Austin | 6G | 874 Feet | 65 Floors | Complete

[The ATX]

Another sign of progress - FAA permit filed for the building. It lists the height at 847' which means the height hasn't been trimmed. It also shows a project start date of 08/07/2019.

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=343862657&row=30

[ILUVSAT]

Outstanding News!

[AusTex]

Does a FAA Permit hold any water? Does the start date mean anything? Inquiring mind wants to know!

[The ATX]

Does a FAA Permit hold any water? Does the start date mean anything? Inquiring mind wants to know!

By themselves, they don't guarantee anything. BUT after a months long period of no news, we have several things happening around the same time:

Hotel on site closing 07/21
City permit filed for excavation/utility work
FAA permit filed

The fact that The Republic is now being publicly marketed can be considered a positive for 6xG as well. Lincoln has always stated that their focus was for 6xG to break ground before The Republic. So maybe it is happening which is why The Republic has more of a marketing focus.

EDIT: I just noticed the building permit was previously filed, but it was just moved back to proposed cases.

[etmav]

Another sign of progress - FAA permit filed for the building. It lists the height at 847' which means the height hasn't been trimmed. It also shows a project start date of 08/07/2019.

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=343862657&row=30

Does it show start date of 08/07/2018 instead of 2019 or am I looking in the wrong place?

Thanks

[The ATX]

Does it show start date of 08/07/2018 instead of 2019 or am I looking in the wrong place?

Thanks

I don't know if that is a typo or the date from when the FAA filing was originally submitted. The filing apparently has to go back for approval though.

[427MM]

Fantastic! Such a handsome design and marvelous height. We know the homes will be in high demand, curious to see who takes the office space and what the name ends up being.

[Austin1971]

[

[GoldenBoot]

^^^Exactly...This tower was trimmed already by the FAA from 873' to the current 848'.

[shanny]

^^^ I still have a very hard time believing the FAA caused the 25' reduction. ABIA is 5 miles from downtown. LaGuardia is 5 miles from Midtown. Seems strange they would be controlling building heights here but not there. Same thing with Love Field, Philadelphia, Charlotte, Vegas, etc... all cities that have buildings taller than 6x and similar airport distances. I apologize for trying to use logic and bringing this up again...

[Sigaven]

^^^ I still have a very hard time believing the FAA caused the 25' reduction. ABIA is 5 miles from downtown. LaGuardia is 5 miles from Midtown. Seems strange they would be controlling building heights here but not there. Same thing with Love Field, Philadelphia, Charlotte, Vegas, etc... all cities that have buildings taller than 6x and similar airport distances. I apologize for trying to use logic and bringing this up again...

I think I remember reading somewhere that the new height limitations have to do with the possibility of a plane having some kind of emergency when taking off and needing room to turn around and land. those airports and cities were already built up before this rule was put in place I think. But someone who knows much more about this stuff can probably correct me if I'm wrong.

[zrx299]

25 feet... the sheer stupidity of that boggles the mind (assuming it's due to regulations)

What exactly is 25 extra feet supposed to do for a commercial plane in an emergency situation? That's like making highways an extra 2 inches wider.
By that logic, airports should all be 50+ miles from city centers.

[the Genral]

Our runways are north to south. In an emergency landing even when circling back, they would have to line up to the north or south and wouldn't be flying over down town. Just my uneducated 2 cents.

[GoldenBoot]

Our runways are north to south. In an emergency landing even when circling back, they would have to line up to the north or south and wouldn't be flying over down town. Just my uneducated 2 cents.

Because the runways are N-S, to re-line up they (in some cases) may have to use airspace over the CBD.

It's all about a safe turn radius.

Even though they have the capability to do so, they will not turn on a dime with passengers onboard. It's more of a gradual return. They will fly out several miles...commence a turn...return past the airport...turn again to line up...and then land. As a visual...think of the lines which make up a magnetic filed.

[Strayone]

Maybe just being a Capital city has another equation to the formula for city building heights.

[Jdawgboy]

Maybe just being a Capital city has another equation to the formula for city building heights.

That's what the CVCs are for though. Unless someone has heard differently, aside from F:A:R ratio and some overlays in certain areas of DT, what remains doesn't have any height restrictions.

[AusTex]

Sooo..... is 850' the tallest a building is going to be allowed in DT Austin? If this building is allowed at only 847' how can we expect the FAA allowing anything taller anywhere downtown? No Super Tall for Austin....Ever!

[lzppjb]

Sooo..... is 850' the tallest a building is going to be allowed in DT Austin? If this building is allowed at only 847' how can we expect the FAA allowing anything taller anywhere downtown? No Super Tall for Austin....Ever!

That's what I've been wondering.

[the Genral]

No Super Tall for Austin....Ever!

Well...that statement, true or not, leaves me with several thoughts. Its the anti Viagra, the burst in the bubble, the ultimate Debbie Downer, the dream destroyer. On the other hand, for Austin, 850 feet is a huge mile stone that if repeated a few times will still give us an incredibly diverse and amazing skyline.
I personally don't think Austin will garner the demand for a super tall, assuming a super tall is at least 1000 ft, at least not in the next 10 to 20 years anyway. If we can add three or four, 800+ footers to the mix, that would satisfy me.

[H2O]

Well...that statement, true or not, leaves me with several thoughts. Its the anti Viagra, the burst in the bubble, the ultimate Debbie Downer, the dream destroyer. On the other hand, for Austin, 850 feet is a huge mile stone that if repeated a few times will still give us an incredibly diverse and amazing skyline.
I personally don't think Austin will garner the demand for a super tall, assuming a super tall is at least 1000 ft, at least not in the next 10 to 20 years anyway. If we can add three or four, 800+ footers to the mix, that would satisfy me.

Toronto, a City / Metro at least 3 times the size of Austin, with one of the largest skylines in the world, has had 800' buildings since the 1970s, and is only now getting super tall.

[AusTex]

Well...that statement, true or not, leaves me with several thoughts. Its the anti Viagra, the burst in the bubble, the ultimate Debbie Downer, the dream destroyer. On the other hand, for Austin, 850 feet is a huge mile stone that if repeated a few times will still give us an incredibly diverse and amazing skyline.
I personally don't think Austin will garner the demand for a super tall, assuming a super tall is at least 1000 ft, at least not in the next 10 to 20 years anyway. If we can add three or four, 800+ footers to the mix, that would satisfy me.

OMG I've been called The Ultimate Debbie D :runaway: ( the anti Viagra, ouch, I'm a guy too; I admit to a few busted bubbles; I am not a parent, therefore the dream destroyer is not possible!)

I really agree that "On the other hand, for Austin, 850 feet is a huge mile stone that if repeated a few times will still give us an incredibly diverse and amazing skyline....If we can add three or four, 800+ footers to the mix, that would satisfy me." Very well said. Better than Debbie et al!:cheers:

[the Genral]

OMG I've been called The Ultimate Debbie D :runaway: ( the anti Viagra, ouch, I'm a guy too; I admit to a few busted bubbles; I am not a parent, therefore the dream destroyer is not possible!)

I really agree that "On the other hand, for Austin, 850 feet is a huge mile stone that if repeated a few times will still give us an incredibly diverse and amazing skyline....If we can add three or four, 800+ footers to the mix, that would satisfy me." Very well said. Better than Debbie et al!:cheers:

You are NOT a Debbie downer or any of those things...Austin possibly never getting a super tall are all those things. You were just stating the possibility of that happening due to FAA regulations.

[AusTex]

You are NOT a Debbie downer or any of those things...Austin possibly never getting a super tall are all those things. You were just stating the possibility of that happening due to FAA regulations.

Reread and better understood, though I was not offended. Thanks for the clarification.

I would like to know the formula the FAA uses for this type of building heigth determination. It must be some distance from runway by turn radius by xyz = allowable building height (as stated before). Our traditional DT area would seem to be covered by the 850' cap, however, possibly if something higher is proposed in the future in the western fringe or north area they might be allowed. Keep Hope Alive.

[Jdawgboy]

I seriously doubt 850 is as high as any building can go. Eventually we will see a 900+ footer. The availability of land will force development that high. I would think the Post Office block will hopefully hold the tallest tower, plus there are a couple of other spots that could eventually see buildings go that high.

[GoldenBoot]

I'd also watch smaller plots not encumbered by a CVC. To max property value, those smaller sites will really be pushed to go tall. On larger sites there are more options on design/height which could still meet desired margins. What I'm saying is that the size of the property does not always equate/correspond to the eventual height of a development on said property.

New York has several prime examples. It's astonishing what someone can put on such a tiny lot. Central Park Tower (aka The Nordstrom Tower) sits on a plot smaller than the post office and it's rising to 1500'. There are also several office towers being constructed/developed which also lie on lots smaller than the post office and rise to more than 1000'.

It's pretty cool to see all of those point towers! The engineering of skyscrapers these days is amazing!

[MichaelB]

I'd also watch smaller plots not encumbered by a CVC. To max property value, those smaller sites will really be pushed to go tall. On larger sites there are more options on design/height which could still meet desired margins. What I'm saying is that the size of the property does not always equate/correspond to the eventual height of a development on said property.

New York has several prime examples. It's astonishing what someone can put on such a tiny lot. Central Park Tower (aka The Nordstrom Tower) sits on a plot smaller than the post office and it's rising to 1500'. There are also several office towers being constructed/developed which also lie on lots smaller than the post office and rise to more than 1000'.

It's pretty cool to see all of those point towers! The engineering of skyscrapers these days is amazing!

yes.... and yes... I sometimes just stare in amazement when I 'm in NYC and see the new point towers!!!! It's really stunning... and kinda frightening.! LOL!

[drummer]

Those NYC ones are nuts, especially when you see them from the air. I'm excited to see some of the smaller, non-CVC lots fill in over time.

That said, I like a combination of larger tall buildings mixed in with the super skinny point towers. Not all fat, not all skinny. It makes things interesting when it's not all the same.

[The ATX]

Not really news at this point. But this is the first acknowledgement that the hotel is closing/unavailable after July 21st on their website. They probably never will announce anything and just quietly shutdown.

https://i.imgur.com/PHbtXks.png

[Austin1971]

[

[zrx299]

Extended Stay got... extended? Boo!

[ILUVSAT]

This is a non-story until a demo permit is approved.

[The ATX]

This is a non-story until a demo permit is approved.

The demo permits were approved last October. They are good until October 2020.

[ILUVSAT]

Geez. I had no idea they have such a wide range of time. How far out is the site plan good for?

[The ATX]

Geez. I had no idea they have such a wide range of time. How far out is the site plan good for?

Site Plan #1 (Demo, excavation, underground parking levels) was approved last September and is good for three years.

Site Plan #2 (Tower) has not been approved.

[gabetx]

Nothing new in the last month or so I am assuming? I see that the Extended Stay is still taking reservations through Aug 31, but redirects to other hotels for anything after.

[The ATX]

Nothing new in the last month or so I am assuming? I see that the Extended Stay is still taking reservations through Aug 31, but redirects to other hotels for anything after.

There has not been a single update made to the site plan application this year. If the hotel actually closes on 09/01, it will be a significant positive step forward.

[We vs us]

ATX Real Estate News says there's some TX state permitting going on for 6X -- and notes a completion date:

The Sixth and Guadalupe project was logged on at the Texas Department of Licensing and Registration. Construction cost for the 67-story high-rise mixed-use is $320 million. Size is about 2.2 million square feet. Yowza! The ownership group is 600 Guadalupe Tower LLC with an address at 711 Navarro St. in San Antonio. That is, of course, one of the partners on the project — Kairoi Residential, formerly the Lynd Co. . . . and completion is projected for August 31, 2023. We’ll see how that goes.

https://atxrealestatenews.com/2019/07/15/and-heres-todays-edition-of-atx-real-estate-news-july-15-2019

[The ATX]

Awesome. The construction permit was filed this morning.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=12280084&t_selected_propertyrsn=1126127

[urbancore]

Awesome. The construction permit was filed this morning.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=12280084&t_selected_propertyrsn=1126127

na na....na na.

[StoOgE]

herewego.gif

[oberthewhat]

What exactly does a construction permit mean for the project moving forward?

[78701]

ATX Real Estate News says there's some TX state permitting going on for 6X -- and notes a completion date:

https://atxrealestatenews.com/2019/07/15/and-heres-todays-edition-of-atx-real-estate-news-july-15-2019

Completion in August 2023? Four years from now? 68-story building with a hotel still standing on its plot? Surely they jest...

[zrx299]

Completion in August 2023? Four years from now? 68-story building with a hotel still standing on its plot? Surely they jest...

That hotel could be wiped out in a matter of a few days. It's not like it's a tower that needs imploded. Just look at how fast they cleared the 5th & Lavaca site.

[Jdawgboy]

That hotel could be wiped out in a matter of a few days. It's not like it's a tower that needs imploded. Just look at how fast they cleared the 5th & Lavaca site.

Agreed, that is not a significant building by any means. They will have no trouble clearing that out fairly quickly.

[StoOgE]

Agreed, that is not a significant building by any means. They will have no trouble clearing that out fairly quickly.

I promise that building would be gone in less than 2 weeks.

[78701]

Still four years is impossible. Just look at all downtown projects. The Proper still has a banner advertising "Early 2019 Move-Ins", for crying out loud.

[GoldenBoot]

Still four years is impossible. Just look at all downtown projects. The Proper still has a banner advertising "Early 2019 Move-Ins", for crying out loud.

Never say never. The Independent took about 3.5 years to top-out. Conversely, on there are a number of supertalls being constructed in NYC that take about 3-4 to fully construct.

So, yes, it is most certainly possible to construct a 68-story, 848' tower within a four-year timeframe.

Let's wait and see when groundbreaking and construction actually occurs.

[enragedcamel]

Besides, it would start being visible on the skyline 12-18 months in.

[The ATX]

This is creeping closer and closer to reality. Retention plans for the excavation were posted for AULCC this afternoon.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/AULCC_2019/FY2019/AULCC%20Agendas%202019/190808/PLAN/

[Billy Cannon]

This is creeping closer and closer to reality. Retention plans for the excavation were posted for AULCC this afternoon.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/AULCC_2019/FY2019/AULCC%20Agendas%202019/190808/PLAN/


Exciting! Didn't this originally only have 1 level below grade? This appears to now be going down 3 levels.

[zrx299]

This is creeping closer and closer to reality. Retention plans for the excavation were posted for AULCC this afternoon.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/AULCC_2019/FY2019/AULCC%20Agendas%202019/190808/PLAN/

Is there anything about the cadence of the overall timelines up to this point that gives you any concerns? Or is this fairly standard for a project of this size?
I honestly have no idea or frame of reference.

[The ATX]

Is there anything about the cadence of the overall timelines up to this point that gives you any concerns? Or is this fairly standard for a project of this size?
I honestly have no idea or frame of reference.

I was worried for a bit because there wasn't (and still hasn't been) any activity posted to the tower site plan since last December. But the recent permit activity related to construction and excavation along with the retention plans posted for AULCC and the hotel closing make a strong case for this moving forward.

There is no typical timeline for big projects, but three years from announcement to groundbreaking seems fairly common. This one is only two years in.

One of the AULCC documents lists the construction dates as 10/21/19 to 12/31/19. There is always some ambiguity as to what these dates mean. If it's ~2 year range or so it's safe to interpret the dates as the construction time frame for the tower. If it's a short range like in this case it often means when the groundbreaking will take place. But demo could still happen before 10/21. Also, it looks like the hotel moved up their closing date a little. Tuesday 08/27 is the last day they are taking reservations.

[Maximusx1]

Could be something could be nothing:

They have the right-most lane on Guadalupe blocked today between 7th and 6th next to Extended Stay with utility trucks digging in the pavement. I was going too quick to notice what the trucks were doing other than ripping up pavement and sidewalk. Perhaps another sign of progress.

[The ATX]

Could be something could be nothing:

They have the right-most lane on Guadalupe blocked today between 7th and 6th next to Extended Stay with utility trucks digging in the pavement. I was going too quick to notice what the trucks were doing other than ripping up pavement and sidewalk. Perhaps another sign of progress.

It is probably related. They filed permits for excavating around the block for utility info related to the project excavation.

[austlar1]

Extended Stay website still not accepting reservations for that location after the end of August.

[the Genral]

Extended Stay website still not accepting reservations for that location after the end of August.

There goes my vacation plans shot to hell....

[AusTex]

There goes my vacation plans shot to hell....

Why Genral, yer easy to please...not even a swimming pool!:rolleyes:

[The ATX]

September 3. :cheers: We have a start day - for demo anyway. A right of way street closure permit was filed today for six weeks during the demo of the Extended Stay from 09/03 to 10/15.

This request is for the Demo phase of the construction project at 600 Guadalupe Street. The overall project includes the construction of a 67 story high rise, but this specific permit is for the first 6 weeks of the project relative to the demolition of the Extended Stay America Hotel prior to excavation. On Guadalupe Street - Northwest corner of the 6th/Guad Intersection - 1520 sf of sidewalk and 628 sf of bike lane. On 6th Street - Northwest corner of the 6th/Guad intersection - 2400 sf of sidewalk, 1360 of metered #712) parking, and 128 sf of unmetered area.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=12290141&t_selected_propertyrsn=1126127

[KevinFromTexas]

It's going to be amazing watching this one go up, but man, I hope they don't drop the ball on The Republic. I really want to see both towers go up, but at this point, The Republic is the building I'm most excited to see rise in Austin among all others.

[The ATX]

The last AULCC posting listed 10/21 - 12/31 as the apparent start date range. That works with the demo schedule.

[urbancore]

Hell YEAH! So pumped about this.

Kev, I agree..... I greedily want them both...NOW.

[The ATX]

Things are happening pretty fast now. A permit to retire gas service to the site for excavation was filed today.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=12291291&t_selected_propertyrsn=2018643

[ILUVSAT]

BUILD IT...BUILD IT...BUILD IT. And...The Republic too!

[ILUVSAT]

This one, The Republic and Block 185 are game-changers in terms of height and architecture for Austin. Plus, you'll finally have a tower surpass the Tower of the Americas as the tallest structure in Texas outside of Houston & Dallas.

[KevinFromTexas]

Technically, we've already done that twice. They bill the Tower of the Americas as being 750 feet and that the observation deck is at 75-stories. But the roof of the tower is at 622 feet, and the observation deck is at 560 feet. Only the antenna goes up to 750 feet. The main roof of the Austonian, which includes a non-public outdoor observation deck, is 75 feet higher than the observation deck of the Tower of the Americas at 635 feet, a full 13 feet higher than the roof of the tower.

And actually, the FCC registration for the antenna atop the Tower of the Americas listed it as 729 feet the last time I checked. I don't know if they've added to it since then. And I don't know why they've billed it as 750 feet all along. Maybe they dismantled part of it or were rounding up or measuring from some low point in the plaza around the tower.

Still, I love the Tower of the Americas, and I consider it to be one of the things San Antonio has that I wish Austin did also. I still try to visit it every time I'm in San Antonio. I don't even care if Austin has taller buildings than the tower. I still view the Tower of the Americas in a special way.

[The ATX]

This will have two cranes. One will reach 492' and one will max out at 925'.

FAA - 925' crane:
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=410642180&row=54


FAA - 492' crane:
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=410644001&row=39

[The ATX]

It would be nice if Lincoln/Kairoi would announce a groundbreaking date. But to sum up what we know so far:

08/28 - Extended Stay Hotel closes

09/03 - 10/15 - Hotel demo

10/21 - 12/31 - Excavation and construction starts

[the Genral]

This totally pleases me. I may still be alive to see it. What really caught my eyes was the 925' crane height. Holy shit chubby balls, that's going to get lost in the clouds. Nothing downtown has ever been that tall, not even close.

[JoninATX]

:skyhighmind:

[Austin1971]

[

[The ATX]

Do you think the two will be Luffing cranes like Block 185?

I don't believe so for two reasons.

1. Permits usually identify whether the crane will be a Luffing crane or a standard tower crane.

2. In Austin, Luffing cranes seem to be used most often on projects in close proximity to tall buildings.

[clubtokyo]

I am so excited about this. Who would have thought baby boy Austin, when compared to Dallas, and Houston would be getting a tower this tall.

[gabetx]

This is getting exciting. It is almost a reality. Just curious, how often does it happen that a project gets this far in the planning/permit stages and then falls through?

[The ATX]

This is getting exciting. It is almost a reality. Just curious, how often does it happen that a project gets this far in the planning/permit stages and then falls through?

I don't recall any big projects getting this far and not being built in Austin.

Considering the last three major economic downturns in Austin:

Mid-80s S&L/oil price crash - This ended Austin's first skyscraper boom. The condo tower proposed to be partially built on a Town Lake island failed, as did a 50-story tower proposed for the NW area of the US 183 & Mopac interchange. But I don't think they were very far along in the process. Maybe Kevin can recollect the details, but the 50-story tower may have had a connection to the One American Center tower that got built. Can anyone else grasp the significance of a 50-story tower (near the Domain!) in the 80s? Also, the round Lamar S&L HQ tower failed and that one was proposed for the 6 x Guadalupe site. It should be noted that that project got as far as the demo of the hotel on site. Sound familiar?

Dot Com crash - Vignette planned 3 ~30-story towers on what is now the WeWork/Waller Park Place site IIRC. But I don't think that project was this far along.

Great Recession - Most projects restarted during the recovery. But two significant failures were the Ovation (Novare 360 twinish condo tower) on the post office block and the awesome 21c hotel and residential project last proposed for the WeWork/WPP site.

[H2O]

I don't recall any big projects getting this far and not being built in Austin.

Considering the last three major economic downturns in Austin:

Mid-80s S&L/oil price crash - This ended Austin's first skyscraper boom. The condo tower proposed to be partially built on a Town Lake island failed, as did a 50-story tower proposed for the NW area of the US 183 & Mopac interchange. But I don't think they were very far along in the process. Maybe Kevin can recollect the details, but the 50-story tower may have had a connection to the One American Center tower that got built. Can anyone else grasp the significance of a 50-story tower (near the Domain!) in the 80s? Also, the round Lamar S&L HQ tower failed and that one was proposed for the 6 x Guadalupe site. It should be noted that that project got as far as the demo of the hotel on site. Sound familiar?

Dot Com crash - Vignette planned 3 ~30-story towers on what is now the WeWork/Waller Park Place site IIRC. But I don't think that project was this far along.

Great Recession - Most projects restarted during the recovery. But two significant failures were the Ovation (Novare 360 twinish condo tower) on the post office block and the awesome 21c hotel and residential project last proposed for the WeWork/WPP site.

Don't forget the Intel Campus - the first 'tower' started before being abandoned and eventually demolished to build the Federal Courthouse - was a victim of Dot Com crash.

[GoldenBoot]

Technically, we've already done that twice. They bill the Tower of the Americas as being 750 feet and that the observation deck is at 75-stories. But the roof of the tower is at 622 feet, and the observation deck is at 560 feet. Only the antenna goes up to 750 feet. The main roof of the Austonian, which includes a non-public outdoor observation deck, is 75 feet higher than the observation deck of the Tower of the Americas at 635 feet, a full 13 feet higher than the roof of the tower.

And actually, the FCC registration for the antenna atop the Tower of the Americas listed it as 729 feet the last time I checked. I don't know if they've added to it since then. And I don't know why they've billed it as 750 feet all along. Maybe they dismantled part of it or were rounding up or measuring from some low point in the plaza around the tower.

Still, I love the Tower of the Americas, and I consider it to be one of the things San Antonio has that I wish Austin did also. I still try to visit it every time I'm in San Antonio. I don't even care if Austin has taller buildings than the tower. I still view the Tower of the Americas in a special way.


Funny. I've always known the ToA to be 735' tall (to the tip of the antenna), for some reason.

[427MM]

I was working on the Ovation and the TWELVE next door (Blocks 51 and 52--Post Office). They were going to be amazing! I remember the Austin Neighborhood Council saying they were going to oppose the rezoning but they were opposing pretty much everything that led to additional housing so we weren't concerned. City Council happily approved them both.

We mothballed all the developments during the downturn, including another TWELVE at the Domain, and stopped paying ourselves. What stung most are the folks who talked about how the downturn didn't even hit Austin. "Oh I beg to differ!" I would think to myself...

This boom is amazing but we're still not producing enough housing! This development is a game-changer for Austin. Can't help but to feel the top priority of our city at this point should be to go big on transit! Hopefully we're voting on a $5+ billion dollar package come Nov. 2020. With Trump on the ballot we should have 75%+ voter turnout which means no matter the anti-transit messaging that some tired old voices will put out there--we'll pass it! Of course what sinks this possibility is a weak package put on by people who primarily drive single-occupant vehicles but insist on leading the effort...

We'll see.

[The ATX]

Don't forget the Intel Campus - the first 'tower' started before being abandoned and eventually demolished to build the Federal Courthouse - was a victim of Dot Com crash.

I didn't count that one since it was a small project. There were of course others during those down turns, but I listed only the largest projects that came to mind.

[The ATX]

I was working on the Ovation and the TWELVE next door (Blocks 51 and 52--Post Office). They were going to be amazing! I remember the Austin Neighborhood Council saying they were going to oppose the rezoning but they were opposing pretty much everything that led to additional housing so we weren't concerned. City Council happily approved them both.

We mothballed all the developments during the downturn, including another TWELVE at the Domain, and stopped paying ourselves. What stung most are the folks who talked about how the downturn didn't even hit Austin. "Oh I beg to differ!" I would think to myself...

I remember the Twelve at the Domain because at 28-stories it was looking like the first 300 footer that far outside of Central Austin. But I didn't realize there was also one planned along with the Ovation. That would have have been a nice project for that area.

[H2O]

I didn't count that one since it was a small project. There were of course others during those down turns, but I listed only the largest projects that came to mind.

Despite its lack of height, that was still a big project for its time, especially in that part of Downtown! The closest taller building would have been Hobby, which was already an anomaly in its location.

[eguidry]

I don't know if it's been posted but the site is up. http://www.6xguadalupe.com I think it has some new renders and some 360 interior panoramas I haven't seen before.

[The ATX]

I don't know if it's been posted but the site is up. http://www.6xguadalupe.com I think it has some new renders and some 360 interior panoramas I haven't seen before.

Nice find. The brochure linked to on the site is new as well.

[gillynova]

I don't know if it's been posted but the site is up. http://www.6xguadalupe.com I think it has some new renders and some 360 interior panoramas I haven't seen before.

That's a beautiful ass rendering. Can't wait for this to be up! :worship:

[clubtokyo]

I’m seeing lots of lighting at night, excited for that :)

[the Genral]

The Independant in one of the pics has a nicer looking crown. Despite the varied opinions about this building, its going to be a game changer. It looks high quality from top to bottom with more amenities than perhaps anything else downtown.

[Syndic]

Either they keep going back-and-forth between the designs or one of these are old renderings.

Here's the one Urbannizer found on http://www.availdevelopment.com/6-guadalupe

https://i.imgur.com/iGpalg0h.jpg

And here's the current one showing on the http://www.6xguadalupe.com/ website.

https://i.imgur.com/CsStXV6h.jpg

I really hope they go with the second one because it's a way stronger look IMO.

[H2O]

Either they keep going back-and-forth between the designs or one of these are old renderings.

Here's the one Urbannizer found on http://www.availdevelopment.com/6-guadalupe

https://i.imgur.com/iGpalg0h.jpg

And here's the current one showing on the http://www.6xguadalupe.com/ website.

https://i.imgur.com/CsStXV6h.jpg

I really hope they go with the second one because it's a way stronger look IMO.

I'm not sure they are all that different. Maybe in the height of the back-lit portion of the crown? I think the rest is all artistic license in how the model is lit.

[Urbannizer]

I prefer the first. New rendering is giving me VE vibes (much smaller crown).

[KevinFromTexas]

George Blume told me that they were wanting to light something like 11 feet of the crown. I'm pretty sure the first rendering is showing more than 11 feet being lit. The 2nd one seems to be more to scale with what I'd estimate is 11 feet of lit crown.

I have to say, I prefer the first rendering also because it seems to be a bit more "polished" than the 2nd. The facade seems to be better contrasted and the garage facade has a little more detail than in the 2nd rendering, which is kind of bland. Also, I want to see this beauty from 20 miles away with the crown lit up, not a ribbon of light around the parapet. 11 feet is 1.30% of 848 feet. :stunned:

The podium in the 2nd one also appears a bit different. The 2nd rendering is missing the glass terrace over the podium, which was a feature that I really liked. It would have made that space still usable during our rainy springs and winters.

[Syndic]

The top of the first one is way more incoherent and reminds me of the top of The Independent. The top of the second one is way cleaner and not a mess. The only renderings on http://www.availdevelopment.com/6-guadalupe show how truly messy the design is.

[We vs us]

They’ve accentuated that vertical stripe in the later rendering — which i hope is reflected in the actual building. That could be just as unique as a well lit crown at night.

[AusTex]

I noticed on the second render, the more recent, they hide the parking podium that faces the Historic Bremond Block. Perhaps they do not want us to see detail or lack of detail that will face 1800's houses. Glass would be respectful, however, they are giving us something that looks suburban and car warehouse like. I fear the worst on an otherwise nice build.

[KevinFromTexas]

It's pretty much always had that vertical strip of lights. I'm guessing that's the main hallway where you'll find the elevator bank on each floor.

Honestly, I'll be happy with the 2nd rendering version. I was just hoping for some dramatic lighting to make this thing visible from afar. Other than that, I do like the design of the 2nd rendering a wee bit more. The renderings they have on the building's website is the design I was hoping they were going with - particularly, this view: http://www.6xguadalupe.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/home_hero_b-1920x1948.jpg and this one - http://www.6xguadalupe.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/DJI_0069_bb-1920x1439.jpg. I like the facade details. The contrast of the glass and mullions is something I really like. It also appears to be more silvery than blue, which will probably be a good thing since if they also build The Republic it'll be nice to have them contrast each other a bit.

[427MM]

Just guessing--VE is a way of life, makes things viable, so if they have nixed some of that amazing crown, understandable, then that probably knocks the height down a bit. Looks like we're in the 835-840 range now. Not a disaster!

[KevinFromTexas]

They have a pdf on the building page that shows the stacking plan listing it as 840 feet, but that height doesn't go all the way to the lowest point at street level.

It's on page 7.

http://www.6xguadalupe.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/6XGuadalupe_Brochure_2019.pdf

[the Genral]

The ONLY thing I don't like about this building is that narrow piece that extends vertically half way up on the upper section on the south wall. It annoys me.

[GoldenBoot]

They have a pdf on the building page that shows the stacking plan listing it as 840 feet, but that height doesn't go all the way to the lowest point at street level.

It's on page 7.

http://www.6xguadalupe.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/6XGuadalupe_Brochure_2019.pdf

Which seems to be at least the height of that door/entryway. Easily 8'-9' in height.

[The ATX]

The formal E-Review construction permit filing with the City's responses was added to the construction permit today. If anyone is interested in permitting minutiae...

https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=12280084&t_selected_propertyrsn=1126127

It seems like they still have a fair amount of things to care of. But that will not affect the start demo and excavation start next month.

[enragedcamel]

Technically, we've already done that twice. They bill the Tower of the Americas as being 750 feet and that the observation deck is at 75-stories. But the roof of the tower is at 622 feet, and the observation deck is at 560 feet. Only the antenna goes up to 750 feet. The main roof of the Austonian, which includes a non-public outdoor observation deck, is 75 feet higher than the observation deck of the Tower of the Americas at 635 feet, a full 13 feet higher than the roof of the tower.

And actually, the FCC registration for the antenna atop the Tower of the Americas listed it as 729 feet the last time I checked. I don't know if they've added to it since then. And I don't know why they've billed it as 750 feet all along. Maybe they dismantled part of it or were rounding up or measuring from some low point in the plaza around the tower.

Still, I love the Tower of the Americas, and I consider it to be one of the things San Antonio has that I wish Austin did also. I still try to visit it every time I'm in San Antonio. I don't even care if Austin has taller buildings than the tower. I still view the Tower of the Americas in a special way.

That's funny. I have an intense dislike for the Tower of the Americas. It looks like an air traffic control tower. Ugly as sin. It's a shame San Antonio has not updated/modernized its outer shell, at least.

[The ATX]

Not groundbreaking news, but the parking lot on site stopped taking reservations and monthly parking contracts.