Austin | Wilson Tower (410 E. 5th) | 519 Feet | 44 Floors | Demo

[The ATX]

A design Intake was filed this morning for a "New high-rise multi-family project at 410 East 5th Street in CBD":

https://abc.austintexas.gov/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=12932096&t_selected_propertyrsn=549074


The site has no CVC, but it is across the street from the Brush Square Park fire station. The 5th & Trinity hotel planned for the same intersection and also across the street from the fire station, was limited to 13-stories. I'm hoping this project has more room for a setback that might allow for more height. Here's the site on Streetview:

https://i.imgur.com/9nc8RB7.png

[H2O]

Downtown Parks Overlay only applies to the first 60 feet from the ROW surrounding Brush Square. I can't find the exact height limitation, but I believe it is 60 feet.

[The ATX]

That's why the Republic Tower was allowed to go tall. The tower starts about 1/5th of a block back from 4th St. I suspect the podium for this project will follow the park overlay; then the residential units will be in a tall thin rectangle (blue maybe? :)) on the back of the site.

[H2O]

Yes, similar to Gables Republic Square, although that is a full block deep. I'm curious how Plaza Lofts got permitted, because I think the Downtown Parks Overlay was already in place before it was built.

[ILUVSAT]

Shouldn't the address be 410 East Fifth Street?

[The ATX]

Shouldn't the address be 410 East Fifth Street?

Fixed, thanks

[The ATX]

Site plan was updated. This is a 54-story residential tower with 644 DUs and a 20K Sq Ft restaurant.

[agsatx88]

At 54 floors, this could be another 600 footer. For reference, the Travis is 594 feet and 52 floors.

[kingkirbythe....]

54-Story Residential Tower Headed for Avenue Lofts Site in Downtown Austin

https://austin.towers.net/54-story-residential-tower-headed-for-avenue-lofts-site-in-downtown-austin/

A 54-story tower project bringing a whopping 644 new multifamily residences and approximately 20,000 square feet of ground-level restaurant space is now planned by local real estate firm Wilson Capital for the 0.8-acre Avenue Lofts condo site located at 410 East Fifth Street in downtown Austin, according to the latest permit activity from the developer — and with the demolition of the existing 38-unit residential building at the property already approved by the city’s Historic Landmark Commission earlier this year, the new tower plan could be moving forward soon.

...

According to the latest permits, the project plans to participate in the Downtown Density Bonus Program to exceed its entitled floor area ratio of 8 to 1, with marketing materials for the site previously indicating a tower with a ratio of 25 to 1 is possible thanks to the site’s lack of other height restrictions. However, the presence of Brush Square next door could impose some design limitations on the building’s frontage due to the impact of the Downtown Parks Overlay — in any case, the building’s density bonus application process will most likely give us our first look at the new tower.

[enragedcamel]

Can we get more supertalls please, all these 500-700 footers are boring as hell now

[valhalla]

What is the downtown parks overlay? Is that similar to the capital overlay? If so, that seems like complete overkill.

[the Genral]

Can we get more supertalls please, all these 500-700 footers are boring as hell now

Said no one 4 years ago.

[enragedcamel]

Said no one 4 years ago.

Well yes, turns out people's standards and expectations change!

[Tyrone Shoes]

Given it is a rare real art deco building in Austin and its history what are the chances this thing will be declared historic????

[Urbannizer]

given it is a rare real art deco building in austin and its history what are the chances this thing will be declared historic????

0

[davidberko]

Well yes, turns out people's standards and expectations change!

Right now we just have a glut of proposed or just starting construction 500-700 footers. Once we get a bunch of those built? Then I'll raise my expectations for taller. Majority of Austin's skyline is still really short. All those 50-55 story buildings will make Austin feel like a big city and dense. High hopes for the railyard project and 3rd and Congress.

[zrx299]

Can we get more supertalls please, all these 500-700 footers are boring as hell now

Oh don't worry, the bloated disproportionally-sized parking podiums will continue to push our buildings ever higher.

[bobbywest87]

Right now we just have a glut of proposed or just starting construction 500-700 footers. Once we get a bunch of those built? Then I'll raise my expectations for taller. Majority of Austin's skyline is still really short. All those 50-55 story buildings will make Austin feel like a big city and dense. High hopes for the railyard project and 3rd and Congress.

You hit the nail on the head right there. Austin feels like a bigger city on this forum than what it actually is, because we’re judging it based on its anticipated size with all these new buildings being proposed or just starting construction. Until those are actually built, we’re still a mid-sized (yet wonderful) city with a few decently sized construction pits.

[the Genral]

You hit the nail on the head right there. Austin feels like a bigger city on this forum than what it actually is, because we’re judging it based on its anticipated size with all these new buildings being proposed or just starting construction. Until those are actually built, we’re still a mid-sized (yet wonderful) city with a few decently sized construction pits.

Even if your criteria for determining if a city's size, small, medium, large, super large is based on the amount and size of the buildings downtown, I think Austin is considered a large city by me and many based on our downtown alone. Factor in that Austin is large enough to accommodate huge crowds for ACL, SXSW, F1 for example, and millions of tourists per year, and has a 50k plus neighbor attached directly to the north with UT, and population wise is the 11th largest US city,
I don't think there's anything medium about this city.
But I concede some might think our downtown has some catching up to do given it's 11th biggest status.

[wwmiv]

Even if your criteria for determining if a city's size, small, medium, large, super large is based on the amount and size of the buildings downtown, I think Austin is considered a large city by me and many based on our downtown alone. Factor in that Austin is large enough to accommodate huge crowds for ACL, SXSW, F1 for example, and millions of tourists per year, and has a 50k plus neighbor attached directly to the north with UT, and population wise is the 11th largest US city,
I don't think there's anything medium about this city.
But I concede some might think our downtown has some catching up to do given it's 11th biggest status.

In America, because of our balkanized urban planning and public transit infrastructure in the context of a regional personal transport infrastructure, city limits are of limited importance to how “big” a “city” feels. Austin may have the 11th largest municipal population, but because it itself is largely suburban in character (because of when it grew) and the collection of suburban municipalities around it sum to a much smaller population than, say, the 12th largest municipality in the country, San Francisco, it “feels” much smaller. In other words, Downtown San Francisco feels bigger because the Metropolitan Statistical Area is larger because our road and transit infrastructure differ: there are many more people who are able to commute into the city both by road and transit from outside the city limits regularly, and the built environment of San Francisco itself has to accommodate that in a much more confined geography. After all, the San Francisco MSA is double Austin’s, 4.6 million to 2.3 million, and the fully integrated Bay Area CSA including San Jose and others is more than four times that of Austin: 9.7 million. Austin feels like a medium “city” because, when you factor in all these other things that lead to urban core development, it is a medium city.

To me, even San Antonio “feels” like a larger city despite not having as large a skyline, because its traditional urban fabric is more expansive and comprised of larger buildings due it having grown earlier.

[davidberko]

Even if your criteria for determining if a city's size, small, medium, large, super large is based on the amount and size of the buildings downtown, I think Austin is considered a large city by me and many based on our downtown alone. Factor in that Austin is large enough to accommodate huge crowds for ACL, SXSW, F1 for example, and millions of tourists per year, and has a 50k plus neighbor attached directly to the north with UT, and population wise is the 11th largest US city,
I don't think there's anything medium about this city.
But I concede some might think our downtown has some catching up to do given it's 11th biggest status.

I think we were strictly speaking from a skyscraper standpoint. Not population.
Austin's downtown has been growing like a weed. No doubt. Until many of these 600 footers top out, our skyline will still feel really small. You go down Caesar Chavez and it's mostly 300-400 footers. I think once the republic starts to go up, the Travis, Block 16, etc., THEN Austin will start to feel like a bigger city. Although I will say this. The traffic on 35 today around 3 going through downtown was so hellacious I was thinking project connect can't happen soon enough. Oy!

[bobbywest87]

I think we were strictly speaking from a skyscraper standpoint. Not population.
Austin's downtown has been growing like a weed. No doubt. Until many of these 600 footers top out, our skyline will still feel really small. You go down Caesar Chavez and it's mostly 300-400 footers. I think once the republic starts to go up, the Travis, Block 16, etc., THEN Austin will start to feel like a bigger city. Although I will say this. The traffic on 35 today around 3 going through downtown was so hellacious I was thinking project connect can't happen soon enough. Oy!

Yes, I was just talking about the skyline itself. Up until about a month ago, the tallest building in Austin was only slightly taller than Trammel Crow in Dallas. Similar to San Antonio, the height and density of Austin’s skyline doesn’t necessarily reflect its larger population. In a few short years that will all likely change. Austin is just now experiencing its first major skyscraper growth, similar to Dallas in the 80s. It’s an exciting time!

[wwmiv]

I think we were strictly speaking from a skyscraper standpoint. Not population.
Austin's downtown has been growing like a weed. No doubt. Until many of these 600 footers top out, our skyline will still feel really small. You go down Caesar Chavez and it's mostly 300-400 footers. I think once the republic starts to go up, the Travis, Block 16, etc., THEN Austin will start to feel like a bigger city. Although I will say this. The traffic on 35 today around 3 going through downtown was so hellacious I was thinking project connect can't happen soon enough. Oy!

After all of that, I still think Austin will “feel” like a medium sized “city.”

Austin’s skyline may be tall and getting taller relative to its peers, but where Austin really falls short is mid-scale density in the neighborhoods around downtown. Only one can really be called densely urban (West Campus), but it is also largely transient. The rest are largely single-family in character and the density boosts are confined to corridors and capped in density between 3-5 floors and effectively even less due to compatibility standards. Austin won’t, to me, truly feel like a large city until some of these larger periphery urban developments take place (the stuff at Lamar and 290, the mega-developments along E. Riverside, and Broadmoor) and are fully connected via corridor development. Oh, and after the east side starts to reach urban escape velocity with taller multi-family buildings. A skyline itself doesn’t make a city feel large while walking the streets and driving around. It just leaves the impression of a large city in a photo from a far off vantage.

[ILUVSAT]

the fully integrated Bay Area CSA including San Jose and others is more than four times that of Austin: 9.7 million. Austin feels like a medium “city” because, when you factor in all these other things that lead to urban core development, it is a medium city.

To me, even San Antonio “feels” like a larger city despite not having as large a skyline, because its traditional urban fabric is more expansive and comprised of larger buildings due it having grown earlier.

I agree with most of your comments. But, one thing to note...SF-Oakland-San Jose lost about 200,000 between the 2020 census (9.7 million) and the 2021 estimate of their CSA.

[wwmiv]

I agree with most of your comments. But, one thing to note...SF-Oakland-San Jose lost about 200,000 between the 2020 census (9.7 million) and the 2021 estimate of their CSA.

That is true. But only speaks to a shrinking magnitude of the difference.

[agsatx88]

After all of that, I still think Austin will “feel” like a medium sized “city.”

Maybe it's because I travel so much for work and fun but for me it feels very much "medium sized" because we don't have a hub airport. All the commonly accepted "large cities" have hub airports and we just have 34 overcrowded gates with 95% origin and destination passengers.

[davidberko]

Maybe it's because I travel so much for work and fun but for me it feels very much "medium sized" because we don't have a hub airport. All the commonly accepted "large cities" have hub airports and we just have 34 overcrowded gates with 95% origin and destination passengers.

Agree about the airport. I drive Uber fulltime and am used to midway, O'haire, detroit metro airport...Abia is tiny!
Pretty sure they are using eminent domain to take over the south terminal to expand Barbara Jordan. That'll be good.
Some excellent well-thought out points wwmiv. Really enjoyed reading your explanations.
Yeah bobby, it's definitely reminiscent of the Dallas boom. It's Austin's turn to shine now and I'm thrilled about it. Wonder if San Antonio will ever urbanize their downtown. I'm fine if they don't. Love it the way it is. But yes, considering our population, ATX and SA don't have downtowns commensurate to the amount of residents.

[427MM]

Our proposed new land development code nixed in the courts by NIMBYs would have really helped to move the needle with all of this. It does the job of what a 1984 code should do--allows farms and forests to be replaced with low-density, auto-centric sprawl. It does a terrible job at allowing infill/redevelopment. Just the way the NIMBYs like it. Super excited to have a brand new City Council tackle this issue next year. They are inheriting a mess made worse by the day by our oppressive zoning. Losing two members who voted against zoning reform could be good for Austin.

[valhalla]

To me, even San Antonio “feels” like a larger city despite not having as large a skyline, because its traditional urban fabric is more expansive and comprised of larger buildings due it having grown earlier.

As someone who grew up in San Antonio, I think this statement, while true for most of history, hasn't been true for at least 10 years. The only large city amenities that San Antonio has on Austin is the Spurs and a handful of subpar museums. Spend any amount of time in San Antonio and you will realize it is devoid of professionals--the hallmark of any major city. Austin is far closer to a San Francisco or a New York or a Chicago. It has big tech, big law, big fill in the blank. San Antonio has big military and big food trucks.

[StoOgE]

As someone who grew up in San Antonio, I think this statement, while true for most of history, hasn't been true for at least 10 years. The only large city amenities that San Antonio has on Austin is the Spurs and a handful of subpar museums. Spend any amount of time in San Antonio and you will realize it is devoid of professionals--the hallmark of any major city. Austin is far closer to a San Francisco or a New York or a Chicago. It has big tech, big law, big fill in the blank. San Antonio has big military and big food trucks.

Im not here to dunk on San Antonio - but I agree with this.

If nothing else the night-life, bar and restaurant scene in Austin is orders of magnitude above what San Antonio has.

Honestly, I would put Austin's food scene on par with anyone other than NYC/San Fran/L.A./Chicago (I mean, NoLA and Charleston are better but very specific cuisine focused)

I moved back here from NYC thinking I would be miserable for food and other than the really top-shelf 2 and 3 Michelin star spots ahve not missed anything. (I'd also argue that Otoko, Emmer and Rye, Olimae, Hestia and a few others would easily be 1 star if not 2 star spots if Texas had a guide.)

[myBrain]

After all of that, I still think Austin will “feel” like a medium sized “city.”

Austin’s skyline may be tall and getting taller relative to its peers, but where Austin really falls short is mid-scale density in the neighborhoods around downtown. Only one can really be called densely urban (West Campus), but it is also largely transient. The rest are largely single-family in character and the density boosts are confined to corridors and capped in density between 3-5 floors and effectively even less due to compatibility standards. Austin won’t, to me, truly feel like a large city until some of these larger periphery urban developments take place (the stuff at Lamar and 290, the mega-developments along E. Riverside, and Broadmoor) and are fully connected via corridor development. Oh, and after the east side starts to reach urban escape velocity with taller multi-family buildings. A skyline itself doesn’t make a city feel large while walking the streets and driving around. It just leaves the impression of a large city in a photo from a far off vantage.

I agree with this. The only city in Texas that has anything like a big city feel for me is Houston, and that's because it has clusters of high-rises in almost every direction. Even then though, when you get off the highway and down to street level Houston doesn't feel like some kind of urban big city environment.

Even Dallas, which has a pretty big skyline, feels pretty small town immediately outside of downtown.

Suburban sprawl cities just never feel that big to me even though they can stretch on forever. It's not just the small scale of the buildings either, it's the visual monotony. Driving across Dallas can feel like you're repeating through the same loop of chain restaurants, car dealerships, and cookie cutter neighborhoods over and over again, and it just kind of becomes a blur. Compare to somewhere like Philly, which is dense even miles from the CBD. There's so much more visual interest and differentiation there.

[Jdawgboy]

To me Austin does feel like a big city nowadays. When you drive down Lamar towards DT from the south, it's absolutely jarring (in a good way) seeing just how impressive this city is morphing into, with all the mid rise apartment buildings rising on both sides and DT rising up in the background. It's definitely not looking small by any means. Same when you drive down 6th, very big city look and feel. Its not just the buildings, the amount of foot traffic in areas outside of DT is also very telling in areas that even 10 years ago were devoid of. I feel that while Austin definitely has a lot of suburban sprawl, it still is more compact in terms of the square miles within the city limits compared to any of the other big Texas cities. I live not far from the St. Elmo District, just yesterday I drove through there and its just amazing at how much that area is changing and being built up. Riverside is well on it's way as well and will look very impressive in a couple of more years.

[SproutingTowers]

As someone who grew up in San Antonio, I think this statement, while true for most of history, hasn't been true for at least 10 years. The only large city amenities that San Antonio has on Austin is the Spurs and a handful of subpar museums. Spend any amount of time in San Antonio and you will realize it is devoid of professionals--the hallmark of any major city. Austin is far closer to a San Francisco or a New York or a Chicago. It has big tech, big law, big fill in the blank. San Antonio has big military and big food trucks.

Same here where I grew up in SA too and can go on and on how bad the city is run. My parents still live there but in Leon Valley which is also poorly run, and SA just go another black eye in the national media and perception of the city.

https://www.sacurrent.com/news/san-antonio-river-walk-brawl-started-by-customer-pissed-off-about-his-bill-captured-on-video-29391656

[SproutingTowers]

I agree with this. The only city in Texas that has anything like a big city feel for me is Houston, and that's because it has clusters of high-rises in almost every direction. Even then though, when you get off the highway and down to street level Houston doesn't feel like some kind of urban big city environment.

Even Dallas, which has a pretty big skyline, feels pretty small town immediately outside of downtown.

Suburban sprawl cities just never feel that big to me even though they can stretch on forever. It's not just the small scale of the buildings either, it's the visual monotony. Driving across Dallas can feel like you're repeating through the same loop of chain restaurants, car dealerships, and cookie cutter neighborhoods over and over again, and it just kind of becomes a blur. Compare to somewhere like Philly, which is dense even miles from the CBD. There's so much more visual interest and differentiation there.

I just returned from Houston and every time I visit it seems like it keeps getting larger. I used to live there and now the edge of the metro city is the Katy Bucc-ee's, but there are enormous warehouses right before it being built so means more sprawl on the west side. Downtown Houston freeways are a mess where it like having three I-35s with 1950's highway design causing unnecessary traffic and lane confusions. Was staring at the JPMorgan Chase Tower imagining how it will look in height in downtown Austin. But people complaining about Austin being too large should take a trip to Houston and see a city so big it has 4 highway loops around it and at one to end of the metro is over 100 miles.

[austlar1]

As someone who grew up in San Antonio, I think this statement, while true for most of history, hasn't been true for at least 10 years. The only large city amenities that San Antonio has on Austin is the Spurs and a handful of subpar museums. Spend any amount of time in San Antonio and you will realize it is devoid of professionals--the hallmark of any major city. Austin is far closer to a San Francisco or a New York or a Chicago. It has big tech, big law, big fill in the blank. San Antonio has big military and big food trucks.

Yep! Your observations are spot on.

[davidberko]

Yep! Your observations are spot on.

And a zoo! San Antonio has a nice zoo.
And an observation tower. And theme parks.
I hope they build that theme park at COTA. That will be sweet!

[DougRockstead]

I just returned from Houston and every time I visit it seems like it keeps getting larger. I used to live there and now the edge of the metro city is the Katy Bucc-ee's, but there are enormous warehouses right before it being built so means more sprawl on the west side. Downtown Houston freeways are a mess where it like having three I-35s with 1950's highway design causing unnecessary traffic and lane confusions. Was staring at the JPMorgan Chase Tower imagining how it will look in height in downtown Austin. But people complaining about Austin being too large should take a trip to Houston and see a city so big it has 4 highway loops around it and at one to end of the metro is over 100 miles.

I am in Houston almost every other week for work.

All areas. From Freeport to Rosenberg, Katy, Cypress, Conroe, Porter, Baytown, Dickinson, Alvin, and of course the downtown metro. I am amazed at the amount of growth in that metro area in every direction. You can almost get to Angleton, maybe 15 minutes of "country" between Pearland and Angelton at this point, and still see signs of growth everywhere.

The Houston Metro area is ridiculous in size.

[loonytoony]

Can we get more supertalls please, all these 500-700 footers are boring as hell now

I heard a very interesting rumbling and believe this is the project referenced...if true you might get your wish :cheers:

[enragedcamel]

I heard a very interesting rumbling and believe this is the project referenced...if true you might get your wish :cheers:

I don't think this can become a supertall with just 54 floors. 6th & Guadalupe is 874 ft with 65 floors, and 98 Red River is 1,022 ft with 73 floors. I know the height of the parking podium adds some variability but even then, you'd need to stretch each floor by a LOT to get this one into supertall (1,000+ ft) category.

[loonytoony]

I don't think this can become a supertall with just 54 floors. 6th & Guadalupe is 874 ft with 65 floors, and 98 Red River is 1,022 ft with 73 floors. I know the height of the parking podium adds some variability but even then, you'd need to stretch each floor by a LOT to get this one into supertall (1,000+ ft) category.


If I'm connecting the right dots, this number is being drastically updated.

[GoldenBoot]

To be considered a "supertall" the building has to be 300m (~984') or taller. Also, one could easily achieve supertall status with 54 floors. There are examples of this all over the planet.

[We vs us]

Interesting, interesting. Would love to see what a supertall with a half-block footprint looks like.

[N90]

Maybe he got it mixed up with the Railyard Condos site?

[ILUVSAT]

...Or 3rd & Congress?

[kingkirbythe....]

Supertall status is 984.252 feet/300 meters. Streeeeeeetch those floors. :haha:

[Jdawgboy]

This bit of info is from loonytoony guys. He doesn't post anything that he does not have an idea of what's going on behind the scenes. He's been spot on over the last few years with regards to DT highrises. Take notice when he posts.

[GoldenBoot]

This bit of info is from loonytoony guys. He doesn't post anything that he does not have an idea of what's going on behind the scenes. He's been spot on over the last few years with regards to DT highrises. Take notice when he posts.

I don't think anyone is doubting loonytoony's validity. At least, I'm not.

Oh...as two points of reference - Bank of America Tower in Atlanta is 55 stories and 1,023' tall and the BOA Tower in NYC is 55 stories and 1,200' tall. However, both are in the ballpark of 950' to the roof.

So, one doesn't really need to "stretch" the floors. Just add some architectural piece to the crown of the building to get extra height.

[Jdawgboy]

I don't think anyone is doubting loonytoony's validity. At least, I'm not.

Oh...as two points of reference - Bank of America Tower in Atlanta is 55 stories and 1,023' tall and the BOA Tower in NYC is 55 stories and 1,200' tall. However, both are in the ballpark of 950' to the roof.

So, one doesn't really need to "stretch" the floors. Just add some architectural piece to the crown of the building to get extra height.

Very true indeed. (speaking of Indeed, totally random I know but they have their logo in Rainbow colors on their HQ Tower for the Pride Parade, saw it lastnight walking)
But I digress... Was just pointing out he is a reliable source.

Isn't one of the NYC towers currently under construction 54 floors and will be over 300 meters... So yea there are many examples of tall buildings that don't necessarily have a ton of floors.

[The ATX]

Those supertall ~55-story buildings are offices. This one is apartments, so the design/uses will need to change to get to that height.

[loonytoony]

This bit of info is from loonytoony guys. He doesn't post anything that he does not have an idea of what's going on behind the scenes. He's been spot on over the last few years with regards to DT highrises. Take notice when he posts.

The big question is did I connect the right dots. What was mentioned will dethrone 98RR.

[We vs us]

The big question is did I connect the right dots. What was mentioned will dethrone 98RR.

Gulp. That would be . . . crazytimes. Were the dots about location in the city? Or developer? or specific project? I've gotta ask, even if you can't share ...

[Urbannizer]

I’m guessing it could be:

3rd & Congress
The Railyards Site
Post office site across from 6xGuad

[We vs us]

I’m guessing it could be:

3rd & Congress
The Railyards Site
Post office site across from 6xGuad

The Railyards is my vote -- it's been out there percolating long enough, and the renderings absolutely suggested major height.

Isn't 3rd and Congress still in dispute? I can't remember from day to day what WC is and isn't contesting.

And of course the Post Office site will outlast all of us, and finally go tall sometime in late 2080.

[loonytoony]

Gulp. That would be . . . crazytimes. Were the dots about location in the city? Or developer? or specific project? I've gotta ask, even if you can't share ...

I’ve shared about as much as I feel comfortable doing at this point, but those are all good questions :)

I know you guys wanted more but hope you understand my position. For what it’s worth I consider this a tier one rumbling. The parties involved or not small players.

[We vs us]

I’ve shared about as much as I feel comfortable doing at this point, but those are all good questions :)

I know you guys wanted more but hope you understand my position. For what it’s worth I consider this a tier one rumbling. The parties involved or not small players.

Understood. Like I said, I had to ask even if you couldn't share. :cheers:

[ILUVSAT]

I’ve shared about as much as I feel comfortable doing at this point, but those are all good questions :)

For what it’s worth I consider this a tier one rumbling. The parties involved or not small players.

Thank you, Loonytoony!

So, you're saying this thing may have some serious legs?!? Do you have a clue on when more information may be made available?

[drummer]

Thank you, Loonytoony!

So, you're saying this thing may have some serious legs?!? Do you have a clue on when more information may be made available?

Wait, this thing will be mobile? :P

[ILUVSAT]

Yes. Giant columns at its base. ;)

[ATX2030]

Could this tower break the 1100' mark? Add a 200' spire on top of that and now were talking.

[Jdawgboy]

Could this tower break the 1100' mark? Add a 200' spire on top of that and now were talking.

I'd rather have a crown, one that complements Frost Bank's crown.


By the way, why has the crown remained dark? Are they no longer wanting to light it?? Seriously its an icon of the city, it's a terrible waste not to light it.

[loonytoony]

Thank you, Loonytoony!

So, you're saying this thing may have some serious legs?!? Do you have a clue on when more information may be made available?

My guess on info would be in the next 6 months or so but :shrug: Lots of moving parts on this one.

If ET does phone home though we'll know. He'll be using a more modern looking device.

[ATX2030]

Crazy to think that the ATX would join such an exclusive club with 2 towers over 1000'! I can think of only 4 cities in N. America that fit that bill. MIA probably will enter that club as well.

[LiveattheOasis]

My guess on info would be in the next 6 months or so but :shrug: Lots of moving parts on this one.

If ET does phone home though we'll know. He'll be using a more modern looking device.

AT&T moving here or the tower designs you've seen look like a phone? ;)

[East7thStreet]

AT&T moving here or the tower designs you've seen look like a phone? ;)

When I think cell phones I think Apple and Samsung.....or maybe the new Starlink/Tesla cell phone coming out soon. All companies with a presence in Austin....

[ItsCalledTownLake]

Thank you, Loonytoony!

So, you're saying this thing may have some serious legs?!? Do you have a clue on when more information may be made available?

Hearing construction start in 2Q23 with 4 year construction timeline. That length of time indicates a very tall building. Look for 9/26 design commission meeting.

[Maximusx1]

Hearing construction start in 2Q23 with 4 year construction timeline. That length of time indicates a very tall building. Look for 9/26 design commission meeting.

Strong entrance!

[The ATX]

Hearing construction start in 2Q23 with 4 year construction timeline. That length of time indicates a very tall building. Look for 9/26 design commission meeting.

Good info. There are also several other major towers yet to make their DC appearance:

701 W. 6th
3rd & San Jacinto towers 1 & 2
Block 41 North
62 East Ave
Hanover 4th & Colorado
Block 87 Rebirth (But it appears dead again)
506 West
12th & I-35

[Urbannizer]

If I'm connecting the right dots, this number is being drastically updated.

Overlooked this- if so it’s quite a swift change in plans as the site plan was only submitted in May.

[kingkirbythe....]

Doesn't this block have a height limit because of Brush Square (not really square) Park across the street?

I hope the city will look the other way if there is.

[Jdawgboy]

It would be ridiculous to have any sort of height limit due to Brush Square which isn't even a full on block Square. It wouldn't do anything at all. No point at all.

[The ATX]

Doesn't this block have a height limit because of Brush Square (not really square) Park across the street?

I hope the city will look the other way if there is.

Yes, the park overlay affects the height just as it did for the 5th & Trinity hotel that was limited to ~13-stories. But this site is big enough where the tower can be set back from the street and go tall. In this case a 360 like rectangle I'm guessing. The Republic Tower was affected by the park overlay as well. But it was able to go tall since the tower was set back by ~1/5th of a block on the side facing the park.

[wwmiv]

Am I allowed to irrationally hold out hope that this design boost will actually be timeless - unlike most of our recent additions and a supertall that will very quickly become dated - and 1200’+ feet?

Because I am. Or whichever tower this rumor ends up being about.

[drummer]

Am I allowed to irrationally hold out hope that this design boost will actually be timeless - unlike most of our recent additions and a supertall that will very quickly become dated - and 1200’+ feet?

Because I am. Or whichever tower this rumor ends up being about.

Yes, yes you are.

[We vs us]

With that park setback -- and the fact that Avenue Loft is only on a half block -- we're going to end up with a paper thin super tall.

[Jdawgboy]

With that park setback -- and the fact that Avenue Loft is only on a half block -- we're going to end up with a paper thin super tall.

Well if it means the setback will make it taller then, yay!

[kingkirbythe....]

I was thinking the same thing.

[agsatx88]

Elevations also added to this site plan. Seems to be 858'.

https://i.imgur.com/Yvr8I7u.jpg

https://abc.austintexas.gov/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=12939377&t_selected_propertyrsn=549074

[The ATX]

Damn. The City is doing a lot of site plan updates today. The rumor was true.

[paul78701]

It doesn't appear to have any balconies? So it must not be residential?

[Echostatic]

God damn that is skinny for something so tall. Just about 75 feet wide.

[myBrain]

"The Hyatt Centric but make it as tall as 6x"

[We vs us]

"The Hyatt Centric but make it as tall as 6x"

I lol'd.

[kingkirbythe....]

I love this rectangle.

If it is all black, very 2001ian.

Swoon!

[The ATX]

It's still appears to be all apartments. No balconies would be unusual.

[kingkirbythe....]

That's true. Rare in Austin, but not necessarily rare in the world.

[Urbannizer]

"The Hyatt Centric but make it as tall as 6x"

432 Park Avenue came to mind..similar facade pattern.

[H2O]

Boring!!! Hopefully the elevations are just placeholders.

[futures]

Lots to like on this building. I know it's another rectangle but, I really like:

1. The height obviously.
2. Framed windows. Much more interesting than solid glass. Potentially brick??
3. Proportion of the parking garage to the building.
4. That slender view...

[drummer]

This one is going to feel absolutely massive on 6th street. And given the location in town, it's going to stick out a lot among the generally shorter buildings. 6xGuad at least has some other height around it. That said, I'm interested in the materials, for sure. Framed windows will be nice.

[LiveattheOasis]

Flying back from Chicago tonight. Seeing all these buildings planned in addition to the ones going up has me really really excited.

[JACKinBeantown]

Elevations also added to this site plan. Seems to be 858'.

https://i.imgur.com/Yvr8I7u.jpg

https://abc.austintexas.gov/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=12939377&t_selected_propertyrsn=549074

I used to work in 41 Madison Ave in NYC. Man, that building swayed in the wind. I hope they have a good damper in this building.

https://www.mannpublications.com/mannreport/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/10/41-Madison-Exterior-2.jpg
https://www.mannpublications.com/mannreport/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/10/41-Madison-Exterior-2.jpg

[Jdawgboy]

Not sure what to think about this. Was hoping for another 1,000 footer, however I don't think we are done with another supertall proposal. I almost want to say would be nice to have some sort of arched decorative roof/crown rather than a flat slab rising 71 floors. Like several of the other diagrams that have come out which aside from the twin rounded towers, are a bit odd looking or hard to get an idea of what the design will actually be, I'll wait for the renderings.

[loonytoony]

Elevations also added to this site plan. Seems to be 858'.

https://i.imgur.com/Yvr8I7u.jpg

https://abc.austintexas.gov/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=12939377&t_selected_propertyrsn=549074

In terms of what I'd heard: this matches the design / location, but not the height. I'll be curious on if we see any updates from the design commission meeting.

[LiveattheOasis]

Are you able to share what the height was you'd heard? Surely had to be more than 1,022, but how much more? Would a spire be what it gets it there?

[enragedcamel]

Are you able to share what the height was you'd heard? Surely had to be more than 1,022, but how much more? Would a spire be what it gets it there?

I hope not. I hate it when spires are used to "cheat" the height.

[loonytoony]

Are you able to share what the height was you'd heard? Surely had to be more than 1,022, but how much more? Would a spire be what it gets it there?

Short answer: taller.

Long answer: I'd like to wait until the design commission meeting before spilling all my beans. I did not see any renders so can't speak to whether this will include a spire.

[myBrain]

I don't hate the design at its current height (assuming the rendering reveals a quality facade) but man, this would be a lame tallest building. A block-wide rectangular monolith.

[H2O]

859' would be taller than the original height of 6 x G by the same developer at Waterline. Maybe that is the source of confusion?

[Jdawgboy]

I don't hate the design at its current height (assuming the rendering reveals a quality facade) but man, this would be a lame tallest building. A block-wide rectangular monolith.

If we're going to have a block-wide rectangular monolith, might as well have the biggest and tallest one eh?:D

[drummer]

If we're going to have a block-wide rectangular monolith, might as well have the biggest and tallest one eh?:D

Obviously...need to be able to brag about it.