AUSTIN | Waterline | 1,034 Feet | 73 Floors | T/O - Page 74

We vs us · #**1461** Posted **Jun 18, 2021, 11:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by H2O

Was it Indeed or 6x that went through the process? I remember speculation and indignation on here that the height might be reduced, but it wasn't in the end.

Hell, I'm STILL indignant.

EDIT: though, to be fair to everyone, it was part of a larger conversation about The 300' Plateau, and what was keeping buildings (at that point) seemingly stuck below a certain artificial ceiling. I think it's clear now that the ceiling was really just demand. And we've blown through it now a couple times over.

DoubleC · #**1462** Posted **Jun 19, 2021, 3:45 PM**

The technical limit laterally from structures is 2000 feet, up to 1000 feet.

Now for those arrival/approach procedures I imagine you need more than just 2000 feet since many times aircraft are flying in the clouds or in “instrument meteorogicial conditions” (meaning they can’t see outside very well if at all), so there’s got to be some swath of airspace that has to be clear for the procedures to remain.

WestAustinite · #**1463** Posted **Jun 22, 2021, 5:43 PM**

Maybe these views have been posted before but I had not seen them:
http://northpoint.co.kr/portfolio/wa...n/?ckattempt=1

DaveinWimberley · #**1464** Posted **Jun 22, 2021, 8:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WestAustinite

Maybe these views have been posted before but I had not seen them:
http://northpoint.co.kr/portfolio/wa...n/?ckattempt=1

I believe these are older renderings. To me, it's quite a shame, because these renderings portray a far more elegant development than the new ones, particularly the one on the right, which shows a warm, vibrant welcoming community. The new (current) renderings, to me, show what a 10% lower budget for building construction results in.

The ATX · #**1465** Posted **Jun 22, 2021, 9:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveinWimberley

I believe these are older renderings. To me, it's quite a shame, because these renderings portray a far more elegant development than the new ones, particularly the one on the right, which shows a warm, vibrant welcoming community. The new (current) renderings, to me, show what a 10% lower budget for building construction results in.

Yeah, these are old renderings. The one on the right also shows the Block 90 project which is why there is more is going on in the rendering. Since that is a second phase project to 98 Red River, it was left out of the current renderings.

The ATX · #**1466** Posted **Jun 25, 2021, 3:54 PM**

I was re-reading what has been added to the site plan revision, and noticed that the City is requiring them to use 92 Red River as the address instead of 98 Red River. So the project is now referred to "92 Red River" in the files that have been added so far. I don't want to change the thread title yet because everyone might think we are getting another supertall in Rainey.

enragedcamel · #**1467** Posted **Jun 25, 2021, 7:40 PM**

When do they start digging?

The ATX · #**1468** Posted **Aug 18, 2021, 5:52 PM**

Nothing exciting to report, but I hate seeing the thread for our first supertall drop to the bottom half of page 2.

The site plan update is still in progress and updates are being posted to it. Just about everything is about flooding and right of way. At least progress is ongoing.

Mopacs · #**1469** Posted **Aug 18, 2021, 6:05 PM**

Looks like it's been added to the diagrams section. Kind of surreal to see it appear among the Texas giants.

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=94194789

myBrain · #**1470** Posted **Aug 18, 2021, 6:31 PM**

From the 1980s to the 2020s

ILUVSAT · #**1471** Posted **Aug 18, 2021, 8:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mopacs

Looks like it's been added to the diagrams section. Kind of surreal to see it appear among the Texas giants.

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=94194789

1,021'?

And, 848' for 6XG?

I can understand the 848' 6XG - but, where did they get 1,021' for 98 Waller?

Sigaven · #**1472** Posted **Aug 18, 2021, 8:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

1,021'?

And, 848' for 6XG?

I can understand the 848' 6XG - but, where did they get 1,021' for 98 Waller?

I think we were speculating on that height awhile back.

KevinFromTexas · #**1473** Posted **Aug 18, 2021, 9:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

1,021'?

And, 848' for 6XG?

I can understand the 848' 6XG - but, where did they get 1,021' for 98 Waller?

1,021 feet is from the site plan. 1,034 feet came from the FAA permit. The two different heights for 6 X Guadalupe are also from the site plan and FAA permit.

ILUVSAT · #**1474** Posted **Aug 18, 2021, 11:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

1,021 feet is from the site plan. 1,034 feet came from the FAA permit. The two different heights for 6 X Guadalupe are also from the site plan and FAA permit.

Oh. Thanks.

Regarding 98 Waller, I thought members estimated a rough height of 1,030' from the lowest point of entry to the tower (based on the site plan)?!? 1,021 from average grade?!?

H2O · #**1475** Posted **Aug 19, 2021, 1:34 PM**

It's nice to see Austin bookending the top 7 with the same number as Dallas and only one fewer than Houston. Who would have thought that would be possible only a few years ago?

sjk · #**1476** Posted **Aug 19, 2021, 1:42 PM**

From my understanding, this building would not only be the tallest building in Texas, but also the tallest building in any U.S. state capital, since Bank of America Plaza in Atlanta currently holds that title at 1,023 feet.

kingkirbythe.... · #**1477** Posted **Aug 19, 2021, 6:43 PM**

Dallas might have another one (890ft) between Transco and Renaissance if it comes to fruition.

StoOgE · #**1478** Posted **Aug 19, 2021, 6:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjk

From my understanding, this building would not only be the tallest building in Texas, but also the tallest building in any U.S. state capital, since Bank of America Plaza in Atlanta currently holds that title at 1,023 feet.

3rd tallest building West of the Mississippi* (with 2 taller proposals out there - 1 in L.A.*** and 1 in Seattle**).

*I will FIGHT L.A. over Wilshire Grand - that is only the 2nd tallest building in LA and that twig on top is some BS. I'd consider this 2nd tallest West of the MS only to Salesforce in San Fran.

**4/C in Seattle seems to have both gone a bit stale *and* is within 3-4 feet in height so could be shorter than this one in any case.

*** LA Grand Hotel is going to wind up with people in jail and not a tower I fear.

ILUVSAT · #**1479** Posted **Sep 9, 2021, 6:07 PM**

Is the site plan still progressing on this one? kind-of quiet lately.

The ATX · #**1480** Posted **Sep 9, 2021, 6:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Is the site plan still progressing on this one? kind-of quiet lately.

Slowly. All Austin projects progress painfully slow through the permitting process IMO. I want to see another one of the 600 plus footers break ground. The ~725' to 750' 321 West tower looks like the best bet. That one will look nice rising up so close to 6xG.