Austin | Block 185/Google Tower #2 | 594 Feet | 35 Floors | Complete

[Sigaven]

Parking garage much improved. Hooray! Also liking that they got rid of the plant strips on the curved side of the building - the curve is much more impactful this way I think!

I think this is truly our most striking building since Frost Tower!

[austlar1]

I like this new rendering, but it does seem like the greenery is looking more and more "optional".

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by austlar1

I like this new rendering, but it does seem like the greenery is looking more and more "optional".

I hope it doesn't become optional. Austin is supposed to be a member of the International Biophilic Cities. Having nature blend into the urban fabric is a huge part of that including greenery as apart of buildings. Projects like this using greenery on the tower portion are important. There are some other problems Austin has to address like the increase of rock desert yards which not only don't fit with the natural environment, they remove habitat and food sources for birds, butterflies, bees, fireflies among other species, not to mention I've seen people spraying poison to kill all the grass that start to grow in these rock yards. Um yea because grass is going to grow regardless because this isn't El Paso or Phoenix and spraying poison really helps with the environment...


Sorry went on a tangent rant.

[The ATX]

Trammell Crow removed the updated Block 185 rendering from their marketing brochure. It was replaced with 301 Congress.

https://www.trammellcrow.com/-/media..._mm_office.pdf

[Echostatic]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Trammell Crow removed the updated Block 185 rendering from their marketing brochure. It was replaced with 301 Congress.

Probably better to market buildings that already exist rather than U/C ones.

EDIT: Block 71 has rederings in the brochure, so who knows what they're after.

[ILUVSAT]

Maybe it's because they do not need to market the building?!? It's 100% leased & Block 71 (and the others tagged) are not.

It has nothing to do with whether a building has been delivered or not. They all need to be marketed if they are not leased up.

Just a thought...

[The ATX]

The flyer was promoting Trammell Crow's capabilities and featured many projects that are leased. It wasn't about leasing for a single project. I think they may have removed it because it was not the final product.

[Urbannizer]

Block 185 by Darius Fontenette, on Flickr

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

Block 185 by Darius Fontenette, on Flickr

Whoa, what's the rebar for?

[Fvn]

Originally Posted by ahealy

Whoa, what's the rebar for?

The diaphragm wall panels. They will act as the final basement walls as well as the earth retention system.

[_Matt]

Originally Posted by Fvn

The diaphragm wall panels. They will act as the final basement walls as well as the earth retention system.

Serious question: Given these are structural elements, does that mean we are out of Site Prep and now into U/C?

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by _Matt

Serious question: Given these are structural elements, does that mean we are out of Site Prep and now into U/C?

No. That won't happen for some time. The (vertical) building site plan has yet to be approved - thus, the (vertical) building construction does not yet have the necessary permits to proceed.

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

No. That won't happen for some time. The (vertical) building site plan has yet to be approved - thus, the (vertical) building construction does not yet have the necessary permits to proceed.

interesting. How far could they go without an approved site plan? Basically complete the "foundation"?

[Fvn]

Originally Posted by _Matt

Serious question: Given these are structural elements, does that mean we are out of Site Prep and now into U/C?

Technically they are load bearing so yes, they count as foundation elements. Which means as soon as the first panel goes in I don't see any reason why you couldn't call it under construction, if U/C is defined by when the building foundation gets underway (which I thought it is)...

I guess Trammell Crow only needs approval for when they want to start going vertical...

[The ATX]

I would say this is U/C because cement is being poured for the diaphragm walls. Normally we don't consider a project to be U/C until vertical columns are being poured. But this is a different type of construction.

The reason for a separate site plan for the excavation and diaphragm walls is to speed up construction. It takes a lot longer to approve a site plan for a tower than it does for the underground parking. By the time the tower is approved the project is well underway this way. A lot of large projects have done this.

[Fvn]

Originally Posted by The ATX

I would say this is U/C because cement is being poured for the diaphragm walls. Normally we don't consider a project to be U/C until vertical columns are being poured. But this is a different type of construction.

The reason for a separate site plan for the excavation and diaphragm walls is to speed up construction. It takes a lot longer to approve a site plan for a tower than it does for the underground parking. By the time the tower is approved the project is well underway this way. A lot of large projects have done this.

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by The ATX

I would say this is U/C because cement is being poured for the diaphragm walls. Normally we don't consider a project to be U/C until vertical columns are being poured. But this is a different type of construction.

The reason for a separate site plan for the excavation and diaphragm walls is to speed up construction. It takes a lot longer to approve a site plan for a tower than it does for the underground parking. By the time the tower is approved the project is well underway this way. A lot of large projects have done this.

So, it's a unique type of construction at the same time that it is a common one?

Is construction going on? Yes, of course. However, I would not officially call a tower U/C if it doesn't even have it's permits to go vertical.

It's all semantics.

Oh, furthermore, they could finish the underground parking and decide to get permits for something completely different on top! So, is Block 185, as currently proposed, U/C...I would say not yet.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

So, it's a unique type of construction at the same time that it is a common one?

Slow down a little and re-read my post, and take note that the two separate paragraphs are referring to two different things.

#1 It's unique because it's diaphragm wall construction.

#2 "A lot of projects have done this" refers to dual site plans and not diaphragm wall construction.

[Urbannizer]

This one is under construction, according to the conditions here on SSP:

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

If a proposal starts construction but goes unnoticed by the moderation team, feel free to post in here to request it be moved.

Site preparation or merely just digging the foundation doesn't count as contruction starting, since digging a hole is just that, digging a hole. And plus any construction taking place within a foundation that pertains only to the excavation doesn't count either, since that's not construction for the actual building itself.

• Foundation work includes the implementation of permanent foundation components such as the drilling of caissons, etc.

• Top down construction involving piling doesn't require a foundation to have been dug for a building to be considered under construction.

A tall building is considered to be ‘under construction’ when site clearing has been completed and foundation / piling work has begun.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

This one is under construction, according to the conditions here on SSP: