HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2016, 5:57 AM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,121


The Statesman article also mentioned:

Quote:
Lake|Flato also is designing noted hotelier Liz Lambert’s planned 89-room Hotel Magdalena, which is to be built on Music Lane, just behind the proposed mixed-use project and west of Lambert’s Hotel Saint Cecilia. Hotel Magdalena could break ground in February, Lake said.
Here's one rendering of that project:



and three other renderings at this slide show courtesy of austintowers.net.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Sep 26, 2016, 3:39 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is online now
400 feet tall
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sunshine and taco trucks on every corner
Posts: 43,958
Site plan for South Urban Lofts. Heights are on page 5. This is under construction.

90 feet to the mechanical penthouse and 72 feet 3 inches to the main roof with 6 floors.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...0Ave_PLANS.pdf

You can also view the single elevation file here. It's file 005.

https://www.austintexas.gov/devrevie...erRSN=11179547
__________________
it's just a jump to the left and then a step to the right.

Last edited by KevinFromTexas; Sep 26, 2016 at 3:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2016, 12:06 PM
Flatiron's Avatar
Flatiron Flatiron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Austin
Posts: 179
This image shows the three parts of the St. Elmo Market project:

https://communityimpact.com/austin/n...st-elmos-fire/

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2017, 5:52 AM
lzppjb's Avatar
lzppjb lzppjb is online now
7th Gen Central Texan
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 2,363
An ad popped up on facebook for Public Lofts: www.publiclofts.com



The site also has construction updates:

2/25/17









Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2017, 3:29 AM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Right here, right now
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburban Low-rise
Posts: 5,119
The northern portion of SoCo on the east side of S. Congress is currently undergoing demo for the Hotel Magdalena mixed use project.

The posts in this thread encompass South Austin in general, so I updated the thread title to reflect South Austin and not just 78745.
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2017, 3:38 AM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Right here, right now
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburban Low-rise
Posts: 5,119
Here are photos of the SoCo demo from the Statesman:




http://austin.blog.mystatesman.com/2...ile-of-rubble/
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2017, 2:15 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Right here, right now
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburban Low-rise
Posts: 5,119
This resource hogging 93 page site plan is worth a look for anyone interested in the Magdalena project.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...0Ave_PLANS.pdf
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 12:21 AM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Right here, right now
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburban Low-rise
Posts: 5,119
The ABJ has a "breaking news" headline about a major South Austin project on MoPac near William Cannon. It's behind the paywall, but it's refering to the "Garza Tract" development. Here's the Site Plan with limited info:

https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/perm...rtyrsn=5310062

It includes three office buildings, a hotel and two (of course) parking garages. If the city would just increase the allowable height outside of Downtown we would see more projects with the office levels stacked on the parking structure. But the general public seems to prefer sprawl over height.
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 1:09 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia
Posts: 3,354
http://www.hgor.com/wp-content/uploa...arza-Tract.pdf

The developer is Brandywine, who definitely isn't opposed to going high in other places so you're right: this may very well be because of city zoning law≥
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 2:17 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is online now
400 feet tall
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sunshine and taco trucks on every corner
Posts: 43,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by The ATX View Post
The ABJ has a "breaking news" headline about a major South Austin project on MoPac near William Cannon. It's behind the paywall, but it's refering to the "Garza Tract" development. Here's the Site Plan with limited info:

https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/perm...rtyrsn=5310062

It includes three office buildings, a hotel and two (of course) parking garages. If the city would just increase the allowable height outside of Downtown we would see more projects with the office levels stacked on the parking structure. But the general public seems to prefer sprawl over height.
I think the philosophy on urbanism needs to be driven home to people even for areas that are outside of the core. I'm not talking about tearing down old neighborhoods. I'm talking about any new development. That area is part of the Edward's Aquifer recharge zone. It's messed up that we're fine with development in that area in the form of acres of impervious coverage parking lots, but don't seek a goal of limited impervious coverage by stacking development. After the two major floods that happened in 2015, there was a lot of comments by people who were concerned that development was contributing to the flooding by creating more impervious coverage that meant that runoff had fewer places to go. It is true, of course, but now that line of concern and discussion has gone away, and we're right back to only complaining about vertical development and seem to look the other way while acres of development go on covering the countryside.
__________________
it's just a jump to the left and then a step to the right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 3:50 AM
drummer drummer is offline
德克萨斯人 y'all
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Asia by way of Texas
Posts: 1,972
Yeah, I agree with you, Kevin. Though I would argue that there is momentum (albeit slow) throughout the Texas metros to seek greater density/walkability in developments outside of the cores. This obviously doesn't apply to all of them - or even possibly the majority of them - but it seems to me that there are more than before. This is especially true in DFW and Houston outside of CBDs. We'll never completely get rid of sprawl, but we can improve what's happening in a lot of areas. This, given the environmental sensitivity of the region, should be one of those areas, of course.
__________________
人无完人
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 4:09 AM
drummer drummer is offline
德克萨斯人 y'all
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Asia by way of Texas
Posts: 1,972
I haven't seen this article posted here yet (forgive me if I missed it).

Quote:
South Austin Development Roundup: There Sure Is a Lot of It, Huh?

It doesn’t take a roundup to know how much development is currently underway south of the river. 78704 has all the streets with “south” in front of their names, and we all know what that means — even though you’ll have to seriously twist my arm before I start saying “SoLa” and “SoFi.”

Vertical mixed-use and multifamily development is rapidly approaching “urban canyon” levels on South Lamar, South First, and South Congress Streets, but there are some other developments tucked away in the ’04 you might not be aware of. Here are some projects on our radar at the moment...
http://austin.towers.net/south-austi...lot-of-it-huh/

What follows is a bunch of photos/descriptions of various developments in South Austin.
__________________
人无完人
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 8:15 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is online now
400 feet tall
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sunshine and taco trucks on every corner
Posts: 43,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by drummer View Post
Yeah, I agree with you, Kevin. Though I would argue that there is momentum (albeit slow) throughout the Texas metros to seek greater density/walkability in developments outside of the cores. This obviously doesn't apply to all of them - or even possibly the majority of them - but it seems to me that there are more than before. This is especially true in DFW and Houston outside of CBDs. We'll never completely get rid of sprawl, but we can improve what's happening in a lot of areas. This, given the environmental sensitivity of the region, should be one of those areas, of course.
People are still really opposed to it, though. That photography page on Facebook, "Over Austin", had a nice aerial photo and some video over Mueller. I just glanced at the comments as I added mine, but one of them commented that it was "too dense". Someone else agreed. Mueller was a major let down. I sort of feel like if you're going to have single family homes that close together that you might as well at least have them be attached or just do an apartment or condo building instead. The thing that bugs me about those properties is that you still have a yard, which seems nice on the surface of it, but that means you still have yard work to do and a placed needed to store your lawn equipment, and with such a small yard it isn't practical. Unless you have the money to hire a lawn service company to come and do it for you, you're going to be stuck with a lawn mower, weed wacker, gas and other stuff to store somewhere, which will probably mean a storage shed that consumes space in what is already a small yard.
__________________
it's just a jump to the left and then a step to the right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 1:23 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
Unless you have the money to hire a lawn service company to come and do it for you,
I imagine many do. With smaller yards, it's cheaper.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
you're going to be stuck with a lawn mower, weed wacker, gas and other stuff to store somewhere, which will probably mean a storage shed that consumes space in what is already a small yard.
With a sufficiently small yard, you can get away with a purely manual reel mower.
You may not even need a weed wacker, and if you do, electrics(even corded) will work fine.


Yards aren't for everyone, but a small plot is pretty low maintenance for those that want one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 1:25 PM
smith_atx smith_atx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
People are still really opposed to it, though. That photography page on Facebook, "Over Austin", had a nice aerial photo and some video over Mueller. I just glanced at the comments as I added mine, but one of them commented that it was "too dense". Someone else agreed. Mueller was a major let down. I sort of feel like if you're going to have single family homes that close together that you might as well at least have them be attached or just do an apartment or condo building instead. The thing that bugs me about those properties is that you still have a yard, which seems nice on the surface of it, but that means you still have yard work to do and a placed needed to store your lawn equipment, and with such a small yard it isn't practical. Unless you have the money to hire a lawn service company to come and do it for you, you're going to be stuck with a lawn mower, weed wacker, gas and other stuff to store somewhere, which will probably mean a storage shed that consumes space in what is already a small yard.
I'm moving to a denser part of the city soon but the new house (detached condo) will have a small yard. It was a requirement for me for the sanity of my dog. I'll either have real grass and trim it with an electric weed-eater or install artificial grass. So I guess my point is, even with a yard you don't have to buy/store all that stuff to take care of it (just one item for me).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 2:14 PM
jbssfelix jbssfelix is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
I imagine many do. With smaller yards, it's cheaper.



With a sufficiently small yard, you can get away with a purely manual reel mower.
You may not even need a weed wacker, and if you do, electrics(even corded) will work fine.


Yards aren't for everyone, but a small plot is pretty low maintenance for those that want one.
In neighborhoods of that density, yard work is often just hired out by the homeowner or as part of the HOA dues. It's easier in those yard sizes just to pay a company $20/mo to come knock out your back yard plus a few others on the block.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 9:52 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Right here, right now
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburban Low-rise
Posts: 5,119
St. Edwards released a master plan for their campus. It includes sidewalks and rather large parking garage that will reduce the amount of on street parking in nearby neighborhoods.

https://communityimpact.com/austin/c...s-master-plan/
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2017, 11:06 PM
drummer drummer is offline
德克萨斯人 y'all
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Asia by way of Texas
Posts: 1,972
I remember the first time I went to NYC (this is relevant to Austin, trust me). I was maybe 12 years old and I went with family. We took a tour of the city and one of the guides was talking about life in such a large city with such density, etc. He made the point that if everyone lived like we did in Texas (because we all have 50+ acres, but the point is still relevant, haha), where would all of these millions of people live? How much land would that take up? Resources? etc.? That's what convinced me that density is good in general - but not necessarily for everyone. I'm not sure I understand the blanket argument against density. IF a person doesn't want to live that way, I'm fine with them in the suburbs or with a larger chunk of land somewhere. However, IF others want to live that way, why on earth would you stop them? If it's in your neighborhood and it adds 10,000 cars per day on the roads (that's a joke directed at the neighbors of One Two East, btw), then I can understand some concern...but do some research and actual critical thinking. I don't get it. Austin and other cities just continue to shoot themselves in the foot. That's why I brought up the idea of slow positive thinking and understanding with regard to denser development in cities in general. It pains me to see how far we need to come, however....
__________________
人无完人
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2017, 2:39 AM
jbssfelix jbssfelix is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by drummer View Post
I remember the first time I went to NYC (this is relevant to Austin, trust me). I was maybe 12 years old and I went with family. We took a tour of the city and one of the guides was talking about life in such a large city with such density, etc. He made the point that if everyone lived like we did in Texas (because we all have 50+ acres, but the point is still relevant, haha), where would all of these millions of people live? How much land would that take up? Resources? etc.? That's what convinced me that density is good in general - but not necessarily for everyone. I'm not sure I understand the blanket argument against density. IF a person doesn't want to live that way, I'm fine with them in the suburbs or with a larger chunk of land somewhere. However, IF others want to live that way, why on earth would you stop them? If it's in your neighborhood and it adds 10,000 cars per day on the roads (that's a joke directed at the neighbors of One Two East, btw), then I can understand some concern...but do some research and actual critical thinking. I don't get it. Austin and other cities just continue to shoot themselves in the foot. That's why I brought up the idea of slow positive thinking and understanding with regard to denser development in cities in general. It pains me to see how far we need to come, however....
Amen.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2017, 7:00 PM
Flatiron's Avatar
Flatiron Flatiron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Austin
Posts: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by The ATX View Post
St. Edwards released a master plan for their campus. It includes sidewalks and rather large parking garage that will reduce the amount of on street parking in nearby neighborhoods.

https://communityimpact.com/austin/c...s-master-plan/
I'm tired of hearing about people complaining about parking by their houses. Unless you don't have a driveway of your own (is this even allowed?) cars should be allowed to park on "your" [taxpayer supported] street.
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 5:41 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.