This is so darn bland. I feel like my last dozen or so posts have been negative, but lately everything just seems so value engineered to oblivion. I am excited for the the curved crown and really hope they continue to finish this one some more.....green glass would be a nice change for sure.

Wonder if Ritz might switch from 80 Red to this tower? Same number of stories and nearly as tall.

The Ritz-Carlton is still planned for 80 Red River.

I suggest you focus your disdain toward the developer, not the city. It's the developer who is solely responsible for the design of the building and how much capital they want to put forth in said design. Underground parking is ridiculously expensive in Central Texas - especially with regard to the number of spaces they seem to be targeting. Furthermore, depending on the size of the below grade parking structure, it could add at least six-to-nine months to the construction timeline. An additional six-to-nine months without revenue.

Good to hear. Since M2 Development Partners has scrubbed it from their website I thought it had fallen through.

Some of the other projects from the architect look pretty similar to the illustrations here and could give us an idea of what this will look like.

https://www.pappageorgehaymes.com/projects/

https://i.imgur.com/10vcMEI.png

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

https://i.imgur.com/nJ0zzgO.png

https://i.imgur.com/wN5OzHF.png

https://i.imgur.com/S7GVuzE.png

Handsome towers but pretty conservative.

I don't get the complaining on some of these proposals. They're building taller finally and yes, some designs are a bit conservative, but that's a start!! Austin's growth and construction is insane and we are beginning to act spoiled LOL

Spoiled is an understatement. We are getting a `800 foot building on a quarter block that will replace lightly used one and two story buildings.

The new building will have ground level retail with patio space.

The density will be great for street life and the tax base.

The design is not just a box/rectangle...there is an overhang, cut in, ton of balconies, and other several design features to break up any boxiness.

We will just have to wait to see if it's value engineered and what quality of materials are used.

IMHO, putting quality materials on a mess of a massing and expecting a decent final result is like putting lipstick on a pig and expecting her to be screwable after.

Is that how you honestly feel about the Austin skyline though? Austin may not have spectacular buildings like you see in some of the larger cities but compared to all the cities of its size, the skyline is looking exceptional.

This tower in particular looks pretty solid, especially if it turns out to anything near to those towers from those photos, like the one's in Chicago, in particular the tall one with that crown. I remember seeing that tower when I was in Chicago a few years ago when I went out there to pedicab. I gave a ride to some folks in that direction where those towers were and I remember being drawn to it while on the ride. If Austin gets anything reminiscent to that, it's going to add more diversity to the skyline. It's not a loss by any means.

Kind of amazing but One Museum Park (the Chicago tower) is '726 tall. If this goes forward as advertised, it'll best OneMP by '60 feet.

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

Agreed. Well said. The more towers and urban homes they build downtown the less inflated the market will be in the metro. And tax base increase like you said. It's a win-win for everyone! :tup:

I like the height, density, and dimensions.

But my MO is that I’m all about improvements and this is a huge upgrade from what’s there now. I feel like people become too attached to the idea of every building being proposed being some architectural masterpiece that they completely miss the point of the infill to begin with.

Name one city in the world where every high rise it has is an architectural masterpiece and I’ll sell you oceanfront property in Colorado. Is it São Paulo? Hong Kong? Tokyo? London? Mexico City? Shanghai? Dubai? Buenos Aires? Moscow? Berlin? Melbourne? Toronto? Even in NYC and Chicago, most of the buildings are pretty nondescript and blah with a few architectural gems thrown in the mix every now and then.

I like this building. I like the crown. It’ll look like a nice sibling to the Austonian.

I like this one. Some of our tallest proposals have been either meh or bland or using bizarre designs that feel sort of hodge podge, but this one looks good to me. I like the balconies, the texture of the facade, the vertical lines, the crown/top, and the color. Austin could use a few more green towers. This will also be pretty slender when viewed from the east and west elevations.

At the moment, other than 6 X Guadalupe and The Republic, this is my next favorite of the new talls.

That garage, though. :doh:

yup the race to fill does not = quality design.

Fingers crossed for renderings late this week. Has anyone noticed if there has been any activity on the site - utility work, tree removal, prepping the house for a move, etc.?

There are no parking minimums and its extremely expensive to dig in Austin.

Unless the city forces developers to put all parking underground or people are happy to not have a place for their cars you are going to continue to see this.

Nothing as of Friday when I walked by. Michelada's is still open, and that house + tree next to it are both still in the ground. Gus's Fried Chicken is also still open but I don't think that building is included in the footprint.

Why is it more expensive to put parking underground in Austin but no other city in the world?

How viable is street parking for downtown residents/

i wouldn't say "extremely" but we don't have a lot of dirt before you hit limestone. less than most places around the country. this is somewhat mitigated downtown though i think. the metro at large though it is expensive to dig