Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wasn't implying that the Domain matched Bellevue, simply that it is Austin's closest analog, understanding that Austin is a smaller and less urban metro across the board. It's a "second downtown" that is roughly the same distance from the real downtown. It offers a polished "walkable" lifestyle without real city problems (homeless and whatnot). It is a dense employment node, particularly for tech. It's a convenient place for people in further away suburbs to do city things like go out to eat (rather than trekking all the way downtown). Etc, etc. As I've mentioned a number of times, it will take substantial development for the area to match present day Bellevue, much less future Bellevue.
Yeah, I agree. I'd probably live there. But to me, the Domain isn't really unique. There's something similar in a lot of sunbelt cities. Scales will vary. There aren't a lot of places like Bellevue. Anyways, original comparison was an entire city versus a suburb.
Overall downtown Bellevue is much smaller than downtown Austin, and I'm not seeing how it's "more urban" in any way really. Perhaps it's roughly equal in Bellevue's best blocks (I wouldn't use the word "urban" to describe Austin to begin with). They are both walkable but also driveable. Austin has much taller buildings and massively more restaurants and nightlife.
None of this really says anything about walkability. It's just proximity of certain types of businesses. Austin's advantages would be narrower streets and downtown's volume of uses.
Bellevue isn't great to walk in due to wide roads and pushbuttons, but its commute mode splits are better. To quote myself, using the ACS: Bellevue was 13.3% transit commutes (its residents) vs. 3.3% for Austin in 2019. Walking 7.8% to 2.6%. Biking 1.6% to 1.1%. Drove alone 56.0% to 70.3%. Bellevue is basically Portland in its commute stats. That's before rail arrives, using city limits. Bellevue is a fraction of the size of Austin's population (by city limits) but it's also a post-war suburb, so that's pretty stark.
Someone mentioned tech in Downtown Bellevue. It's worth noting that Amazon isn't just growing there -- it's turned the tsunami of HQ1 into HQ1b, with millions of square feet of offices currently underway, totaling 8 towers between 14 and 43 stories in addition to what's already there.
The Domain would not impress many people outside of the south TBH. It's a business park with apartments, a mall, Whole Foods and a soccer field. I would absolutely live there but it's just not organic.
Bellevue to me, as a family guy who likes walkability, order, and cleanliness is pretty close to perfect. I lived in downtown Bellevue. Incredibly walkable, without the hoodlums and crazy drivers (for the most part). It's definitely not a place to party. It does have businesses though. Salesforce, Microsoft, UiPath and quite a few other tech companies have offices there. Amazon will as well. On the drive into Bellevue, it's downtown is comparable to many cities, though probably not Austin level.
His comments lead me to think he has not been to Bellevue.
Bellevue is high-density suburbia and most of the restaurants, bars and clubs are inside mall-type developments, which doesn't feel traditionally urban at all. Tacoma's urban core to me is by far the second most urban part of the Seattle metro area, because it has real urban bones and is highly walkable and pedestrian-scale. Bellevue feels more modern and is much safer and more expensive than Tacoma, with taller buildings, but on the ground Tacoma actually feels like a real city, Bellevue doesn't.
I'd say the U District is #2 for urbanity in the Seattle area, outside Downtown's orbit. If the concrete strike ends someday, it's also adding thousands of beds of student housing that are starting to fill in the gaps and up its vibrancy game.
Students are what Downtown Bellevue is lacking most, and they might be DT Austin's greatest advantage.
But Tacoma is on quite a roll. It has the Northwest's only real urban prairie, but the volume of apartment construction in core areas is getting pretty epic. UW Tacoma has grown from nothing to over 5,000 students, much of that in historic buildings that used to be derelict. The streetcar (or "light rail") is being extended this year (real light rail will arrive from Seattle in 2030 or so), it's getting real tourism due to the museum district (and casinos), and its Mt. Rainier view is 20 miles closer than from Seattle. I'd invest in Tacoma big time right now.
None of this really says anything about walkability. It's just proximity of certain types of businesses. Austin's advantages would be narrower streets and downtown's volume of uses.
Bellevue isn't great to walk in due to wide roads and pushbuttons, but its commute mode splits are better. To quote myself, using the ACS: Bellevue was 13.3% transit commutes (its residents) vs. 3.3% for Austin in 2019. Walking 7.8% to 2.6%. Biking 1.6% to 1.1%. Drove alone 56.0% to 70.3%. Bellevue is basically Portland in its commute stats. That's before rail arrives, using city limits. Bellevue is a fraction of the size of Austin's population (by city limits) but it's also a post-war suburb, so that's pretty stark.
Someone mentioned tech in Downtown Bellevue. It's worth noting that Amazon isn't just growing there -- it's turned the tsunami of HQ1 into HQ1b, with millions of square feet of offices currently underway, totaling 8 towers between 14 and 43 stories in addition to what's already there.
Comparing these stats makes no sense given that Austin is 10x larger in area... If you made a Bellevue sized city on top of downtown Austin it would easily win these. UT alone probably has more people that commute on foot than Bellevue has in the entire city.
The Census Dept. commute stats are about work, not school. I'm sure Austin would do better with college students.
But again Bellevue is a postwar suburb and doing pretty well with that in mind. It beats Denver, LA, and a lot of other core cities in work commute stats. It wouldn't do well in school commute stats, as its only major campus is a commuter school.
Bellevue is high-density suburbia and most of the restaurants, bars and clubs are inside mall-type developments, which doesn't feel traditionally urban at all. Tacoma's urban core to me is by far the second most urban part of the Seattle metro area, because it has real urban bones and is highly walkable and pedestrian-scale. Bellevue feels more modern and is much safer and more expensive than Tacoma, with taller buildings, but on the ground Tacoma actually feels like a real city, Bellevue doesn't.
Comparing these stats makes no sense given that Austin is 10x larger in area... If you made a Bellevue sized city on top of downtown Austin it would easily win these. UT alone probably has more people that commute on foot than Bellevue has in the entire city.
But then so would Clemson or the university of arkansas right?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
