AUSTIN | Fairmont Hotel | 595 FEET SPIRE/456 FT ROOF | 37 FLRS | Complete - Page 13

KevinFromTexas · #1 Posted **Jun 26, 2013, 6:19 PM**

Correction, make that 1 foot shorter. The Austonian's top floor is 607 feet while the LA hotel's top floor is 606 feet. The 16 foot number I was thinking of would have been the 622 foot main roof of the Austonian.

GoldenBoot · #2 Posted **Jun 26, 2013, 8:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Correction, make that 1 foot shorter. The Austonian's top floor is 607 feet while the LA hotel's top floor is 606 feet. The 16 foot number I was thinking of would have been the 622 foot main roof of the Austonian.

You mean top residential floor in the Austonian begins at 607'. There are two amenity levels in the crown (weight room and meeting facilities/party room).

KevinFromTexas · #3 Posted **Jun 26, 2013, 8:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

You mean top residential floor in the Austonian begins at 607'. There are two amenity levels in the crown (weight room and meeting facilities/party room).

Yeah, that's actually the 54th floor. I sort of forgot about that. I just checked the elevations, and the 56th floor is at 634 feet 11 inches. The 55th floor is actually level with the main roof at 621 feet 11 inches.

So I guess technically we should be saying the top floor is 635 feet. There's also two mechanical levels at the 57th and 58th levels. The 58th level is at 669 feet 11 inches, but it's off limits to everyone except building maintenance. It's inside that crescent slope in the crown at the very top.

KevinFromTexas · #4 Posted **Jul 10, 2013, 4:19 AM**

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl...lects-dwg.html

Quote:

Jul 9, 2013, 6:00pm CDT
Fairmont Austin developer selects dwg. for landscaping assignment

Jan Buchholz
Staff Writer-
Austin Business Journal

Dwg., an Austin-based landscape architectural firm, has been selected to handle landscaping for the new Fairmont Austin Hotel, which will be built at the northeast corner of Cesar Chavez and Red River streets.

Developer Manchester Financial Group LLC announced the selection Tuesday. Manchester is planning to break ground on the $350 million, 50-story hotel in November with completion by summer 2016.

KevinFromTexas · #5 Posted **Aug 7, 2013, 2:26 AM**

The city's FTP site has a new file posted for the street utilities.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...it%20Plans.pdf

KevinFromTexas · #6 Posted **Aug 23, 2013, 3:27 AM**

Another file has been uploaded. It has to do with the grade elevation.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...in%20Hotel.pdf

The ATX · #7 Posted **Aug 23, 2013, 3:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Another file has been uploaded. It has to do with the grade elevation.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...in%20Hotel.pdf

The permits are for shoring the walls for the big dig part of the project. This certainly looks to be on track for the November start date.

KevinFromTexas · #8 Posted **Oct 8, 2013, 1:07 AM**

Yep, the height came from the building elevations. Also the person with Gensler who I had originally gotten the 700 foot height from, they haven't responded to my emails since the site plan came out with the different height.

And Austin already has a taller building than San Antonio. Towers aren't usually thought of as being buildings. Also the Tower of the Americas is only 622 feet to the roof. The 750 foot height is to the antenna, and actually I've seen a height of 728 feet listed for it on the FCC's antenna registration website. And also, antennas are not a permanent fixture of any structure. San Antonio should know that well since even the Tower Life Building had its antenna removed and the flagpole replaced.

Even so, I believe their tallest building is only 466 feet, which means that Austin has not only 1 building taller than their's, but 4. And two more than Fort Worth.

GoldenBoot · #9 Posted **Oct 8, 2013, 3:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

...And also, antennas are not a permanent fixture of any structure.

Kevin, what I meant was that if the Fairmont were at least 751' tall, there would be absolutely no argument as to it being taller or not.

Also, most "antennas" could be removed should one wish. However, most are now apart of the architectural design of a structure. Whether or not they operate as a communications transponder, it really doesn't matter. Most are now apart of the overall architecture of a building. Plus, they can be revenue generating sources of a building's owner by leasing out its use as a transponder.

The Tower of Life Building's TV "antenna" was removed in 2010, as it was obsolete and too costly to upgrade. Furthermore, the "antenna" was an afterthought (not apart of the original architectural design). The building opened in 1928/29 without an "antenna."

jngreenlee · #10 Posted **Nov 12, 2013, 6:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

The Tower of Life Building's TV "antenna" was removed in 2010, as it was obsolete and too costly to upgrade. Furthermore, the "antenna" was an afterthought (not apart of the original architectural design). The building opened in 1928/29 without an "antenna."

I think this recent ruling is in your favor:
http://www.statesman.com/ap/ap/gener...uilding/nbp7g/

"Under [The Height Committee of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat]'s current criteria, spires that are an integral part of a building's aesthetic design count. Broadcast antennas that can be added and removed do not."

KevinFromTexas · #11 Posted **Oct 11, 2013, 8:32 PM**

Gables tower, Fairmont Hotel inch along city’s permit process

The ATX · #12 Posted **Oct 25, 2013, 1:54 AM**

Tower crane permit applied for on 10/21! This is moving along.

https://www.austintexas.gov/devrevie...erRSN=11036059

jngreenlee · #13 Posted **Oct 25, 2013, 1:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

Tower crane permit applied for on 10/21! This is moving along.

https://www.austintexas.gov/devrevie...erRSN=11036059

Number of Days Requested = 9900

Why? Or, why not 9999?

The ATX · #14 Posted **Oct 25, 2013, 3:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jngreenlee

Number of Days Requested = 9900

Why? Or, why not 9999?

...and the end date is specifically Nov. 27, 2040.

Permit requests have some odd date ranges.

wwmiv · #15 Posted **Oct 25, 2013, 2:03 AM**

Awesome. I fully expect this project to happen.

Austin1971 · #16 Posted **Dec 12, 2013, 4:44 PM**

Any news on if this will break ground next month? We should know something by now right?

The ATX · #17 Posted **Jan 2, 2014, 5:52 PM**

It's January, so that means we're on Fairmont watch. The site is still being used for parking today.

Spaceman · #18 Posted **Jan 2, 2014, 7:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

It's January, so that means we're on Fairmont watch. The site is still being used for parking today.

I catch hell for my pessimistic outlook but I have always been very skeptical about this project..

lzppjb · #19 Posted **Jan 2, 2014, 7:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spaceman

I catch hell for my pessimistic outlook but I have always been very skeptical about this project..

Yes, we already know that.

Global · #20 Posted **Mar 28, 2014, 7:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spaceman

I catch hell for my pessimistic outlook but I have always been very skeptical about this project..

I've been looking forward to the day when optimism would win out over pessimism. I know - now Spaceman will probably say, he'll believe it once actual site work begins...