AUSTIN | Waterline (98 Red River) | 1,022 Feet | 73 Floors | U/C - Page 66

urbancore · #**1301** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 5:52 PM**

let the haters, hate...

gimme gimme gimme

I'll take it.

drummer · #**1302** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 7:17 PM**

I've read a lot of comments about the crown. I personally don't mind it as a part of the rest of the design, which is asymmetrical and an overall broken-up design. I would not like it on a more symmetrical building. However, for those of you who like this building except for the crown, what alternative crown would you prefer? Just curious.

kingkirbythe.... · #**1303** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 8:31 PM**

I don’t think it’s about being a “hater“. It’s more about wanting a higher quality of something. The more I look at this building, the more I see three unremarkable buildings stacked on top of each other. I loved this building at first. I was swept up in the fact that Austin would get a supertall. Once that sunk in, I began to look at the quality of that supertall. Frankly, I feel this one is lacking in quality and is at best mediocre.

On a different note, I thought I remember Austin having an ordinance about how tall buildings could be close to the lake. Possibly some sort of height rising as you went away from the river? Maybe I’m just thinking of the university overlay height system in West Campus.

KevinFromTexas · #**1304** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 8:40 PM**

The top isn't my favorite, but admittedly, I'm not sure how I would change it if I could. Most modern towers these days are symmetrical, so seeing this one being very asymmetrical does make it a bit strange. I was trying to think of what other towers might be like it and only came up with 30 Hudson Yards in New York, F5 Tower in Seattle, and 181 Fremont in San Francisco.

I could see the design of the tops of 30 Hudson Yards and 181 Fremont being applied to 98 Red River, or even F5 Tower, though, neither of those are exact matches either when trying to think about how to do the top of an asymmetrical tower. I think one thing I would change with 98 Red River's crown is to have the columns in the southwest corner of the crown flipped upside down so that they're /\ shaped instead of \/. That would set up a design at the peak of the roof where you could carry that design up with a spire on the southwest corner of the roof. I'm not crazy about spires, but I don't think it would look bad here. Just look at 181 Fremont to see. 30 Hudson Yards might be a tougher fit for the roof here since you'd have to somehow mesh the crown with the rest of the facade, and 30 Hudson Yards does that well, but having no columns and just a curtain wall like the the rest of the tower's facade might not look right with the brick like facade because you'd have to figure out how to make that strange since the brick pattern would be cut off by the angled roof.

30 Hudson Yards
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=95171

181 Fremont
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=67666

F5 Tower
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=69837

MichaelB · #**1305** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 8:48 PM**

I'm just gonna vote for "like it".
Cool vibe.

Echostatic · #**1306** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 9:08 PM**

I like it

lonewolf · #**1307** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 9:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingkirbythe....

I don’t think it’s about being a “hater“. It’s more about wanting a higher quality of something. The more I look at this building, the more I see three unremarkable buildings stacked on top of each other. I loved this building at first. I was swept up in the fact that Austin would get a supertall. Once that sunk in, I began to look at the quality of that supertall. Frankly, I feel this one is lacking in quality and is at best mediocre.

On a different note, I thought I remember Austin having an ordinance about how tall buildings could be close to the lake. Possibly some sort of height rising as you went away from the river? Maybe I’m just thinking of the university overlay height system in West Campus.

never clarify or rebut labels others put on you! this is an opinion community, fire away!

can't recall any setback laws in regards to our waterfront though

The ATX · #**1308** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 9:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lonewolf

can't recall any setback laws in regards to our waterfront though

Northshore, Austin Proper and Block 185 are examples of buildings designed to comply with waterfront setback requirements.

The ATX · #**1309** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 9:45 PM**

We've had this discussion in other threads - early in the Quincy thread comes to mind - but buildings near the lake need a "distinct top". And an angled roof is one way to meet that requirement. The probably never gonna be built Ikon Tower had an angled roof as well.

lonewolf · #**1310** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 9:50 PM**

doesn't seem to be a very high bar. by any chance do you know what it is?

always thought these were going along with the setback motif throughout our DT. didn't know there was a water setback

The ATX · #**1311** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 9:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lonewolf

doesn't seem to be a very high bar. by any chance do you know what it is?

always thought these were going along with the setback motif throughout our DT. didn't know there was a water setback

I think it was discussed in one of the threads for the three buildings in that rendering that front Shoal Creek, Block 185 maybe. Without searching through the threads, IIRC it was a ~70 degree angle beginning from a certain height of the base (~40') to the top.

the Genral · #**1312** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 10:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

I've read a lot of comments about the crown. I personally don't mind it as a part of the rest of the design, which is asymmetrical and an overall broken-up design. I would not like it on a more symmetrical building. However, for those of you who like this building except for the crown, what alternative crown would you prefer? Just curious.

Something like this...
http://images.skyscrapercenter.com/building/db0001.jpg

https://images.skyscrapercenter.com/...n_imresolt.jpg

or this...

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/160/39...43d4f0bf_b.jpg
Now that's a crown!

Sigaven · #**1313** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 10:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Genral

Something like this...

http://images.skyscrapercenter.com/building/db0001.jpg

Sigaven · #**1314** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 10:13 PM**

I don't mind the crown on this one, it just feels a little meh. For this being Texas's new tallest tower, there should be something on this tower that makes it truly iconic rather than something that looks half-thought. I think a spire would help greatly and make it look more intentional.

the Genral · #**1315** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 10:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaven

That hurts....

Sigaven · #**1316** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 10:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Genral

That hurts....

Sorry I just think it looks very Dubai/Miami-esque tacky...my personal opinion, nothing against you

the Genral · #**1317** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 10:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Sorry I just think it looks very Dubai/Miami-esque tacky...my personal opinion, nothing against you

How astute of you. It is on top of an Emirates Tower in Dubai.

The ATX · #**1318** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 10:32 PM**

I think the amazing creek & street level interaction that this project provides is the most important aspect of it. More important than the height and crown. Everyone will have a different opinion of any particular building's design, and individual opinions pro or con are not worth anything more than a few posts in a discussion forum.

the Genral · #**1319** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 10:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Sorry I just think it looks very Dubai/Miami-esque tacky...my personal opinion, nothing against you

I wasn't really hurt by that...I was just kidding

115 cheap posts to go like this to hit 4000 posts!

The ATX · #**1320** Posted **Dec 7, 2020, 11:10 PM**

The site plan revision application got rejected today. No big deal other than a slight delay in getting info about the specific plans filed with the city. They will just refile with a correction to whatever Admin issue popped up. Maybe Eskimo knows more?