SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   City Compilations (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=87)
-   -   AUSTIN | Projects & Construction III (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=199012)

KevinFromTexas Apr 4, 2015 5:26 AM

Northshore - 424 feet - 38 floors

http://i.imgur.com/1vd4Uvh.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/qiyWfcT.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/DyRpHYt.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/9Qsy3ZL.jpg

Seaholm Residences - 341 feet - 30 floors

http://i.imgur.com/roDOMtw.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/jLc5jGx.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/Z82XmTB.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/eeAh1dD.jpg

Seven - 263 feet - 24 floors

http://i.imgur.com/h6t5sdf.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/Yt4OLwo.jpg

Hotel Van Zandt - 197 feet - 16 floors

http://i.imgur.com/Z8yr7Jr.jpg[/img]

Aspen Heights - 235 feet - 22 floors

http://i.imgur.com/UXtYha8.jpg[/img]

University House - 192 feet - 19 floors

http://i.imgur.com/lpK63uc.jpg[/img]

St. David's Foundation Headquarters - 140 feet - 8 floors

http://i.imgur.com/tdyJi5d.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/funwMuJ.jpg

KevinFromTexas Apr 5, 2015 4:59 AM

70 Rainey - construction to begin this fall.

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/busi...3948020.735692
Quote:

More growth on Rainey Street
New 35-story condo tower to continue transformation of once-quiet downtown neighborhood.

Posted: 12:00 a.m. Saturday, April 4, 2015

By Shonda Novak - American-Statesman Staff

Austin’s swiftly evolving Rainey Street district is about to undergo even more change: A planned 35-story luxury condominium tower that will continue the transformation of the once-quiet downtown neighborhood.

New York-based development company Sackman Enterprises Inc. told the American-Statesman that the project — named 70 Rainey after its address — will have more than 160 residences priced from the $300,000s up to $3 million. The company plans to start construction in the fall and is targeting a late 2017 opening. Sackman bought the site from Austin-based Riverside Resources, which had a city-approved site plan in place.

The condo tower is the first Austin project for Sackman Enterprises, but more are on the way, said C.J. Sackman, the 27-year-old director of development for Sackman Enterprises. The company plans at least six projects in Austin over the next several years, Sackman said.

“This is the largest expansion for Sackman Enterprises outside of the Northeast in its 45 years,” C.J. Sackman said. His father, Carter Sackman, is president of the firm, which was founded in 1969 by Carter Sackman’s father Alan Sackman.
Renderings

https://www.facebook.com/SeventyRainey/timeline

http://www.70rainey.com/

http://i.imgur.com/ZykMKgz.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/v38P2E6.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/MEfySiL.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/ef6mdzv.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/U295UE6.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/yboVyf6.jpg

TexasPlaya Apr 5, 2015 6:44 PM

Nice.

The ATX Apr 7, 2015 10:42 AM

I hope they don't compromise that rendering on the final product. It looks awesome in that rendering.

KevinFromTexas Apr 7, 2015 8:19 PM

I really like the idea of the trees on the podium. It sort of carries over the greenery of Waller Creek onto the building. I don't think this would look good on all buildings in every area of downtown, but it makes sense when it's along the river or the creeks or bordering a park.

The ATX Apr 13, 2015 1:05 AM

The rendering for Austin's new tallest has been released. Austin will now have the two tallest all residential towers west of the Mississippi.

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/l...trendering.jpg
http://www.mystatesman.com/news/busi...3948020.735700

Clev Apr 13, 2015 5:16 AM

Wow, I love it!

drummer Apr 13, 2015 5:19 AM

That's awesome.

Kotliz Apr 13, 2015 1:06 PM

Ha, Just saw that on KXAN's site, all the comments hated it. "It's different, I hate it." What's with people? :shrug:

The ATX Apr 13, 2015 2:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kotliz (Post 6988386)
Ha, Just saw that on KXAN's site, all the comments hated it. "It's different, I hate it." What's with people? :shrug:

I've come to the conclusion that only people who hate things spend time commenting on news sites.

eburress Apr 13, 2015 5:03 PM

I like it, except for that single floor that awkwardly, inelegantly juts out halfway up. Lose that and for me, like turns to love. Either way, I hope it happens. :)

Jdawgboy Apr 13, 2015 8:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country (Post 6988500)
I've come to the conclusion that only people who hate things spend time commenting on news sites.

I agree, doesn't matter what the news story is about there's always people who comment crazy weird rants. They have nothing better to do all day than to comment negative hatred. That's why it's overhelmingly lopsided.:lynchmob:

lzppjb Apr 13, 2015 9:29 PM

Almost everyone on shaggybevo disliked the design as well. I think it'll grow on people.

Cloud92 Apr 13, 2015 9:50 PM

well I hate it :p

The ATX Apr 13, 2015 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cloud92 (Post 6989092)
well I hate it :p

Well head on over to the KXAN and Stateman articles and join in on the apparent fun. :)

KevinFromTexas Apr 13, 2015 11:31 PM

I like it. I like that it's weird without being too abstract and gaudy. I think it has the potential to be beautiful actually. I really want to see that mechanical screen lit from below creating a crown-like affect that the Frost Bank Tower has. The Austonian's lighting is more like accent lighting, but this building could be a true beacon on the skyline at night.

wwmiv Apr 13, 2015 11:32 PM

It is beautiful.

I'm just sick of pedestrian beautiful. I want something abso-fucking-lutely stunning already.

Cloud92 Apr 14, 2015 5:23 AM

I guess ill sit in the corner and loath the building by myself Is
Is it luxury condos?

The ATX Apr 14, 2015 5:50 AM

"I guess ill sit in the corner and loath the building by myself Is
Is it luxury condos?"

It's marketed as ''luxury" - whatever that means - as is virtually every other condo and apartment project downtown or anywhere in the world apparently.

KevinFromTexas Apr 14, 2015 6:39 AM

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl...r-will-be.html
Quote:

Skyline scraper: New high-rise condo tower will be Austin's tallest building
Apr 13, 2015, 8:12am CDT

Michael Theis
Digital Editor-
Austin Business Journal

The tallest residential building west of the Mississippi River may soon rise above Austin's skyline, as developers have laid out the specifics for a 685-foot, 58-story condominium tower downtown.

Developers envision the $300 million project, dubbed the Independent, as a gleaming, white Jenga-like tower at the northeast corner of West Third Street and West Avenue. Renderings show the building with offset floor sections that make it look something like an uneven stack of books.

The building will have a total of 950,000 square feet, including 491,000 square feet that is sellable. Developers plan to have 13,500 square feet of retail on the ground floor. Residents will have 370 units to choose from, ranging from 675 square-foot one-bedroom units to 3,485 square-foot three bedroom floor plans.

NYC_Longhorn Apr 15, 2015 4:05 AM

Reminds me of the SNL skit of the two adult film girls selling bubbly... "Luxury"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country (Post 6989666)
"I guess ill sit in the corner and loath the building by myself Is
Is it luxury condos?"

It's marketed as ''luxury" - whatever that means - as is virtually every other condo and apartment project downtown or anywhere in the world apparently.


GoldenBoot Apr 15, 2015 5:15 PM

Interesting Forbes article re: amenities to ignore.

"9 Amenities Luxury Condo Buyers Should Ignore"

Hey Urbanspace, may want to rethink your marketing techniques?!?

Paul in S.A TX Apr 15, 2015 5:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country (Post 6980249)
I hope they don't compromise that rendering on the final product. It looks awesome in that rendering.

Wow, very impressive.

The ATX Apr 19, 2015 8:28 AM

Here's Rev. 7 of my 2015 list of the tallest Austin projects that are at least 10-stories and/or 100'. There are 48 active projects on the list.

Projects completed so far in 2015 have a strikethrough, and will remain on the list for reference but not be counted in the total number of projects.

Projects that are highlighted are either U/C or underway with demolition/site prep and have financing in place. In other words, these projects are happening!


http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/...20Page%201.png
http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/...Page%202.1.png

BevoLJ Apr 23, 2015 11:41 PM

Updated original post with the Hill Countries updated list. =)

Syndic Apr 25, 2015 1:49 AM

New rendering from the (new?) video on The Independent's website:

http://i.imgur.com/BNYSevK.png

drummer Apr 25, 2015 4:01 AM

I like it. I think it'll look great!

Onn Apr 25, 2015 6:59 AM

Very innovative design actually! Certainly adds a whole new dimension to the Austin skyline.

wwmiv Apr 25, 2015 9:00 AM

Cross-posted to relevant threads:

Here's a map I've made of the Austin CVCs. It's color-coded by city defined (black), state defined (red), and state defined alterations of the city defined CVCs (yellow).

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?m...s.kFyc1SOGTRGA

I've also subdivided the layers such that you can click on and off those Interstate 35 layers which would be inevitably removed by sinking Interstate 35, thus opening up significant swaths of land to high rise development.

I would imagine that if UT-Medical School leaders are thinking strategically, they might want to consider the long term impacts of having these CVCs de facto destroyed by advocating the pseudo-removal of the reason they exist in the first place: Interstate 35.

The removal of those CVCs opens up significant nearby land for private medical school related development, as well as bolstering the city's state goals of increasing our tax-base along Waller Creek. Unfortunately, one of the biggest problems along Waller is that this set of CVCs completely remove the possibility of intense creek focused development.

KevinFromTexas Apr 25, 2015 5:37 PM

^That's awesome. I'll have to bookmark it and refer to it.

wwmiv Apr 25, 2015 6:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevinfromtexas (Post 7003890)
^that's awesome. I'll have to bookmark it and refer to it.

:d

I'm in the process of adding the entirety of the most recent emerging projects poster to this map in a different layer. I plan on having different layers subdivided by primary usage and color coded by construction status. Within each of the projects descriptions I have links to the relevant threads here on SSP, if those exist.

KevinFromTexas Apr 26, 2015 1:35 AM

Whoa, that sounds great. Keep us updated on the progress of it.

wwmiv Apr 26, 2015 2:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas (Post 7004217)
Whoa, that sounds great. Keep us updated on the progress of it.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...s.kFyc1SOGTRGA

CVCs:

Medium Grey: City defined
Dark Grey: State defined
Light Grey: State modifications of City defined CVCs


Building Development:

Dark Blue: under construction
Medium Blue: planned
Light Blue: conceptual or district
Light Brown: recently or soon to be finished


Other Development:

Green: parkland developments or public art installations
White: road improvements



I've tried to include as many projects as I can possibly think of. I'd like to give editing access to you, Kevin, as well as Hill Country and BevoLJ, if y'all would like it.

Does anybody see projects I'm missing? I know there are some, but I'm not an encyclopedia. :)

wwmiv Apr 26, 2015 3:47 AM

Can I just say how stupid some of our CVCs are?

CVC #29 protects the view from the Memorial practice field. Dumb.
CVC #30 protects the view from the UT swim center building entrance... Dumber.

There are multiple CVCs that protect NB views from Interstate 35. Dumb, if we want to sink the lanes.

There are multiple CVCs that are protected by both the state and city, but which have slightly distinct definitions. The state's definition of the MoPac bridge is much broader than the city's, and I think I prefer it. Same thing for Longhorn Shores. The city's definition of the Redbud Trail view is incoherently off-base and doesn't really protect anything. The state's is better. On the flip side, the state's Barton Creek Pedestrian Bridge definition is unneeded and the city's is much superior.

The ATX Apr 26, 2015 3:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wwmiv (Post 7004295)
Can I just say how stupid some of our CVCs are?

CVC #29 protects the view from the Memorial practice field. Dumb.
CVC #30 protects the view from the UT swim center building entrance... Dumber.

There are multiple CVCs that protect NB views from Interstate 35. Dumb, if we want to sink the lanes.

There are multiple CVCs that are protected by both the state and city, but which have slightly distinct definitions. The state's definition of the MoPac bridge is much broader than the city's, and I think I prefer it. Same thing for Longhorn Shores. The city's definition of the Redbud Trail view is incoherently off-base and doesn't really protect anything. The state's is better. On the flip side, the state's Barton Creek Pedestrian Bridge definition is unneeded and the city's is much superior.

I really hope that once all of surface parking lots and underutilized lots are built out that the city and state will revisit some of the CVCs like the ones you pointed out. But despite the amazing amount of tower construction going on, I think we are still a few years away from that. There are still a lot of underutilized parcels of land downtown.

wwmiv Apr 26, 2015 4:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country (Post 7004302)
I really hope that once all of surface parking lots and underutilized lots are built out that the city and state will revisit some of the CVCs like the ones you pointed out. But despite the amazing amount of tower construction going on, I think we are still a few years away from that. There are still a lot of underutilized parcels of land downtown.

Agreed.

OtherKevin Apr 27, 2015 7:31 PM

Seaholm and GreenWater update

http://i.imgur.com/e3ff1v3l.jpg
(click for larger image)

Syndic Apr 29, 2015 1:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OtherKevin (Post 7005904)
Seaholm and GreenWater update

http://i.imgur.com/e3ff1v3l.jpg
(click for larger image)

Lookin' good, OtherKevin. I can't wait until I start working down there next week.

Kotliz Apr 29, 2015 4:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OtherKevin (Post 7005904)
Seaholm and GreenWater update

Thanks for posting such a large version of that view. Very impressive. A whole chunk of city going up at once.

ILUVSAT Apr 29, 2015 9:26 PM

And that "chunk" does not yet include Austin Proper Hotel & Residences, Block 185 (to the south of Austin Proper) or The Independent (whose sites are all in view).

corvairkeith Apr 29, 2015 10:50 PM

Here's a few shots taken from the other side of the lake today. They really show how much the skyline is changing with just those developments.

http://i.imgur.com/1pWHRqv.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/rtZjR06.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/UVho0Mo.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/LO7gbKx.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/tRLc0ge.jpg

IluvATX Apr 29, 2015 11:55 PM

It looks like Seaholm is 2 and a half floors from topping out and Northshore on the 24th floor, which I believe is the last setback.

OU812 May 2, 2015 3:24 PM

NEW sports arena DEFINITELY has to be here!!
http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl...re-of-the.html

Whether it's the Frank Erwin Center's replacement or to lure a PRO sports franchise to Austin.

Otherwise, Mueller could be an ideal location assuming there's enough room. The neighborhoods in and around Mueller probably wouldn't like it though.

I've always though the southeast intersection of highways 290 and 183 would be good for a sports arena or stadium as well.

IluvATX May 2, 2015 5:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OU812 (Post 7012459)
NEW sports arena DEFINITELY has to be here!!
http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl...re-of-the.html

Whether it's the Frank Erwin Center's replacement or to lure a PRO sports franchise to Austin.

Otherwise, Mueller could be an ideal location assuming there's enough room. The neighborhoods in and around Mueller probably wouldn't like it though.

I've always though the southeast intersection of highways 290 and 183 would be good for a sports arena or stadium as well.

I still think the Erwin Center replacement needs to be on campus. A large city arena on the Statesman site would be nice if it DID lure Pro sports and was mixed use with retail, etc. Otherwise, I think a continuation of the South Shore vision would be best for the site. Also, I always thought the land around 71 and 130 would be great for a stadium. There is great infrastructure, an airport , and COTA nearby. And no nimbys to complain about it.

wwmiv May 2, 2015 8:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OU812 (Post 7012459)
NEW sports arena DEFINITELY has to be here!!
http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl...re-of-the.html

Whether it's the Frank Erwin Center's replacement or to lure a PRO sports franchise to Austin.

Otherwise, Mueller could be an ideal location assuming there's enough room. The neighborhoods in and around Mueller probably wouldn't like it though.

I've always though the southeast intersection of highways 290 and 183 would be good for a sports arena or stadium as well.

There's not a single indication in that article that the city desires an arena there. In fact, all indications are that the city is taking the right path re: mixed-use housing, office, and hospitality.

drummer May 3, 2015 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IluvATX (Post 7012569)
I still think the Erwin Center replacement needs to be on campus.

Very much agreed.

NYC_Longhorn May 5, 2015 1:56 PM

Frank Erwin replacement built as a big ass attached to a stadium expansion on the south end zone? Seems that all the infrastructure for parking is near the stadium.

Otherwise, I think east austin Holly Street? What do you guys think skyline wise? It would be nice to get something like the Seattle stadium... I hate when cities put their stadiums away from downtown.... Let's Madison Square Garden that shit!


Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer (Post 7012894)
Very much agreed.


NYC_Longhorn May 5, 2015 2:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wwmiv (Post 7003689)
Cross-posted to relevant threads:

Here's a map I've made of the Austin CVCs. It's color-coded by city defined (black), state defined (red), and state defined alterations of the city defined CVCs (yellow).

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?m...s.kFyc1SOGTRGA

I've also subdivided the layers such that you can click on and off those Interstate 35 layers which would be inevitably removed by sinking Interstate 35, thus opening up significant swaths of land to high rise development.

I would imagine that if UT-Medical School leaders are thinking strategically, they might want to consider the long term impacts of having these CVCs de facto destroyed by advocating the pseudo-removal of the reason they exist in the first place: Interstate 35.

The removal of those CVCs opens up significant nearby land for private medical school related development, as well as bolstering the city's state goals of increasing our tax-base along Waller Creek. Unfortunately, one of the biggest problems along Waller is that this set of CVCs completely remove the possibility of intense creek focused development.


Smart Dude WWMIV

OtherKevin May 7, 2015 11:58 AM

Seaholm and GreenWater photo update

http://i.imgur.com/QMPfgwfl.jpg
(click for larger image)

Syndic May 8, 2015 12:41 AM

Always appreciate the update, Kev.

FYI, a couple of users on the Independent forum are saying they have sources who are telling them that the project has financing in place. I guess we'll have to wait and see. But that's encouraging.

If anyone is keeping score: the West End is kicking the East End's ass. Come on, Waller Park Place and 99 Trinity! You can do it!


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:20 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.