AUSTIN | Waterline | 1,034 Feet | 73 Floors | T/O - Page 35

Geckos_Rule · #**681** Posted **Sep 25, 2016, 2:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by loonytoony

Any mention on height? There was talk of 60+ stories at some point.

Nothing concrete, but he did mention at least 2 of the towers would be taller (if only slightly) than the Austonian. So that's good news.

He also mentioned that more of the project is being shifted towards office space, which needs a larger footprint than a residential building.

Geckos_Rule · #**682** Posted **Sep 25, 2016, 2:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul78701

Five buildings on the original site where the three buildings were supposed to go? Is there enough room for that?

Or are those two additional buildings going on the site they bought across the street at the southeast corner of Red River and Caesar Chavez?

Or are those the two additional buildings the ones on the Town Lake Villas site? (less likely I'm guessing since that's still in flux?)

He seemed pretty confident that the restrictive covenant on the Villas would be removed. Speaking as a Shore resident, I don't think many of the homeowners here are really too worried about it, beyond the couple loud voices. Locking down a grocery store in the area would singlehandedly change a lot of minds about limiting development on that site.

The ATX · #**683** Posted **Sep 25, 2016, 2:43 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geckos_Rule

Nothing concrete, but he did mention at least 2 of the towers would be taller (if only slightly) than the Austonian. So that's good news.

He also mentioned that more of the project is being shifted towards office space, which needs a larger footprint than a residential building.

I appreciate your insight, but I'm always skeptical about inside information. We have had some inside info posted on here before that turned out to be true. Are you able to indicate whether your source works for the developer, architect or engineering firm? I'm guessing it's not the city based on the lack of permit activity.

wwmiv · #**684** Posted **Sep 25, 2016, 4:56 AM**

I'm skeptical given that plans keep getting grander, not that they are getting grander. The fact that they are getting grander (whether this latest info is true is irrelevant to this statement) seems to me to be based less on market fundamentals, which keep delivering to us projects smaller than this (especially the office projects that have actually gotten bigger with time), but rather on a lack of knowledge by the developer on how to lure financing.

Geckos_Rule · #**685** Posted **Sep 25, 2016, 5:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wwmiv

I'm skeptical given that plans keep getting grander, not that they are getting grander. The fact that they are getting grander (whether this latest info is true is irrelevant to this statement) seems to me to be based less on market fundamentals, which keep delivering to us projects smaller than this (especially the office projects that have actually gotten bigger with time), but rather on a lack of knowledge by the developer on how to lure financing.

I was told that they're working with Sutton Company, but that the "main guys" were from a much, much, much larger company out of NYC. So the project was planned to be closer to an NYC-scale type project, and less of a Central Texas-scale type project. This was pretty vague information, so like me, I would take it with a small grain of salt. But he didn't seem worried at all about the financing.

Geckos_Rule · #**686** Posted **Sep 25, 2016, 5:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

I appreciate your insight, but I'm always skeptical about inside information. We have had some inside info posted on here before that turned out to be true. Are you able to indicate whether your source works for the developer, architect or engineering firm? I'm guessing it's not the city based on the lack of permit activity.

Well I wasn't exactly told to be totally confidential, but I'd hate to upset the guy I talked to by shouting all of this information (especially something that could be tied to him) from the rooftops. But I suppose I can say that among the developer, architect, or engineering firm, he's very high up and would certainly know exactly what he's talking about in regards to WPP. Whether he's telling me what he hopes to be true, or what will be true, I'm not sure. He did indicate that nothing was exactly set in stone, but he seemed confident that the project as planned would move forward pretty well.

the Genral · #**687** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 12:25 AM**

I have a friend who gave me pretty good insider info on the Fairmont when everyone was skeptical that it would even come to fruition. His only inaccuracy was saying the only alteration to the original plan was to the lobby and ballroom space. Ok, so a bit more was altered, but it is getting built. If any of youse guys recall, he was part of the electrical crew on the Colorado tower who witnessed the accident that almost killed a worker. Point is, I do like it when insider info is made available, if just to keep the dream alive, but generally, the reality of imminent construction doesn't happen until the construction components bidding begins. Btw, I lost my insider to the suburbs as he decided to work closer to his home in the burbs.

The ATX · #**688** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 12:34 AM**

Scraperwill has made some spot on calls about building height before they were public knowledge. He got the S.A. Frost tower right back when everyone thought it was going to be much taller. In fact his first post about it was deleted because the Mod thought he was trolling.

the Genral · #**689** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 1:20 AM**

But my insider brought me gifts such as this drilled out plug from one of the floors on the Colorado Tower.

The ATX · #**690** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 1:39 AM**

You must be easy to shop for.

KevinFromTexas · #**691** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 1:45 AM**

Cool. Somewhere in our driveway, or one of the brick pathways, are a couple of bricks from the old 1915 Brackenridge Hospital Building. My dad grabbed a few after they demolished it in 1983/84 because my brother was one of the last babies born there. I have one of the 4x4 foot Frost Bank Tower construction/pedestrian walkway signs hanging in my bedroom at the head of my bed. lol

the Genral · #**692** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 2:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

You must be easy to shop for.

I'm hoping someone will bring me one of the minute hands off the UT tower clocks or perhaps one of the bells.

the Genral · #**693** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 2:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Cool. Somewhere in our driveway, or one of the brick pathways, are a couple of bricks from the old 1915 Brackenridge Hospital Building. My dad grabbed a few after they demolished it in 1983/84 because my brother was one of the last babies born there. I have one of the 4x4 foot Frost Bank Tower construction/pedestrian walkway signs hanging in my bedroom at the head of my bed. lol

I know we are straying way off topic, but this thread would pretty much be dead if we didn't, but now I want to cruise around looking for souvenirs like the ones you got kevin. To the extreme, in my hometown, they closed down a major street and turned it into a mall which was a retail disaster. They tore down the blocks, bricks and walls and opened the street back up. A guy from upstate NY recovered all those discarded materials and built an amazing castle out of them.

The ATX · #**694** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 3:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Genral

I'm hoping someone will bring me one of the minute hands off the UT tower clocks or perhaps one of the bells.

Now I'm thinking you are quite difficult to shop for.

GoldenBoot · #**695** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 9:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geckos_Rule

...but that the "main guys" were from a much, much, much larger company out of NYC.

Maybe he/she was referring to McCourt Global?!? They have been a part of this development/proposal for some time.

Geckos_Rule · #**696** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 9:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Genral

I have a friend who gave me pretty good insider info on the Fairmont when everyone was skeptical that it would even come to fruition. His only inaccuracy was saying the only alteration to the original plan was to the lobby and ballroom space. Ok, so a bit more was altered, but it is getting built. If any of youse guys recall, he was part of the electrical crew on the Colorado tower who witnessed the accident that almost killed a worker. Point is, I do like it when insider info is made available, if just to keep the dream alive, but generally, the reality of imminent construction doesn't happen until the construction components bidding begins. Btw, I lost my insider to the suburbs as he decided to work closer to his home in the burbs.

For the fairmont, my guy told me that the changes stemmed from new "skyscraper rules" that is required by the city (or state, or the US? I don't remember). But either way, these new rules would have required 3 emergency exits instead of two, and that changing that while leaving the rest the same, would have cost an extra $30 million.

wwmiv · #**697** Posted **Sep 26, 2016, 9:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geckos_Rule

For the fairmont, my guy told me that the changes stemmed from new "skyscraper rules" that is required by the city (or state, or the US? I don't remember). But either way, these new rules would have required 3 emergency exits instead of two, and that changing that while leaving the rest the same, would have cost an extra $30 million.

If he used the term "skyscraper rules" verbatim, I'd take everything your "guy" says with several grains of salt.

Geckos_Rule · #**698** Posted **Sep 27, 2016, 2:10 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wwmiv

If he used the term "skyscraper rules" verbatim, I'd take everything your "guy" says with several grains of salt.

No, definitely not. I used the quotes not in the sense that it was a direct quote from him, but more in a way that I don't remember exactly what he said, but it was something about the rules regarding building very tall buildings.

H2O · #**699** Posted **Sep 27, 2016, 10:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geckos_Rule

No, definitely not. I used the quotes not in the sense that it was a direct quote from him, but more in a way that I don't remember exactly what he said, but it was something about the rules regarding building very tall buildings.

He is referring to the International Fire Code, developed following 9/11, and adopted by the City of Austin around 2012. Under the IFC, any occupied floor above 400' requires 3 exit stairs and an additional separate fire fighter's elevator. That is why we are seeing most buildings top out at around 400'. Making up for the extra cost would require significantly more height than 400' - 500' to justify.

resansom · #**700** Posted **Sep 27, 2016, 1:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by H2O

He is referring to the International Fire Code, developed following 9/11, and adopted by the City of Austin around 2012. Under the IFC, any occupied floor above 400' requires 3 exit stairs and an additional separate fire fighter's elevator. That is why we are seeing most buildings top out at around 400'. Making up for the extra cost would require significantly more height than 400' - 500' to justify.

Oh well, now we know why Austin seemingly has a 400' plateau - makes sense. Thanks for posting that information!