AUSTIN | Waterline | 1,034 Feet | 73 Floors | T/O - Page 24

The ATX · #**461** Posted **May 5, 2015, 6:53 AM**

We're looking at one project with 600'+, 500'+ and 300'+ towers that is being built in what's currently a dead zone that will create a destination along Waller Creek. This is great, and it can't start soon enough.

wwmiv · #**462** Posted **May 5, 2015, 6:55 AM**

Plus another 400' one across the street, of course.

pscajunguy · #**463** Posted **May 5, 2015, 7:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

We're looking at one project with 600'+, 500'+ and 300'+ towers that is being built in what's currently a dead zone that will create a destination along Waller Creek. This is great, and it can't start soon enough.

Waller Creek is going to be magnificent, and everybody will be welcome (within limits, of course). I bet there will be some exciting retail and restaurants around there. Who knows, they might even preserve the old back deck of the Chaindrive, for historical reasons, so we can sip on our beers and cocktails while overlooking the creek.

The ATX · #**464** Posted **May 5, 2015, 8:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pscajunguy

Waller Creek is going to be magnificent, and everybody will be welcome (within limits, of course). I bet there will be some exciting retail and restaurants around there. Who knows, they might even preserve the old back deck of the Chaindrive, for historical reasons, so we can sip on our beers and cocktails while overlooking the creek.

I think the old chain drive was destroyed in that fire several weeks ago. But I never saw an updated news story about it after the night of the fire. Waller Creek might end up being a cool "River Walk-like" laid back alternative to the chaos on 6th St. and Red River as well as Rainey - or it might just end up being a conduit that connects all the chaos.

lzppjb · #**465** Posted **May 5, 2015, 10:58 PM**

The traffic will be a nightmare, but I'm still excited about this project.

drummer · #**466** Posted **May 6, 2015, 8:21 AM**

Traffic will continue to be a nightmare until some other mass transit options exist, unfortunately. Who knows when that will be.

...but this project is going to be awesome, of course.

AusTxDevelopment · #**467** Posted **May 6, 2015, 7:41 PM**

Austin Business Journal
Major downtown Austin office project lands site plan approval; will financing follow?
http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl....html?page=all

austlar1 · #**468** Posted **May 6, 2015, 8:15 PM**

Below is a quote from the Biz Journal's article that I found interesting. The article recognizes Mack Pike and Sutton's limitations in terms of providing financing and suggests that it is all up to McCourt and crew to find the dough to build. It also discusses the lack of known financing for the Independent project. This is one of the few times I have ever seen any skepticism in local reporting of proposed developments. I wonder whether the local press is finally starting to take a harder look at developer press releases and statements. I think the McCourt group might soon start demolishing the rest of the buildings on their parcels, if for no other reason than to quell doubts and keep interest in this project alive. I don't look for a real construction start for another year or longer.

" During robust economic times, developments are paraded before the public with great fanfare — and then some of them quietly disappear when the economic cycle heads downward and the channels for capital retract. Whether the Waller Creek project and The Independent ever get built is anyone’s guess"

The ATX · #**469** Posted **May 6, 2015, 9:02 PM**

So McCourt wasn't providing all of the financing. Well, that's not good.

ILUVSAT · #**470** Posted **May 6, 2015, 9:15 PM**

Also, $500 million for three towers? That seems pretty low. I guess these are going to be point towers, considering the project is roughly 1.4 million SF in total (about the size of the JW and Fairmont; which, coincidentally, cost roughly $350M and $375M, respectively).

As Luck Day proclaimed to Harry Flugleman: "No dough, no show." I would assume the development team is well under way in their attempt to secure financing for the project. Hope they are making headway toward a positive announcement...

JoninATX · #**471** Posted **May 6, 2015, 9:30 PM**

Very interesting considering that they stated a while back that this project was fully funded. Here's to finding them success.

ILUVSAT · #**472** Posted **May 6, 2015, 10:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoninATX

Very interesting considering that they stated a while back that this project was fully funded. Here's to finding them success.

I thought so too. Guess not.

austlar1 · #**473** Posted **May 6, 2015, 10:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

So McCourt wasn't providing all of the financing. Well, that's not good.

I always figured that McCourt and his Guggenheim Partners would be seeking other sources of funding for at least part of this project. That is usually how these things work out. McCourt brought in Hines Interests to partner with his firm on the Hudson Yards project. That spreads the risk around and allows for both firms to use their expertise to attract money for the project. I would not be surprised to see Hines or some other firm come into this project before all is said and done. It sounds like McCourt still wants to move forward with this project based on the statements provided for this article. I just have doubts it will start building this year.

austintilIdie · #**474** Posted **May 7, 2015, 2:52 AM**

If Waller builds out like that without a rail plan in the pipeline we may have to push for a pedestrian/bike bridge to the future SouthShore/Statesman area. It would save time a hike from Rainey to SoCo.

loonytoony · #**475** Posted **May 7, 2015, 8:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by austintilIdie

If Waller builds out like that without a rail plan in the pipeline we may have to push for a pedestrian/bike bridge to the future SouthShore/Statesman area. It would save time a hike from Rainey to SoCo.

The Waller Creek project has plans for a ped/bike bridge: https://www.wallercreek.org/vision/l...ontoon-bridge/

KevinFromTexas · #**476** Posted **May 7, 2015, 8:42 PM**

I would really love that. I'm just not a fan of the overhead junk. I would also rather the bridge be permanent. I really dislike the idea of the bridge only being extended twice daily. That seems like it would make it a waste of money then. It would probably cost $5 million to build.

Jdawgboy · #**477** Posted **May 7, 2015, 8:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I would really love that. I'm just not a fan of the overhead junk. I would also rather the bridge be permanent. I really dislike the idea of the bridge only being extended twice daily. That seems like it would make it a waste of money then. It would probably cost $5 million to build.

It's too low to be permanent. Going by those renderings it looks like it won't be any higher above the water than the boardwalk. That would stop all the sight seeing boat tours which go a little further east not to mention kyakers and conoes.

I agree with you about the twice a day extension. I think they should just build a higher permanent bridge like the one next to Lamar. It could even be a city icon if they do a suspension type bridge with a unique design. I would love to see something like the bridges in Dallas cross over the river. Why not a pedestrian bridge?

Digatisdi · #**478** Posted **May 7, 2015, 8:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I would really love that. I'm just not a fan of the overhead junk. I would also rather the bridge be permanent. I really dislike the idea of the bridge only being extended twice daily. That seems like it would make it a waste of money then. It would probably cost $5 million to build.

Yeah I have to say I kind of hate the pontoon bridge. I've always thought it looked kind of stupid and I've been trying to let it grow on me but... I'd rather it be something that is a permanent connection while preserving water access to the eastern part of Town Lake. Like a low pedestrian bridge that's high enough to allow access for paddleboarders or something.

KevinFromTexas · #**479** Posted **May 7, 2015, 9:42 PM**

Yeah, I was aware of the boat clearance issue. Surely there has to be a way to design a taller bridge that could still connect to the boardwalk.

Also, the rendering doesn't even suggest that their current plan has the bridge tying into the boardwalk anyway. That trajectory has it coming out of the mouth of Waller Creek at Trinity Street and connecting somewhere between the east parking lot of Austin American-Statesman's property and that state office complex. The boardwalk is around 1,100 feet east of there. Ideally that state office complex on Riverside should be redeveloped. Build the bridge across there and let it connect to the driveway that exits on Riverside. It's too bad the MACC is located where it is, otherwise I'd say put the bridge across from there connecting from Red River across the river to where the boardwalk starts. It's a straight shot across. Of course the Trinity connection makes more sense anyway because it's closer to the convention center.

loonytoony · #**480** Posted **May 7, 2015, 10:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I would really love that. I'm just not a fan of the overhead junk. I would also rather the bridge be permanent. I really dislike the idea of the bridge only being extended twice daily. That seems like it would make it a waste of money then. It would probably cost $5 million to build.

I talked to one of the architects on the project, albeit years ago (old brain gets fuzzy sometimes!). Believe he said that as it is a pontoon bridge, it's technically a "boat" in the eyes of the city. That meant it was easier to permit and/or cheaper to construct.