East Austin Gentrification: Hallelujah! (Round Rock: shop, move, bills)

[verybadgnome]

Originally Posted by TXEX06

This thread is hilarious! The original east side residents keeping their property a "dump" allowed investors to make a stealing.

The hipsters will move out once wally world and chains start opening up shop.

One of the great things about older neighborhoods is they were built before the ascent of automotive-centric planning. Thus we have restaurants like Buenos Aires with only a few parking spaces, sites that the chains will avoid like the plague. Fine by me as I never drive to east Austin restaurants. Of course East 7th and a few other streets and the like do have more potential in this regard, but they are in the minority.

[Komeht]

It has excellent proximity to downtown. Nothing will prevent it from gentrifying except making the connections into CBD worse than they already are.

[balor123]

I love E Austin and think it has nice character already. However, I don't see why it can't change and still have nice character. The residents just need to first agree on what they would like it to look like (unlikely to happen) and then make sure that their opinions are well known. Developers don't care what they build, they just want to build something and make money in the process.

But, the residents of E Austin also need to realize that they aren't an island. They have greatly benefited from their proximity to downtown Austin for decades and the sacrifices that those neighborhoods have made to make it that way for them. They are sitting on valuable and irreplaceable land which urban planners can't work around and it's their turn to pay it forward. Issues at stake here are not just whether people think their neighborhood is pretty but also whether housing is affordable to the population at large, how long people sit in traffic and how much pollution is created in the process, and even things like whether businesses move to Austin or other cities.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by balor123

I love E Austin and think it has nice character already. However, I don't see why it can't change and still have nice character. The residents just need to first agree on what they would like it to look like (unlikely to happen) and then make sure that their opinions are well known. Developers don't care what they build, they just want to build something and make money in the process.

But, the residents of E Austin also need to realize that they aren't an island. They have greatly benefited from their proximity to downtown Austin for decades and the sacrifices that those neighborhoods have made to make it that way for them. They are sitting on valuable and irreplaceable land which urban planners can't work around and it's their turn to pay it forward. Issues at stake here are not just whether people think their neighborhood is pretty but also whether housing is affordable to the population at large, how long people sit in traffic and how much pollution is created in the process, and even things like whether businesses move to Austin or other cities.

How about "the original residents just need to agree on what they would like it to look like"? Can you lget on board with that, or do you mean "the newcomer residents just need to agree on what they would like it to look like and everyone who was already there just needs to do what they're told"? That's the attitude of the OP, and I think it's a shameful one but one all too common these days.

[balor123]

Who are the original residents? Native Americans? People who built the first homes 300 years ago? 50 years ago? 10 years ago? We're all newcomer residents, some just to a lesser degree. The foundation of all civilized societies is that everyone just needs to do what they're told. We're fortunate in that unlike a lot of other societies, we get to provide our input about what we're told we have to do. The strongest societies are the ones which resist attempts to disrupt that balance, whether it be from newcomer or original residents. By my observation, this country leans strongly towards original residents and its a strong contributor to many of our problems (for that matter, you can see it even in places like China and the USSR as well).

[scm53]

Originally Posted by balor123

The foundation of all civilized societies is that everyone just needs to do what they're told. We're fortunate in that unlike a lot of other societies, we get to provide our input about what we're told we have to do.

Dude, you are in the wrong state for that approach. We have gotten along just fine for 178 years on the principle that the individual - not government, not 'society" - is preeminent.

[Raskolnikov]

Here's an interesting poll. https://twtpoll.com/vq1klnq124nilkh Related to the 'Austin Revealed' PBS program about the racial divide in Austin. Relevant to this topic. Wonder what people think. Is Austin progressive? Not as progressive as it sees itself?

[balor123]

Who is we? I was born and raised in Texas. I'm an "original resident". However, I'm not anywhere near 178 years old.

Anyway, I think you misunderstood my statement. I didn't state that you need to be told what to do, just that when you are told you need to do it. How much you need to be told depends on where you live. There's a lot more interaction between people in cities so more telling tends to be needed there. Out in bumble, very little is needed. East Austin isn't bumble.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by balor123

Who is we? I was born and raised in Texas. I'm an "original resident". However, I'm not anywhere near 178 years old.

Anyway, I think you misunderstood my statement. I didn't state that you need to be told what to do, just that when you are told you need to do it. How much you need to be told depends on where you live. There's a lot more interaction between people in cities so more telling tends to be needed there. Out in bumble, very little is needed. East Austin isn't bumble.

Well, if we're going to go there, my people on both sides were in Texas before it was Texas. The point, though, is that there are some people who insist on moving somewhere and then doing their dead level best to make it into where they came from or their idea of the "ideal place" and then complain when the people who were there before they showed up who liked it just fine or who were, after long experience with the place and intimate knowledge of its vices and virtues, getting rid of the former and keeping the latter, don't immediately fall into line and change what THEY like to what the newcomer likes. When these folks move to the country from the city, the term that is often applied to them is citiots. When they move from one state to another, the "welcome to X, now go home" signs start appearing (which apply for the most part not to everyone from their original state but just to that kind of person - some states seem to have more of that kind originally, though). When they go to another country, they're called Ugly Americans.

And, no, "more telling" doesn't need to be done ANYWHERE. You are in the wrong state, and for the most part in the wrong country, for that attitude, as stated.

[Raskolnikov]

Looking at the original post, I wonder when hipsters will start wearing skinny KKK robes 'ironically'.