow, without affecting connectivity that much except in a few key places.

It also has more retail AND got rid of the pad site in the NW and instead reoriented that retail building toward the street which is GREAT for walkability especially because the apartments in the NW is also reoriented to the sidewalk rather than being separated by a large useless green space that would eventually become dilapidated and unkept lessening the value of everyone in that neighborhood. In fact, everything is reoriented to the main thoroughfare.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2015, 8:45 PM
Digatisdi's Avatar
Digatisdi Digatisdi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Downtown Austin
Posts: 415
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
This actually looks on the whole a better plan. It actually ends up being more dense, the street grid is spaced out a bit more which actually will help with traffic flow, without affecting connectivity that much except in a few key places.

It also has more retail AND got rid of the pad site in the NW and instead reoriented that retail building toward the street which is GREAT for walkability especially because the apartments in the NW is also reoriented to the sidewalk rather than being separated by a large useless green space that would eventually become dilapidated and unkept lessening the value of everyone in that neighborhood. In fact, everything is reoriented to the main thoroughfare.
Yeah I wasn't making a judgement, I'd certainly like to see a more readable version, and actually it looks like there's a northern road connection which looks like it was lacking in the old plan. and I'm staunchly pro-roundabout, and it looks like the revised plan has two
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2015, 2:05 AM
Syndic's Avatar
Syndic Syndic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,945
Collective input makes for more polished and interesting places, I think. Some myopic developer with dollar signs in his eyes alone is not a good party to be making such large places. I'm glad this happened. One of the most important changes seems to be moving the apartments in red in the top left corner closer to the road so that an ugly parking lot isn't visible from the street. Typical dumb developer move.

__________________
Anti-Leslie Pool. Bury I-35! Make The Domain public!
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:23 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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