AUSTIN | Waterline | 1,034 Feet | 73 Floors | T/O - Page 56

the Genral · #**1101** Posted **Nov 12, 2020, 7:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nickelplate

As an avid skyscraper nerd from way back I can confidently say we all know what we are waiting for in a new tallest. I like a modern contemporary with a unique strong statement.. 90s - early 00s was a prime timeframe for quality skyscrapers. Adding in residential and a utilitarian type 2020 use makes these new designs less than steller and not visually appealling. That said I dont hate this design but really want a stunning strong tower to say this is Austin on the skyline. Holding out hope for that to happen around republic square.

I feel 100 percent the same way. Wow! I'm not alone. I too am still waiting...

We vs us · #**1102** Posted **Nov 12, 2020, 1:29 PM**

Yep, agreed. Nice mission statement.

ahealy · #**1103** Posted **Nov 12, 2020, 1:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nickelplate

As an avid skyscraper nerd from way back I can confidently say we all know what we are waiting for in a new tallest. I like a modern contemporary with a unique strong statement.. 90s - early 00s was a prime timeframe for quality skyscrapers. Adding in residential and a utilitarian type 2020 use makes these new designs less than steller and not visually appealling. That said I dont hate this design but really want a stunning strong tower to say this is Austin on the skyline. Holding out hope for that to happen around republic square.

Yeah, I agree as well... I'm starting to see the cracks in this one just a bit. I really want something with more detail and less mis-matched lines and exposed concrete, etc. The crown COULD be a lot more impressive. I've always imagined our tallest to be something like Devon Tower in OKC maybe.

urbancore · #**1104** Posted **Nov 12, 2020, 2:11 PM**

I see this is as our first- super tall. Not our signature tower.

I really believe we will have a couple, maybe several, that will blow us all away.

I prefer the first version, it’s “refined whimsical”.

The best is yet to come! God I love my city.

JACKinBeantown · #**1105** Posted **Nov 12, 2020, 4:30 PM**

The original design was clearly better. Why does that always happen?

I hate it when architects make two floors look like one. It makes the building look like it has fewer floors. Who thinks that looks good? (Rhetorical question as no one thinks that looks good.)

ahealy · #**1106** Posted **Nov 12, 2020, 4:55 PM**

So, most importantly.... this should have a public sky deck or restaurant. It's already pretty ridiculous that we don't have some sort of public space that is always open ABOVE 30 floors or more.

urbancore · #**1107** Posted **Nov 12, 2020, 5:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahealy

So, most importantly.... this should have a public sky deck or restaurant. It's already pretty ridiculous that we don't have some sort of public space that is always open ABOVE 30 floors or more.

This would be one sick roof top bar/restaurant.

Armybrat · #**1108** Posted **Nov 12, 2020, 8:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahealy

So, most importantly.... this should have a public sky deck or restaurant. It's already pretty ridiculous that we don't have some sort of public space that is always open ABOVE 30 floors or more.

clubtokyo · #**1109** Posted **Nov 13, 2020, 2:06 AM**

Yes we overdue for nice high floor restaurant.

The ATX · #**1110** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 4:06 PM**

The site plan was filed today. No building info yet.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/public-s...ertyrsn=879326

ILUVSAT · #**1111** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 6:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

The site plan was filed today. No building info yet.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/public-s...ertyrsn=879326

473 units?

92 Red River?

The ATX · #**1112** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 7:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

473 units?

92 Red River?

They are revising the approved WPP site plan, and 92 Red River was the addressed used for the WPP site plan.

ILUVSAT · #**1113** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 9:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

They are revising the approved WPP site plan, and 92 Red River was the addressed used for the WPP site plan.

Ah, that's right.

Oh, this was posted on another thread...

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...257981&row=359

467' seems a bit high for the "site elevation." I assume that's grade level and not necessarily the lowest entry level for the building - meaning it could be a little taller than the 1025' listed.

The ATX · #**1114** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 9:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Ah, that's right.

Oh, this was posted on another thread...

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...257981&row=359

467' seems a bit high for the "site elevation." I assume that's grade level and not necessarily the lowest entry level for the building - meaning it could be a little taller than the 1025' listed.

Wow. An FAA permit for the building has been filed already!

clubtokyo · #**1115** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 9:46 PM**

So really could legit be getting a super tall?? This is crazy.

The ATX · #**1116** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 9:56 PM**

The FAA permit was filed about a week ago. But it is listed as being in Dallas instead of Austin:

Echostatic · #**1117** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 10:45 PM**

woah.

Syndic · #**1118** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 10:50 PM**

Don't Dallas my Austin

clubtokyo · #**1119** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 10:55 PM**

Is the developer from Dallas? Must be a typo? It says Travis county. Lol

KevinFromTexas · #**1120** Posted **Nov 16, 2020, 10:55 PM**

If the people at the FAA are getting full medical insurance with their jobs there - I assume they do, then I really wish they'd get an eye exam. It's disheartening to think there are Austin FAA permits floating around in other cities. Btw, I've seen the same thing happen before where Austin buildings were listed in San Antonio's search forms. Ugh.