HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive


 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2012, 4:30 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Austin <------------> Birmingham?
Posts: 57,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by plinko View Post
^I knew there was something wrong with that skyline rendering. 388ft?
Yeah, it was confusing. I think the condo towers will be slightly taller by what the renderings show. And I counted 33 floors for them. That hotel height was way off, too. I was thinking it would be around 300 feet, but it looks to be around 150 feet instead.

I wish they were taller. We'll have a view of them from our neighborhood, but just barely if they're 388 feet. 360 Condominiums sticks up nice from our neighborhood, and Frost is like a nightlight.

I love the density, though. That area of downtown is going to be incredible. They're also going to construct 2nd Street through that property. Right now 2nd Street dead ends at San Antonio Street. Across the creek the city is also planning an 8 to 10-story central public library with a rooftop deck. Like I said, I cannot wait to see this area develop.
__________________
Conform or be cast out.
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2012, 6:14 PM
TGBinSD's Avatar
TGBinSD TGBinSD is offline
Time to musk up
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: A whale's vagina
Posts: 24
i LOVE the density of this project. however, it's much shorter than originally proposed. it's also too box-y for my liking. i would like to see more diversity in design, especially along the waterfront. i'm also not a fan of twins, especially along the waterfront. i'd rather they build one awesome tower now, then gradually add more great towers in the future. it's going to be awesome at street level, though. overall, i think it's a really nice proposal, but not for the waterfront. austin deserves better...just my 2 cents.
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2012, 9:56 PM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is offline
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGBinSD View Post
i LOVE the density of this project. however, it's much shorter than originally proposed. it's also too box-y for my liking. i would like to see more diversity in design, especially along the waterfront. i'm also not a fan of twins, especially along the waterfront. i'd rather they build one awesome tower now, then gradually add more great towers in the future. it's going to be awesome at street level, though. overall, i think it's a really nice proposal, but not for the waterfront. austin deserves better...just my 2 cents.
Im hoping that at the time of construction, one or more of those buildings will be taller than what is planned now. They had been stressing that each building would be at minimum 30 floors each which means that they could have more floors when all is said and done when they break ground.
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2012, 6:04 PM
MightyYoda MightyYoda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 445
Based on the time table for when they want to get started and how many apartment complexes are getting under construction ASAP. I actually think this will switch back to a condo model. It really only makes sense for them to say a minimum of 30 floors if that is their apartment model and they are still monitoring the markets to see if they will go back to adding condos. There are no other condo's currently slated for construction though projects can easily switch between condo and apartment without a ton of hassle. Seems like doing lower floors apartments and adding more floors to make room for condos would work best for this project when projecting 2 years out.
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2012, 6:29 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Where the lights are much brighter
Posts: 12,045
Even though there are a lot of rental towers in the works, the overall number of units isn't that much over the next few years considering the current shortage and the fact that the population is increasing by 60,000 to 70,0000 each year.
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2012, 6:49 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Austin <------------> Birmingham?
Posts: 57,326
Exclamation Green Water building heights!

I emailed Gensler to get the building heights for GreenWater, which is the official name by the way. The individual buildings, however, do not have official names yet. So they're calling them by their block number.

GreenWater | Block 23 Office
419 feet to the rooftop box
379 feet to the mechanical penthouse
349 feet to the main roof
28 floors
566,074 gross square feet
524,143 usable square feet

GreenWater | Block 1 Residential
412 feet 6 inches to the rooftop box
388 feet 6 inches to the main roof
110 feet to the podium
141 feet to the taller portion of the podium.
38 floors
682,120 gross square feet
531,700 usable square feet

GreenWater | Block 185 Residential
410 feet to the rooftop box
380 feet to the main roof
110 feet to the podium
39 floors
436,975 gross square feet
336,600 usable square feet

GreenWater | Block 188 Hotel
234 feet to the mechanical penthouse (highest architectural point).
219 feet to the main roof
19 floors
245,643 square feet (Not sure which this is).

Click for site plan


Click for aerial site plan/map
__________________
Conform or be cast out.
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2012, 10:53 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
H20,

Yeah, I meant to say the Museum Tower is the AMOA block. The Intel site is where the new federal courthouse is going.

As for those two buildings I mentioned, you were right, at least about the residential building. I went back and looked at the diagram that Stratus had included in their presentation. The 292 foot building is a residential building. The 257 foot building is a hotel though. The 223 foot building must be the office building. That building isn't shown in the skyline rendering. It's immediately north of the 425 foot building. One of the renderings above shows it with 360 Condominiums.



Here is the diagram.
WOW...the 830' 6th & Brazos (T. Stacy's) tower seems only 20'-30' taller than the 683'-tall Austonian...
__________________
AUSTIN (City): 974,447 +1.30% - '20-'22 | AUSTIN MSA (5 counties): 2,473,275 +8.32% - '20-'23
SAN ANTONIO (City): 1,472,909 +2.69% - '20-'22 | SAN ANTONIO MSA (8 counties): 2,703,999 +5.70% - '20-'23
AUS-SAT REGION (MSAs/13 counties): 5,177,274 +6.94% - '20-'23 | *SRC: US Census*
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2012, 10:57 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 3,260
I'm "okay" with the plan if they actually construct buildings identical to the ones presented in the pdf.
__________________
AUSTIN (City): 974,447 +1.30% - '20-'22 | AUSTIN MSA (5 counties): 2,473,275 +8.32% - '20-'23
SAN ANTONIO (City): 1,472,909 +2.69% - '20-'22 | SAN ANTONIO MSA (8 counties): 2,703,999 +5.70% - '20-'23
AUS-SAT REGION (MSAs/13 counties): 5,177,274 +6.94% - '20-'23 | *SRC: US Census*

Last edited by GoldenBoot; Jul 23, 2012 at 5:21 PM.
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2012, 1:03 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Austin <------------> Birmingham?
Posts: 57,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBoot View Post
WOW...the 830' 6th & Brazos (T. Stacy's) tower seems only 20'-30' taller than the 683'-tall Austonian...
Remember that there were two different designs and two different heights for T. Stacy's project. The taller (current?) one was 830 feet with 70 floors, while the one shown in that drawing was announced as 705 feet tall with 47 floors.
__________________
Conform or be cast out.
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2012, 1:49 AM
nixcity's Avatar
nixcity nixcity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Austin, TX.
Posts: 768
I'm sorry, but this is a complete failure to me. What is fronting Cesar Chavez is atrocious and I'm more than tired of the huge boxy podiums and although the "crowns" look sweet, just slapping them on top of yet another rectangular prism doesn't do it for me. They are also way to short and due to the fact they are all about the same height it really flattens out the skyline. The office building looks great though, it can stay, lol. And there are a few little nice touches but overall this gets a C- at best compared to an A for their original plan or that of Stratus. City Council, this property is way to valuable to do this!!!!
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2012, 5:23 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
Remember that there were two different designs and two different heights for T. Stacy's project. The taller (current?) one was 830 feet with 70 floors, while the one shown in that drawing was announced as 705 feet tall with 47 floors.
The taller proposal is the "current" one. However, not sure if it will ever be built on Tom's watch.
__________________
AUSTIN (City): 974,447 +1.30% - '20-'22 | AUSTIN MSA (5 counties): 2,473,275 +8.32% - '20-'23
SAN ANTONIO (City): 1,472,909 +2.69% - '20-'22 | SAN ANTONIO MSA (8 counties): 2,703,999 +5.70% - '20-'23
AUS-SAT REGION (MSAs/13 counties): 5,177,274 +6.94% - '20-'23 | *SRC: US Census*
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2012, 4:50 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Austin <------------> Birmingham?
Posts: 57,326
__________________
Conform or be cast out.
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2013, 8:07 PM
Sigaven Sigaven is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,477
Is Gensler the architect for the winning proposal?
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2013, 8:57 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Austin <------------> Birmingham?
Posts: 57,326
Yes.
__________________
Conform or be cast out.
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2013, 9:54 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver
Posts: 5,301
Looking back at the linked article a few posts above by Kevin, do we we have an updated start date for Seaholm? The article said late 2012, but obviously that's passed. When, also, is the updated time frame for this (GreenWater) set of projects? If it were really early 2013, we'd be hearing alot more about it already.
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2013, 7:10 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Austin <------------> Birmingham?
Posts: 57,326
New rendering for the Block 1 residential tower in this development. This one is 413 feet with 38 floors. Supposedly it's going to break ground before the end of the year.

As for the design, I'm thinking this one will have to grow on me. I'm not sure about it, yet.

This building, and a planned twin to the west (left) will front the river and will be very prominent buildings on the skyline.

__________________
Conform or be cast out.
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2013, 7:12 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver
Posts: 5,301
While I love the building (as I posted in the dedicated thread), I really cannot stand twins unless they're in a massive skyline and are not prominent. I hope to death they do not build twins. I want something totally different in the other lot.
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2013, 12:17 PM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
JACKinBeantown
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 8,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
New rendering for the Block 1 residential tower in this development. This one is 413 feet with 38 floors. Supposedly it's going to break ground before the end of the year.

As for the design, I'm thinking this one will have to grow on me. I'm not sure about it, yet.

This building, and a planned twin to the west (left) will front the river and will be very prominent buildings on the skyline.

Ugh. Austin has been getting some average buildings lately. Too bad. This certainly doesn't reflect the flavor of the city.

At least it will block the view of the W from the east.
__________________
Hi.

Last edited by JACKinBeantown; Aug 18, 2013 at 12:29 PM.
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2013, 11:52 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver
Posts: 5,301
The fact that you don't like the W speaks volumes about your architectural taste.
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Aug 19, 2013, 1:58 AM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
JACKinBeantown
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 8,846
Yes. Yes, it does.

And I meant that it will block the view of the W from the west. My apologies.
__________________
Hi.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:15 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.