One thing we are not short of in Austin is some fantastic architects working on projects around town. Not so much for the buildings recently announced, but on parks and like the Waller Creek thing, I think has some great potential. I believe the poppy is meant to be something like what you are talking about. The O'Keeffe connotations making the conservatives uncomfortable is just another plus. :P

I also saw a amazing bridge design recently in one of the south shore district things posted around here somewhere recently. For the area where the AAS is currently.

Ugh. I hate that poppy thing.

I say every building should be Iconic. That is truly how you get unique awesome looking skylines. Shanghai downtown. Lower Manhattan before they built all the boxy boring buildings.

don't hate the poppy, hate the game....

poppy will be cool experience when underneath it I bet ...

I feel like the drive for iconicism is a holdover of our confused, suburban, car-centric, Modernist past. That's why we have so many starchitects now. Everyone's trying to design "iconic" buildings. It's individualistic. We need humility and authenticity, not attention hunger and branding. Cities aren't brands. They're real places where people have to live. I actually don't even like the Sydney Opera House. Instead of people thinking about the actual city when you mention Sydney, they just think of that one building. Same goes for Seattle and Toronto. I'd much rather have 50 "normal" buildings than one "iconic" building.

People from places like New York and London don't get it. They seem stuck in that old mindset a little bit. Here's a perfect example of that: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/18/re...anted=all&_r=0

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/f...uthShore02.jpg


http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/f...uthShore01.jpg

Agree that there is some good work going on with the Waller Creek project! I also love the poppy.

Those bridge designs were cool. I thought I remember them being student projects, but easily could be wrong.

Oh! There they are! very cool. Were these projects or real proposals?

They were projects - done by students at the UT School of Architecture showing what could be done as part of that whole South Shore Redevelopment.

AH! Thank you! I thought that was the case.

It's good to have interesting concepts circulating. Raises expectations.

Yeah, it's always been my lifelong dream to stand underneath a humongous semi-flattened coffee filter propped up with giant toothpicks. I'm wth lzppjb on this. I just think it looks stupid.

But to each his own, I guess.

I like the Bridge but I can see how some people may not like it. Its a bit too modernistic and doesn't seem to fit in well with Austin. The 360 bridge is still better than that one and either way it was done by students. I still think the concepts are cool though and would definitely not mind having that in Austin. Especially that train!!

I'm not a fan of bridges with a lot of overhead structure. I'd rather have the "open air" views. Also for all the complaining people do about utility lines, suspension bridges have those pesky cables mucking up a view. I like being able to look down the river while crossing the bridges and being able to see the hills. I feel like the buildings on both sides of the river accent and frame the view of the hills, but a large bridge crossing the river would truly block the view in some ways.

People from places like New York and London don't get it. They seem stuck in that old mindset a little bit. Here's a perfect example of that: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/18/re...anted=all&_r=0[/QUOTE]

I'm from Austin, and politely disagree with a lot of your generalizations... we don't all view buildings the same way and black and white characterizations of "cities with nothing" is inaccurate.... Seattle has a lot more going for it than its space needle.... library and such are pretty amazing....

there is a lot of backlash against starchitects... it's unwarranted... these people endeavor to do something great and that will be studied for years... I would argue that these projects, as narcissistic and full of inadequacy as their creators may be, still are brilliant and worthy of praise... I will take interesting architecture with walkability any day over your city of infill blandness... in the article you posted walkertower.com seems like this guy was a visionary

Marriott Progress
 

Here's the Marriott from 2nd and Brazos yesterday. Second picture from 3rd street (August 24).

http://venish.com/austin-skyscraper-...iott-Aug24.jpg

http://venish.com/austin-skyscraper-...ott2-Aug24.jpg

Seaholm Progress
 

Here's a look at the, about 25-foot deep hole behind the power plant for the Seaholm tower.

http://venish.com/austin-skyscraper-...holm-Aug24.jpg

This is becoming city v. city. You guys need to knock it off or you're going to get this whole thing shut down.

I think it's worthwhile to talk about. The differences are important and they reflect the different socio-political values, which is something that a lot of people fail to take into consideration when talking about buildings. Buildings help create culture, so what values we instill in our buildings is important. I'm completely against starchitecture not only because I disagree with individualism, but also because I disagree with globalization (as it's currently manifested) and colonialism. I believe that less is more and I wouldn't wear over-the-top clothing or drive an over-the-top automobile, so I don't want over-the-top buildings. It's not blandness, it's refinement and moderation.

Under construction and proposed buildings poster
 

Here's an updated poster. I've not included the Catherine or Green Water 1, Riverview or the various West Campus buildings. There are a few other smaller builds that I've not included on this round either, but still I think this makes for a fairly amazing collection. Feel free to pass on missing stat's like the floor count and height of the Westin and Seaholm towers if they exist.

http://venish.com/austin-skyscraper-...line-Aug13.jpg

When do you guys think the east-central parts of downtown Austin, say the land on both sides of sixth and east of congress, will be built out with most currently underused land developed? Are there any midrises planned for this area, woodframe stuff or is it mostly being reserved for highrise buildings?

I just think a seemless grid in this area, no major parking lots left, is going to be key to "completing" the cityscape, so to speak.