AUSTIN | Block 16 | 590 Feet | 41 Floors | Approved

[We vs us]

Originally Posted by Maximusx1

I don't get this place sometimes. This is 'skyscraperpage' and here we have a proposal for a building that would be the current tallest in the city and yall are against it because of how it would effect a convention center expansion? What the hell?

Well, I mean, yeah, it's a skyscraper page but if you look at our conversations we're clearly interested in a lot more than that. Transportation, ABIA, suburban development, econ dev, soccer stadiums, you name it. And lets be honest -- the ACC expansion bears directly on whether/how this gets built. It's definitely relevant.

And fwiw, I'm not against it as such, but am definitely interested in how it's going to interact with the city's plans. We're setting ground rules for what happens over easily the next decade in that part of the city - and probably longer. It's not just a building - it's also important macro city stuff.

[Vexal]

In SimCity, you have to build a lot of the boring buildings before skyscrapers start to show up. I think it might be like that in real life too, although I've never been personally given the chance to try.

That's why we care about the convention center. It facilitates the growth of a city's economic -- and height -- expansion.

[ILUVSAT]

GB mentioned it a couple of pages back - and then I read the Towers article on this thing...WOW, the similarities in size and design to Tom Stacy's tower are striking.

Both designs are/were 47 stories. Both are/were over 700' tall. The overhanging/cantilevered faces are/were both facing west. Both had an outdoor terrace on the east side. The widest façades are/were the north and south-facing ones. Etc., etc., etc.

Oh, and both were east of Congress and south of Sixth Street. Hee, hee...

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by clubtokyo

I like the design. I guess I am weird? Honestly this could easily be in Tokyo. Not as a flagship or anything but just an everyday building. Whats the big deal?

723 foot buildings here aren't everyday buildings, though, at least not now, so it shouldn't look like one. That's where my "New York canyon bury worthy" comment came from. I'm not saying it has to be another Frost Bank Tower or Block 185/Google Sail, but there are going to be 4 buildings over 600 feet within 3 blocks of each other that have this two tower stack setup. I'm just asking for some variation. I mean, I doubt all of these will even be built, but the thought that they might and will have very similar designs doesn't appeal to me.

[myBrain]

The stacked glass box is just an expression of what the office market wants. Floor-to-ceiling windows, wide floorplates, and outdoor spaces. The easiest way to achieve this is stacking glass boxes. It's what you're seeing everywhere. This building might as well be out of Hudson Yards.

[Geckos_Rule]

Originally Posted by myBrain

The stacked glass box is just an expression of what the office market wants. Floor-to-ceiling windows, wide floorplates, and outdoor spaces. The easiest way to achieve this is stacking glass boxes. It's what you're seeing everywhere. This building might as well be out of Hudson Yards.

And on that note, 10 Hudson Yards uses the same style of shingled glass as this one. Although hopefully it will be a bit more striking here....because in real life, the shingled design is hardly visible from a distance on 10 Hudson Yards.

[mercury6]

I'm here for height, mass, and glass. A salute to those who want more

[Jdawgboy]

I'm here for quality over quantity. I like tall but let's not build tall only for the sake of it being tall. I'd also like to see great designs. We can and should ask for at least that much.

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by mercury6

I'm here for height, mass, and glass. A salute to those who want more

Then you probably like Houston.

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I'm here for quality over quantity. I like tall but let's not build tall only for the sake of it being tall. I'd also like to see great designs. We can and should ask for at least that much.

(like button)

[mercury6]

[QUOTE=JACKinBeantown;9020628]Then you probably like Houston.


I'd like Houston a lot more if the towers were centralized

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I'm here for quality over quantity. I like tall but let's not build tall only for the sake of it being tall. I'd also like to see great designs. We can and should ask for at least that much.

You echoed my sentiments exactly from my posts #94 and #96 in this thread but didn't babble on to get your point across like I did and do. I wish I could do that
We are only going to have so many opportunities for something exceptional and tall. Oh btw, I wonder if the designers got their inspiration from looking at photos of Stonehenge?

[mercury6]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I'm here for quality over quantity. I like tall but let's not build tall only for the sake of it being tall. I'd also like to see great designs. We can and should ask for at least that much.

Sure man, feel free to ask for whatever you want.

[Sigaven]

Dang, so much hate for this proposal....i Have to diverge from the pack as well and say I love it. The massing could use some work, the cantilever adds some interest but a less boxy overall mass would be nice. But I love the detailing of the glass walls. Finally a tower with texture as opposed to flat and boring.

Plus from what I've read on Towers, the convention center expansion could be done "vertically" in a way that allows this tower to happen. Why do we need to expand low to the ground?

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Dang, so much hate for this proposal....i Have to diverge from the pack as well and say I love it. The massing could use some work, the cantilever adds some interest but a less boxy overall mass would be nice. But I love the detailing of the glass walls. Finally a tower with texture as opposed to flat and boring.

Plus from what I've read on Towers, the convention center expansion could be done "vertically" in a way that allows this tower to happen. Why do we need to expand low to the ground?

The building doesn't look like anything else that exists downtown. It adds variety. I don't understand the hate either. Not every building can be iconic.

The CC expansion can definitely happen along with this building. I don't understand the cynicism WRT that either.

Also, this is a perfect location for a large office building. It is only steps away from the red line station and, hopefully, steps away from a new blue/gold line station.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by paul78701

The building doesn't look like anything else that exists downtown. It adds variety. I don't understand the hate either. Not every building can be iconic.

The CC expansion can definitely happen along with this building. I don't understand the cynicism WRT that either.

Also, this is a perfect location for a large office building. It is only steps away from the red line station and, hopefully, steps away from a new blue/gold line station.

The Gold line got nixed because there was pressure to downscale the financial commitment because of covid. I think it's a regular bus. I was really really bummed. It would be really really useful to link your light rail system to your multi-purpose arena. Hopefully they can find the money down the line and get it built. I think they are still doing the engineering for it but I could be wrong.

[urbancore]

i dig it. it doesn't blow me away, but I think, for now, only "the Sail" will do that.

[We vs us]

Design commission recommends them for density bonus.

ABJ has a couple of other interesting tidbits in the write up. One interesting thing -- Gensler is riding herd on both this project and the latest CC iteration, and is tweaking this design to be more oriented to the foot traffic produced by conventions.

I'm still so-so on the design but warming up to the concept.

47-story Block 16 tower recommended for density bonus

By Daniel Salazar – Staff Writer, Austin Business Journal
Aug 25, 2020, 7:54am CDT
A downtown tower proposed next to the Austin Convention Center has cleared a key hurdle.

Austin's Design Commission recommended Aug. 24 the Block 16 high-rise for participation in the downtown density bonus program.

Austin-based developer Manifold Real Estate wants to build a 47-story office tower with ground-floor retail at 320 E. Second St., which is on the north side of Second Street between San Jacinto Boulevard and Trinity Street. Plans call for 723 feet of height and 741,319 square feet of space, which would make it bigger than the largest existing office high-rise, Frost Bank Tower, which clocks in at a little more than 535,000 square feet.

"We are very excited for this potential project," said Todd Runkle, co-managing director in Austin for architecture firm Gensler, which designed the building. "This project will make a significant impact."

The skyscraper would replace a half-block of low-rise buildings currently home to restaurants such as P.F. Chang's and Fleming's Prime Steakhouse.

The Central Business District-zoned tract has a permitted floor-to-area ratio of 8:1, but developers want that to go up to 21:1 under the density bonus program.

Travis Albrecht, Gensler's design director in the Austin office, said the lobby's placement in the center of the block on Second Street will allow retail on both sides of the tower's base.

"The public is intended to really move in and through the majority of this project along this south side," he said.

Albrecht also said the tower's civic plaza will now be placed along Trinity Street.

"As people, visitors and Austinites, spill out of the convention center, that opening ... creates a nice, shady, public open space for people," he said.

Digo Lima, a Gensler senior project designer, said the space's art, flexible cafe seating and bench area would be welcoming to people leaving the convention center.

Lima said there would also be two balconies for every office level on the building, as well as a large amenity deck on the 36th level.

"It's a striking and unique profile for the skyline of Austin," Lima said of the tower design.

Runkle said the building would have 17 levels of above-grade parking and three levels of below-grade parking — something that will likely disappoint urbanists about a project in transit-heavy downtown.

Design commissioners ultimately found that the project was in substantial compliance with the city's urban design guidelines, one of the major requirements for participating in the downtown density bonus program.

Commissioner Aan Coleman, who motioned for a vote of substantial compliance, said the project still needs more study on improving pedestrian circulation along Second Street.

Joshua Meiners was the only commissioner to vote against the motion, saying he wanted to see more programming connected to performance art or music featured in the project.

Planning and Zoning Department staff have the final say on whether the project will receive a density bonus.

The tower stands in the path of expanding the Austin Convention Center, which city officials have indicated is still moving ahead despite the pandemic. It's possible Manifold and the city work together on the tower — a recent memo indicated a partnership is being explored for a "vertically integrated tower/convention center expansion."

https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/n...s-forward.html

[IluvATX]

I like the shingle style windows, but that cantilever looks odd and makes me wish the west face would go straight to the top.

[The ATX]

One from the Statesman...

[Tornado]

Originally Posted by The ATX

One from the Statesman...

I'd love to have a building like that grace San Antonio's skyline.