The Transformation of South Lamar

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by IluvATX

Suburban development doesn't seem to be as considerate to the environment. I'd expect more within city limits.

... it's an function of space, not an issue of (necessarily) consideration of the environment.

Because this project is taking up less space than a typical suburban project with the same number of units, we are necessarily destroying less trees when we build this project than when we build the equivalent suburban project.

Thus, building urban is by definition better for the environment than building suburban.

For every dense urban development that occurs, there exists less need to build typical suburban developments of equivalent size. Thus, I will always support these dense centrally located developments regardless of the number of trees they displace or destroy. And I will support them precisely because they are the more environmentally friendly choice.

One exception to this: parks are needed in some places, but this is not one of those places because there is easy access to the greenbelt for this entire corridor.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

^Definitely. I look at our street often and wonder how many trees were bulldozed to make way for it. And even though the developers did a good job of building the houses between the trees, I'm sure some were cut down to make room.

Amen brutha.

[IluvATX]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

... it's an function of space, not an issue of (necessarily) consideration of the environment.

Because this project is taking up less space than a typical suburban project with the same number of units, we are necessarily destroying less trees when we build this project than when we build the equivalent suburban project.

Thus, building urban is by definition better for the environment than building suburban.

For every dense urban development that occurs, there exists less need to build typical suburban developments of equivalent size. Thus, I will always support these dense centrally located developments regardless of the number of trees they displace or destroy. And I will support them precisely because they are the more environmentally friendly choice.

One exception to this: parks are needed in some places, but this is not one of those places because there is easy access to the greenbelt for this entire corridor.

I was referring to the city about taking the environment into consideration, but I totally agree that dense, urban development is better for the environment than suburban sprawl. Obviously property value plays a huge part too.

[LoneStarMike]

It looks like Eskew Place at 3600 S. Lamar has had a name change. It will now be called GreenView.


South Lamar GreenView project unveiled with intense buyer interest
Mar 17, 2015
Jan Buchholz
Austin Business Journal

The article has a rendering.

Here is another rendering from the architect's website:



Kelly Grossman Architects

[_Matt]

Looks very... vehicle oriented. Still good for density.

[IluvATX]

^^ Is this what's next to Red's Porch? ^^

[LoneStarMike]

^^Yes. You can see the Red's Porch sign in the background of this photo taken about 5 weeks ago.

[jngreenlee]

Left turns into there will be a mess! And so close to the terrible Hobby Lobby/Wheatsfield vs Lamar interchange with the very long light pattern. Will be interesting.

[lzppjb]

At least they have a center lane in that area, so people turning left into the complex won't block northbound traffic. But it will require friendly southbound drivers during rush hour to get in there.

[AusTxDevelopment]

Originally Posted by jngreenlee

Left turns into there will be a mess! And so close to the terrible Hobby Lobby/Wheatsfield vs Lamar interchange with the very long light pattern. Will be interesting.

I can't remember the exact rules but depending on how many units they have they are supposed to have 2 exits. I wonder if they will have an exit into either Red Porch's parking lot (north) or the Retreat At Barton Creek's driveway (south), which is part of a lighted intersection with Pack Saddle Road. It may be that this is too small to require multiple exists. At least they changed the name from Eskew Place to GreenView. I was not a fan of the original name.

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by AusTxDevelopment

At least they changed the name from Eskew Place to GreenView. I was not a fan of the original name.

Did anyone here Eskew for your opinion?

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by _Matt

Looks very... vehicle oriented. Still good for density.

That was my first impression as well, a feeling of disappointment that there will be more blacktop fronting Lamar. But then I realized that the view from the west side of the complex is a major selling point, so they're probably trying to squeeze as many cars to the front and side(s) as possible.

What's the restaurant in the front? Is it something that's already there?

[corvairkeith]

Originally Posted by Tech House

What's the restaurant in the front? Is it something that's already there?

That's where the Golden Corral will be relocating.

[sammyk]

Originally Posted by corvairkeith

That's where the Golden Corral will be relocating.

I know you're joking but it already relocated to 35.

[drummer]

Perhaps the Taco Cabana from by the Pfluger Bridge?

[KevinFromTexas]

Facebook page and website for Greenview Condominums.

http://greenviewaustin.com/

https://www.facebook.com/greenviewaustin/timeline


https://www.facebook.com/greenviewau...type=3&theater


https://www.facebook.com/greenviewau...type=3&theater

View from 3rd floor looking west.

https://www.facebook.com/greenviewau...type=3&theater


https://www.facebook.com/greenviewau...type=3&theater


https://www.facebook.com/greenviewau...type=3&theater

[drummer]

So with these renderings from Kevin, one of the differences that stands out to me from an earlier picture from LoneStarMike (on 3/18) is the lack of a restaurant/coffee shop out front on Lamar. I wonder if that's not happening or if it's from a third party and perhaps later. Anyone know? I'd love to see Lamar have retail most of the way down in front of all of these developments as it'd encourage walking. The surface parking lot doesn't help with that, but you know...can't win 'em all.

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by drummer

So with these renderings from Kevin, one of the differences that stands out to me from an earlier picture from LoneStarMike (on 3/18) is the lack of a restaurant/coffee shop out front on Lamar. I wonder if that's not happening or if it's from a third party and perhaps later. Anyone know? I'd love to see Lamar have retail most of the way down in front of all of these developments as it'd encourage walking. The surface parking lot doesn't help with that, but you know...can't win 'em all.

The developer says they plan to build approx 2000 sqft stand alone restaurant space fronting Lamar, and lease/sell it to a local restaurant group/chef. Only problem will be turning left onto Lamar without a light.

[Jdawgboy]

Not bad really other than the surface parking, and in this case it makes sense, I think it will be a nice addition.

Man check out the picture with the skyline and the row of VMU's down Lamar. It really is amazing to see just how much it has changed over the last couple of years.

[LoneStarMike]

This was mentioned in the recent article in the Austin American Statesman about 70 Rainey:

The condo tower is the first Austin project for Sackman Enterprises, but more are on the way, said C.J. Sackman, the 27-year-old director of development for Sackman Enterprises. The company plans at least six projects in Austin over the next several years, Sackman said.

[SNIP]

The firm also has purchased the site on South Lamar Boulevard where the La Feria Mexican restaurant is located. The restaurant will continue to operate until Sackman Enterprises is ready to move forward with an office project there, C.J. Sackman said.

While it's good to see more development along S. Lamar, I'll miss the La Feria neon sign.



That and the Horseshoe Lounge sign are/were some of the best neon along S. Lamar.