Austin's urban growth.... (Houston, Dallas, San Antonio: house, to live in, professionals)

[DTXman34]

Originally Posted by hound 109

Everyone that I know likes Dallas (& Houston). We have friends there, have relatives there. We travel there often for Business and recreational events.

Hate's a strong word. You mis-use it and probably use it too often. I only hate lima beans, Isis & the Arlington Cowboys.

Unfortunately, that's been my experience. I know they're many Austinites, perhaps the majority that aren't like that. Too bad I've encountered very few of them.

I do hate Isis and the Arlington Cowboys as well

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

Thanks for the reasonable post. I wasn't meaning to say that Austin should turn into Dallas. Apparently just saying Dallas on this forum is akin to yelling bomb in a movie theater. I do agree that a lot of Austin when I visited in my college years was not that great and the development I see now has massively improved the city. It doesn't remind me of Houston or Dallas, but something on it's own. All I was wondering is if Austin was planning to continue the trend of improving it's cityscape.

Why is all development in this forum seen as some sort of "Dallas-ization" of the city?

when you go to the austin airport you see local chains with a local flavor. When you go to the DFW airport you see national chains. You could be in any airport.

Dallas is a lot like southern california, it is focused on presenting a wealthy beautiful image.

Austin is more like portland which embraces a dirty, more raw image (but an image nonetheless).


The big difference is in culture. A lot of the things like a flashy opera house, fancy museums come with wealth and materialism. The desire to pursue materialism over things that truly matter is a huge difference in culture.

In austin you can put family life first, the outdoors over indoor venues, and casual over fancy, local vs chain.

In the bay area, they have the highest number of plastic surgeries in the country. It is all about image and wealth, and showing how smart you are. Southern california is the same, although without the intellectual snobbery.

Dallas is also about wealth and showing how wealthy you are and going to places, like museum galas, to show how wealthy you are.

In austin, that is not the norm and people today wouldnt stand for it. However it is changing with so much wealth coming from other places.

The solution is to ensure there is affordable housing so that the central core isnt just a playground for the rich. The answer for affordable housing is to change zoning so that multifamily can be built where there were only SFH lots before.

[radiolibre99]

Originally Posted by riaelise

If I wanted a New York experience, I would have stayed in New York. While I relocated due to love, I would have not relocated if I was basically swapping one big city for another. I don't care about upscale dining and shopping - I buy outlet and off the rack yet my closet is stocked with fancy names. Coming from the East coast, why would I want a place to emulate the west coast? Heh.

One of the things I loved about Austin was its people, the laid back vibe, the slower pace of living. I can live without the world class stuff. I openly admit that I am a suburbanite for life, and even that term is loosely used because my ideal situation would be living in Georgetown, by the square, in one of the old Victorians or having a nice home on some acreage, but I digress..probably where I live now is as good as it gets at this stage of my life.

But I'm not talking about the outskirts. Austin metro reminds me of the Bay Area. You have SF and then the surrounding towns which keep their charm. I thought Austins plans were to grow something akin to that. How does that affect someone wanting to live in Georgetown? I don't understand how having upscale dining and shopping and world class amenities in the inner core will somehow ruin all of Austin. I was working out near Pluggerville and it felt country as heck in some parts, but I didn't see development changing it up drastically.

Are you guys talking strictly about suburban and exurban development?

[centralaustinite]

I think your fundamental mistake is in the phrase "Austin plans"! Sure there is zoning (and changing with Code Next) but this isn't some Soviet state with five year economic plans, private investors, private developers, private money is what builds Austin. Individual residents and even the CoA government itself have little input.

And SF is a horrible model that no city on earth should seek to emulate! A childless city, a city that lacks density, a city riven between the very rich and the very poor.

Austin used to be a place where things were created and that ethos still exists in places but increasingly Austin is a place where "cool" is consumed. Risks are now too high -- ie land and rent cost too much -- for the kind of experimentation (urban farms, Sekrit theater, Cathedral of Junk, HOPE gallery) that made Austin interesting to thrive.

[radiolibre99]

Originally Posted by Austin97

when you go to the austin airport you see local chains with a local flavor. When you go to the DFW airport you see national chains. You could be in any airport.

Dallas is a lot like southern california, it is focused on presenting a wealthy beautiful image.

Austin is more like portland which embraces a dirty, more raw image (but an image nonetheless).


The big difference is in culture. A lot of the things like a flashy opera house, fancy museums come with wealth and materialism. The desire to pursue materialism over things that truly matter is a huge difference in culture.

In austin you can put family life first, the outdoors over indoor venues, and casual over fancy, local vs chain.

In the bay area, they have the highest number of plastic surgeries in the country. It is all about image and wealth, and showing how smart you are. Southern california is the same, although without the intellectual snobbery.

Dallas is also about wealth and showing how wealthy you are and going to places, like museum galas, to show how wealthy you are.

In austin, that is not the norm and people today wouldnt stand for it. However it is changing with so much wealth coming from other places.

The solution is to ensure there is affordable housing so that the central core isnt just a playground for the rich. The answer for affordable housing is to change zoning so that multifamily can be built where there were only SFH lots before.

That's totally respectable and I didn't mean to say that it needed to uproot its culture and vibe. I think it's what makes Austin great. But I did find its half Bay Area, half Portland. It did remind me of San Jose in some parts and Portland in others so I see the battle for the soul of the city.

That's why I'm torn too and was sucked in by the low stress vibe of the outter city and the natural landscape. But there is still this incessant nagging that I have to live in a big city. It's unexplainable and I don't know why but I know it's just more stress and this need to live in a big bustling relevant place. At the same though I felt Austin was more connected to the cultural zeitgeist than Houston and it felt more hip and connected to the centers of pop culture too. So there's that too.

Heck I get the hype and I understand why you guys fight tooth and nail to keep Austin the way it is.

[JJG]

Originally Posted by centralaustinite

And SF is a horrible model that no city on earth should seek to emulate! A childless city, a city that lacks density, a city riven between the very rich and the very poor.

...San Francisco?

Explain.

[radiolibre99]

YEs SF is pretty packed in. More so than Manhattan in some parts.

[hornraider]

Some people over-romanticize about the idea of Austin rather than the reality of it being just another fast-growing city. ATX has its unique vibe being buried by its growth, its happening to many cities. IMHO, all the big Texas cities are way more alike than ANY city in CA or the east coast. Its kind of like that commercial where the janitor compares himself to the custodian. I'm pretty sure if Houston, Dallas, S.A., and F.W., were all small cities today, they would seem more authentic and different from each other.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

YEs SF is pretty packed in. More so than Manhattan in some parts.

SF is pretty dense (especially when looking at population weighted density).

However (and possibly this is what the other poster was referring to) it's extremely adverse to adding any new additional density, especially via additional height.

This has lead to SF's affordability crisis.

[DTXman34]

Originally Posted by Austin97

when you go to the austin airport you see local chains with a local flavor. When you go to the DFW airport you see national chains. You could be in any airport.

Yawn. Typical Austin pretentiousness - "We're so local and authentic. Dallas is nothing but generic chains blah blah blah." Have you been to Dallas Love Field lately? Plenty of places there with local flavor. Heck, even DFW Airport has a lot shops with Cowboy hats, boots, etc. I also see plenty of chains at Austin-Bergstrom as well. Another thing to factor is the sheer size of DFW Airport compared to Austin's and the fact it's a major airline hub -- no **** there's going to be a ton of chains. Doesn't matter if it's JFK, DFW, LAX, etc.

If you excuse me, I gotta head down to 7-Eleven. You know, that generic chain.... that started in Dallas! Yes that's right, the world's first convenience store which started in Dallas. Here I thought I must be living in a creative desert.