AUSTIN | Block 16 | 590 Feet | 41 Floors | Approved - Page 15

jake.robs · #**281** Posted **Mar 13, 2023, 6:07 PM**

Isn't this an office building? There's no way there's that good of a market for office space for a pure office supertall, so that means we are probably in for a design change.

I really liked the design on this one. Hopefully, they just extend the current design up and add balconies for the probable residential they will add on top.

Side note, the convention center is slowly going to start feeling like an open pit mining hole with all these supertalls around it.

jake.robs · #**282** Posted **Mar 13, 2023, 6:16 PM**

See what I mean? (using the 1072 ft height)

clubtokyo · #**283** Posted **Mar 13, 2023, 6:45 PM**

Whoa that would be shocking to see another supertall potentially.

ahealy · #**284** Posted **Mar 13, 2023, 8:03 PM**

This is nuts and totally fucking amazing!!!!!! Give me that tallest center tower dream I dream of! I really hope this holds true. That location!!!!!

ILUVSAT · #**285** Posted **Mar 13, 2023, 8:12 PM**

The thread title suggests that this tower's site plan was already approved. Would this change not require the removal and resubmission of a new one?

KevinFromTexas · #**286** Posted **Mar 13, 2023, 9:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

Five FAA permits for the building were filed. The building height is listed as 1033' to 1072'. Here's one:

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...716235&row=220

Nice. I mean, holy cow! There are 5 permits filed for it, two for 1,072 feet, two for 1,055 feet and one for 1,033 feet. We must be getting some kind of tiered roof of equal setbacks - rising 22 feet each.

GoldenBoot · #**287** Posted **Mar 13, 2023, 10:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

...must be getting some kind of tiered roof of equal setbacks - rising 22 feet each.

Huh. Now that sounds intriguing!

KevinFromTexas · #**288** Posted **Mar 13, 2023, 10:12 PM**

And not quite 22 feet each.

JACKinBeantown · #**289** Posted **Mar 13, 2023, 10:36 PM**

Jeeze! Austin's skyline could soon be the third biggest in the country / 4th in North America.

Mopacs · #**290** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 12:24 AM**

Absolutely insane. So Austin could be the only city in the US outside of NYC and Chicago with more than 2 supertalls?

WestAustinite · #**291** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 12:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jake.robs

Isn't this an office building? There's no way there's that good of a market for office space for a pure office supertall, so that means we are probably in for a design change.

I really liked the design on this one. Hopefully, they just extend the current design up and add balconies for the probable residential they will add on top.

Totally agree. I'm hopeful but skeptical on this one.

JACKinBeantown · #**292** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 1:06 PM**

At 1,072 feet and 43 floors, the average floor height would be 24.93 feet. Unless there's a spire. (Please let there not be a spire.)

H2O · #**293** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 1:44 PM**

I'm wondering if somebody didn't fill out the paperwork correctly. Maybe what it should read is Site Elevation 471, Structure Height 601, Height AMSL 1072.

bobbywest87 · #**294** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 1:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

At 1,072 feet and 43 floors, the average floor height would be 24.93 feet. Unless there's a spire. (Please let there not be a spire.)

Who wouldn’t be a fan of a 456 ft tall spire? Think of all the bbq you could skewer.

bobbywest87 · #**295** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 1:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by H2O

I'm wondering if somebody didn't fill out the paperwork correctly. Maybe what it should read is Site Elevation 471, Structure Height 601, Height AMSL 1072.

This makes absolutely way too much sense.

StoOgE · #**296** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 3:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by H2O

I'm wondering if somebody didn't fill out the paperwork correctly. Maybe what it should read is Site Elevation 471, Structure Height 601, Height AMSL 1072.

This feels pretty likely but it was done "wrong" more than once now. However 600' jives with the floor count.

GoldenBoot · #**297** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 3:38 PM**

The five FAA filings in question say nothing about floor count. Obviously, if this does rise above 1000' (or anything higher than the proposed 616'), the floor count will have changed.

Also, the filings do list 471' as grade + 1033 or 1055 or 1072 as structure height equaling a total height AMSL. Yes, this could be a structural height documentation error. But, whoever filed these did it five times without catching the error.

The ATX · #**298** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 5:14 PM**

I went back to look at the site plan. It was originally approved in 02/22. But the updated elevations with the new design were not added until 09/22 or later, and they were not posted in this thread yet. They are on pages 41 & 42 on the site plan:

https://abc.austintexas.gov/public-s...rtyrsn=6653570

We got the 616' height from a TOWERS article. But the elevations are 582' with ~40 floors. The window washing crane is sticking up another ~8' in the elevations so going with a height of 590' is arguable. I'm leaning towards an FAA filing error like H20 suggested. But as Goldenboot pointed out, they would have had to make the error on five filings without catching it.

ATX2030 · #**299** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 6:21 PM**

I don't see anyway this would break ground being just an office tower in its' original design. There's no market for a 40 floor, 700,000+ office tower. In order for the project to move forward perhaps they needed to add a residential and hotel component to the office tower which would account for the added height.

The ATX · #**300** Posted **Mar 14, 2023, 6:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATX2030

I don't see anyway this would break ground being just an office tower in its' original design. There's no market for a 40 floor, 700,000+ office tower. In order for the project to move forward perhaps they needed to add a residential and hotel component to the office tower which would account for the added height.

That was my initial thought, and I hope that's the case. But I would like to see the site plan withdrawn and re-submitted (like Waterline) to corroborate it. I know people connected to this project follow me on Twitter, and I hope somebody can provide an update.