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

[H2O]

I agree and I think 6xGuadalupe is the worst offender we have. Particularly the parking podium. It is doubly offensive to me because it is literally surrounding and next to designated historic houses and district and there was absolutely no attempt to recognize them and respond in any way. I like the height and mix of uses, but the base is as bad as it gets with the possible exception of the 6th Street frontage.

[mercury6]

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

Thanks for asking. Here's what I mean.

The Woolworth Building in New York is 792 feet tall. The John Hancock Building in Boston is 790 feet tall. So they're almost exactly the same height. But the Woolworth has a design made to look tall, and a big part of that design is a white building with clearly delineated windows.


https://2015.ctbuh.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Woolworth_Overall2_MGa-769x1024.jpg

While Hancock is all glass of the same color. On Woolworth you can see each floor clearly, while on Hancock all you basically see is a monolith of blue glass. (In this picture you can see the lines between floors, but remember that you're looking at a still image on a bright, sunny day. Usually it just appears as one sheet of blue glass in real life. Still, every floor looks exactly the same.)


https://s3-production.bobvila.com/slides/21124/original/john_hancock_building.jpeg?1501005178

The sense of human scale comes to play when you remember that the average grown human is between 5-6 feet tall. So when you see the windows on Woolworth, you can see all those clearly delineated floors and imagine people on each floor, so it gives you a sense of how tall the building is. You can't do that so easily with an all glass building. Maybe at night when the lights are on, but that's pretty much it.

So when all glass buildings are added to skylines, it takes away part of that sense of grandeur because you lose the human scale. Look at New York City before and after the glass/box buildings were added. The old skyline was beautiful, grand and soaring.


https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2700/4083894465_30b7e76d34_z.jpg?zz=1

The new skyline... it has a bunch of boxes blocking the view of the older, more majestic skyscrapers.


https://d21xlh2maitm24.cloudfront.net/nyc/Brooklyn-Bridge-Park.jpg?mtime=20190620143027

Both look incredible

[We vs us]

Originally Posted by H2O

I agree and I think 6xGuadalupe is the worst offender we have. Particularly the parking podium. It is doubly offensive to me because it is literally surrounding and next to designated historic houses and district and there was absolutely no attempt to recognize them and respond in any way. I like the height and mix of uses, but the base is as bad as it gets with the possible exception of the 6th Street frontage.

Word.

I love the fact that we're getting this building, but think the building itself falls far short on a lot of what should be our highest priorities.

I've been trying to take a picture of the historic house on that lot that they're building around, and so far have failed completely to get the real sense of how overwhelmed it is. We'll probably have to leave it to one of our drone flyers to get the whole enormity of the thing.

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by mercury6

Both look incredible

That's fine, but that's not the point I was making. I was talking about how all glass buildings take away some of the sense of scale. Anyway, I'm glad you like them both (assuming you mean Woolworth and Hancock). So do I.

[dshanktu]

I had the same question about "sense of scale" and found this explanation super helpful. Thanks, JACKinBeantown!

[StoOgE]

The problem of course is tenants want floor to ceiling windows with unobstructed views.

[theOGalexd]

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

Yup. I'm so tired of all-glass buildings. Look at One American Center next to Indeed. Indeed is much taller but it has no sense of scale because it's a wedge with all glass (at least it's not a box). Whereas OAC looks like a building with a lot of floors because you can see them. Aloft too; it's a box but at least it has interesting fenestration.

Same thing with buildings like the Encore/Palazzo in Vegas. They don't look 630+ feet to me at all.

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

Thanks for asking. Here's what I mean.

The Woolworth Building in New York is 792 feet tall. The John Hancock Building in Boston is 790 feet tall. So they're almost exactly the same height. But the Woolworth has a design made to look tall, and a big part of that design is a white building with clearly delineated windows.


https://2015.ctbuh.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Woolworth_Overall2_MGa-769x1024.jpg

While Hancock is all glass of the same color. On Woolworth you can see each floor clearly, while on Hancock all you basically see is a monolith of blue glass. (In this picture you can see the lines between floors, but remember that you're looking at a still image on a bright, sunny day. Usually it just appears as one sheet of blue glass in real life. Still, every floor looks exactly the same.)


https://s3-production.bobvila.com/slides/21124/original/john_hancock_building.jpeg?1501005178

The sense of human scale comes to play when you remember that the average grown human is between 5-6 feet tall. So when you see the windows on Woolworth, you can see all those clearly delineated floors and imagine people on each floor, so it gives you a sense of how tall the building is. You can't do that so easily with an all glass building. Maybe at night when the lights are on, but that's pretty much it.

So when all glass buildings are added to skylines, it takes away part of that sense of grandeur because you lose the human scale. Look at New York City before and after the glass/box buildings were added. The old skyline was beautiful, grand and soaring.


https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2700/4083894465_30b7e76d34_z.jpg?zz=1

The new skyline... it has a bunch of boxes blocking the view of the older, more majestic skyscrapers.


https://d21xlh2maitm24.cloudfront.net/nyc/Brooklyn-Bridge-Park.jpg?mtime=20190620143027

thank you. Good answer. Keep it up!

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by H2O

I agree and I think 6xGuadalupe is the worst offender we have. Particularly the parking podium. It is doubly offensive to me because it is literally surrounding and next to designated historic houses and district and there was absolutely no attempt to recognize them and respond in any way. I like the height and mix of uses, but the base is as bad as it gets with the possible exception of the 6th Street frontage.

Agree. Smells of "value engineering" and compromise in the worst of ways.
I really find it offensive that so much effort went into the top of the parking podium and the relationship to the neighborhood was flipped off.

Tall at what cost?

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by We vs us

Word.

I love the fact that we're getting this building, but think the building itself falls far short on a lot of what should be our highest priorities.

I've been trying to take a picture of the historic house on that lot that they're building around, and so far have failed completely to get the real sense of how overwhelmed it is. We'll probably have to leave it to one of our drone flyers to get the whole enormity of the thing.

Fingers crossed that small house isn't damaged in the process of construction.
Built in 1858 it is the oldest of the "Bremond Block" homes and one of the oldest left in the city.

And seeing how poorly the space around it is designed.... maybe a mural?

[H2O]

Originally Posted by StoOgE

The problem of course is tenants want floor to ceiling windows with unobstructed views.

Why should the bottom of a desk have a view?

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by dshanktu

I had the same question about "sense of scale" and found this explanation super helpful. Thanks, JACKinBeantown!

You're welcome.

Originally Posted by StoOgE

The problem of course is tenants want floor to ceiling windows with unobstructed views.

Do beams, pipes, wiring and AC ducts between floors want windows? Buildings can have floor-to-ceiling windows but still have non-glass facades between floors and between offices, apartment rooms, etc. A thoughtful architecture can always find a solution to what others view as a problem. That's why they get paid to do their jobs.

One of my favorite buildings in Los Angeles has floor-to-ceiling windows, but isn't all glass. The architect solved the problem!

https://live.staticflickr.com/6169/6191165869_b9d7987b29_b.jpg

[Geckos_Rule]

Yeah, my office at 100 Congress in Austin has functionally floor-to-ceiling windows, and it's similar to these other examples. The windows aren't completely side-by-side so everyone's wall isn't entirely windows, but they do essentially cover all but the top 6" and bottom 6" of the walls. My understanding is that 111 Congress is essentially built the same way too.

Something like that could certainly be done elsewhere as well...

[kingkirbythe....]

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

You're welcome.




Do beams, pipes, wiring and AC ducts between floors want windows? Buildings can have floor-to-ceiling windows but still have non-glass facades between floors and between offices, apartment rooms, etc. A thoughtful architecture can always find a solution to what others view as a problem. That's why they get paid to do their jobs.

One of my favorite buildings in Los Angeles has floor-to-ceiling windows, but isn't all glass. The architect solved the problem!

https://live.staticflickr.com/6169/6191165869_b9d7987b29_b.jpg

Exactly.

This has always been one of my favorite skyscrapers. Simple but beautiful design.

[myBrain]

Not to be a —, but maybe everyone's opinions about glass curtain walls could move to a different thread? I don't see the discussion as particularly relevant to this building. The lower, office portion is glassy but uses a variety of materials and glass colors. The upper portion is dominated by balconies, concrete and steel. It's by no means just a glass box.

Here's some renderings to get us back on track

http://www.digolima.com/#/6xguadalupe/

[drummer]

My office has floor to ceiling windows also. And my view: the hallway. But at least I can see into the giant meeting room next to it. And through that I can see a surface parking lot with some tiny trees around it. Jealous?

That being said, I like glass the a smooth look on a building. But I also like the texture of older buildings and a variety of materials/colors. While I don't mind 6th and Guad in its current form too much (despite it being less than some earlier designs), I hope that the next several behemoth towers don't follow suit so we can have some variety.

[drummer]

Originally Posted by myBrain

I like how this one plays off of the Independent. Fits in nicely.

[We vs us]

That's a great point that I hadn't thought of. Blockiness vs blockiness.

It'll make our curves stand out more -- like Block 165, and the Republic's slight taper, and 415 Colorado's crest.

[mercury6]

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

That's fine, but that's not the point I was making. I was talking about how all glass buildings take away some of the sense of scale. Anyway, I'm glad you like them both (assuming you mean Woolworth and Hancock). So do I.

Didn't consider your point, cool pics and just expressing my satisfaction with both skylines. cheers amigo

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by myBrain

Not to be a —, but maybe everyone's opinions about glass curtain walls could move to a different thread? I don't see the discussion as particularly relevant to this building.

I don't mind when a thread's conversation occasionally takes a detour. I think it actually is relevant to this building because we were discussing an element of design precisely because this building doesn't have it. Nobody got upset. On the contrary, several people specifically expressed that they were happy with the conversation. And we'll get back to the building itself as soon as someone posts a new photo. No worries.

And cheers to you too, mercury6.