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

[kingkirbythe....]

Originally Posted by bobbywest87

I need a big, tall on purpose purple skyscraper.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Here's a new list I put together for yesterday's Austin Projects Lists updates. It shows completed and U/C. This gives a good idea of how the skyline will compare to other cities in a few years. Of course many of the proposals will eventually start as well. The amount of buildings at any given height threshold is impressive for a U.S. metro with ~2.5K population.

It's really something how the One American Center was our lone 400 footer and tallest building from 1984 to 2004. For 20 years that building was our tallest, and in the last 18 years, it's been surpassed in height 28 times. It really shows the significance of the skyscraper construction that has taken place during the last two decades.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

It's really something how the One American Center was our lone 400 footer and tallest building from 1984 to 2004. For 20 years that building was our tallest, and in the last 18 years, it's been surpassed in height 28 times. It really shows the significance of the skyscraper construction that has taken place during the last two decades.

That, and Frost dropping to #16 after it was at one time over 100' taller than #2 One American Center.

[bobbywest87]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

It's really something how the One American Center was our lone 400 footer and tallest building from 1984 to 2004. For 20 years that building was our tallest, and in the last 18 years, it's been surpassed in height 28 times. It really shows the significance of the skyscraper construction that has taken place during the last two decades.

I like this list! One thing, does 321 West need an * as well?

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by bobbywest87

I like this list! One thing, does 321 West need an * as well?

Yes, there are already project updates and typos in need of fixing for the next update to the lists.

[Mopacs]

Spotted from the higher elevations of Lago Vista. First time I've ever captured downtown and Lake Travis in the same shot (approx 20 miles). Kinda sad to see the lake level though.






Also near Lago Vista/Jonestown.





Even showing up in random spots like Cedar Park. The base of 6xG is roughly 500 feet lower in elevation than this spot.

[DougRockstead]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

It's really something how the One American Center was our lone 400 footer and tallest building from 1984 to 2004. For 20 years that building was our tallest, and in the last 18 years, it's been surpassed in height 28 times. It really shows the significance of the skyscraper construction that has taken place during the last two decades.

Love this list. I keep a word document of what is going on downtown with elevation, hegihts, floor count and address on my computer here.

If anyone has the data I'd love to have construction start and end dates as well as floor counts and current status (proposed/approved/ UC...etc) to track all these buildings.

You excel spreadsheet made my brain happy. I love tracking things in that manner.

[JoninATX]

Originally Posted by Mopacs

Spotted from the higher elevations of Lago Vista. First time I've ever captured downtown and Lake Travis in the same shot (approx 20 miles). Kinda sad to see the lake level though.






Also near Lago Vista/Jonestown.





Even showing up in random spots like Cedar Park. The base of 6xG is roughly 500 feet lower in elevation than this spot.

Nice shots Mopacs! I instantly get California vibes from looking at these photos.

[Mopacs]

Originally Posted by JoninATX

Nice shots Mopacs! I instantly get California vibes from looking at these photos.

Thanks! Definitely get a California foothills feel out there. There's a good 600+ foot rise in elevation from the lake to the top of the ridge on the northern end of Lago. Also ~1000 feet higher than the lowest elevations in Travis County.

[theOGalexd]

Originally Posted by Mopacs

Thanks! Definitely get a California foothills feel out there. There's a good 600+ foot rise in elevation from the lake to the top of the ridge on the northern end of Lago. Also ~1000 feet higher than the lowest elevations in Travis County.

I've always wondered how the hills in West Austin/NW San Antonio stack up against something like the Hollywood Hills.

Those lake shots definitely give off a strong south Orange County vibe though.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Strayone

The [ATL] skyline was very tall and toothy and long.

Filler can be toothy, too:

Originally Posted by bobbywest87

The way that glass teflects purple though is unreal. Has anyone seen that in real life or is that a photo-specific effect?

Originally Posted by The ATX

Here's a new list I put together for yesterday's Austin Projects Lists updates. It shows completed and U/C. This gives a good idea of how the skyline will compare to other cities in a few years. Of course many of the proposals will eventually start as well. The amount of buildings at any given height threshold is impressive for a U.S. metro with ~2.5K population.

From your document:

Removing non-DT/WC buildings there are 62 buildings completed or under construction over 300’. We also have 1 more in site prep (Ritz), another 2 in demo with a start date (Conrad & Annie B), and 2 with start dates that haven’t turned dirt yet (Perennial & Rainey Tower). There is also 1 more with an announced start date not reflected in the spreadsheet (12th @ I-35). That leaves 24 other projects over 300’ not yet under construction.

Note 1–Format: City (Skyline): Total Complete + U/C (U/C only) — +Addt’l Proposed / On-Hold

Note 2: I used a minimum of 10 ‘overall’ (completed + under construction + proposed + on hold) 300’+ towers in a single skyline to be included here.

Note 3: All numbers are 300’+ towers.

Note 4: All are hand-counted from SSP maps, so there are probably discrepancies and human errors. Nashville, Denver, Dallas, etc. probably have higher U/C and proposal numbers, for instance, because much of the chatter for those cities happens elsewhere.

Orlando: 9 — +5
Richmond: 10
Jacksonville: 10
Hartford: 10
Sacramento: 10 — +2
St. Louis (Clayton): 10 — +1
Louisville: 11
Newark: 11 — +1
Fort Worth: 11 — +1
Houston (Greenway+Kirby): 11 — +1
St. Louis (Downtown): 11 — +1
Miami Beach: 11 — +2
St. Paul: 12
Indianapolis: 12 — +1
Phoenix (Downtown): 13
Oakland: 13 — +2
San Antonio: 13 (1) — +2
Bellevue: 14 (1) — +3
Tampa: 14 — +4
Milwaukee: 15 — +3
Kansas City: 16
Portland: 16 (1)
Salt Lake City: 16 (3) — +2
Fort Lauderdale: 16 — +8
Atlantic City: 18
Cincinnati: 18
Houston (Medical Center): 19 — +3
Columbus: 19 (1) — +4
Nashville: 21 — +1
Cleveland: 22 (1) — +1
New Orleans: 25
Los Angeles (Century City): 25 — +2
Atlanta (Buckhead): 30 — +2
Baltimore: 31 — +1
Charlotte: 32 (1) — +1
Houston (Uptown+Galleria): 32 — +9
Pittsburgh: 34
New York City (Long Island City): 36 (3) — +5
Detroit+Windsor: 38 (2) — +2
San Diego: 39 — +7
Minneapolis: 40 (1) — +1
New York City (Brooklyn) — 41 (1) — +9
Denver: 47 — +3
Jersey City: 47 — +17
Las Vegas: 57 — +5/2

Austin (Downtown): 62 (13) — +24

Los Angeles (Downtown): 64 (6) — +37/3
Dallas: 69 — +6
Atlanta (Downtown+Midtown): 69 — +8
Sunny Isles Beach: 70 (1) — +4
Houston (Downtown+Midtown): 70 (3) — +7
Philadelphia: 80 (3) — +34
Boston (Downtown+Back Bay+Cambridge): 82 (7) — +23
Seattle: 84 (9) — +18
San Francisco: 124 — +13/2
Miami: 135 (8) — +57/1
New York City (Downtown/Lower Manhattan): 169 (3) — +12/1

I am going to leave Chicago and Midtown Manhattan alone, the former likely having half again as many as all the skylines above combined and the latter likely having half again more than every other skyline (Chicago’s included) above combined.

The buildings that qualify Austin:

1. Texas State Capitol, 311’, 1888
—
2. UT Main Building, 307’, 1937
—
3. Dobie Center, 307’, 1972
4. Chase Tower, 322’, 1974
5. Bank of America Center, 336’, 1975
6. 600 Congress, 401’, 1984
7. 301 Congress, 306’, 1986
8. One Eleven Congress, 397’, 1987
9. 100 Congress, 328’, 1987
10. San Jacinto Center, 324’, 1987

All of the buildings that comprise our boomlet. Like a volcano letting out a plume or a tremor before an earthquake. What a perfect book-end, tbh, because we wouldn’t have another 300’+ building until 2002: 300 W. 6th at 328’.

[Mopacs]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

.....

Charlotte: 32 (1) — +1
Houston (Uptown+Galleria): 32 — +9
Pittsburgh: 34
New York City (Long Island City): 36 (3) — +5
Detroit+Windsor: 38 (2) — +2
San Diego: 39 — +7
Minneapolis: 40 (1) — +1
New York City (Brooklyn) — 41 (1) — +9
Denver: 47 — +3
Jersey City: 47 — +17
Las Vegas: 57 — +5/2

Austin (Downtown): 62 (13) — +24

Los Angeles (Downtown): 64 (6) — +37/3
Dallas: 69 — +6
Atlanta (Downtown+Midtown): 69 — +8
Sunny Isles Beach: 70 (1) — +4
Houston (Downtown+Midtown): 70 (3) — +7
Philadelphia: 80 (3) — +34
Boston (Downtown+Back Bay+Cambridge): 82 (7) — +23
Seattle: 84 (9) — +18
San Francisco: 124 — +13/2
Miami: 135 (8) — +57/1
New York City (Downtown/Lower Manhattan): 169 (3) — +12/1

I am going to leave Chicago and Midtown Manhattan alone, the former likely having half again as many as all the skylines above combined and the latter likely having half again more than every other skyline (Chicago’s included) above combined.

Boy does that put things into perspective. Austin is hanging around some heavy hitters there.

[Mopacs]

Originally Posted by theOGalexd

I've always wondered how the hills in West Austin/NW San Antonio stack up against something like the Hollywood Hills.

Those lake shots definitely give off a strong south Orange County vibe though.

Quite comparable! The hills are a little more topographically prominent in the OC and Hollywood Hills, but not dramatically so.

https://en-us.topographic-map.com/maps/ndx/Austin/

Austin/Travis County



San Antonio/Bexar County



Hollywood Hills



Orange County



Anyways, sorry to go too off topic. Still it was interesting spotting 6xG thorough the varied landscapes of the Austin area.

[theOGalexd]

Originally Posted by Mopacs

Quite comparable! The hills are a little more topographically prominent in the OC and Hollywood Hills, but not dramatically so.

Interesting, thanks for that!

[wwmiv]

Slightly reformatted:

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Tier 1
Orlando: 9 — +5
Richmond: 10
Jacksonville: 10
Hartford: 10
Sacramento: 10 — +2
Louisville: 11
Indianapolis: 12 — +1
San Antonio: 13 (1) — +2
Tampa: 14 — +4
Milwaukee: 15 — +3
Kansas City: 16
Portland: 16 (1)
Salt Lake City: 16 (3) — +2
Atlantic City: 18
Cincinnati: 18
Columbus: 19 (1) — +4

Tier 1b
Phoenix (Downtown+Midtown): 20
St. Louis: 11 — +1; Clayton: 10 — +1

Tier 2
Nashville: 21 — +1
Cleveland: 22 (1) — +1
New Orleans: 25
Baltimore: 31 — +1
Charlotte: 32 (1) — +1
Pittsburgh: 34
Detroit+Windsor: 38 (2) — +2
San Diego: 39 — +7
Denver: 47 — +3

Tier 2b
Minneapolis: 40 (1) — +1; St. Paul: 12

Tier 3
Las Vegas: 57 — +5/2
Austin: 62 (13) — +24
Philadelphia: 80 (3) — +34
Boston (Downtown+Back Bay+Cambridge): 82 (7) — +23

Tier 3b
Los Angeles (Downtown): 64 (6) — +37/3; (Century City): 25 — +2
DFW Dallas (Downtown+Uptown): 69 — +6; Fort Worth: 11 — +1
Atlanta (Downtown+Midtown): 69 — +8; (Buckhead): 30 — +2
Seattle: 84 (9) — +18; Bellevue: 14 (1) — +3

Tier 4b
San Francisco: 124 — +13/2; Oakland: 13 — +2

Tier 5d
Houston (Downtown+Midtown): 70 (3) — +7; (Uptown+Galleria): 32 — +9; (Medical Center): 19 — +3; (Greenway+Kirby): 11 — +1

Tier 6
Chicago: 405 (4) — +19

Tier 6d
Miami: 135 (8) — +57/1; Sunny Isles Beach: 70 (1) — +4; Fort Lauderdale: 16 — +8; Miami Beach; 11 — +2

Tier 7f
New York City (Midtown/Upper Manhattan): 732 (16) — +32; (Downtown/Lower Manhattan): 169 (3) — +12/1; Jersey City: 47 — +17; (Brooklyn) — 41 (1) — +9; (Long Island City): 36 (3) — +5; Newark: 11 — +1

[wwmiv]

Follow up:

Kitchener+Waterloo: 4 (3) — +18
Niagara Falls: 5 — +9
London: 9 (3) — +4
Winnipeg: 10 (2)
Ottawa+Gatineau: 17 (1) — +4
—
Edmonton: 27 (3) — +16
—
Montreal: 76 (11) — +8
Calgary: 99 (3) — +9
—
Vancouver: 106 (9) — +25; Burnaby (Metrotown): 31 (4) — + 16; Burnaby (Brentwood): 25 (8) — +4; Surrey: 19 (5) — +6; Coquitlam: 9 (1) — +5; New Westminster: 8 (3) — +5; Burnaby (Lougheed): 4 (1) — +6

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Follow up:

Kitchener+Waterloo: 4 (3) — +18
Niagara Falls: 5 — +9
London: 9 (3) — +4
Winnipeg: 10 (2)
Ottawa+Gatineau: 17 (1) — +4
—
Edmonton: 27 (3) — +16
—
Montreal: 76 (11) — +8
Calgary: 99 (3) — +9
—
Vancouver: 106 (9) — +25; Burnaby (Metrotown): 31 (4) — + 16; Burnaby (Brentwood): 25 (8) — +4; Surrey: 19 (5) — +6; Coquitlam: 9 (1) — +5; New Westminster: 8 (3) — +5; Burnaby (Lougheed): 4 (1) — +6

Observations (the obvious)

1. no core city outside Toronto has more than one major skyline within its municipal boundaries;
2. skylines tend to be larger on a per capita basis in Canada than in the United States;
3. where multiple metropolitan skylines exist, in Canada these tend to be disproportionately transit-oriented commuter skylines dominated by housing, whereas in the United States these tend to be multiple office and hospitality districts to which people use personal or public transit to enter.

[DougRockstead]

What is the difference between hotel and hospitality on your spreadsheet? Am I missing something?

Originally Posted by The ATX

Here's a new list I put together for yesterday's Austin Projects Lists updates. It shows completed and U/C. This gives a good idea of how the skyline will compare to other cities in a few years. Of course many of the proposals will eventually start as well. The amount of buildings at any given height threshold is impressive for a U.S. metro with ~2.5K population.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by DougRockstead

What is the difference between hotel and hospitality on your spreadsheet? Am I missing something?

There is no difference. I used to use "hotel" instead of "hospitality" and just
didn't change them all.

[IluvATX]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Slightly reformatted:

And I always thought Jacksonville was a tier 8 skyline.