Austin, what if... - Page 4

Jdawgboy · #61 Posted **Jul 23, 2011, 6:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Genral

Last one for tonight,,,,what if we could build as high as we wanted within a 5 or 10 mile radius around the city? We'll explore this more later along with some buildings to the west, but for now, check this out...
I love the 3 buildings at Ben White and I35 in the distance. You know many big cities have tall building outside their DTs, Dallas, Houston, even San Antonio.
We're only there in our minds I guess...

I used to wish Austin was more like Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio in that regard but now I am glad we are not. Don't get me wrong I would like to see one or two dense tall areas in the city outside of Downtown and I think it will just be a matter of time as it gets more difficult to build in Downtown, but I am glad we don't have random highrises spread throughout the city. When you see Downtown, you know thats the heart of the city but when you have highrises spread out everywhere it gives a sense IMO of unconformity with no true center even if there is one. I hope that when we do see highrises outside of Downtown, they will be in density clusters and not spread out. If you have to create a secondary Downtown then do it but as far as spread out random highrises I say no thanks.

KevinFromTexas · #62 Posted **Jul 23, 2011, 6:52 PM**

^Conformity? Ha! Since when does Austin practice that?

And it looks like that one version of the One American Center in the lower right doesn't approve of being messed with. LOL

Nice one, the Genral. That gives a pretty good idea of what those buildings in South Austin would look like taller and creating a skyline there.

We could have tall buildings outside of downtown, but until they're in an urban setting with walkable streets and pedestrian oriented businesses, I'd say no. Tall buildings aren't enough. They're nice to look at, but without any kind of connection to the street and surroundings, it wouldn't be a neighborhood it would just be a complex. Having tall buildings in a suburban setting like those pictured above in the distance would take away from downtown. Of course those buildings do that now to some extent, but what's worse is they don't create any desirable atmosphere there to encourage more development from a demand from people who want to be there. At least when you have a 2nd district outside of downtown with tall buildings that are built to create an urban environment with pedestrian oriented businesses, walkable streets and sidewalks, you at least create a legitimate neighborhood that can develop its own vibe and culture besides just being one more office complex next to a highway.

Also, not even density is key to making an urban neighborhood. No one would disagree that Miami and areas of LA and a few other locales are dense, but most of those buildings do not interact with their street and so don't act like any sort of urban fabric to create an actual urban neighborhood. Miami has TONS of residential towers. They added something like 21 buildings over 500 feet in the last decade, but hardly any of those interact with their street. Most of the "neighborhoods" those towers are part of don't support pedestrian street life. And you're more likely to see a car drive down the street than a pedestrian walk down it.

austlar1 · #63 Posted **Jul 23, 2011, 8:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

^Conformity? Ha! Since when does Austin practice that?

And it looks like that one version of the One American Center in the lower right doesn't approve of being messed with. LOL

Nice one, the Genral. That gives a pretty good idea of what those buildings in South Austin would look like taller and creating a skyline there.

We could have tall buildings outside of downtown, but until they're in an urban setting with walkable streets and pedestrian oriented businesses, I'd say no. Tall buildings aren't enough. They're nice to look at, but without any kind of connection to the street and surroundings, it wouldn't be a neighborhood it would just be a complex. Having tall buildings in a suburban setting like those pictured above in the distance would take away from downtown. Of course those buildings do that now to some extent, but what's worse is they don't create any desirable atmosphere there to encourage more development from a demand from people who want to be there. At least when you have a 2nd district outside of downtown with tall buildings that are built to create an urban environment with pedestrian oriented businesses, walkable streets and sidewalks, you at least create a legitimate neighborhood that can develop its own vibe and culture besides just being one more office complex next to a highway.

Also, not even density is key to making an urban neighborhood. No one would disagree that Miami and areas of LA and a few other locales are dense, but most of those buildings do not interact with their street and so don't act like any sort of urban fabric to create an actual urban neighborhood. Miami has TONS of residential towers. They added something like 21 buildings over 500 feet in the last decade, but hardly any of those interact with their street. Most of the "neighborhoods" those towers are part of don't support pedestrian street life. And you're more likely to see a car drive down the street than a pedestrian walk down it.

I tend to agree with Kevin on this one. Austin is currently better off without large outlying high rise clusters. If one were to develop, I am hoping it would be in the context of a reconfigured commercial district that is linked to highways and city transit options. Every time I drive around the Highland Mall area I can't help but think how this whole area could be reconfigured with devopment tailored to a revised street grid that encourages density, mixed use, pedestrian traffic, public transit, etc. Few cities have such a desirable parcel of underutilized land so close to the existing center of things. I hope we don't squander this opportunity with lots of fill in or make-do reuse of the Highland Mall area. I am not sure the ACC takeover of much of the Highland Mall is really a step in the right direction, but ACC as a component in a totally redeveloped area might be a very good thing. Of course, it would be nice to see some really tall and some kinda tall buildings go up there as well. I dont guess there is much there at the present time that would lend itself to one of The General's stretch jobs!

the Genral · #64 Posted **Jul 23, 2011, 10:26 PM**

Photo by paradox27 modified by the Genral

In keeping with my theme of seeing if taller is better, I raised the roofs on these buildings near the 360 bridge. Well, even I have standards and have decided that no buildings at all is the better choice for that area. So I asked myself, what if we could tear them down and restore the area...it would look like this,

KevinFromTexas · #65 Posted **Jul 23, 2011, 10:45 PM**

That's pretty cool. It's like turning back the clock 30 years or so.

BevoLJ · #66 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 3:55 AM**

Heh ya. Good thing Richard Garriott moved his office downtown before General destroyed it! lol. You should do one of the pictures of one of his castles, Britannia Manor, in that picture. Make it into something huge like the Tower of London overlooking lake Austin and Pennybacker. =) Is Pennybacker 30 yet? It should be getting close. I can't remember if it was mid 80's or earlier 80's when it was built.

the Genral · #67 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 4:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BevoLJ

Heh ya. Good thing Richard Garriott moved his office downtown before General destroyed it! lol. You should do one of the pictures of one of his castles, Britannia Manor, in that picture. Make it into something huge like the Tower of London overlooking lake Austin and Pennybacker. =) Is Pennybacker 30 yet? It should be getting close. I can't remember if it was mid 80's or earlier 80's when it was built.

The Tower of London may show up somewhere...

the Genral · #68 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 4:47 AM**

Photo by Mopacs from this forum modified by the Genral

On this pic I raised the roofs on just about everything with 4 or more floors so I could get some density. What we get with this is an east, west, north and south shot at a taller denser Austin. What we also got I found was a lot of dull, boring towers. So...in conclusion, we need new, shiney construction to enhance our skyline. This mod was the most time consuming so far, it took me on and off most of the afternoon but I think it was worth it. Btw, since the Austonian and the Four Seasons were under construction, I was only able to raise the towers, there are no roofs on them. This one is fun just going back and forth with the original.

the Genral · #69 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 5:53 AM**

Photo by LoneStarMike from this forum Modified by the Genral

Now you see it........

Now you don't........

Hey, where'd that come from? You know, this ain't a bad idea!

Photo by LoneStarMike from this forum
This is the Whole Foods World HQ. Come on! Freakin World HQ. They could have done better than that. At least I did...

Photo by LoneStarMike

And I looked to the south and I said...arise and be seen!! And it was good.

austlar1 · #70 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 7:56 AM**

General, you are on a roll now. Those last few enhancements have been inspired.

the Genral · #71 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 8:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

^Hey, with a taller UT Tower they could do more letters and even words with the lights on in the windows.

I've always thought that building would have looked great taller. Actually, there's a building in Tampa, Florida. It's their tallest building. It's designed by the same architecture firm and looks quite similar. Oddly enough, Tampa has a few buildings that look like our's. The one in Tampa that looks like 100 Congress above, is their tallest building. It's 20 floors taller than 100 Congress and is 579 feet tall. Even it's name, 100 Tampa, is for it's address - a major skyscraper street in that city.

I checked out some Tampa pics and you're right, they are similar, but theirs is much nicer. Ours looks like it was compromised by city ordinances. The building codes of the past will forever be a blight on our skyline. Jeesh, that sounds a bit dramatic.

the Genral · #72 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 9:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by austlar1

General, you are on a roll now. Those last few enhancements have been inspired.

Thanks austlar1, I'm really glad you are enjoying this thread.

KevinFromTexas · #73 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 8:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BevoLJ

Is Pennybacker 30 yet? It should be getting close. I can't remember if it was mid 80's or earlier 80's when it was built.

It was built in 1982.

Scroll down to the 1970s/1980s for some construction photos of the bridge.
http://www.texasfreeway.com/Austin/h...c_photos.shtml

http://www.texasfreeway.com/Austin/h...c_photos.shtml

the Genral · #74 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 9:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

It was built in 1982.

Scroll down to the 1970s/1980s for some construction photos of the bridge.
http://www.texasfreeway.com/Austin/h...c_photos.shtml

http://www.texasfreeway.com/Austin/h...c_photos.shtml

Hmmm, the PB 360 bridge and I arrived in TX at about the same time. You can see the golf course in the background under construction too. That's a pretty cool web link.

BevoLJ · #75 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 9:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

It was built in 1982.

Scroll down to the 1970s/1980s for some construction photos of the bridge.
http://www.texasfreeway.com/Austin/h...c_photos.shtml

Very cool webpage! Thanks.

I remember when they were building Pennybacker. I must have been 4 or 5 when my mother took me to see them putting it together. That is right near where I grew up. She took me up there and I remember her telling me how they shipped the parts of the bridge all the way from Japan.

If that sucker is getting to 30 that makes me feel really damn old. =(

Sorry for the off topic there General. Back to mutilating more sacred UT buildings! lol. I am really loving this thread. Great work mate.

the Genral · #76 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 9:50 PM**

Photo by stepper77 from ssforum modified by the genral

This one is by request. I wasn't sure the Norwood Tower would hold up to additional floors, but she did.

the Genral · #77 Posted **Jul 24, 2011, 10:17 PM**

Photo by jowens from ssforum modified by the genral

The Towers of South Austin, nuff said.

jowens · #78 Posted **Jul 25, 2011, 12:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Genral

Original pic by Downtown Austin from this forum modified by the Genral

What a fun thread!

You made the LBJ and Towers on LBL look like commie blocks.

the Genral · #79 Posted **Jul 25, 2011, 2:38 AM**

photo by mopacs from ssforum, modified by the genral

Ok, here it is...I bring to you the home of your NFL team, the Austin Genrals!!!
I looked at locations all over the Austin area and settled on here. So remember, this is a "what if" thread and as this goes, what if we had a pro football team, and what if that part of town was sparsely populated to the point that any residents were happy to sell their homes for cash and season tickets for life. So no need to worry about the location. If you look closely, you can see the main entrance. There is surface parking behind the stadium, but the main parking is in the two rather large parking garages. The brown patch will be a future paved bus parking lot. To look good in front of the cameras, I raised the roof on numerous DT buildings. So without further delay, I give you Austin Stadium...

the Genral · #80 Posted **Jul 25, 2011, 2:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jowens

What a fun thread!

You made the LBJ and Towers on LBL look like commie blocks.

Thanks jowens, I'm glad you are liking this thread. I used one of your photos above. Keep checking back. I'm going to keep this going for a while longer.
Btw, not all taller mods translate well, I agree with your assessment.