[AustinGoesVertical]

Originally Posted by the Genral

The fact that the Austonian and the Independent are going to be the tallest buildings in Austin at this time is objective. Whether or not I think they are signature towers is subjective, so my basis for what I think would be a signature tower is totally opinionated.
Despite the goofy crown on the Austonian, I'll consider it signature, the Independent, not so much. It doesn't take my breath away. The Frost is more iconic than signature because it is at least 100' too short. Examples of what I consider signature towers I would love to see here with reasonable simularity, Key Tower...Cleveland, Devon Energy Center...Oklahoma City, BoA...Charlotte, and BoA...Dallas to name a few. And it doesn't need to be 1000', a stunning, bold, shiney, breathtaking 6 - 800 footer would be fine. The only things going for the Independent is location and height. Its unique design does not make it signature imo.
As far as this building is concerned, its anti signature, it wants to blend in. It could be curvy, with curved tiers with dramatic contrast and underground parking, but it doesn't want to be unique and stand out. Its an opportunity lost. Having suffered through the CoA induced stubby building boom of the 80s, I'm just hoping for more.

I think the Austonian is signature, but the Independent being similar height will take away from it a bit. I love your Key Tower example. That's really what I want for Austin, something in even the 850-950 ft range that can stand out. I do want a solid design but I really like the Comcast Center in Philly as a signature tower comp. I could totally see something like that on the post office site. I also think increased height can offset a rather generic design. I think the Independent Jenga-style is somewhat out of the box and is something that would look better with height. Imagine two to three more cubes stacked on top, and a beautifully lit crown. At 900-1,000 ft, the Independent could have been a signature tower despite the parking podium.