HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 8:16 PM
Syndic's Avatar
Syndic Syndic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Matt View Post
Actually, the property is subject to multiple restrictions because it is fronts town lake (like North Shore apt.) and shoal creek (like Proper), so it must follow the 70 degree rule on both West and South sides of the property. Therefore any height would be restricted to a sliver in the NE corner.
This seems to only make it likelier that it will be tall. To maximize the potential for the lot, the tower portion will have to be tall and slender.
__________________
Anti-palm trees. Death to I-35!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 8:32 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 2,073
I don't believe so. If they have to adhere to the 70-degree rule from the west and south (at the 45' level), then the max height of this tower would be about 250' (including an angular crown to reach max height).

I have, however, not completed any research into any conditional overlays which may encumber the height of any tower on Block 185. So this 70-degree rule may not apply (fully) or a variance may be obtained.

In any case, I don't see a tower taller than 480' on this site. Within Green Water, a "super tall" would have had to been built where 500 West Second is going up. And we know that's going to be a squatty 397' tower.
__________________
Austin (City): 947,890 +19.93% - '10-'16 | Austin MSA (5 counties): 2,056,405 +19.82% - '10-'16
San Antonio (City): 1,492,510 +12.44% - '10-'16 | San Antonio MSA (8 counties): 2,429,609 +13.40% - '10-'16
AUS-SAT "CSA" (13 counties): 4,486,014 +16.25% - '10-'16 | *SRC: US Census*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 8:40 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 2,073
As an example, the building depicted below was to show developers what a building could look like if they adhered to the "rules" and almost maximizing revenue-generating square footage for the Austin Proper site. This design could have produced a tower near 480' tall.

If the 70-degree rule does apply to Block 185, then you would have to imagine a 70-degree slice through the south façade of this tower...cutting it's height dramatically (as the point in which the two angles would meet reduced the maximum height by roughly 230' or so).

__________________
Austin (City): 947,890 +19.93% - '10-'16 | Austin MSA (5 counties): 2,056,405 +19.82% - '10-'16
San Antonio (City): 1,492,510 +12.44% - '10-'16 | San Antonio MSA (8 counties): 2,429,609 +13.40% - '10-'16
AUS-SAT "CSA" (13 counties): 4,486,014 +16.25% - '10-'16 | *SRC: US Census*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 10:05 PM
austlar1 austlar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,213
Back in the 1950s most cities the size of Austin were thrilled to have a couple of 400 footers. I guess that is no longer the case. Thought this was interesting. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=178409
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 10:41 PM
AustinGoesVertical AustinGoesVertical is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 384
Pure pontificating here, but what is the status with Sand Beach Park, wedged between Cesar Chavez and the part of W 2nd St. that deadends. That is very close to the Seaholm/power plant etc. Would also be in the "Independent Neighborhood." Can that land be privately developed because then in theory this Facebook tower could be going there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 10:45 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio
Posts: 3,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinGoesVertical View Post
Pure pontificating here, but what is the status with Sand Beach Park, wedged between Cesar Chavez and the part of W 2nd St. that deadends. That is very close to the Seaholm/power plant etc. Would also be in the "Independent Neighborhood." Can that land be privately developed because then in theory this Facebook tower could be going there.
That's a publicly owned park and will never be developed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 10:50 PM
AustinGoesVertical AustinGoesVertical is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
That's a publicly owned park and will never be developed.
Okay, thanks. Must be block 185 then.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 11:29 PM
Austin1971 Austin1971 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 510
Facebook should either buy the future TC courthouse site or the old post office and go big. If they truly want to go tall at the 185 site they certainly have the money and clout to change the variance and build it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2015, 11:58 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio
Posts: 3,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin1971 View Post
Facebook should either buy the future TC courthouse site or the old post office and go big. If they truly want to go tall at the 185 site they certainly have the money and clout to change the variance and build it.
I would be opposed to such an action. It would fundamentally alter the visual element along the riverfront.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2015, 12:13 AM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by IluvATX View Post
Does anyone know if it's possible this could be commercial. It goes against the master plan, but I'd think demand would determine the end product.
Absolutely it could be commercial. While it was originally supposed to be residential, I just found this on the RECA's Facbook page:



Link

TBD=to be determined.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2015, 12:28 AM
loonytoony loonytoony is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 58
Block 185

Hi all. Long time lurker. I've seen a lot of recent posting about Block 185 potentially being a FB or office tower. Where did that idea come from? Very curious as I've only ever heard of this being a residential component. Apologies for any formatting issues.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2015, 1:00 AM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Neon Dreams
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: In a dream
Posts: 5,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by loonytoony View Post
Hi all. Long time lurker. I've seen a lot of recent posting about Block 185 potentially being a FB or office tower. Where did that idea come from? Very curious as I've only ever heard of this being a residential component. Apologies for any formatting issues.
It was based on a comment made by a friend of a friend of an anonymous internet poster.
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2015, 1:06 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio
Posts: 3,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hill Country View Post
It was based on a comment made by a friend of a friend of an anonymous internet poster.
A well sourced one, though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2015, 1:11 AM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Neon Dreams
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: In a dream
Posts: 5,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
A well sourced one, though.
And I certainly don't doubt Syndic's sincerity.
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2015, 1:14 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio
Posts: 3,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hill Country View Post
And I certainly don't doubt Syndic's sincerity.
agreed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2015, 1:42 AM
loonytoony loonytoony is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hill Country View Post
It was based on a comment made by a friend of a friend of an anonymous internet poster.
I see. So pretty much a sure thing then
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2015, 2:18 AM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Neon Dreams
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: In a dream
Posts: 5,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by loonytoony View Post
I see. So pretty much a sure thing then
Almost as good as building permit and a rendering!
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2015, 2:41 PM
AusTxDevelopment AusTxDevelopment is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 484
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
Absolutely it could be commercial. While it was originally supposed to be residential, I just found this on the RECA's Facbook page:



Link

TBD=to be determined.
Here is the original massing plan (from Kevin's post on the Greenwater/Seaholm thread back in 2012: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...&postcount=239 ) It was originally going to very much like Northshore, in both height and shape. However it was going to have fewer units.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2015, 1:43 AM
drummer drummer is offline
德克萨斯人 y'all
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Asia by way of Texas
Posts: 2,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hill Country View Post
Almost as good as building permit and a rendering!
Great, so they're starting construction tomorrow then, right? I like how quickly this is going...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2015, 10:33 PM
AusTxDevelopment AusTxDevelopment is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 484
I don't think Block 185 is where Facebook is going. I posted on the Austin Proper thread that there is a very strong rumor that Cielo Property is redeveloping the Austin Music Hall site into a 250,000 square foot office building (see thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...=215343&page=6 ). The massing for this rumored building even shows up in the Proper rendering that's posted on RECA's website, as mentioned and posted in the Proper thread. From the below site plan, Austin Music Hall is north of Proper, and Block 185 is south of Proper. I think the building that Syndic's friend was talking about is Cielo's redevelopment, not Block 185.

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 12:29 PM.

     

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