AUSTIN | The Independent | 690 FEET | 58 FLOORS | Complete - Page 30

The ATX · #**581** Posted **May 8, 2015, 6:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoninATX

I have no doubt that this tower will break ground, the only thing that may concern me is a possible design change.

Some may say a design change would be a good thing.

But I like it the way it is. I don't think any of the big proposals including this one are in trouble as of right now. There are three - Homewood Suites, 99 Trinity and ZaZa - that have had some unknown (to us anyway) delay, but I don't think they are anywhere near vaporware. Several months ago I would have included the Fairmont on that list. But that worked out well.

JoninATX · #**582** Posted **May 8, 2015, 8:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

Some may say a design change would be a good thing.

But I like it the way it is. I don't think any of the big proposals including this one are in trouble as of right now. There are three - Homewood Suites, 99 Trinity and ZaZa - that have had some unknown (to us anyway) delay, but I don't think they are anywhere near vaporware. Several months ago I would have included the Fairmont on that list. But that worked out well.

Same, I don’t want The Independent to change. I like the whole weird, unusual look. Reminds me why I love Austin.

KevinFromTexas · #**583** Posted **May 13, 2015, 3:25 AM**

SkyscraperPage diagrams illustrator "ArcCrypts" drew a diagram of the Independent in SkyscraperPage's diagrams.

http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=104051

the Genral · #**584** Posted **May 13, 2015, 3:45 AM**

So we get this weird looking under achieving blocky thing while Miami gets this gem...

ILUVSAT · #**585** Posted **May 13, 2015, 5:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Genral

So we get this weird looking under achieving blocky thing while Miami gets this gem...

Miami has a TON of gems! Absolutely stunning gems.

Developers in the Miami area have far more competition than exists in Austin today. Thus, the design of buildings are far more important in capturing potential buyers. Austin will not see "high design" until the competition level increases. And, that is really too bad.

ILUVSAT · #**586** Posted **May 13, 2015, 5:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

SkyscraperPage diagrams illustrator "ArcCrypts" drew a diagram of the Independent in SkyscraperPage's diagrams.

http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=104051

Neat mock-up!

1) There is no longer an "office" component in this tower.
2) How do we know what the actual heights of the "main roof" and "top floor" are?

The ATX · #**587** Posted **May 13, 2015, 9:11 PM**

The new renderings are all interiors:

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl...ls-latest.html

AusTxDevelopment · #**588** Posted **May 13, 2015, 9:50 PM**

Here are the interior renderings from that link Hill Country posted ( http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/ga...ls-latest.html ) The flat dogs by the window in that second to last shot of the dog lounge made me laugh. Photoshop fail.

pscajunguy · #**589** Posted **May 14, 2015, 4:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Miami has a TON of gems! Absolutely stunning gems.

Developers in the Miami area have far more competition than exists in Austin today. Thus, the design of buildings are far more important in capturing potential buyers. Austin will not see "high design" until the competition level increases. And, that is really too bad.

Yes, Miami has a lot of proposed gems, 5 super-talls over 1,000 feet and 13 in the 800-1,000 foot range. They also have the twin to the Independent,(Chelsea Tower) at 654 feet, but they also have 36 buildings proposed and U/C that top that range. But the difference between Miami and Austin is that most of our new high rises will be populated by Americans. Miami has a huge influx of foreign investment, as should be expected. And people in Miami like to brag about how they have the #3 skyline in America, and they are catching up with New York and Chicago and claim to be the new Dubai.
I'll take Austin, for now!

The ATX · #**590** Posted **May 14, 2015, 6:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pscajunguy

Yes, Miami has a lot of proposed gems, 5 super-talls over 1,000 feet and 13 in the 800-1,000 foot range. They also have the twin to the Independent,(Chelsea Tower) at 654 feet, but they also have 36 buildings proposed and U/C that top that range. But the difference between Miami and Austin is that most of our new high rises will be populated by Americans. Miami has a huge influx of foreign investment, as should be expected. And people in Miami like to brag about how they have the #3 skyline in America, and they are catching up with New York and Chicago and claim to be the new Dubai.
I'll take Austin, for now!

They will be sinking into the ocean well before Austin which may be why they have a lot of supertalls planned.

On a serious note, virtually all U.S. cities with a majority of their downtown high rises being residential are coastal cities (which includes the Great Lakes.) I can't think of another inland city in the U.S. that has such a disproportionate amount of residential high rises in its CBD as Austin. If hotels are counted, maybe Vegas. Although most of their high rises are not Downtown.

drummer · #**591** Posted **May 14, 2015, 11:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

They will be sinking into the ocean well before Austin which may be why they have a lot of supertalls planned.

On a serious note, virtually all U.S. cities with a majority of their downtown high rises being residential are coastal cities (which includes the Great Lakes.) I can't think of another inland city in the U.S. that has such a disproportionate amount of residential high rises in its CBD as Austin. If hotels are counted, maybe Vegas. Although most of their high rises are not Downtown.

Not disagreeing - but what about DFW? Dallas is seeing a lot of construction, too. Fort Worth is seeing some, but not nearly as much.

wwmiv · #**592** Posted **May 14, 2015, 11:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

They will be sinking into the ocean well before Austin which may be why they have a lot of supertalls planned.

On a serious note, virtually all U.S. cities with a majority of their downtown high rises being residential are coastal cities (which includes the Great Lakes.) I can't think of another inland city in the U.S. that has such a disproportionate amount of residential high rises in its CBD as Austin. If hotels are counted, maybe Vegas. Although most of their high rises are not Downtown.

Minneapolis, Charlotte, and Denver have a significant portion of residential, tho I don't think any have a majority of their high rises as being residential.

Portland is not coastal, technically, and they definitely have a majority residential.

The ATX · #**593** Posted **May 15, 2015, 2:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

Not disagreeing - but what about DFW? Dallas is seeing a lot of construction, too. Fort Worth is seeing some, but not nearly as much.

Dallas and Ft. Worth's downtowns are mostly office, so they are not even part of the discussion. As my post indicated I was only referring to residential towers as a proportion of a city's downtown towers.

pscajunguy · #**594** Posted **May 15, 2015, 2:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

Dallas and Ft. Worth's downtowns are mostly office, so they are not even part of the discussion. As my post indicated I was only referring to residential towers as a proportion of a city's downtown towers.

Well, then again, just what would high rise residential towers in Dallas or Ft Worth look out over? A million dollar view is a million dollar view, and they just don't have any.
They would be not much better than the view from a high rise residential building in Wichita Falls, looking out over the muddy Wichita River. Or maybe a high rise residential building in Lubbock, looking out over the Texas Tech campus.

austlar1 · #**595** Posted **May 15, 2015, 5:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pscajunguy

Well, then again, just what would high rise residential towers in Dallas or Ft Worth look out over? A million dollar view is a million dollar view, and they just don't have any.
They would be not much better than the view from a high rise residential building in Wichita Falls, looking out over the muddy Wichita River. Or maybe a high rise residential building in Lubbock, looking out over the Texas Tech campus.

Apartments for sale DT Fort Worth in Tower Building. There is one more new highrise in DT Fort Worth and numerous conversions of pre WW2 office buildings that are either condo or rentals. The views are not bad:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/50...70571963_zpid/
http://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale...55_rect/12_zm/

This is a unit in the other new build in DT Fort Worth. Pretty nice and a bargain by Austin standards.
http://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale...ect/12_zm/2_p/

This is a unit in the old Texas and Pacific Train Station building. The commuter train to Dallas is downstairs. Neat authentic loft style units. http://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale...92_rect/14_zm/

Downtown Dallas and adjacent Uptown/Turtle Creek have condo and rental towers with amazing cityscape views. This is pretty typical of what is available downtown or adjacent to downtown. Uptown is just across from the downtown Arts Center and is arguably part of downtown, especially if you also include the Victory Park area. Uptown and Victory Park are probably 2 to 1 (or more) residential high rise over office buildings. The old downtown is still largely office buildings, but the number of converted older office buildings is growing and impressive.
http://www.highrises.com/dallas/list...e-street-2901/

More Dallas buildings downtown or in the vicinity of downtown.
http://www.highrises.com/dallas/building-directory/

drummer · #**596** Posted **May 15, 2015, 10:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

Dallas and Ft. Worth's downtowns are mostly office, so they are not even part of the discussion. As my post indicated I was only referring to residential towers as a proportion of a city's downtown towers.

Gotcha - must've read it too fast.

KevinFromTexas · #**597** Posted **May 16, 2015, 7:04 AM**

The Independent Austin - https://www.facebook.com/independent...type=1&theater

JACKinBeantown · #**598** Posted **May 16, 2015, 6:25 PM**

Austin is trying to copy Jersey City? NEW JERSEY?!

https://ironstatedevelopment.files.w...harborside.jpg

Austin is officially not weird anymore.

The ATX · #**599** Posted **May 16, 2015, 6:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

Austin is trying to copy Jersey City? NEW JERSEY?!

https://ironstatedevelopment.files.w...harborside.jpg

Austin is officially not weird anymore.

But Jersey City is weird.

It has the awesome benefit of being a more affordable alternative to Manhattan.

NYC2ATX · #**600** Posted **May 17, 2015, 12:37 AM**

I think this design is actually very Austin. One thing I've always noticed about the buildings here is they have an exceptionally geometric apperance. Blocky, angular forms that look like a child could build it with blocks (and I don't mean that in a negative way). Consider buildings like 100 Congress and 1 Congress, the angular crown of the former and the almost triangular/pentagonal shape of the entirety of the latter. Or the W which is a giant rectangle, and who's facade detailing is that of smaller rectangular flourishes, or 360, who's subtle deco effects are subtle because they're distilled down to the simplest of that style's shapes. A building with too much detailing would be most out of place on the Austin skyline, so a tower that's almost literally made of blocks makes total sense. Just my humble opinion.