AUSTIN | 70 Rainey | 419 FEET | 34 FLOORS | Complete - Page 8

KevinFromTexas · #**141** Posted **Apr 24, 2015, 8:04 PM**

I think positioning the tower where they're planning to and having the park there is a fair compromise to the museum which was concerned about views. The museum will also no doubt benefit from the park.

Cd1076 · #**142** Posted **Apr 25, 2015, 2:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I think positioning the tower where they're planning to and having the park there is a fair compromise to the museum which was concerned about views. The museum will also no doubt benefit from the park.

I agree completely, I've just seen a lot of negativity online and from some East Cesar Chavez neighborhood folks who are against any and all change in the area.

I'm really looking forward to all of the added density in this area, this is an exciting time to watch it all unfold.

drummer · #**143** Posted **Apr 25, 2015, 4:07 AM**

I think that's a great compromise, especially considering that if the development company owns it and they have approval from the city, they don't have to do anything for the MACC. I think this goes above and beyond what they're required to do. Good for them - good neighbors make better neighborhoods.

loonytoony · #**144** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 5:43 PM**

Rumor has it the developer has parted way with Platinum Realty, preferring instead to go with an in-house team. Hoping this indecision isn't a sign of things to come on this project.

ILUVSAT · #**145** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 9:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by loonytoony

Rumor has it the developer has parted way with Platinum Realty, preferring instead to go with an in-house team. Hoping this indecision isn't a sign of things to come on this project.

So? Maybe they could not come to a contract agreement. Furthermore, this tower is a long way from coming out of the ground. So this would not make me worry in the least. And, they may have told Platinum that they were going "in-house" so they don't tip their hat as to which other firm they are speaking.

There are plenty of residential real estate firms both in Austin and out - some with far more high-rise experience than Platinum.

Should the developer decide to actually go "in-house," what's wrong with that?

bigdogc · #**146** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 9:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by loonytoony

Rumor has it the developer has parted way with Platinum Realty, preferring instead to go with an in-house team. Hoping this indecision isn't a sign of things to come on this project.

Yes I have heard this as well.

loonytoony · #**147** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 10:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Should the developer decide to actually go "in-house," what's wrong with that?

Nothing wrong, just seems a bit odd on the timing is all. Their official launch party is tomorrow... I expect there will be a PR campaign to 'splain what's happening. Hopefully it includes more renderings.

The ATX · #**148** Posted **May 6, 2015, 10:21 PM**

The MACC sucks.

http://www.statesman.com/news/busine...ey-stre/nk96J/

Digatisdi · #**149** Posted **May 7, 2015, 3:30 AM**

"Saldaña, however, said that “reducing disturbance on Rainey” means imposing on the Mexican American Cultural Center."

In what universe? How? This is almost as bad as the claim that a tower at 70 Rainey would block their views of downtown. How on earth would reducing the disturbance on a main roadway in the area, and a main access point impose on the MACC?

The ATX · #**150** Posted **May 7, 2015, 7:24 AM**

The MACC is dysfunctional and so full of itself. Here's another new example of it from the Statesman:

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/m...llence-/nmBG8/

lzppjb · #**151** Posted **May 7, 2015, 12:38 PM**

The MACC is not iconic. They are giants in their own imagination.

If they screw this up, I hope Sackman makes their lives hell during construction.

LoneStarMike · #**152** Posted **May 7, 2015, 1:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lzppjb

If they screw this up, I hope Sackman makes their lives hell during construction.

That's what I didn't get about Saldaña's comment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digatisdi

"Saldaña, however, said that “reducing disturbance on Rainey” means imposing on the Mexican American Cultural Center."

If you increase disturbance on Rainey, how is that going to help MACC? Seems to me like they'd have fewer visitors to the museum.

KevinFromTexas · #**153** Posted **May 7, 2015, 6:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lzppjb

The MACC is not iconic. They are giants in their own imagination.

If they screw this up, I hope Sackman makes their lives hell during construction.

I enjoyed photographing the museum a little while after it was completed, but yeah, it's just another building really. I still marvel more at city hall than I do the museum for example, and city hall is a few years older. Anyway, I don't think they realize it, but they aren't being good stewards of the neighborhood or good members of it when objecting to this tower, though, they might say that's the reason. Besides the whole nice cohesive neighborhood with diverse members of it and different kinds of architecture that hint at that, I would think they would welcome development around their museum. To me it makes it seem more important and interesting if it's surrounded by stuff. If I saw one building sitting somewhere all by itself surrounded either by parking lots or vacant lots, especially in an urban setting, that would be very strange.

drummer · #**154** Posted **May 8, 2015, 1:01 AM**

I don't understand how anyone can make so many outrageous claims and demands. They built in the downtown area (Rainey being a part of CBD, that is), and they expect tall buildings to NOT happen around them? There's not a MACC view corridor like the CVC, haha.

wwmiv · #**155** Posted **May 8, 2015, 2:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

I don't understand how anyone can make so many outrageous claims and demands. They built in the downtown area (Rainey being a part of CBD, that is), and they expect tall buildings to NOT happen around them? There's not a MACC view corridor like the CVC, haha.

Sure, but they also built in the only historically Mexican part of town (all others that we consider Mexican were either white lower class or black to start off) that was not historically considered part of downtown and are hoping to preserve some of that history by opposing developments that would help to price out any current or potential Mexican residents of that area.

Ergo, I'm torn. On the one hand, the neighborhood is not going to be preserved demographically and has already passed the event horizon. On the other hand, their aims are... noble... even if they're going about it in the entirely wrong way. Better to serve as a beacon for the Mexican community and preserve the culture in the area rather than ensure that Mexican residents are able to reside in this particular neighborhood. In time, if Mexican-Americans can share in economic prosperity, they'll be able to return.

JAM · #**156** Posted **May 8, 2015, 7:27 PM**

Just want to chime in on the MACC. I haven't followed what has occurred on the 70 issues, but the MACC has been a great neighbor for the Rainey area. They have worked with all of us to solve different issues in the area, parking included. Also enjoy the events they hold there. Try attending one sometime. Maybe it will give you a different perspective.

wwmiv · #**157** Posted **May 8, 2015, 7:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAM

Just want to chime in on the MACC. I haven't followed what has occurred on the 70 issues, but the MACC has been a great neighbor for the Rainey area. They have worked with all of us to solve different issues in the area, parking included. Also enjoy the events they hold there. Try attending one sometime. Maybe it will give you a different perspective.

There's also this, which I've heard from others.

The ATX · #**158** Posted **May 8, 2015, 7:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAM

Just want to chime in on the MACC. I haven't followed what has occurred on the 70 issues, but the MACC has been a great neighbor for the Rainey area. They have worked with all of us to solve different issues in the area, parking included. Also enjoy the events they hold there. Try attending one sometime. Maybe it will give you a different perspective.

I did try attending an event there one time, and it made my opinion of the MACC worse. Me and out of town guest went there for an exhibit after they were supposed to be open. But nobody was there. As we were leaving somebody was just getting there to open up the office. We asked if we could see the exhibit in the gallery. He didn't know much about the current exhibit, but went to open up the gallery for us. When we got there he said he wouldn't be able to let us in, and I can't remember what the reason was. What a POS attraction. We then went over to Rainey St. and had a good time.

wwmiv · #**159** Posted **May 8, 2015, 7:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

I did try attending an event there one time, and it made my opinion of the MACC worse. Me and out of town guest went there for an exhibit after they were supposed to be open. But nobody was there. As we were leaving somebody was just getting there to open up the office. We asked if we could see the exhibit in the gallery. He didn't know much about the current exhibit, but went to open up the gallery for us. When we got there he said he wouldn't be able to let us in, and I can't remember what the reason was. What a POS attraction. We then went over to Rainey St. and had a good time.

Sounds like a he-said, she-said.

GoldenBoot · #**160** Posted **May 8, 2015, 10:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digatisdi

"Saldaña, however, said that “reducing disturbance on Rainey” means imposing on the Mexican American Cultural Center."

In what universe? How? This is almost as bad as the claim that a tower at 70 Rainey would block their views of downtown. How on earth would reducing the disturbance on a main roadway in the area, and a main access point impose on the MACC?

I know and have worked with Paul in the past. He is a good guy...more bark than bite. And, I have had to correct him on several occasions. To me, he obviously misspoke and nobody was there to clarify what he meant.

In any case, I trust the MACC never imagined when they built their facility several years back on that site (plans began in the late 1990's/early 2000's - first building completed in 2007, I think), that Rainey Street would ever become what it is transitioning into today. They are just angry with themselves for being wrong and are acting like typical NIMBY's (as is the case in several parts of our growing community).

I don't blame them...to an extent. It does not take a genius to figure out that Austin has doubled its population every 20-25 years since its incorporation in 1839. Growth is inevitable: MACC, learn how to cope and become one with it. It is NOT going to change.

Rainey Street's transformation is exciting and beneficial to the city. MACC, show that you support Austin's growth and its growing place on this planet. Especially when developers are extending an olive branch - and then you swipe it down like a little baby. Why are you thinking about "expansion" at this time? You have not even completed your first three phases of original development! Geez...

I may have to call Paul...