AUSTIN | Fairmont Hotel | 595 FEET SPIRE/456 FT ROOF | 37 FLRS | Complete - Page 101

masonh2479 · #**2001** Posted **Sep 28, 2017, 5:06 AM**

I don’t know if this has been brought up already but the new opening date for the Fairmont is December 1st.

clubtokyo · #**2002** Posted **Sep 30, 2017, 3:54 AM**

Shitty pic, but it’s blue tonight...

Mopacs · #**2003** Posted **Oct 1, 2017, 4:36 AM**

Tonight, from the I-35 NB frontage road.

From Pleasant Valley, just south of Longhorn Dam

drummer · #**2004** Posted **Oct 1, 2017, 7:09 AM**

Nice shots! Looks good, nice to see some more color.

futures · #**2005** Posted **Oct 1, 2017, 4:36 PM**

I've seen this lit up quite a few times downtown recently. I don't want to be overly negative, but the uplighting on the spire is pretty bad. It just illuminates one section of the spire about a third of the way up. It actually looks like there's a spotlight shining on one of the connection points. Just looks poorly executed.

The LEDs around the top of the building look great though.

the Genral · #**2006** Posted **Oct 1, 2017, 11:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by futures

I've seen this lit up quite a few times downtown recently. I don't want to be overly negative, but the uplighting on the spire is pretty bad. It just illuminates one section of the spire about a third of the way up. It actually looks like there's a spotlight shining on one of the connection points. Just looks poorly executed.

The LEDs around the top of the building look great though.

Yeah I noticed that too. I was hoping they would re adjust the floodlights when they saw how uneven the entire spire is lit, but with the large connecting joints blocking the light from below, I doubt it would make a difference. I'm disappointed they even used flood lights in the first place. They are more suitable the way they are used like on Frost.

Jdawgboy · #**2007** Posted **Oct 2, 2017, 1:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Genral

Yeah I noticed that too. I was hoping they would re adjust the floodlights when they saw how uneven the entire spire is lit, but with the large connecting joints blocking the light from below, I doubt it would make a difference. I'm disappointed they even used flood lights in the first place. They are more suitable the way they are used like on Frost.

Yea I'm concerned about the spire lighting. Did they decide to get rid of the ring lighting that they lit a few times before the scaffolding went up? The current lighting looks terrible, I keep thinking that can't be the final result.

austlar1 · #**2008** Posted **Oct 6, 2017, 4:29 AM**

Finally saw this building lit up tonight. They had the blue band on full throttle on the top of the south side of the building, and all segments of the spire were distinctly lit. Now if they can just change or do some tricks with the color or colors on the "spire". I still think it looks like a big pole or maybe a mast on a steamship.

StoOgE · #**2009** Posted **Oct 6, 2017, 4:45 AM**

It's been blue the last week or so.

That seems to be the "default" they are going with for now.

Jdawgboy · #**2010** Posted **Oct 6, 2017, 5:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by StoOgE

It's been blue the last week or so.

That seems to be the "default" they are going with for now.

Soooooo boring, like we need another solid blue. I may just apply for a job there to be in charge of the lights so I can make sure they change lol.

Jdawgboy · #**2011** Posted **Oct 6, 2017, 5:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by austlar1

Finally saw this building lit up tonight. They had the blue band on full throttle on the top of the south side of the building, and all segments of the spire were distinctly lit. Now if they can just change or do some tricks with the color or colors on the "spire". I still think it looks like a big pole or maybe a mast on a steamship.

So that actually have the segments lit instead of the spotlights? Ooooh I wanna see!!!

austlar1 · #**2012** Posted **Oct 6, 2017, 5:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

So that actually have the segments lit instead of the spotlights? Ooooh I wanna see!!!

Not sure how they are lit, but each segment was the same brightness as opposed to earlier when the lowest segment got all the light.

KevinFromTexas · #**2013** Posted **Oct 6, 2017, 8:02 PM**

Posted September 30.

Over Austin - https://www.facebook.com/overaustin/...type=3&theater

Jdawgboy · #**2014** Posted **Oct 11, 2017, 8:20 AM**

They did not light the spire the way that we saw at the beginning. At this point I think they scrapped that lighting for the spotlights, however they did tweak the lights so the spire is more uniformly lit.

Ugh I'm unable to upload the pic that I took for some reason... Guess I'll have to find yet another image hosting site

The ATX · #**2015** Posted **Oct 11, 2017, 9:02 PM**

From Community Impact:

Quote:

The spire is the maximum height allowed by the Federal Aviation Firm, according to the same release. It was designed, along with the rest of the hotel, by design firm Gensler.

https://communityimpact.com/austin/c...e/#prettyPhoto

KevinFromTexas · #**2016** Posted **Oct 11, 2017, 9:53 PM**

That doesn't make any sense. The building was originally planned to be 572 feet to the roof and 691 feet to the spire. So height shouldn't be an issue there. And, I know there are taller spires and masts than that atop other buildings. Even in Texas, the tallest is the communication mast atop the One Shell Plaza in Houston which is 285 feet tall and tops out at 999 feet. The tallest one in Chicago is 472 feet tall atop the John Hancock Center. That one tops out at 1,500 feet. The tallest one on the Willis Tower is 298 feet and tops out at 1,730 feet. The one atop One World Trade Center in New York is 408 feet and tops out at 1,792 feet.

Sigaven · #**2017** Posted **Oct 11, 2017, 9:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

That doesn't make any sense. The building was originally planned to be 572 feet to the roof and 691 feet to the spire. So height shouldn't be an issue there. And, I know there are taller spires and masts than that atop other buildings. Even in Texas, the tallest is the communication mast atop the One Shell Plaza in Houston which is 285 feet tall and tops out at 999 feet. The tallest one in Chicago is 472 feet tall atop the John Hancock Center. That one tops out at 1,500 feet. The tallest one on the Willis Tower is 298 feet and tops out at 1,730 feet. The one atop One World Trade Center in New York is 408 feet and tops out at 1,792 feet.

Maybe it's limited proportionally to the height of the building somehow?

KevinFromTexas · #**2018** Posted **Oct 11, 2017, 10:58 PM**

Maybe, but there's a 311 foot mast atop a 601 foot building in Chicago. Granted, that one is next to a much taller building, but still.

ahealy · #**2019** Posted **Oct 12, 2017, 1:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

That doesn't make any sense. The building was originally planned to be 572 feet to the roof and 691 feet to the spire. So height shouldn't be an issue there. And, I know there are taller spires and masts than that atop other buildings. Even in Texas, the tallest is the communication mast atop the One Shell Plaza in Houston which is 285 feet tall and tops out at 999 feet. The tallest one in Chicago is 472 feet tall atop the John Hancock Center. That one tops out at 1,500 feet. The tallest one on the Willis Tower is 298 feet and tops out at 1,730 feet. The one atop One World Trade Center in New York is 408 feet and tops out at 1,792 feet.

Yeah, all I could think of was Sears & Hancock....or all of Chicago.

Community Impact also says at "590 ft and tallest in the city", which is just incorrect lazy reporting

The ATX · #**2020** Posted **Oct 12, 2017, 1:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahealy

Yeah, all I could think of was Sears & Hancock....or all of Chicago.

Community Impact also says at "590 ft and tallest in the city", which is just incorrect lazy reporting

They were referring to the tallest hotel apparently because the next sentence says the Austonian is the tallest building. They also said "Federal Aviation Firm". What's that? All that aside, I took it to mean that the height of the spire was maxed out in relation to the height of the building per FAA rules.