Austin | The Travis | 594 Feet | 52 Floors | T/O - Page 5

The ATX · #81 Posted **Feb 21, 2019, 10:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maximusx1

Good to know and thanks for posting the elevations!

We only got 5th & Lavaca renderings from the Design Commission today. The others have a good chance of showing up at the March meeting.

We vs us · #82 Posted **Feb 21, 2019, 11:13 PM**

I'm definitely ready to see some renderings for these two; also very interested to see if the second tower is actually truly on the table at this point or not. It's still a little strange to me that they felt they had to gauge demand with Tower 1 before proceeding with 2 -- when it seems pretty obvious that demand warrants just about anything on that corner of DT.

KevinFromTexas · #83 Posted **Feb 22, 2019, 12:14 AM**

KVUE did a story on the demo this at noon today. They said the developer was planning a 40-story tower.

The ATX · #84 Posted **Feb 22, 2019, 12:27 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

KVUE did a story on the demo this at noon today. They said the developer was planning a 40-story tower.

KVUE has significantly increased their reporting on construction projects as part of their Boomtown Series. But they get details wrong. They need to do some research here.

KevinFromTexas · #85 Posted **Feb 28, 2019, 10:39 PM**

Some FAA permits filed today:

The Travis Phase I - building - 575 feet
Work schedule: 05/01/2019 to 12/01/2022
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...8135534&row=15

The Travis Phase I - building - 577 feet
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...8135535&row=16

The Travis Phase I - building - 593 feet
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...8135536&row=17

The Travis Phase I - building - 593 feet
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...8135537&row=18

urbancore · #86 Posted **Feb 28, 2019, 11:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Some FAA permits filed today:

Dumb question: The FAA permits do not relate to the tower crane permits, do they? Are the crane permits COA?

The ATX · #87 Posted **Feb 28, 2019, 11:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbancore

Dumb question: The FAA permits do not relate to the tower crane permits, do they? Are the crane permits COA?

The FAA requires separate permits for the building and crane. No crane permits for the Travis have been filed yet.

urbancore · #88 Posted **Feb 28, 2019, 11:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

The FAA requires separate permits for the building and crane. No crane permits for the Travis have been filed yet.

got it, so they still need to file crane permits with FAA?

I think it was you who mentioned, that when the tower crane permits are filed (presumably with the COA), the project is a go....or am i mis-remembering?

The ATX · #89 Posted **Mar 1, 2019, 12:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbancore

got it, so they still need to file crane permits with FAA?

I think it was you who mentioned, that when the tower crane permits are filed (presumably with the COA), the project is a go....or am i mis-remembering?

It's only the COA tower crane permits that have a (~10 year) history of indicating that a project is 100% a go. The Fairmont and 70 Rainey seemed to challenge that record for a while. But that worked out.

The ATX · #90 Posted **Mar 9, 2019, 10:02 AM**

From the Fairmont. It looks like the site is a pile of dirt now. Imagine this view with all the proposed towers - especially at bottom right. The proposals include
3 between 300' and 400' and 6 just under or over 600'. That doesn't even include WeWork's substantial tower next to the IHOP just out of view at center-bottom.

https://youtu.be/xZx7JTWsXA8

Urbannizer · #91 Posted **Mar 20, 2019, 8:55 PM**

zrx299 · #92 Posted **Mar 21, 2019, 1:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

From the Fairmont. It looks like the site is a pile of dirt now. Imagine this view with all the proposed towers - especially at bottom right. The proposals include
3 between 300' and 400' and 6 just under or over 600'. That doesn't even include WeWork's substantial tower next to the IHOP just out of view at center-bottom.

That f'in Millennium building... ugh. UGH!
Old salt, new photo angle.

Jdawgboy · #93 Posted **Mar 21, 2019, 4:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by zrx299

That f'in Millennium building... ugh. UGH!
Old salt, new photo angle.

Yea that picture really shows just how large the Millennium's footprint is. It's a real shame that they did not build a taller tower with a compact footprint. We do not need anything like that built ever again in the CBD.

The ATX · #94 Posted **Mar 21, 2019, 7:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Yea that picture really shows just how large the Millennium's footprint is. It's a real shame that they did not build a taller tower with a compact footprint. We do not need anything like that built ever again in the CBD.

It also shows how ugly the row of buildings in Rainey facing I-35 is/will be:

Awful Millennium Rainey > Goofy Greek Restaurant > Goofy Homewood Suites > Boring Fairfield Inn > Lame Cambria Hotel > Nice but Tiny Lady Bird Hotel > Electric Substation > Chevron > Two Ugly Holiday Inn Buildings > Possibly the best one in the bunch: One Austin (if it's not dead.).

drummer · #95 Posted **Mar 21, 2019, 8:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

It also shows how ugly the row of buildings in Rainey facing I-35 is/will be:

Awful Millennium Rainey > Goofy Greek Restaurant > Goofy Homewood Suites > Boring Fairfield Inn > Lame Cambria Hotel > Nice but Tiny Lady Bird Hotel > Electric Substation > Chevron > Two Ugly Holiday Inn Buildings > Possibly the best one in the bunch: One Austin (if it's not dead.).

You know, the first city I lived in on the east coast of China had a big fancy road to a shiny new high speed rail station, but it went by some very low-income areas that were considered by some to be too ugly for the eyes of drivers to view, so they built giant billboards to cover the area up. There's always that possibility, I suppose.

Geckos_Rule · #96 Posted **Mar 21, 2019, 2:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Yea that picture really shows just how large the Millennium's footprint is. It's a real shame that they did not build a taller tower with a compact footprint. We do not need anything like that built ever again in the CBD.

While generally I agree, I'll offer a counter-point: AMLI Downtown. It's about the same size, and takes up an entire block, and is only 4 floors. But while Millenium has mostly ground-floor apartments, and only one restaurant (and I guess a bar about the size of a broom closet), the AMLI has retail and restaurants lining basically every inch of the ground floor there. I think it's one of the best buildings in downtown solely because of how much it has (although I certainly wouldn't be complaining if it were much taller).

That said, the AMLI was built a decade ago, and Millennium was in 2017.

zrx299 · #97 Posted **Mar 21, 2019, 3:16 PM**

Just imagine all the land that could be freed up if you cut & cover 35 with decks, not to mention reconnecting neighborhoods. Rainey wouldn't be this isolated clusterf*** that's difficult to get in and out of. A tunnel would obviously be better, but that will never happen. Decks every so often eliminate the need for tunnel infrastructure.

Dallas and Columbus OH, among others, have done this on some of their freeways.
Although Texas has this extreme fascination with parallel frontage feeder roads that make bloated interstates twice as wide as necessary. Most other states don't build highways this way.

paul78701 · #98 Posted **Mar 21, 2019, 4:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

It also shows how ugly the row of buildings in Rainey facing I-35 is/will be:

Awful Millennium Rainey > Goofy Greek Restaurant > Goofy Homewood Suites > Boring Fairfield Inn > Lame Cambria Hotel > Nice but Tiny Lady Bird Hotel > Electric Substation > Chevron > Two Ugly Holiday Inn Buildings > Possibly the best one in the bunch: One Austin (if it's not dead.).

I vaguely remember that a project may be in the works for the Greek place. I might be mis-remembering though. Maybe someone here knows something?

paul78701 · #99 Posted **Mar 21, 2019, 4:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by zrx299

Although Texas has this extreme fascination with parallel frontage feeder roads that make bloated interstates twice as wide as necessary. Most other states don't build highways this way.

I believe that it is more than a fascination. I think it's now TxDOT policy and maybe even state law to require those frontage roads. I can't remember which.

zrx299 · #**100** Posted **Mar 21, 2019, 4:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul78701

I believe that it is more than a fascination. I think it's now TxDOT policy and maybe even state law to require those frontage roads. I can't remember which.

Hooray for the 1960s-style urban planning paradigm.