Marriott to Las Manitas: Le Odio, Usted Debo Irse

Austin needs to grow up! We really need people to start seeing Austin as a city. We are not going to be able to attract big business and manufacturing facilities without it. These little businesses aren't doing anything for this city except making money for themselves and even that is minimal. It's time to start thinking up, as in high rises and larger office buildings. Yeah, it is a shame that music venues have to go, but the new office buildings and hotels will bring much more to this city. Also, for anyone who lives in the central / south area of Austin, your property values are going to skyrocket. Anyone with a house will soon be able to get one of these suckers from California to pay $500K plus for a 1500 sq. ft. pad!!!

All in all it's time for change and the only way to do that is to tear down and start over for the most part. What's been here obviously isn't working and something drastic needs to be done to change the image of this city. We need the conventions and we need more places for people to stay during SXSW. It's just the way it folks.

Oh...2nd street...it's mini-dallas...but don't worry, there are plenty of overpriced local boutiques that will charge you $300 a shirt, on S. First...and I'm pretty sure they're FROM Austin.

Careful, don't be TOO mainstream, you've lived in Austin for 14 years...it's 'bout time you went TOTALLY counterculture.

I've lived here all my life...and I am SO SICK of you-too-cool-for-anything-not-'weird' people. What a unique approach you have to being an "individual". Good for you. I bet you look inthe mirror and feel good about yourself. You lucky dog, you.

Post #32..."Seriously, if anyone can come on here and honestly divulge who they are and tell us how you're connected to the deal and what is really happening that would be great. As of now I'm sure most of us will stick with the high percentage story that the area is getting fucked over and Marriot doesn't give a rats ass about anything local, specifically LM and Esq."

I like that you want to call other people out and yet, you posted anon. too. Hmmm, something about pots calling kettles black?

Anyway...What makes you think b/c someone reads a newspaper they are "connected" to the deal?

Guess what...I lease an apartment, and I know that at anytime when my lease is up, my apartment can decide to not renew with me.

Is Las Manitas above contract LAWS now?

As I said M1EK, just disregard, you are always right. I guess there are no national chains or really absurly priced stores in the 2nd street district. Hey has anyone been to the Wich Which in Tempe or Gerogia? Also, there's a really cool Puma jump suit in the window of one of those stores for $300, anyone know if its still there?

"You're always coming back with "they'll be three more yadda yadda yadda" but in reality, there is only one Las Manitas and a Subway, Starbucks and a trendy clothing store with $200 t-shirts really just doesn't fill my heart with warm local business thoughts."

So the new 2nd street district is full of Subways and Gaps and Starbuckses? Could've fooled me.

A little more info on the Marriott/Las Mas negotiations from the Statesman this morning:

"[T]he developer buying the land has offered to give the sisters free rent through next August, plus moving expenses equal to a year's rent."

http://www.statesman.com/business/content/business/stories/realestate/09/27/27lasmanitas.html

Also, the Landmark Commission had Steve Sadowsky do a preservation on the history of the block at their meeting Monday night. Interesting (in a sad way) to see all the great buildings that were once on that block and have been torn down over the years. No action on declaring the existing structures landmarks, but it appears that a decision on that is coming.

M1EK - are you actually a commerical developer or involved with one job wise? While I'm all for anti-sprawl, I'm also for making sure that local businesses don't get the shaft. You're always coming back with "they'll be three more yadda yadda yadda" but in reality, there is only one Las Manitas and a Subway, Starbucks and a trendy clothing store with $200 t-shirts really just doesn't fill my heart with warm local business thoughts. Do you see where some of us are coming from here? If we didn't do this would we be a desolate little Texas town - no, we'd be like we have been and the way some of us like it and that hasn't been too bad. Personally I'm not a super trendy, hit the Foundation on my walk home from the other trendy bar, shop in an overpriced "grocery" store that has 1000 sq. feet type of person. I moved to Austin 14 years ago for a reason and got away from large metropolitan areas for a reason. While some things would be great for the Austin economy, huge ugly buildings with no windows is not what I consider progress. I consider it a future traffic problem, parking problem and overall congestion for the city that has no real public transportation plan for these thousands of people that will be in downtown, but of which, none of them actaully work down there. Just a little thought before the dollar signs is all I'm asking. But as usual, your post indicates that you are correct and the rest of us us are wrong so I guess just ignore the above rant.

"getting fucked over" now apparently means "not allowed to stay and pay below-market rent". I did not know that.

I would not expect Marriott Corporate to care, at all, about anything local. The developer is the one who would, and probably does.

Sources have already stated that there are no extended leases to be signed, no help to relocate, just words of encouragement from the multi-billionaire stating that yes, LM should relocate "somewhere". Glad he also stated that he was no in favor of the Save LM campaign.

Seriously, if anyone can come on here and honestly divulge who they are and tell us how you're connected to the deal and what is really happening that would be great. As of now I'm sure most of us will stick with the high percentage story that the area is getting fucked over and Marriot doesn't give a rats ass about anything local, specifically LM and Esq.

From what I hear, Marriott is NOT just throwing the owners (and the wittle kiddies) in the street. They made them an offer to extend their lease as long as possible, PAY for ANY moving costs, and assist, AT NO CHARGE, these business with relocating and any city approvals they need.

Where's the balanced story here? Have we LOOKED at both sides??

Thank God we are finally going to have 5 Marriot's downtown. nothing screams economic prosperity and betterment for our city than 5 of the same hotle chain within 10 miles of each other. Seriously, why is this guy and his company suck pricks? If its going to have street level retail (and that's great) why can't LM and Esq. have spots reserved for them at the current lease rates they have now? But I guess development is only good for the city if we destroy everything local and replace it with three chains in its place.

Well, that seems like a logical approach, but obviously Marriott doesn't see things the same way we do.

And seeing that it will take at least a year for them to get permits and variances before starting construction, you'd think that they would have the decency to provide the families of Escuelita with the lease extension that they are asking for so they can finish out the school year and have time to assess their options. But no lease extension has been provided and the parents still don't know if they'll have childcare past December.

Why couldn't the Las M, Escuelita, etc. be incorporated as street-level establishments adjoining the hotel?

I don't think we need another Mariott, and I'd like things to stay the way they are, but that's not really feasible -- so why is compromise out of the question? It'd be a good PR move for the hotel, if nothing else.

1. Don't feed the trolls.

2. I agree with Shilli. This doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing equation.

Nuke Las Manitas, or the little man!

Mark,

I've never seen you post here before - so please clue me in: what content have you provided that's been remotely helpful? I look back at ricardo's post #8, and it's freakin' obvious to me that he's mad that Las Manitas will have to move. What's "spin" about that?

white lodgings and marriott, are all about $$$$$ they are capitalist. they don't care a rats a#*! about what the people, including children, of austin want or need. To save these two cultural institutions, is not only saving austin or keeping it weird. it will perserve a diverse culture that is locallly owned by womin, that give a lot to many people and introduces children to another culture via food, music, art, and calor (warmth).

it's easy for one to say LM and Escuelita can move somewhere else, but reality is that it is not so simple. there are many things to consider. what is easy, is for these billion dollar companies to build around the existing non-billionaire, nor millionaire local hard working businesses.

Ricardo, Don't listen to M1EK. He's like this with every post. He's so negative and always puts a spin on what other people post. It's gotten to the point where I just skip over his posts and read other people's.

It's just sad to see this property being taken over by money-hungry suits when the current tenants actually care about Austin and support it's citizens through projects at Las Manitas and La Peña.

So tell me, where do i say that las manitas must stay where it is??

I say a lot... including my distaste for big business as usual... but never do i say it must stay where it is. the closest i come is saying the question, "So why don't they just move?"...

i said this was about a lot more than just the issue of las manitas having to move... i didn't say they had to stay.

Ricardo,

Your latest comment is kind of disingenuous, when I go back and read your first comment (#8). Are you pulling my leg?

ok... maybe i should just say it in english.

I am NOT saying that LAS MANITAS MUST STAY where is is now.

clear enough M1EK?

I AM saying... don't just do business as usual without giving a damn about those being displaced. have a heart. after all, it's a well respected restaurant (maybe not by you)... and a children's day care. (have anything against these "ilk"?)

Ricardo,

There is no way to feasibly develop this block to the extent desirable without requiring that some or all of these tenants move out. Most of the good stuff that's gone up downtown over the past 10-15 years is on blocks where "little guys" used to be; and now, thanks to the increased street-level retail, a lot MORE "little guys" get a chance to be there.

I categorically reject the idea that Las Manitas has a greater moral claim on their rented space than does any future tenant (especially since it's quite likely that the new development will have much more street-level retail space than currently exists on this block - so we're talking about ONE restaurant today versus maybe TWO OR THREE in the future). If you and your ilk think it's such a vital institution that must be preserved at all costs, why don't you make a counterbid to the Finleys for the property?

you read into my comments something that wasn't there. i am not against progress, which i see as inevitable. I do believe in the reinvestment into the downtown area... i believe it's good for the long term health of Austin.

I just don't believe it has to happen by stepping on the little guys.

What ever happened to caring about who you're displacing in your rush to build your next money maker? Why does it simpy have to be "of course they have to move... get out." Why not help to find a better solution than that? Why not care a little?

Re: DSK's comment, the Holiday House was a restaurant which is dearly missed in Tarrytown - and the only solution to having one (or a few) landlords having that kind of control (in this case, wacky vegetarian control) is to increase the SUPPLY of competing landlords. In Tarrytown's case, this means allowing some mixed-use zoning here and there so that maybe some buildings along Expedition get street-level retail (with less psychotic landlords). In downtown, it means supporting projects which bring along more street-level retail supply than they displace. That's where my "why do the 2 or 3 future restaurants have any less claim on the block than Las Manitas does" comment comes from. A lot of great stuff downtown would never have happened if we had always operated in this kind of "don't get rid of any existing businesses" model so favored by most commenters.

I THINK the Marriott project qualifies, even in its current ugly form. Shawn, do you know for sure, since you sound skeptical on this point?

I don't think what we've got there now staying there is a realistic possibility. Something is going to get built on that block, and I want it to be as effective as possible in creating a better urban environment. That block is extremely central and very important to the future of Austin.

My ideal would be to preserve all the existing structures on the west side of the block and to preserve the alley running N/S down the middle of the block. Marriott could build one new hotel on the SW corner (which could perhaps extend above Las Mas) and two more on the entire East half.

All three structures would have as much ground floor retail as possible, facing every direction, including towards the alley. The sidewalks would be widened and trees added along the street per the new city design regs.

I have to admit it seems a teensy bit odd to me to see such vehement objection to building large downtown-type buildings downtown. Keeping Austin Weird I guess.

I never understood the hubub over Holiday House either. When you rent rather than own, you have to entertain the possibility that the landlord may want to go in a different direction, be it dense downtown hotel or vegan strip mall.

I might feel more strongy if this wasn't the middle of downtown, and if the owners weren't so well-off. As it is, I'm sure they can find a new and improved location near by, and the community will support them. Or they could counterbid higher.

Shilli,

The ugliest boxiest possible hotel is a huge improvement for the city over what's there now, in terms of generating pedestrian traffic - which is, in case people forget, what keeps downtown 'local'. There was nothing weird about Austin's 1980s downtown - it was the typical drive-away-at-5:00 ghost town that most donut-hole sprawling cities collapsed into.

Ask Marriott to incorporate the existing structures somewhat? Sure. I'm all with you. But I'd take their ugly-ass designs over what we've got now, if those were the two choices.

Ricardo,

Your comment makes me dislike Las Manitas even more than I already did, and I already disliked them a lot.

The best thing for Austin's financial health (which keeps property taxes lower than they would otherwise be; which means we can all continue to afford to live and work here) is to put something up on this block more lucrative than a couple of short buildings and parking lots.

And the implication that Las Manitas, as a current tenant, has more claim to this spot than the 2 or 3 future restaurants which might be able to move in thanks to new street-level retail is morally suspect. Squatters' rights is a load of crap.

After reading his disgusting remark, I am boycotting Marriott. When my company tries to book me there on company trips, I'm telling them hell no and for them to book me at La Quinta. Screw Marriott. For those of you who don't see the bigger picture and how he represents everything that is wrong with Corporate America, you need to stop for a moment and think: what makes this city unique and not another Dallas or another Houston? It's places like Las Manitas that make Austin fun, charming, and special to live in.

I agree! It's a much more global issue. J. Willard Marriott isn't concerned about the people in Austin. He's not even concerned about whether the employees of his hotel will have chilcare. All he's concerned about is his pocket book. This is just another Wal-Mart in my opinion.

I'll be there. Thanks for the heads-up. This Marriott proposal is a travesty.

Yes, Las Manitas does own another building on the block... and it is and has been a good tenant at the building it currently resides in. So why don't they just move?

Well, although sometimes it may seem that the only issue here all about Las Manitas... it is NOT.

It about much more than that.

"Why should you hold up a several hundred million dollar investment because of a small little restaurant?"

Pity the foo who mess with las manitas!

Isn't Las Manitas' problem that they don't own their current building? I hate to see them move, but what do they plan to do? Buy the land from an unwilling seller? They can't force the landowner to sell to them, rather than Marriott.

EIFS is the sythetic stucco that covers most cheap buildings from the last 20 years. It doesn't allow water to escape, so most of those buildings now have mold growing inside their walls.

http://www.hadd.com/eifs/

Also, it looks tacky and wears badly.

what is EIF please?

Personally, I am as concerned with what what is being gained as with what is being lost. The two recently constructed Marriotts indicate that they aren't terribly concerned with materials, architecture, ground floor retail, etc. The proposed drawings for the new Marriots may be a little better, but not much - there appears to be a blank wall facing Congress, which to me is unnacceptable. I think if they were forced to integrate the existing structures, it would make the new building better in every way.

Thanks Mr. Marriott for the publicity. Your stupid comment ought to get people fired up enough to come to our happy hour. I have eaten at Las Manitas forever and my daughter attended Escuelita del Alma next door. Everyone come out and help us shut this moron up.

What he said may have been crocthety, but it was absolutely correct. They OWN A BUILDING ON THE SAME BLOCK TO WHICH THEY COULD RELOCATE.