Austinist: The Accidental Gentrifist: Maim that Tune - Living Next Door to Greatness

Benj

Sun, 02 Dec 2007 11:22:33 -0600

I don't think Deville is doomed. Sacrificial lamb for another venture, maybe. But certainly not doomed. I know a missing wall and scary circus tent isn't 'progress', but I'd argue that not doing anything in the moment beats making the wrong move, or even a good move at the wrong time. They usually know what they're doing, and now that I've left that sphere for 'the world', I can appreciate how smart and savvy those guys are.

Arsenal

Sat, 01 Dec 2007 06:04:10 -0600

You prolly right. I just don't really care but increasing apparent value is good for a buyout even if it's on the cheap as it apparently is. Potential revenue is a bargaining chip for higher value vis a vis a buyout. Positioning/negotiation. I'm a little suspicious. The advance of development hasn't really progressed beyond knocking down a wall and erecting a rented fenced/tent/crappy back bar area since a few months. Seriously. That place is doomed. I'm also drunk at the moment.

Benj

Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:44:27 -0600

Short memory, Arse? The Deville expansion was a basic, straight-up desire, made possible by an internal change within the company just after most of that block narrowly avoided becoming a condo. If I recall, at one point 3 or so years back, it was within the realm of possibility that Deville would be leveled and move shop to the mixed-use currently erecting itself across the street.

Arsenal

Thu, 29 Nov 2007 06:55:25 -0600

I got nothing. Transmission is a hedge. DeVille expanding is a value grab anticipating a buyout/condo. JMO.

Edie

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:09:59 -0600

Oh no, Austin, please don't grow up.....stick with the tight jeans and patch-quilted hoodie and I can live vicariously through you.

mdahmus

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:03:59 -0600

cram, the simple fact that so many other people have jumped in here to say "YEAH, THOSE CONDO DWELLERS SHOULD JUST SHUT UP!" might be a hint that the sarcasm wasn't detectible for many, not just me. GrapeApe, you're hopeless. I get to hear a lot of the Eastwoods/Hancock complaining about Stubbs. And they're not new - these are the same people who have been complaining about noise for at least as long as I've been here; and they live in HOUSES, not condos. There is no evidence whatsoever that's remotely reliable, as truecraig has pointed out, that the complaints are condo-driven - everybody who has been verifiably complaining in public at these meetings has been a single-family homeowner.

cram

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:54:31 -0600

Kat, There's actually a great market for renting condos downtown during SXSW and ACL Fest to out-of-towners. I know a few people that leave town and rent out their condos, because SXSW isn't their thing. I would guess that the Zilker condos will have the same demand for ACL Fest.

KatintheHat

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:30:05 -0600

I agree with an accumulation of points mentioned in here. 1) You move to downtown Austin, you should damn well know what you're getting into. 2) It's not that hard to soundproof the new condos since they DO know what they're getting into. As for all the festivals (ACL, FFFFest) they're only freaking once a year... It's not like people in Zilker or the North Campus area can't say, "Gee, this weekend is that big festival. I hate music. I should go out of town that weekend so I don't have to deal with it."

cram

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:02:23 -0600

Benj, The sarcasm in your entry was borderline obvious, just because so many people in Austin actually think what you were lampooning. You weren't over the top enough, I suppose, for me to be completely sure. Anyway, I just thought of those questions about the expansions the other night. I haven't had a chance to ask around if anyone had any more insight. I'm not sure how they are "off-mark" though. It's been pretty obvious that a condo building was going into the Reddy Ice lot for a long time, the Mohawk and Deville only recently really started expanding outside, etc. Is it "off-mark" to think that set of residences across the street from Deville wouldn't add to Deville's business? Like I said, I'm assuming the owners' of both of those establishments know what they're doing even if it seems counterintuitive right now.

Mowank

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:51:38 -0600

Stubb's will be moving their stage to face south/southwest towards 6th Street during the remodel.

anns

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:29:04 -0600

Lucky you, living next to a band! All the bands that used to live on our street have been gentrified out of our central 'hood.

Benj

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:12:06 -0600

Cram, YoYoMa, please see comment No.6. It's pretty clear that I'm lampooning the people crying about the condos, not joining them Further Cram, speaking of irony, I think it's pretty odd you suggest I do research for a tongue-in-cheek editorial, then offer your off-mark opinions on the Deville/Mohawk expansions. I worked there for a little over six years, so if you want to actually know about timelines and reasons, you can ask me. Or them. Don't know if that qualifies as a 'journalism task', editorial-talkin'-guy. For the record, and to contribute to the above noise violation anecdotes, most of our noise complaints came from a residence on the hill (now gone), and guests in a large hotel a couple blocks away... guests who no doubt moved here later, and then bought condos. (Please see comment No.6 again-- no cyan just yet)

cram

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:53:47 -0600

Grape, Understand your point completely, but I'm still wondering who/where these bars/condos are. There's a set of older condos (very Melrose place, btw) diagonally behind Opal Divines (I think Sandra Bullock's Bess or whatever is in front of them). I could see music from Key Bar (Is that what its called next to Wahoos?) or Mother Egans or Opals causing havoc for these condos. But, none of those places are really music venues -- only Momos could possibly be considered a venue. Is the music on too loud at Little Woodrows and people are confusing that with a live music venue? And there are all the new condo buildings (Plaza, Tower, etc) on W 5th/6th. But, once again, I can't imagine how the volume at any "music venue" could possibly be loud enough given that the residences in those new towers don't start until the 3rd, 4th, or higher floors up. The existing condos have been there for years and years, so these noise complaints aren't anything new. There are so few condos in that area that I'm just really skeptical that its not just a bad egg or two (which yes, is all that it takes). I just don't buy it.

cram

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:47:42 -0600

True, I don't know why I put op-ed. I meant to just put editorial. It must be Monday. I agree with what you're saying there, and I'm glad to learn that I'm not the only one scratching his head about Deville/Mohawk's expansion decisions. For what its worth, its not impossible (nor THAT expensive) to soundproof (relatively speaking) those new condos during construction. If they did an even half-assed job doing that, most of the owners would probably be ok with it. Just think about it: Who is buying a $200-500k condo across the street from 3 venues (Deville, Mohawk, Stubbs) without some sort of expectation regarding noise? Those people are probably unaware that the Mohawk is loud as can be on a Tuesday night, but they're also stoked to be able to walk to Stubbs to see Willie. Point is, they're not going to be appearing from a vacuum without knowing what they're getting into on their investment.

Grape Ape

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:41:13 -0600

Several along W. Sixth Cram. My main point was a bit of sarcasm in response to M1EK's assertion that absolutely no condo owners complain about noise and that its is only the NAs that don't share his view of the perfect city brining complaints.

truecraig

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:56:27 -0600

If condo owners are already complaining in any official capacity (not, "I heard about this dude who complained to a guy about..." because those complaints don't change public policy), then it's the first I've heard of it. But that doesn't mean it isn't a possibility worth bringing up, considering the circumstances. Cram, I often wonder the same exact thing about Deville and Mohawk, and what their owners' visions of the future for Red River are. Why choose NOW to expand? But they were both, though perhaps to a lesser extent, music venues long before the plans for the condos were drawn up. So was Stubb's, which last I heard, was expanding all the way out to those abandoned-looking warehouses across the street from the condos' south side. Are all these music venues just shit-outta-luck if the condo-owners-to-be deem the noise to be suddenly unacceptable? I'm guessing yes. Sure, I'm just speculating here, because I can't see the future. But I'm having trouble believing that those who can actually afford to live in those condos will forever be cool with being half-surrounded by late-night outdoor music venues. Though I'm open to being wrong about that. Op-ed = opposition (or opposing) editorial, written and published in response to a non-hyphenated variety of editorial. The comments section is pretty much the "open" op-ed section of the ist.

Elizabeth S.

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:48:57 -0600

When I was in jr. high, my best friend lived across the street from Retarted Elf. That is all.

cram

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:34:07 -0600

Grape, I find it hard to believe that any existing music venues are close enough to existing condos to cause noise complaints, unless you're talking about 6th street pseudo-venues that back up to the Avenue Lofts. The Houlihans on 3rd went out of business, so the Railyard can not complain about live music from their rooftop stage any more. What bars are you talking about?

Benj

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:29:00 -0600

mdahmus, If Allen says it's cool, from now on I'll write in cyan or magenta whenever I feel like being especially ironical. Just to be, you know, clear.

cram

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:28:49 -0600

I really wish the Austinist* would do some mediocre investigative journalism and talk to existing downtown condo residents about noise violations, show attendance, etc etc etc. Other than the building mentioned in this entry (across from Mohawk) and (if you want to grasp for straws) the new Sabine Condos (above/behind Habana Calle 6), all the new condos are blocks and blocks away from any music venues. Unless you count the new buildings near La Zona Rosa/Austin Music Hall -- both of which are about as soundproof as you can get. And, I'm guessing that these kinds of nonsensical rants about condo-dwellers who might wind up shutting down live music in Austin really have more to do with Red River and less to do with La Zona Rosa, Austin Music Hall, or Cedar Street, right? Anyway, you've got hundreds of people living at the Railyard, Brazos Lofts, Avenue Lofts, etc who are closer to loudness than 99% of the new condo dwellers EVER will be. How many of THOSE people are complaining about live music vs the fire station, Harleys, dumpster clanking, whatever? It doesn't take Walter Cronkite to figure out that the people living at The Shore or Milagro or Monarch aren't complaining about loud live music, so why even pretend that its the case -- even if it does make for a slightly hysterical hair-on-fire op-ed piece? Here are some other thoughts, specific to the Reddy Ice condo building-- 1. Why would DeVille expand into a music venue (of sorts) knowing that a condo building is coming if they didn't think they could survive as a music venue? Years ago, what made DeVille awesome was that it was NOT a music venue and you could go unwind in a dark quiet bar with the same people you'd go to shows with. I suppose Side Bar and Creekside have taken that role for many of us, but DeVille's owners knew a condo building was coming so becoming a music venue seems counterintuitive. 2. Same with Mohawk being opened and/or expanding outside. The condo building was zoned and coming when that place was Velvet Spade (and probably Le Priveledge and/or Caucus Club). Why put all that capital investment into a great new music venue across from a potential clusterfuck? Both DeVille and Mohawk probably could have succeeded as non-venue spots and increased their business because they would have hundreds of new customers across the street. Now it seems like they're both set up to be points of contention because of potential noise violations. Side question: How the hell are people who live in condos complaining when most of the condos aren't even built yet? *Feel free to substitute the Austin Chronicle or Austin Statesman; This isn't a very difficult journalism task.

Grape Ape

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:28:43 -0600

M1EK, You are not absolutely correct here. While the latest public chapter in the noise issue has been championed by NAs, I know several bar owners who have been approached numerous times by condo dwellers asking that they turn it down or not even have bands on certain nights. Hell, one even went as far to ask for bands to only be allowed to play on certain nights, because he goes out those nights and he wouldn't have a problem with that, but that they should really consider not having bands play the nights that he stays in because he said he really needs his rest those nights. Just a little selfish maybe - or even better, an example of what type of people are really moving into the condos?

YoYoMa

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:27:44 -0600

Another day, another baseless crybaby rant about condos. I could hear FFFFest from Mopac virtually anywhere central. ACL can be heard all over the place. Why is it assumed condo owners would be complaining when these areas are full of regular housing? Oh, right, because condos are the symbol of evil in Austin.

truecraig

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:10:28 -0600

While working the FFFFFFFest at Waterloo Park, a concerned citizen from NORTH CAMPUS (lived near 29th and San Jacinto) rode up on his bike and requested that the festival "turn it down" because it was so loud in his backyard that he couldn't read The New Yorker in his hammock or some shit. I 'splained to him that it was the echo down the creek, that it was physics who was harshing his buzz (just as what happens with Stubb's) but he seemed convinced that all of Austin was being destroyed by The Rock and that we were simply being difficult about it. Perhaps he’s right. I’m not fit to judge. What I do know is that wherever you find someone DOING something, you will also find their loud detractors. Everyone has been (or will be) on both sides of that fence. The question here is whether or not the condos being built next to established booze/music venues will suddenly start crying about the noise level when they knew damn well, WAY beforehand, that the noise would come with the real estate. My guess is yes, they will complain. Loudly. And if they choose to rally for more quiet, they will be victorious, probably for the reasons Ben mentions: "scene maturity". If that comes to pass, then the new meeting point of Austin's evolving youth culture will likely need to move. Maybe to The Domain. And Austin will, again, change. Takes all kinds, I 'spose.

mdahmus

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 11:43:39 -0600

For the five billionth time, it's NOT THE CONDO PEOPLE that are complaining about sound - it's the people in the Zilker and Bouldin and Eastwoods and Hancock neighborhoods living in old houses (most of them have been there for a very long time; and are constantly raising this issue; if you've been here even five years, this hasn't been the first time).