Austin | 6G | 874 Feet | 65 Floors | Complete

[AusTex]

Originally Posted by the Genral

Well...that statement, true or not, leaves me with several thoughts. Its the anti Viagra, the burst in the bubble, the ultimate Debbie Downer, the dream destroyer. On the other hand, for Austin, 850 feet is a huge mile stone that if repeated a few times will still give us an incredibly diverse and amazing skyline.
I personally don't think Austin will garner the demand for a super tall, assuming a super tall is at least 1000 ft, at least not in the next 10 to 20 years anyway. If we can add three or four, 800+ footers to the mix, that would satisfy me.

OMG I've been called The Ultimate Debbie D ( the anti Viagra, ouch, I'm a guy too; I admit to a few busted bubbles; I am not a parent, therefore the dream destroyer is not possible!)

I really agree that "On the other hand, for Austin, 850 feet is a huge mile stone that if repeated a few times will still give us an incredibly diverse and amazing skyline....If we can add three or four, 800+ footers to the mix, that would satisfy me." Very well said. Better than Debbie et al!

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by AusTex

OMG I've been called The Ultimate Debbie D ( the anti Viagra, ouch, I'm a guy too; I admit to a few busted bubbles; I am not a parent, therefore the dream destroyer is not possible!)

I really agree that "On the other hand, for Austin, 850 feet is a huge mile stone that if repeated a few times will still give us an incredibly diverse and amazing skyline....If we can add three or four, 800+ footers to the mix, that would satisfy me." Very well said. Better than Debbie et al!

You are NOT a Debbie downer or any of those things...Austin possibly never getting a super tall are all those things. You were just stating the possibility of that happening due to FAA regulations.

[AusTex]

Originally Posted by the Genral

You are NOT a Debbie downer or any of those things...Austin possibly never getting a super tall are all those things. You were just stating the possibility of that happening due to FAA regulations.

Reread and better understood, though I was not offended. Thanks for the clarification.

I would like to know the formula the FAA uses for this type of building heigth determination. It must be some distance from runway by turn radius by xyz = allowable building height (as stated before). Our traditional DT area would seem to be covered by the 850' cap, however, possibly if something higher is proposed in the future in the western fringe or north area they might be allowed. Keep Hope Alive.

[Jdawgboy]

I seriously doubt 850 is as high as any building can go. Eventually we will see a 900+ footer. The availability of land will force development that high. I would think the Post Office block will hopefully hold the tallest tower, plus there are a couple of other spots that could eventually see buildings go that high.

[GoldenBoot]

I'd also watch smaller plots not encumbered by a CVC. To max property value, those smaller sites will really be pushed to go tall. On larger sites there are more options on design/height which could still meet desired margins. What I'm saying is that the size of the property does not always equate/correspond to the eventual height of a development on said property.

New York has several prime examples. It's astonishing what someone can put on such a tiny lot. Central Park Tower (aka The Nordstrom Tower) sits on a plot smaller than the post office and it's rising to 1500'. There are also several office towers being constructed/developed which also lie on lots smaller than the post office and rise to more than 1000'.

It's pretty cool to see all of those point towers! The engineering of skyscrapers these days is amazing!

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

I'd also watch smaller plots not encumbered by a CVC. To max property value, those smaller sites will really be pushed to go tall. On larger sites there are more options on design/height which could still meet desired margins. What I'm saying is that the size of the property does not always equate/correspond to the eventual height of a development on said property.

New York has several prime examples. It's astonishing what someone can put on such a tiny lot. Central Park Tower (aka The Nordstrom Tower) sits on a plot smaller than the post office and it's rising to 1500'. There are also several office towers being constructed/developed which also lie on lots smaller than the post office and rise to more than 1000'.

It's pretty cool to see all of those point towers! The engineering of skyscrapers these days is amazing!

yes.... and yes... I sometimes just stare in amazement when I 'm in NYC and see the new point towers!!!! It's really stunning... and kinda frightening.! LOL!

[drummer]

Those NYC ones are nuts, especially when you see them from the air. I'm excited to see some of the smaller, non-CVC lots fill in over time.

That said, I like a combination of larger tall buildings mixed in with the super skinny point towers. Not all fat, not all skinny. It makes things interesting when it's not all the same.

[The ATX]

Not really news at this point. But this is the first acknowledgement that the hotel is closing/unavailable after July 21st on their website. They probably never will announce anything and just quietly shutdown.

[Austin1971]

[

[zrx299]

Extended Stay got... extended? Boo!

[ILUVSAT]

This is a non-story until a demo permit is approved.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

This is a non-story until a demo permit is approved.

The demo permits were approved last October. They are good until October 2020.

[ILUVSAT]

Geez. I had no idea they have such a wide range of time. How far out is the site plan good for?

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Geez. I had no idea they have such a wide range of time. How far out is the site plan good for?

Site Plan #1 (Demo, excavation, underground parking levels) was approved last September and is good for three years.

Site Plan #2 (Tower) has not been approved.

[gabetx]

Nothing new in the last month or so I am assuming? I see that the Extended Stay is still taking reservations through Aug 31, but redirects to other hotels for anything after.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by gabetx

Nothing new in the last month or so I am assuming? I see that the Extended Stay is still taking reservations through Aug 31, but redirects to other hotels for anything after.

There has not been a single update made to the site plan application this year. If the hotel actually closes on 09/01, it will be a significant positive step forward.

[We vs us]

ATX Real Estate News says there's some TX state permitting going on for 6X -- and notes a completion date:

The Sixth and Guadalupe project was logged on at the Texas Department of Licensing and Registration. Construction cost for the 67-story high-rise mixed-use is $320 million. Size is about 2.2 million square feet. Yowza! The ownership group is 600 Guadalupe Tower LLC with an address at 711 Navarro St. in San Antonio. That is, of course, one of the partners on the project — Kairoi Residential, formerly the Lynd Co. . . . and completion is projected for August 31, 2023. We’ll see how that goes.

https://atxrealestatenews.com/2019/0...s-july-15-2019

[The ATX]

Awesome. The construction permit was filed this morning.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/perm...rtyrsn=1126127

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Awesome. The construction permit was filed this morning.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/perm...rtyrsn=1126127

na na....na na.

[StoOgE]

herewego.gif