AUSTIN | Modern Austin Residences | 658' | 56 FLOORS | U/C

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by paul78701

Independent is 690 ft with 58 floors. The simple math says that 11.896551724 per floor. Multiply that by 55 and that comes to approx 654 ft. That of course ignores things like the crowns and number of garage levels, but it's probably close enough of an approximation.

The 690'/58 floors for the Independent includes garage, main body and crown. So, your estimate would include the same for The Modern.

This was, if I remember correctly, 602' and 51 stories as originally planned. So, your ~650' ballpark estimate should be accurate.

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by resansom

Yes, it's disappointing to say the least. Watching the devolution of this building is a study in value engineering and cost-cutting - if not that then somebody please explain to me how they ended up here?

Yep. This screams cost cutting down to the damn fine lines. I guess the height is cool? Everything on Rainey looks the same

[Echostatic]

I like it. Doesn't try to be anything it's not.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by ahealy

Yep. This screams cost cutting down to the damn fine lines. I guess the height is cool? Everything on Rainey looks the same

Yeah they sorta do. It would be nice to get a round-ish tower there to compliment the elegant and iconically timeless Holiday Inn nearby.

[valhalla]

Originally Posted by the Genral

Yeah they sorta do. It would be nice to get a round-ish tower there to compliment the elegant and iconically timeless Holiday Inn nearby.

A 600 foot version (with better materials) of the holiday inn would be glorious

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by valhalla

A 600 foot version (with better materials) of the holiday inn would be glorious

So, something like a half sized US Bank / Library Tower?

[mercury6]

I'm here for any 600ft'er on Rainey

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by the Genral

Yeah they sorta do. It would be nice to get a round-ish tower there to compliment the elegant and iconically timeless Holiday Inn nearby.

No surprise, Gen. Your comment is ::chef's kiss::

[sjk]

KVUE posted an article about this and the Facebook comments were 100% negative from what I saw, though there were a fair amount of people that "liked" the post. However, the criticism wasn't geared towards the design whatsoever. The majority of commenters seemed to be frustrated at the price of the units, only 20 affordable housing units, and frustration with the impact on Rainey. Very different response if you don't ask skyscraper enthusiasts...

[H2O]

Originally Posted by The ATX

From the website:


https://modernaustinresidences.com/#banner

I think this would be greatly improved if the top level (which appears to be open air - possibly amenity space) were two or three times taller, more like the outdoor amenity deck on top of the podium.

[austlar1]

Well, to be honest, I don't think this building is likely to improve the quality of my life or anyone I know. I guess it will look impressive when viewed from afar, so there is that. The resentment shown in the comments on the KVUE post are from people who sense the loss of the user friendly and fun downtown that they once knew. This new high-rise downtown ends up being a place for visitors and conventioneers along with the well-heeled residents who can afford the price of admission. I get that this counts as progress, and change is inevitable and maybe even desirable. Still, anyone who has lived in Austin for a while understands that we've paid a hefty price for all these changes-

[myBrain]

Originally Posted by sjk

KVUE posted an article about this and the Facebook comments were 100% negative from what I saw, though there were a fair amount of people that "liked" the post. However, the criticism wasn't geared towards the design whatsoever. The majority of commenters seemed to be frustrated at the price of the units, only 20 affordable housing units, and frustration with the impact on Rainey. Very different response if you don't ask skyscraper enthusiasts...

Yeah I saw that too.

The city and the media need to do a better job explaining the affordable housing program. The way it's presented here is harmful to the pro-development cause. The laypeople of Facebook do not seem to understand that "affordable housing" has a concrete definition and that it's the result of a city program to encourage developers to offer below-market-rate housing in exchange for building more units. Instead, people are reading it as almost a spiteful "throw some crumbs to the poors" on the part of the developer, and honing in on the implication that the rest of the units are UNaffordable -- which, considering market rate units start at $400k (for a studio, I think, but still), isn't all that true.

[valhalla]

Originally Posted by austlar1

Well, to be honest, I don't think this building is likely to improve the quality of my life or anyone I know.

Basically, NIMBY reasoning in a nutshell.

[myBrain]

Originally Posted by austlar1

Well, to be honest, I don't think this building is likely to improve the quality of my life or anyone I know. I guess it will look impressive when viewed from afar, so there is that. The resentment shown in the comments on the KVUE post are from people who sense the loss of the user friendly and fun downtown that they once knew. This new high-rise downtown ends up being a place for visitors and conventioneers along with the well-heeled residents who can afford the price of admission. I get that this counts as progress, and change is inevitable and maybe even desirable. Still, anyone who has lived in Austin for a while understands that we've paid a hefty price for all these changes-

This building is a manifestation of the demand for housing in Austin thanks to its economic success. It's an effect, not a cause. And if your concern is housing prices then you DO benefit from this structure, as it's adding units into our supply that help meet demand that would otherwise be directed at the existing housing inventory. Every million dollar unit here represents a McMansion that would otherwise be built on the east side or Hyde Park or Travis Heights.

"from people who sense the loss of the user friendly and fun downtown that they once knew"

I don't get this one. Downtown has been thriving with new things to do thanks to all of the development. Maybe we're losing a bar here, and maybe Rainey's atmosphere is being chipped away... but Rainey was always going to be temporary, a flash in the pan. If anything what the success of Rainey demonstrates is that we should begin opening up more neighborhoods to more flexible uses so that we can see new entertainment areas grow organically.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by valhalla

Basically, NIMBY reasoning in a nutshell.

OK, but tell me what it's going to do for you? How does it make Austin a better place to live? I am truly interested in your answer. For years I was a cheerleader for just about every high rise project that came down the pike (except 6XGuad which I hate), but lately I am not feeling it. Too many tall boxy buildings with little architectural merit bloating a downtown that frankly deserves more thoughtful and balanced development. We are going (Well, you are. I am too old) to have to live with these gigantic and mostly ugly black or blue glass monstrosities for years to come. Give me a reason to like this building. For your information, I was one of the first people on SSP to recognize the utility of converting Rainey St. houses into bars, restaurants, and other neighborhood amenities back when most SSP members were in favor of letting a single developer have at the entire street with another pie in the sky proposal for several blocks of mediocre mid rise buildings. I am also one of the few SSP participants that have consistently expressed a strong desire to see a subway tunnel built to serve light rail in downtown Austin. I've suggested it for years and always got shut down by naysayers. Well, now it looks like we may actually get a subway tunnel and a real light rail system to serve downtown. I don't think you can call me a NIMBY based on my support for progressive changes downtown over the past decade plus that I've participated on this site.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by myBrain

This building is a manifestation of the demand for housing in Austin thanks to its economic success. It's an effect, not a cause. And if your concern is housing prices then you DO benefit from this structure, as it's adding units into our supply that help meet demand that would otherwise be directed at the existing housing inventory. Every million dollar unit here represents a McMansion that would otherwise be built on the east side or Hyde Park or Travis Heights.

"from people who sense the loss of the user friendly and fun downtown that they once knew"

I don't get this one. Downtown has been thriving with new things to do thanks to all of the development. Maybe we're losing a bar here, and maybe Rainey's atmosphere is being chipped away... but Rainey was always going to be temporary, a flash in the pan. If anything what the success of Rainey demonstrates is that we should begin opening up more neighborhoods to more flexible uses so that we can see new entertainment areas grow organically.

What are all the NEW things to do downtown that you couldn't do ten or fifteen years ago? And back then you could do it without breaking the bank. I'm not talking about the loss of Rainey bars and restaurants. Rainey was a bunch of semi derelict houses as recently as 2008, but there were great places to eat, hear real live music, and party all over downtown. So much of that is gone now, some of it admittedly dispersed into the hoods, but still...

[JollyvilleJ-Rad]

Originally Posted by austlar1

What are all the NEW things to do downtown that you couldn't do ten or fifteen years ago?

Live there?

Originally Posted by myBrain

This building is a manifestation of the demand for housing in Austin thanks to its economic success. It's an effect, not a cause. And if your concern is housing prices then you DO benefit from this structure, as it's adding units into our supply that help meet demand that would otherwise be directed at the existing housing inventory. Every million dollar unit here represents a McMansion that would otherwise be built on the east side or Hyde Park or Travis Heights.

Preach! The horrific traffic on 183 is a result of the upper-middle class neighborhood and McMansion sprawl in CP, Leander, Liberty Hill. Not that those people would necessarily live closer with more dense options, but every time I see another couple hundred units of housing are being built downtown on half a block, that's hundreds more people not buying on a hundred acres in the burbs (or in my backyard lol).

I have never been a prolific visitor of downtown, but as the city center I have to imagine that it has always constantly evolved in character - more so than smaller neighborhoods that aren't the CBD. That's where true character and local culture thrive IMO. Anything built downtown is that much less degradation and gentrification (which is not unique to the east side anymore).

[myBrain]

Originally Posted by austlar1

What are all the NEW things to do downtown that you couldn't do ten or fifteen years ago? And back then you could do it without breaking the bank. I'm not talking about the loss of Rainey bars and restaurants. Rainey was a bunch of semi derelict houses as recently as 2008, but there were great places to eat, hear real live music, and party all over downtown. So much of that is gone now, some of it admittedly dispersed into the hoods, but still...

There are more bars and restaurants downtown than 10-15 years ago, absolutely. How is that even arguable? There are even whole new sections of "downtown" that didn't even exist then. There have been some key losses for sure, but in another 10 years time we'll be lamenting the closure of the places we currently think of as new (exactly Rainey's case). Has it gotten more expensive? Sure, but it was more expensive in 2011 than in 2001 too.

[MichaelB]

"MODERN"!!! LOL!!! all the marketing in the world doesn't disguise filler... no matter how tall it is. Higher standards please.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by myBrain

There are more bars and restaurants downtown than 10-15 years ago, absolutely. How is that even arguable? There are even whole new sections of "downtown" that didn't even exist then. There have been some key losses for sure, but in another 10 years time we'll be lamenting the closure of the places we currently think of as new (exactly Rainey's case). Has it gotten more expensive? Sure, but it was more expensive in 2011 than in 2001 too.

More restaurants, mostly hotel, convention and visitor oriented. Dining options have improved overall, especially if you count all the new spots out on far W. 6th and South Congress, but that is not really downtown. I am not sure I agree with regards to the number of bars, music venues, etc. Rainey happened around the same time a lot of venues were closing elsewhere. West 6th certainly did pop over the past decade, but many of those places existed in simpler formats before being lavishly expanded.