AUSTIN | 5th + Colorado | 242 FEET | 18 FLOORS | Complete - Page 3

KevinFromTexas · #41 Posted **Mar 4, 2014, 2:56 AM**

20 floors now and at least 244 feet.

http://downtownaustinblog.org/2014/0...-5th-colorado/

IluvATX · #42 Posted **Mar 4, 2014, 3:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

20 floors now and at least 244 feet.

http://downtownaustinblog.org/2014/0...-5th-colorado/

344 feet on the link for 20 floors... Lol.

KevinFromTexas · #43 Posted **Mar 4, 2014, 6:17 AM**

There's no way that's right. What probably happened was the elevation lists the ground elevation as "100 feet" instead of 0. When you read building elevations and measure the height you have to pay attention to what the ground level elevation is. Sometimes they list it as 0' and whatever number is above is the actual height. Other times, though, the ground elevation is listed as 100'. In those cases whatever number is listed above is actually 100 feet taller than the actual height. So if it says 344' you would need to subtract 100 feet. The elevations for the new Westin Hotel at 5th & San Jacinto are the same way. They list it as being 314 feet tall, but only because the ground elevation is listed as 100 feet. That hotel is actually just 214 feet. I'm not sure why they do it that way sometimes and sometimes the other way.

lzppjb · #44 Posted **Mar 4, 2014, 6:48 AM**

Could you look at past ones and see if they list it as 100' when they have below ground structure, and 0' when it's all above ground?

KevinFromTexas · #45 Posted **Mar 4, 2014, 7:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lzppjb

Could you look at past ones and see if they list it as 100' when they have below ground structure, and 0' when it's all above ground?

For the Westin it shows the sub-levels and subtracts from the street level "100 feet". So the first level under ground is listed as 88 feet, while the bottom level is listed as 58 feet. The Westin has 4 levels under ground.

For 7th & Rio Grande, it lists the first number above ground as 0 and there are no levels below ground. Maybe they do this when a building has sub-levels? Maybe that's the case and the 5th & Colorado office tower will have a few floors of parking below grade in addition to the ones above? We'll know for sure once the elevations are released for it.

The Shore also has the ground elevation number as 100 feet. Doesn't it have below ground parking?

lzppjb · #46 Posted **Mar 4, 2014, 8:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Maybe they do this when a building has sub-levels?

That's what I was attempting to say. It's not an exact measurement of how deep the hole is, just that there is a hole.

IluvATX · #47 Posted **Mar 4, 2014, 12:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

For the Westin it shows the sub-levels and subtracts from the street level "100 feet". So the first level under ground is listed as 88 feet, while the bottom level is listed as 58 feet. The Westin has 4 levels under ground.

For 7th & Rio Grande, it lists the first number above ground as 0 and there are no levels below ground. Maybe they do this when a building has sub-levels? Maybe that's the case and the 5th & Colorado office tower will have a few floors of parking below grade in addition to the ones above? We'll know for sure once the elevations are released for it.

The Shore also has the ground elevation number as 100 feet. Doesn't it have below ground parking?

It makes sense to start at 0 100 feet underground as opposed to 0 at grade for construction purposes.

KevinFromTexas · #48 Posted **Mar 5, 2014, 12:25 AM**

Ok, so I've seen the elevation now. It shows the ground level elevation as 100 feet. So it's a pretty good bet it'll be shorter than the 344 foot height that was mentioned. The 244 foot height that was mentioned is to the main roof slab (the floor). The parapet (barrier wall on the main roof) is about another feet higher. So if you were standing on the main roof of the building your feet would be at 244 feet above the street and there would be a 4 foot barrier wall between you and the edge. The mechanical roof roughly measured tops out at about 269 feet. That's the highest the building goes. Also the 20th floor is actually a mechanical floor for HVAC and elevator equipment, so it's not an occupied floor, nor does it have space for lease in it. So the building should actually be listed as having 19 floors instead of 20. Most of the time mechanical floors aren't even mentioned in real estate literature. Imagine listing a residential building as having 20 floors and someone deciding they want a unit on the 20th floor only to find out that that floor isn't available because it's mechanical only.

The elevation didn't actually list the height of the mechanical penthouse roof (top of the building), so I had to measure it out with a sheet of paper. Mechanical penthouses are usually exempt in height variances as long as it doesn't block the view of a protected view such as our capitol view corridors. So, in most cases mechanical penthouse heights aren't even listed in building elevations.

And by the way, Austin does not have a single building over 250 feet tall with fewer than 20 floors. Every building in Austin (there's 29 of them) that is at least 250 feet tall also has at least 20 floors. The only building that is taller than 250 feet tall with fewer than 20 floors is the Capitol, and for obvious reasons.

I think the first building that will break that will be the new 17-story civil courthouse since courthouses typically have high floor-to-floor heights.

Anyway, if anyone wants it I can email them the elevation.

Syndic · #49 Posted **Mar 5, 2014, 2:37 AM**

Anyway, it will be good infill. Until that Downtown Austin Blog post, I had forgotten what was on that site previously. I just hope the building ends up looking considerably better than that initial rendering they put out.

AusTxDevelopment · #50 Posted **Mar 31, 2014, 8:34 PM**

New marketing video that has updated renderings of 5th + Colorado, including lobby and street level.

http://vimeo.com/89447131

jngreenlee · #51 Posted **Mar 31, 2014, 8:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AusTxDevelopment

New marketing video that has updated renderings of 5th + Colorado, including lobby and street level.

http://vimeo.com/89447131

That user's vimeo page has versions of it the video that include Chase signage at the top. Looks like they've had some back-and-forth, judging by the dates:
http://vimeo.com/rubiconmarketing

AusTxDevelopment · #52 Posted **Mar 31, 2014, 8:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jngreenlee

That user's vimeo page has versions of it the video that include Chase signage at the top. Looks like they've had some back-and-forth, judging by the dates:
http://vimeo.com/rubiconmarketing

Wow, that's a big oops. That other video is most likely a client presentation to Chase Bank - their lease is up next year at 221 W. 6th and all the new downtown construction is chasing them to get them to move to the new buildings. They are all offering to rename the buildings after the bank. Only one big bank per downtown highrise - they all have exclusives, so its a big deal when a bank moves. Back in the day, Frost Bank Tower grabbed Frost Bank from 816 Congress (which used to be known as the Frost Bank Building). Otherwise we would be calling Frost Tower 401 Congress.

Edited to add: It is a big deal when a bank moves, but it's not uncommon. 301 Congress used to be known as the Guaranty Bank Building, and One Congress Plaza (111 Congress) used to be known as Franklin Federal Tower. But you have to be old like me to remember that.

KevinFromTexas · #53 Posted **Mar 31, 2014, 9:47 PM**

The Frost Bank Tower's original name was Congress at Fourth. They even had marketing signs for it.

Here's a clip of Franklin Federal's One Congress Plaza flyover. This commercial helped hook me on skyscrapers.

• Video Link

The ATX · #54 Posted **Mar 31, 2014, 10:03 PM**

From the Vimeo video:

JoninATX · #55 Posted **Apr 1, 2014, 2:29 AM**

Love it!

the Genral · #56 Posted **Apr 1, 2014, 3:01 AM**

I'm pretty much ok with the design. They took what essentially is just a 9 story office building and made it look like an almost 20 story office building by disguising the parking half quite nicely like the Colorado Tower. But....this one could have been a signature tower at 50 + floors. I like the vertical lines and glass mix. It will at least make it appear taller than it is. Overall, this will add density with a bit of style imo.
I'm curious if the other side is a mirror of the pictured side. If so, it will really make me wish it was much, much taller.

Jdawgboy · #57 Posted **Apr 1, 2014, 7:54 AM**

You know, I'm not 100% sure but I think the lot is within the Warehouse District Overlay which means there is a height limit. It's taller than what was originally going to be there but I don't know if they would have been able to do anything taller let alone a 50+ floor tower, though I would have loved to see one there

KevinFromTexas · #58 Posted **May 1, 2014, 5:15 AM**

http://prezi.com/a8vp1v4ohxix/downto...ntation-41814/

Syndic · #59 Posted **May 1, 2014, 12:34 PM**

So, it's a glass box with a big blank wall. Cool.

texboy · #60 Posted **May 1, 2014, 4:28 PM**

This IMO is disappointing in terms of height and design. Maybe having Frost down the street doesn't help, but to me this looks like something that would be built in the Houston burbs. Yes, it is helping density, but these developers really need to start thinking outside the box with respect to design. Austin's downtown deserves better than these bland towers that are being thrown up.