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

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by eskimo33

In most cases, a site plan revision is quicker than the original approval. As one would guess, the applicant is submitting revisions not starting the process anew.
For the new buildings, the biggest issues I can see are:
1. The footprints of the new buildings appear to be in a different location than the original plan. Sometimes this triggers a new submittal, sometimes not. It really depends on how different the new footprints are and how the new layout impacts the proposed on-site infrastructure.
2. It appears the new project will be a phased. The North tower has the potential to need significant grading. Not sure how the grading will impact the floodplain and what those impacts might have on the South tower.

Isn't the floodplain changing when Waller Creek Tunnel finally becomes fully operational? Was it not a major component of why they built it - pulling several acres out of the floodplain?

[Echostatic]

No, the diagram will have to wait until 2026. The drawers are still busy making another 50 versions of the Empire State Building and several thousand soviet housing complexes in Eastern Europe.

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by Echostatic

No, the diagram will have to wait until 2026. The drawers are still busy making another 50 versions of the Empire State Building and several thousand soviet housing complexes in Eastern Europe.

(laugh button)

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by Echostatic

No, the diagram will have to wait until 2026. The drawers are still busy making another 50 versions of the Empire State Building and several thousand soviet housing complexes in Eastern Europe.

Ain't that the damn truth! I never look at those anymore, mainly because ours sucks sh*t through a straw lolll

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by Echostatic

No, the diagram will have to wait until 2026. The drawers are still busy making another 50 versions of the Empire State Building and several thousand soviet housing complexes in Eastern Europe.

Huh?

[The ATX]

Here is some misc. stuff that may be of interest...


A Sq. Ft. comparison of Lincoln's big three Austin projects:




I like this one. It's a nighttime lighting diagram:




Here are all four Axon drawings:

[The ATX]

I meant to add that those Axon drawings are dated October 9th, so they are most likely the version of the project going through the approval process.

[The ATX]

Just because we haven't seen these for several posts...

[Geographer]

What's in that crown? It looks like an unusually-shaped lighthouse. The angle suggests a large public space with incredible views of the river and hill country.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by Geographer

What's in that crown? It looks like an unusually-shaped lighthouse. The angle suggests a large public space with incredible views of the river and hill country.

It's mechanical with a residential amenities area that will have the highest pool in the state.

[Geographer]

What are floors 2 through ~10? Is that the hotel?

Where's the parking garage?

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by Geographer

What are floors 2 through ~10? Is that the hotel?

Where's the parking garage?

The parking and hotel levels are the same. It's a big podium. Go back and look and the renderings and drawings that have already been posted if you want more info.

[GoldenBoot]

Is it 1409' or 1416'6" AMSL to the highest amenity level? Both have been depicted.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

Is it 1409' or 1416'6" AMSL to the highest amenity level? Both have been depicted.

Go with whatever you are seeing on the last Axon renderings. They are dated October. Any other drawings that differ from that are dated June.

[Geographer]

I see now how podium's facade changes for the garage vs the hotel. The garage has more and thicker diagonal beams.

I'm happy that Austin is getting a huge tower like this as it's a major vote of confidence in the future of the city, but the design seems disjointed and unfinished. The prominent diagonal columns remind me up matchstick models and look cheap. They might look cool up close but not at a distance. The different facades for each section make it look like different architects worked on different sections rather than having a single vision for the project. I hope Austin's design commission recommends the developers tighten up and unify the design of the tower.

The ground level interaction with the lake and street is well-done. It is nice that they hide the parking garage away from the lake.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by Geographer

I see now how podium's facade changes for the garage vs the hotel. The garage has more and thicker diagonal beams.

I'm happy that Austin is getting a huge tower like this as it's a major vote of confidence in the future of the city, but the design seems disjointed and unfinished. The prominent diagonal columns remind me up matchstick models and look cheap. They might look cool up close but not at a distance. The different facades for each section make it look like different architects worked on different sections rather than having a single vision for the project. I hope Austin's design commission recommends the developers tighten up and unify the design of the tower.

The ground level interaction with the lake and street is well-done. It is nice that they hide the parking garage away from the lake.

The Design Commission looks for public benefits like retail, public art, street level interaction and this case the interaction with the creek. They don't decide anything about the buildings architecture. They may complain about parking podiums, but that's about it. This project should get a lot of love when it goes to the DC.

[Sigaven]

Anyone think this tower could use a spire?

(forgive my poor photoshopping skills)

[Syndic]

Whoa, that looks way better with a spire.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Anyone think this tower could use a spire?

(forgive my poor photoshopping skills)

I generally dislike spires, but that one works.

[ahealy]

Ladies & gentlemen: "The Pfizer"