SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (
-   Completed Project Threads Archive (
-   -   AUSTIN | GreenWater | 4 Towers | 39 FLOORS | 38 FLOORS | 35 FLOORS | 28 FLOORS (

KevinFromTexas Jun 17, 2009 6:59 PM

If we haven't heard about one yet, then one certainly won't happen by either of those two dates.

priller Jun 17, 2009 7:10 PM

Just wanted you to know they are actually tearing down stuff at the Green plant. I spotted bulldozers and rubble this morning while driving by.

Scottolini Jun 17, 2009 8:10 PM


Originally Posted by AustinSkyscrapers (Post 4307455)
We have a city pop. of 700,000+ and a metro pop. of 1,000,000+.

I hate to be too uptight about things, but I hear people say the "over one million" or "about one million" in regards to the Austin metro, and I get annoyed. The metro is actually about 1.7 million, and rapidly growing. But if that's too exact for you, and you want to round to the nearest million, then go ahead and say "almost 2 million". It's a heck of a lot closer to the truth.

Okay, now that I got that off my chest...;)

AustinSkyscrapers Jun 17, 2009 8:38 PM


Originally Posted by priller (Post 4311612)
Just wanted you to know they are actually tearing down stuff at the Green plant. I spotted bulldozers and rubble this morning while driving by.

That act has a possibility of being the site prep?

priller Jun 17, 2009 9:48 PM

No, not site prep. Just tearing down the plant.

AustinSkyscrapers Jun 17, 2009 10:09 PM

Oh thanks priller. For a moment I thought tearing down the plant would mean site prep. Oh boy.

StoOgE Jun 24, 2009 3:36 AM

I'm real glad the city went with a developer who can self finance this thing if it comes down to it. I really hope this all breaks ground next year.

Do we have any idea of a development timeline? Would it be like city center in Vegas where everything is constructed at once?

If this and T. Stacey actually get off the ground.. oh boy we will be cookin.

AustinSkyscrapers Jun 24, 2009 4:37 PM

And here's my percentage:

Green Plant & Seaholm Substation Redevelopment: 50%-Well, what you got to do with a abandoned plant and substation? We Austinites and Austonians don't want filler or filth in our skyline, especially when it comes to abandoned stuff. This thing might be too much to City Hall, so there's a "low" percentage.

KevinFromTexas Nov 22, 2009 3:06 AM

I was downtown today and just happened to drive by Green. They've just recently demolished the water tower. It was a bit of a surprise seeing it laying there. This water tower was 83 feet tall.

KevinFromTexas Nov 25, 2009 6:36 AM

Green proposal (with renderings) - and they're using one of priller's photos.

shakman Nov 25, 2009 2:26 PM

This will fill in the skyline towards the west quite well.

KevinFromTexas Nov 25, 2009 2:39 PM

Only the two green models in the rendering are part of the project. Every other building in the photo already exists, even the CG renderings of a couple of new buildings farther to the right, and extreme left.

I doubt those are the actual designs either, since this project was supposed to have about 4 or 5 towers, with the tallest ones rumored to be 650 to 725 feet. I'm thinking the towers will probably be closer to 400 or 500 feet though.

KevinFromTexas Nov 26, 2009 5:35 AM

Water tower demolition pics taken by our own 427MM.

phillyskyline Jan 15, 2010 4:53 PM

This project is super exciting, I woudl luv to see all these towers built at once... Austin would automatically be a top 10 skyline in the US with this project IMO.

Thymant Jan 15, 2010 10:14 PM

When is this supposed to start?

Scottolini Jan 18, 2010 11:27 PM


Originally Posted by Thymant (Post 4652056)
When is this supposed to start?

It's supposed to start later this year, after the decommissioning and deconstruction of the plant is complete.

I do believe the road extensions, and new central library will begin construction in the next year or so, but there will be delays on the rest of the project.

Thymant Jan 20, 2010 3:00 AM

I can't wait! So this will be using the Trammell crow design with 5 towers?

wwmiv Jan 20, 2010 4:23 AM

Yes, the Trammell Crow proposal.

migol24 Feb 10, 2010 6:36 PM

i still would have preferred stratus properties. too bad though... such a waste of a beautiful design. that 600' footer would've been a landmark building... very modern. the whole design really captured the idea of what austin is trying to be. i believe had that design been chosen downtown would've been a thriving one rivaling the best not only in texas but in the nation. and i'm not just talking skyline-wise here. i don't understand why they chose the trammel crowe properties... the designs look very uninspiring. unlike stratus designs which were modern, original, provided density a la vancouver and were "greenhouse" friendly just the same... trammel crowe on the other hand seemed like they just wanted to go with the taller and cheaper designs with no density or creativity or anything really. and the whole h-e-b idea would've been great. just walking distance from lamar and whole foods headquarters. what a shame. i really hope trammel crowe does some good with their designs and hopefully will be much different than the original ones. either way that stratus 600' footer still would've been a great wonder to look at in our skyline. what a shame.

migol24 Feb 10, 2010 6:49 PM


Originally Posted by AustinSkyscrapers (Post 4301013)
A really nice project here guys! It looks like a city on its own with trees, a power plant (Abandoned though), solar panel field, lots, roads, a major road, a stream, a park, courts, swimming pool, and skyscrapers! "Green Water City". I really want these buildings to be built. It may even be a new borough in Austin!

still not as nice as stratus properties... it looks very stupid in my honest and blunt opinion. too much open spaces... no density, no creativity. it won't bring people in... just the rich people living there. 2nd street district will keep opening unsuccesful businesses like it's been happening these last 2 years. no one goes there... no one can afford it. it's not vibrant. it's not active. it's not appealing. just looks like a closed neighborhood for rich people that has very tall buildings. it doesn't even seem like austin to me. i could be so very wrong... and i truly hope i am. and if someone has a better understanding of this project let me know... cause i really don't get it. will this project bring in more retail, shops and restaurants thus creating more jobs? will it FINALLY bring a crowd in like everyone assumes 2nd st district does? cause 2nd street is a boring and overrated spot. even the people that live there don't make a big deal of it. the stratus properties seemed to bring in that diversity that 2nd st was lacking... and this trammel crowe doesn't seem like it at all. i'm sorry but i'm not really feeling it. everyone talks about houston this and finally austin will be like houston and or this and that. have you been to houston downtown? nothing but office buildings and businesses and the people walking around are the office clerks and ceo's that work there and the homeless people bumming the workers around downtown. think of sanfrancisco, vancouver, new york... houston is nothing like those places. i assumed austin was trying to bring in that urban feel to it.... and with the trammel crowe it just doesn't feel like it. maybe i'm looking way into this. i don't know.

All times are GMT. The time now is 9:09 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.