AUSTIN | Block 16 | 590 Feet | 41 Floors | Approved

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

And which one is that? The 16 floor one that's kinda like IBC?

Check the update thread. Kevin posted about it after it showed up in yesterday's AULCC files.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by myBrain

I can't be the only one who hates scrolling through PDFs.

This looks like a tall version of Gensler's Domain towers.

I remember George Blume had posted some models to one of his accounts photo accounts that he shared here. It was the one where he was blindfolded and was putting his hands on the building models and being able to tell which one was which. I remember in that account he had, he had a collection of models just sitting on the table. One of those, I remember, looked a lot like this one. I remember thinking to myself, man, that looks like a significant tower height-wise. Does anyone still have a link to that account of his? George?

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I remember George Blume had posted some models to one of his accounts photo accounts that he shared here. It was the one where he was blindfolded and was putting his hands on the building models and being able to tell which one was which. I remember in that account he had, he had a collection of models just sitting on the table. One of those, I remember, looked a lot like this one. I remember thinking to myself, man, that looks like a significant tower height-wise. Does anyone still have a link to that account of his? George?

I remember that. The photo may be posted in the Third + Shoal thread. But that thread is too long and vile for me to want to spend time parsing through it.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I'm confused.... So is the the shorter of the two (possible) proposed towers that we saw in the main thread or is this on a different block??

Another boring box... can't they at least try to create a more architecturally significant design?

No, this is on a different block. It's the PF Chang's site, 1 block south of the Railyard redevelopment.

I actually had done up a model of this with my Google Earth model, and I had revise it after I realized I didn't do it right. This tower will run the full length of the block. I used the measurements the site plan provided to get the dimensions right for the two halves of the tower. I don't know why I didn't do that before.

Anyway, the yellow towers are the Railyard redevelopment. I scaled them at 650 and 1,000 feet.

The blue one is Block 16.

The red one is the Austin Marriott at Cesar Chavez.







The yellow tower in the background on the right is a 400 foot mock model I did for the Eightfold project just to give an idea of the views.



The yellow tower on the horizon is a 400 foot mock model I did at the Broadmoor site next to one of the old IBM office buildings.





From the Butler Park Doug Sahm Hill.

[We vs us]

Hey those are awesome!

[IluvATX]

Maybe it could be built with a podium without parking to allow for CC space. And yes I still lurk around here, just not as often with work and such.

[427MM]

Hope I'm wrong, but this has all the feeling to it of a bottom feeder trying to drive up the value of the land with a bogus play just to see it bought out through eminent domain for the convention center expansion. Not impressed. Sandy was also the person credited for blowing up the Brackenridge deal through his connections with UT. That all went from an incredible vision to something quite underwhelming in a hurry.

[George_Blume]

Patience.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by George_Blume

Patience.

Gensler is the architect working with the city on the early plans for the CC expansion. Maybe you know something about the CC plans?

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by George_Blume

Patience.

George, can you tell us what the height will be to the mechanical penthouse? The building elevations from the site plan only show the main roof height of 557 feet. The mechanical seems to go up another 50+ feet from there.

[George_Blume]

I know nothing about the CC. I’m saying we all need to exhibit some patience about where the design is going. Plus the CC is in the hands of the voters. So we should exhibit some patience there too.

The height is also in flux. But its architectural height is roughly in the 600’.

Architectural height means absolute total height above MSL. as in top of highest built point.

[427MM]

Originally Posted by George_Blume

I know nothing about the CC. I’m saying we all need to exhibit some patience about where the design is going. Plus the CC is in the hands of the voters. So we should exhibit some patience there too.

The height is also in flux. But its architectural height is roughly in the 600’.

Architectural height means absolute total height above MSL. as in top of highest built point.

A good reminder, propositions A and B are BAd. Vote NO in NOvember.

A nice write up: https://www.statesman.com/opinion/20...ons-for-austin

[Vexal]

Originally Posted by 427MM

A good reminder, propositions A and B are BAd. Vote NO in NOvember.

A nice write up: https://www.statesman.com/opinion/20...ons-for-austin

For people too lazy to read (not me, asking for a friend), can you explain in one sentence the answer do this question: "do we want the convention center expansion?" Preferably explain in one word.

[We vs us]

Yes.

[kingkirbythe....]

No

[Geckos_Rule]

Maybe, I dont know

[Echostatic]

Yes for expansion. Vote NO on the propositions.

[Jdawgboy]

Um... so there are those that don't want the expansion??? Even though we are losing millions of dollars that would be going to city services because our current space is not large enough... That we know much larger conventions want to come here but can't due to lack of space....

And we as city taxpayers having to be the ones to compensate for the money that could be generated by these larger and higher profile conventions... please tell me the logic in that?

Is it not so much the reality that we need more convention space but rather how the props are worded making this particular proposal a bad way to go about it? Does anyone have the prop writeups that could post them in the Convention Center thread? What are the other options to providing that space?? Are there any other options at all????

[NYC2ATX]

Honestly, it kind of seems like the city just waited too long to move on that land that they long had these tentative plans for, and you know, developers aren't just going to wait for them. Maybe that's just my perspective as an outsider but idk

Also honestly, I would rather have the tall buildings instead. Austin should follow and further innovate the way many cities are now going, expanding their convention centers vertically or underground instead of swallowing more land and space. Or B- they could instead expand west across Red River and design a landmark creek-front face with all that additional space along Waller Creek.

[jowens]

Yes!