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

[Riverranchdrone]

Originally Posted by AusTex

Well someone has to say it: An inch means A Lot in some measurements!

Now by inch. Do you mean what women call an inch or what men call an inch?

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Riverranchdrone

Now by inch. Do you mean what women call an inch or what men call an inch?

Why restrict yourself? Ask a gay man what an inch is and you’ll get a full footlong as the answer.

[gillynova]

Almost there to topping out (August)

Can't believe it's almost May 2025 already

[Urbannizer]

FAA filing for the crane to be taller than initially planned. Hmmm what’s the reason behind this?

https://x.com/theatx1/status/1912236015357472910?s=46&t=3S8HC_afKAMHVCgfx518rg

Initial filing:

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=635658026&row=0

[Armybrat]

Maybe they’re planning on erecting some kind of tall antenna on top….like the Fairmont did?

[Riverranchdrone]

Maybe they want to beat Miami with their 1041 foot Waldolf tower. Waterline will be at 1022ft plus 20-40 feet would do that. An extra floor or two.

[IluvATX]

It might have something to do with the window washing boom, but it’s more fun to speculate until 1-12-26

[Urbannizer]

Originally Posted by Armybrat

Maybe they’re planning on erecting some kind of tall antenna on top….like the Fairmont did?

The difference in crane height is only 35’ so I wouldn’t think this is the case.

Originally Posted by Riverranchdrone

Maybe they want to beat Miami with their 1041 foot Waldolf tower. Waterline will be at 1022ft plus 20-40 feet would do that. An extra floor or two.

My guess is the crown will be slightly taller. Also there was an FAA filing in the past for a height to 1,034’.

[davidtexan]

Looks like great progress on the hotel amenity deck and vehicle drop-off area.

[Urbannizer]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

My guess is the crown will be slightly taller. Also there was an FAA filing in the past for a height to 1,034’.

I've read through many pages of this thread and here's what I gathered:

Looking back I noticed the first FAA filing for the building was for 1,025'. With The ATX calculations to the lowest elevation point it was confirmed to be 1,022' (the guy who leaked the project gave us 1,021').

The second filing, submitted four months later came in at 1,034'. Take into account the lowest elevation point it'd be 1,031'. This one has a determination letter by the FAA.

There's elevations for both heights from strong anonymous sources. 1,031' was noted to be the most recent at the time, but elevations for 1,022' were submitted and approved to the city.

The second FAA crane submission comes just before the final jump. Was the first filing for the crane related to the initial building height submission? Which means this is taller than the 1,022' figure? I know the city approved elevations for the that version but any chance there was some sort of error? Quite an oddball here.

[Echostatic]

1,031' would make Waterline the tallest building in the South.

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

I've read through many pages of this thread and here's what I gathered:

Looking back I noticed the first FAA filing for the building was for 1,025'. With The ATX calculations to the lowest elevation point it was confirmed to be 1,022' (the guy who leaked the project gave us 1,021').

The second filing, submitted four months later came in at 1,034'. Take into account the lowest elevation point it'd be 1,031'. This one has a determination letter by the FAA.

There's elevations for both heights from strong anonymous sources. 1,031' was noted to be the most recent at the time, but elevations for 1,022' were submitted and approved to the city.

The second FAA crane submission comes just before the final jump. Was the first filing for the crane related to the initial building height submission? Which means this is taller than the 1,022' figure? I know the city approved elevations for the that version but any chance there was some sort of error? Quite an oddball here.

Before discovering this forum many years ago, I felt like a bit of an outcast for being the only person I knew who would geek out on building heights and such. Thanks, internet!

[AusTex]

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

Before discovering this forum many years ago, I felt like a bit of an outcast for being the only person I knew who would geek out on building heights and such. Thanks, internet!

I agree. We are all fairly "Normal" in our World here. It really is nice to have a place to just BE, and enjoy sharing our interests in aspects of Tall Buildings and the Evolution of The City in general. Great Space Indeed!

[Urbannizer]

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

Before discovering this forum many years ago, I felt like a bit of an outcast for being the only person I knew who would geek out on building heights and such. Thanks, internet!

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

Before discovering this forum many years ago, I felt like a bit of an outcast for being the only person I knew who would geek out on building heights and such. Thanks, internet!

A case that doesn't sit right with me.

Second FAA filing for 1,031' came after the developer submitted the 1,022' version to the COA. I highly suspect they were pushing through the planning process quickly and/or didn't resubmit to avoid any delay. Developers were trying to get their office space out of the ground to lure tenants fishing for space and to make the entire recipe work at the time (hotel/office/residential), they had to move quickly.

It's much more critical to report correct figures to the FAA. I believe this is 1,031.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by Echostatic

1,031' would make Waterline the tallest building in the South.

I've seen the CTBUH number for Bank of America Plaza in Atlanta is 1,023 feet, but I've also been able to measure it at 1,040 feet in Google Earth.

That's an awesome building, by the way. I saw it in person in December.

https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=57

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I've seen the CTBUH number for Bank of America Plaza in Atlanta is 1,023 feet, but I've also been able to measure it at 1,040 feet in Google Earth.

That's an awesome building, by the way. I saw it in person in December.

https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=57

I love that building. I get to see it twice a year for work.

I would also take Google Earth measurements with a grain of salt. It's almost like quoting "facts" from Wikipedia. Atlanta's BOA tower is truly 1023'.

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

A case that doesn't sit right with me.

Second FAA filing for 1,031' came after the developer submitted the 1,022' version to the COA. I highly suspect they were pushing through the planning process quickly and/or didn't resubmit to avoid any delay. Developers were trying to get their office space out of the ground to lure tenants fishing for space and to make the entire recipe work at the time (hotel/office/residential), they had to move quickly.

It's much more critical to report correct figures to the FAA. I believe this is 1,031.

Huh...A May 2021 FAA filing listed the tower at 1034'. I wonder which is the true height.

[Urbannizer]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Huh...A May 2021 FAA filing listed the tower at 1034'. I wonder which is the true height.

Take into account the lowest elevation point and you get 1,031'.

[The ATX]

Pinning down the height on this one has definitely been a challenge. Usually - or really almost always - the FAA height is slightly lower than the height we get from the approved elevations, so this one is unique. One recent example is the ATX Tower. The elevations have it 675' while the FAA filing has it at 673'.

[The ATX]

The last I checked, the CTBUH determines building height from the lowest side with a public entrance. On this forum we usually use the lowest point regardless of any entrance. That's how we got 710' for the Republic Tower instead of the "advertised" 708'.