HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #181  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2014, 7:56 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
you suck
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: down the street from the taco trailer
Posts: 46,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jdawgboy View Post
Okay so let me get this straight, they are making a big deal over a CVC that actually angles down so people can see it from Red River St.? That's just plain dumb and why does the sight line have to be so far down where it meets the Capitol? As long as you can see the dome then it shouldn't matter. The sight line should be raised up to the base of the dome, that alone would not only remove the intake facility out but may even remove the other building out as well.
The CVCs are predetermined based on the elevation above sea level of the Capitol dome and the location of the preserved view. To preserve the view, buildings must be shorter the closer they are to the location of the preserved view. This is why the sight line slopes downward. Buildings must not exceed the sea level elevation of the dome anywhere within that corridor.

So say you're a developer wanting to build a building within one of the CVCs. And let's say within that view corridor the base of the Capitol dome starts at 653 feet above sea level. You would need to determine the sea level elevation of your property before you started designing your project. The top of your building could not exceed 653 feet above sea level.

Here is a list of the CVCs with the sea level elevations of each.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u...tm/GV.3151.htm
__________________
Blue Leader, this is Troll Fighter
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #182  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2014, 4:16 PM
jngreenlee jngreenlee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 254
In today's City Council Meeting, Item 11:

Quote:
Authorize the negotiation and execution of a construction contract with OSCAR RENDA CONTRACTING for the Waller Creek Tunnel Project 8th Street Creek Side Inlet Facility Rebid in the amount of $5,213,382 plus a $260,670 contingency, for a total contract amount not to exceed $5,474,052.
This -might- be the intake rebuild.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #183  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2014, 4:45 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by jngreenlee View Post
In today's City Council Meeting, Item 11:



This -might- be the intake rebuild.
I can't read the whole statesman story, but at least the second paragraph presents it as separate/additional/unrelated

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news...nel-fea/nhqDc/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #184  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2014, 4:48 PM
jngreenlee jngreenlee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
I can't read the whole statesman story, but at least the second paragraph presents it as separate/additional/unrelated
You made a bingo. Picture worth a thousand words:


From the article:
Quote:
Meanwhile, the City Council is slated to decide Thursday whether to add a separate $5.2 million feature to the tunnel project. City staffers say that feature, an inlet at 8th Street, is not absolutely necessary but will help reduce flooding even more along Waller Creek.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #185  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2014, 4:54 PM
jngreenlee jngreenlee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 254
This inlet looks like corporate cronyism for Stubb's!!!



Also, the (not-quite) riverwalk features along that area are always interesting. Wonder what will happen to them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #186  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2014, 5:35 PM
corvairkeith's Avatar
corvairkeith corvairkeith is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 882
That area did flood pretty bad a few months back.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #187  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2014, 9:32 PM
jngreenlee jngreenlee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 254
http://austintexas.gov/council_meeti...tion_notes.cfm

Quote:
11 Authorize the negotiation and execution of a construction contract with OSCAR RENDA CONTRACTING for the Waller Creek Tunnel Project 8th Street Creek Side Inlet Facility Rebid in the amount of $5,213,382 plus a $260,670 contingency, for a total contract amount not to exceed $5,474,052.
APPROVED
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #188  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2015, 12:58 AM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,164
April 16, 2015










For reference, here's the initial rendering:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hill Country View Post
Here's the culprit in Waterloo Park:


http://www.statesman.com/news/news/l...othly-o/nW2Y5/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #189  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2015, 1:07 AM
IluvATX IluvATX is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Anchorage-Austin-Anchorage-Austin and so forth...
Posts: 416
Nice update. I noticed that the lake side of Waller Creek looks almost done also.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #190  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2015, 1:58 AM
airwx airwx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 146
The Parks and Recreation Board are scheduled to receive an update on the 21st of April. From the slides posted in the backup, it looks like they will be flooding the lagoon and removing the bulkhead any day now.


Also, note that they are using OverAustin's great drone imagery in their presentation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #191  
Old Posted May 7, 2015, 9:40 PM
airwx airwx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 146
They flooded the tunnel and lagoon. Here's a before and after picture from user centennialg's thread on reddit:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #192  
Old Posted May 7, 2015, 11:00 PM
hookem hookem is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,434
Man, they seriously need some "Don't swim here!" signs around that lagoon...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #193  
Old Posted May 7, 2015, 11:15 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio
Posts: 3,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by hookem View Post
Man, they seriously need some "Don't swim here!" signs around that lagoon...
Well, technically swimming isn't allowed anywhere on the river downtown, right?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #194  
Old Posted May 7, 2015, 11:26 PM
the Genral's Avatar
the Genral the Genral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Far from the maddening crowd
Posts: 2,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by hookem View Post
Man, they seriously need some "Don't swim here!" signs around that lagoon...
I was thinking exactly the same thing. I wonder if this intake will be strong enough to create a whirlpool, and if so, will it be strong enough to suck a person or dog down threw it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #195  
Old Posted May 7, 2015, 11:33 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio
Posts: 3,608
Is the intake lagoon filled yet?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #196  
Old Posted May 7, 2015, 11:33 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio
Posts: 3,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by the Genral View Post
I was thinking exactly the same thing. I wonder if this intake will be strong enough to create a whirlpool, and if so, will it be strong enough to suck a person or dog down threw it?
That's the out, not the in.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #197  
Old Posted May 8, 2015, 1:38 AM
the Genral's Avatar
the Genral the Genral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Far from the maddening crowd
Posts: 2,878
Ok, I'm confused, a common occurrence in my older age. Where is the water return intake? I assumed this was
where they would get the water to pump back upstream, through this big hole. I guess I forgot the only time the tunnel would be used is in case of flood. Now that the lagoon is flooded, then the tunnel must be full and operational, in time for Memorial day. So how does all this water going down this huge hole not end up squirting back out the northern end of the tunnel?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #198  
Old Posted May 8, 2015, 1:57 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio
Posts: 3,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by the Genral View Post
Ok, I'm confused, a common occurrence in my older age. Where is the water return intake? I assumed this was
where they would get the water to pump back upstream, through this big hole. I guess I forgot the only time the tunnel would be used is in case of flood. Now that the lagoon is flooded, then the tunnel must be full and operational, in time for Memorial day. So how does all this water going down this huge hole not end up squirting back out the northern end of the tunnel?
It's kind-of both? The way the water return is supposed to work doesn't actually connect it all way to this lagoon. Instead, each of the three intake facilities upstream will have a water pump to return water from the bottom of the channel (so that they're only vertical shafts that pump water up, rather than vertical shafts that connect to a horizontal pump system). Because they'll be pretty distant from this lagoon, any current created in the lagoon to generate water flow upstream will be negligible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #199  
Old Posted May 8, 2015, 3:21 AM
the Genral's Avatar
the Genral the Genral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Far from the maddening crowd
Posts: 2,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
It's kind-of both? The way the water return is supposed to work doesn't actually connect it all way to this lagoon. Instead, each of the three intake facilities upstream will have a water pump to return water from the bottom of the channel (so that they're only vertical shafts that pump water up, rather than vertical shafts that connect to a horizontal pump system). Because they'll be pretty distant from this lagoon, any current created in the lagoon to generate water flow upstream will be negligible.


Thanks wwmiv, your accurate explanation inspired me to find a drawing. I am no longer confused...about this at least...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #200  
Old Posted May 8, 2015, 3:27 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio
Posts: 3,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by the Genral View Post


Thanks wwmiv, your accurate explanation inspired me to find a drawing. I am no longer confused...about this at least, now, where did I leave the tv remote?...
Hmm. I thought there was a return pump after every intake, but it appears I'm mistaken. There's only one at the first intake facility. That might be a strategic mistake by the designers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:02 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.