AUSTIN | 300 Colorado | 446 FEET | 32 FLOORS | COMPLETE

[The ATX]

Here's the Statesman's version. It's been out since about 5:00PM yesterday, and there are no hateful comments about all sorts of things (at the time of my posting.)

http://www.mystatesman.com/business/...2Q0b1bseiKKgM/

[clubtokyo]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Here's the Statesman's version. It's been out since about 5:00PM yesterday, and there are no hateful comments about all sorts of things (at the time of my posting.)

http://www.mystatesman.com/business/...2Q0b1bseiKKgM/

There is a shit ton of hateful comments on the Statesmen Facebook post about this tower.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by clubtokyo

There is a shit ton of hateful comments on the Statesmen Facebook post about this tower.

The haters have since been distracted by 6th & Guadalupe. LOL.

[The ATX]

The sentiment expressed during the Design Commission meeting (as well as on here) seems to be more about saving the Warehouse District in general and not so much about saving this particular building. If anyone other than me watched that exciting meeting video, the developers did consider the character of the Warehouse District with the design at street level. They purposely chose to use stones/bricks of a small size and of a color to fit with the area. This is from the meeting presentation:

[The ATX]

This project was discussed on the Monday night (08/28) Historic Landmark Commission meeting. No word on the outcome, but those who don't care for this project may be happy to know what the staff recommended:

Initiate historic zoning or postpone until September 25, 2017 to fully evaluate options for
the future of this building. This building is too important to the character of the
Warehouse District to not entertain and evaluate options other than strict demolition.

There's a lot of history in the backup files:

http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=282751
http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=282754

[AustinGoesVertical]

One idea would be to gut the entire interior and literally just keep the exterior walls as a skin for the lobby. Could build the necessary support beams right up against it and then go vertical with a slight overhang. Isn't Hotel Zaza actually utilizing bricks from the original buildings in their street level facade. I see many options for this project moving forward while preserving some of this current structure. Sullivan's is already closing for it so would it just sit empty for years? I think this project would increase the density in that area so I'm personally all for it.

[The ATX]

The Historic Landmark Commission voted to go with the staff recommendation. They are going ahead with the process to designate the Sullivan's building as historic, and postponed discussion about 300 Colorado until the September meeting. I interpret this as an attempt to kill the project, but I'm not sure.
Trying to designate a building as historic after a site plan is filed seems to be the same thing as trying to add a CVC to site after a site plan was filed. In the case of the proposed CVC changes, we know that projects with filed site plans will be grandfathered in and only the old CVCs will apply.

[MichaelB]

happy to take the possibly minority view here.
Glad the city it taking action to look at historical status of what warehouses are left.
Glad they are getting off their ass about this.
It it the nature and fabric of the warehouses that caused this area of town to blossom when it did. To loose this all is to loose a great depth and texture in the urban landscape.

I disagree that this is a parallel to the CVC. The CCV was a created entity that was overlaid over the city. It did suck for the values of some property. AND also caused other property to increase in value.
Having buildings designated historical can happen at any moment in a process and anyone involved in this project knows that.

The developers knew this could be designated historical. If you recall , they lied about it in their applications.....( scroll up to find). Why else would they do that if they weren't trying to slip this in under the radar. Obviously they have no interest in the fabric of the city.
Besides.... thats one bland filler design.

I think we have so many projects happening its great to be more selective and work to not be another generic city.

Have at it ya'll... just think where you want to live and why before you tell me there is no value in less generic more unique design and cites.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

happy to take the possibly minority view here.
Glad the city it taking action to look at historical status of what warehouses are left.
Glad they are getting off their ass about this.
It it the nature and fabric of the warehouses that caused this area of town to blossom when it did. To loose this all is to loose a great depth and texture in the urban landscape.

I disagree that this is a parallel to the CVC. The CCV was a created entity that was overlaid over the city. It did suck for the values of some property. AND also caused other property to increase in value.
Having buildings designated historical can happen at any moment in a process and anyone involved in this project knows that.

The developers knew this could be designated historical. If you recall , they lied about it in their applications.....( scroll up to find). Why else would they do that if they weren't trying to slip this in under the radar. Obviously they have no interest in the fabric of the city.
Besides.... thats one bland filler design.

I think we have so many projects happening its great to be more selective and work to not be another generic city.

Have at it ya'll... just think where you want to live and why before you tell me there is no value in less generic more unique design and cites.

Well, I happen to agree with you. I would hate to see the building housing Sullivan's go. Without me getting on a soapbox about how cool Austin used to be back in the day, I agree we can't get rid of ALL the establishments that were the catalyst of bringing the progress and growth we are seeing today. Just as important to me, not building tall on that lot will at least open up that area to a bit more sky and an openness feel. Not every part of town needs to be incredibly dense, not at the mercy of the few recognizable establishments and buildings we have left. I do think that block should be left alone.

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by The ATX

This project was discussed on the Monday night (08/28) Historic Landmark Commission meeting. No word on the outcome, but those who don't care for this project may be happy to know what the staff recommended:



There's a lot of history in the backup files:

http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=282751
http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=282754

I'm all for preserving historical buildings, but once you get to the conclusion at the end of the second backup file, it sounds like the building has been significantly changed. I guess I don't completely understand why it should still qualify as historic.

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by paul78701

I'm all for preserving historical buildings, but once you get to the conclusion at the end of the second backup file, it sounds like the building has been significantly changed. I guess I don't completely understand why it should still qualify as historic.

Not sure if it does. I'm happy its getting looked at.

But To be honest part of this is just point of view. I have no need to see more for just mores sake at this point. I'm looking for interesting texture , variety and architecture.
My days of cheerleading for height at all costs are over.

I hope it does get designated. I want that district to stay low and entertainment oriented..... Surrounded by high rises with interesting architecture.

Guess a lot depends on what you want out of your neighborhood.
And it is walkable for me....

[Jdawgboy]

I'm happy about this as well. If the developer really wants the tower built, there is a surface parking lot across the intersection that they can look into buying. I've also been very vocal about preserving the few warehouses that we have left.

Besides, we have 608 Guadelupe to look forward to!

[The ATX]

Here's the site plan with elevations beginning on page 26.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...rado_PLANS.pdf

[urbancore]

the coolest thing about this building is that is was a brothel.

I don't see anything "historic" about this building other than it's old memories for me and my friends partying in the warehouse district in the early 90's.

I won't miss it one bit, if I'm being honest.

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

the coolest thing about this building is that is was a brothel.

I don't see anything "historic" about this building other than it's old memories for me and my friends partying in the warehouse district in the early 90's.

I won't miss it one bit, if I'm being honest.

Having family in Austin and spending a lot of time in that area when I was in school, I would definitely not consider that specific building historic either (especially after reading the documents presented to the commission).

It's not even 100 years old. It is not architecturally significant. It's been heavily altered already. And, nothing interesting has happened within its walls (save the brothel which once occupied a part of it).

Maybe Riverside Resources can work with the commission and agree to save as much of the façade and incorporate it into the new structure. This idea has already been proposed on this thread - and I like it.

I smell an expensive lawsuit coming if the city tries to kill this project via a piecemeal historic zoning. If the city wanted to "save" this district, they should have done so YEARS ago.

[drummer]

Rather than preserve this building, maybe just having some historic feel (brick warehouse appearance) on the lower floors could suffice. That way it would at least match the area to a degree without having to mess with utilizing the existing facade, especially if it would require significant changes from their plans (not sure if it would).

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by drummer

Rather than preserve this building, maybe just having some historic feel (brick warehouse appearance) on the lower floors could suffice. That way it would at least match the area to a degree without having to mess with utilizing the existing facade, especially if it would require significant changes from their plans (not sure if it would).

They've already committed to that.

[drummer]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

They've already committed to that.

Oh, I misunderstood that. I've not been reading the thread very thoroughly while traveling. Thanks for the clarification.

[eskimo33]

I have never been a big fan of incorporating facade's into a buildings designs it seems like most of them end up being not all that well incorporated (at least here in Austin).
Look at 300 N Lamar
I think they should have at least extended the colour pallet down the entire side of the building, It currently looks like someone superglued this weird facade on the side. I would have preferred to see a continuation of the design for the entire side. However, I could see how some might feel that by continuing the design, it might be not truly representing the historic character.
I am sure that there are other examples around town, but this is the only one that I can think of..

[H2O]

Originally Posted by eskimo33

I have never been a big fan of incorporating facade's into a buildings designs it seems like most of them end up being not all that well incorporated (at least here in Austin).
Look at 300 N Lamar
I think they should have at least extended the colour pallet down the entire side of the building, It currently looks like someone superglued this weird facade on the side. I would have preferred to see a continuation of the design for the entire side. However, I could see how some might feel that by continuing the design, it might be not truly representing the historic character.
I am sure that there are other examples around town, but this is the only one that I can think of..

I generally agree, but the Dumas Blacksmith Shop façade incorporated into the podium of the Austonian is a very successful example of rebuilding an historic façade with a modern building.

https://goo.gl/maps/mmTX7Ahm1P92

I think they key was wrapping the façade around the corner a few feet, and the neutral band above the cornice line.