AUSTIN | Project Updates Thread Part II - Page 284

KevinFromTexas · #**5661** Posted **Dec 1, 2018, 6:07 AM**

Egads. I sure do hope those are the preliminaries. Those vaguely remind me of the United Nations twins in New York.

Sigaven · #**5662** Posted **Dec 1, 2018, 9:04 AM**

Very likely just massing and not any proposed design. But will say it would be very cool if Austin got a pair of twin towers, or at least sibling towers. Maybe even leaning ones like the Veer towers in Las Vegas.

Jdawgboy · #**5663** Posted **Dec 1, 2018, 4:13 PM**

I hope they will be taller than that. Neither over 600 feet... let's not end up with a 500-600 foot plateau.

Jdawgboy · #**5664** Posted **Dec 1, 2018, 4:18 PM**

Lol they have the heights wrong lol they have the 597 foot for the shorter tower and the 563 foot for the taller..

clubtokyo · #**5665** Posted **Dec 1, 2018, 4:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Very likely just massing and not any proposed design. But will say it would be very cool if Austin got a pair of twin towers, or at least sibling towers. Maybe even leaning ones like the Veer towers in Las Vegas.

Leaning towers would be awesome and quirky like Austin

We vs us · #**5666** Posted **Dec 1, 2018, 5:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Novacek

Presumably the city is still considering acquiring/EDing that property for the convention center expansion?

Everything we’ve seen in the hospitality community shows the Railyard plots separate from the CC expansion. Obv things could’ve changed but I think this is within the scope of the CC District master plan.

FWIW, I have no idea why the blocks currently envisioned for the expansion remain off the market. They’re prime development blocks, CC or no CC. Can the city put a hold of some sort on ground it has interest in? Prior to, or outside of ED?

This is about what we understand the expansion will look like:

We vs us · #**5667** Posted **Dec 1, 2018, 5:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I hope they will be taller than that. Neither over 600 feet... let's not end up with a 500-600 foot plateau.

Funny that that seems like the next significant height notch. Though if we can increase our plateau by 200 ft every five years or so, I guess I’d have to stop complaining. That’s a respectable pace, IMO.

NYC2ATX · #**5668** Posted **Dec 2, 2018, 1:52 AM**

OH MAN....and here I thought that there might be a lull now that several towers are nearing or at completion. Already now, there are five (count em' 5!) new buildings that are out of the ground or near to it: 91 Red River, 300 Colorado, 5th and Brazos, Block 71, and the Marriott.

Add to it 6XGuad and Block 185, which seem to be eyeing groundbreakings, and the skyline will shed another cocoon in another year or two giving way to the next new skyline. Austin feels like the just-add-water city these days, it's a true thrill.

As Ariana Grande would say, thank u, next..

KevinFromTexas · #**5669** Posted **Dec 2, 2018, 5:47 AM**

Oh, that sucks. I had typed out a post hours earlier today about how I was expecting the office tower in this massing model to be taller than it's being represented here based on the numbers we have for The Republic from its elevations while taking into account the office floors and parking levels of both, and I lost it. I got logged out earlier. Anyway, I had calculated that the office tower here would likely have a top floor height of 639 feet. And that's without considering the fact that the massing model doesn't show a mechanical penthouse, even though I'm sure there would be one. That could add another 10 to 20 feet. And nevermind whatever crown there might be. I think it's safe to say this will easily be 600 feet and maybe considerably more.

We vs us · #**5670** Posted **Dec 2, 2018, 4:19 PM**

For a marketing piece — supposedly showing what MIGHT be built here — this seems very specific.

clubtokyo · #**5671** Posted **Dec 2, 2018, 4:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by We vs us

For a marketing piece — supposedly showing what MIGHT be built here — this seems very specific.

I was thinking that also, pretty detailed. Don’t they normally just talk about the lot and what’s around it?

paul78701 · #**5672** Posted **Dec 2, 2018, 8:05 PM**

I've been a bit surprised that there hasn't yet been more office development in this area. I would think that any building within easy walking distance of the Metro Rail station would be highly coveted.

austlar1 · #**5673** Posted **Dec 2, 2018, 10:11 PM**

It would be, if the Metro rail system carried a significant number of passengers. Probable there are multiple bus lines running on nearby Congress that carry as many or more daily passengers.

Sigaven · #**5674** Posted **Dec 3, 2018, 4:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Oh, that sucks. I had typed out a post hours earlier today about how I was expecting the office tower in this massing model to be taller than it's being represented here based on the numbers we have for The Republic from its elevations while taking into account the office floors and parking levels of both, and I lost it. I got logged out earlier. Anyway, I had calculated that the office tower here would likely have a top floor height of 639 feet. And that's without considering the fact that the massing model doesn't show a mechanical penthouse, even though I'm sure there would be one. That could add another 10 to 20 feet. And nevermind whatever crown there might be. I think it's safe to say this will easily be 600 feet and maybe considerably more.

Yeah another user pointed out that the diagram states the taller tower is 563 feet and the shorter is 597....perhaps a typo on the first one and it is supposed to say 663 feet?

H2O · #**5675** Posted **Dec 3, 2018, 11:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by austlar1

It would be, if the Metro rail system carried a significant number of passengers. Probable there are multiple bus lines running on nearby Congress that carry as many or more daily passengers.

There are virtually no bus routes remaining on Congress. They've all moved over to Guadalupe / Lavaca. All of the significant office development is happening on that side of Downtown, but I don't think the buses are the reason. All of the office developments are still building substantial amounts of parking. I think the main reason for the shift is the greater availability of undeveloped (and underdeveloped) land.

We vs us · #**5676** Posted **Dec 3, 2018, 5:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by austlar1

It would be, if the Metro rail system carried a significant number of passengers. Probable there are multiple bus lines running on nearby Congress that carry as many or more daily passengers.

It's actually striking how much thought went in to other stations and their ability to generate TOD . . . while the downtown terminus is literally stranded in amongst the convention center, a park, a parking garage and an empty lot, and a cluster of hotels. Like, THE WORST placement you can think of to serve commuters.

Remind me again why they weren't able to push down 4th to Republic Park?

papertowelroll · #**5677** Posted **Dec 3, 2018, 7:14 PM**

The metro rail effectively has one use case: Live by the Leander or perhaps Lakeline station, work downtown. Interestingly, after the MOPAC construction finally finished a lot of my co-workers who fit that use case actually switched to the 985 bus, because it drops off in a more convenient location on the west side of downtown and is just as fast as the train, thanks to the toll lane.

IMO it demonstrates that while rail is nice in various ways, dedicated ROW is the real killer feature. Please get the 2020 transit package passed, Austinites...

Novacek · #**5678** Posted **Dec 3, 2018, 7:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by papertowelroll

and is just as fast as the train, thanks to the toll lane.

And thanks to the rail currently running extra-slow, due to construction.

The toll lane is a positive step, but it'll never run faster than the day it's constructed, while rail routes will (long term) improve their speed with more passing tracks, double-tracking, superelevation, limited grade separation, etc.

papertowelroll · #**5679** Posted **Dec 3, 2018, 7:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Novacek

And thanks to the rail currently running extra-slow, due to construction.

The toll lane is a positive step, but it'll never run faster than the day it's constructed, while rail routes will (long term) improve their speed with more passing tracks, double-tracking, superelevation, limited grade separation, etc.

Only MOPAC is tolled, though. We could eventually have that entire route on separated or tolled lanes, so I don't really agree with you there. There is also the concept of self driving cars, and potentially demand based routing.

I'm not really a red line hater, but it is a fact that it took (and continues to take) an enormous amount of investment relative to the utility it provides. I actually really like Cap Metro's ART solution as a more 21st century solution to the problem.

atxsnail · #**5680** Posted **Dec 3, 2018, 8:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by papertowelroll

The metro rail effectively has one use case: Live by the Leander or perhaps Lakeline station, work downtown. Interestingly, after the MOPAC construction finally finished a lot of my co-workers who fit that use case actually switched to the 985 bus, because it drops off in a more convenient location on the west side of downtown and is just as fast as the train, thanks to the toll lane.

IMO it demonstrates that while rail is nice in various ways, dedicated ROW is the real killer feature. Please get the 2020 transit package passed, Austinites...

I specifically bought in Crestview bc of the train station. A good number of my neighbors take the train to work downtown and a small handful use it to commute north to the Domain area. I personally take it to Kramer and ride my bike to work further west.

I suspect over time that the "reverse commute" will get more popular, mostly as Plaza Saltillo and Broadmoor come on board and as the Domain offices continue to develop. They'll need to add later southbound runs for that to ever really take off however.