Austin | Indeed Tower (Block 71) | 542 Feet | 36 Floors | COMPLETE

[GoldenBoot]

If the ~40 story office tower has the same average floor height ratio as Frost (~15'), it would be 624' at 40 stories. Obviously, Frost's average floor height is screwed by it's crown.

I cannot remember...isn't the roof (not the top of the crown) of Frost 444'? If so, taking Frost, again, as an example, the new 40-story office tower could be in the range of 538' without any crown.

[KevinFromTexas]

^The mechanical penthouse rises to 443 feet. The main roof slopes downward from 424 feet to 415 feet, so essentially, the mechanical penthouse is 19 feet tall. The crown sits on the main roof as well as the mechanical penthouse.

[The ATX]

There have been some permits filed for this in the last week, but no site plan yet. A couple of the permits were for drilling on the site. Trammell Crow still hasn't announced their plans for Block 185. This project seems to be moving past that one.

[AustinGoesVertical]

Originally Posted by The ATX

There have been some permits filed for this in the last week, but no site plan yet. A couple of the permits were for drilling on the site. Trammell Crow still hasn't announced their plans for Block 185. This project seems to be moving past that one.

While I was holding out hope for a 60+ story tower here, two towers might make for better density. Two ~25 story ones would have been a let down, but based on the square footage, it seems like we'll see a new tallest office tower if they have high floor heights and any sort of crown. That's a win. I'm assuming this will be a spec office tower, so some solid pre-leasing might bode well for the Travis county lot landing a big time high rise.

Question: Are we projecting about 40-stories based on an assumption about floor plate size, or is there something that references it in the documents. Part of me wants to hold out hope for a skinny tower - albeit unlikely.

[The ATX]

Some math could be done by someone more motivated than me right now to better determine the height. We know the residential unit count and office square footage as well as the lot sizes. That historical building on the corner will apparently remain, so the residential tower will most likely be a point tower on 1/4 of the block on either side of the historical building. That leaves 1/2 of the block (a rectangle ) for the office tower. Of course we don't know if the parking will be all above ground, but based on other projects we could assume five levels of it may be underground. A nice crown would be a bonus.


http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/pr...road-trip.html

[The ATX]

I think we can rule out both of the two proposals that we have renderings for. They don't match the info we now know.

[AustinGoesVertical]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Some math could be done by someone more motivated than me right now to better determine the height. We know the residential unit count and office square footage as well as the lot sizes. That historical building on the corner will apparently remain, so the residential tower will most likely be a point tower on 1/4 of the block on either side of the historical building. That leaves 1/2 of the block (a rectangle ) for the office tower. Of course we don't know if the parking will be all above ground, but based on other projects we could assume five levels of it may be underground. A nice crown would be a bonus.

Nice rationale. In that case, the orientation would probably be similar to Google Tower. I remember talk of a public plaza though too. Of course that may have been wishful thinking here rather than in an article. If that were the case, maybe we'd see 1/4th be the historical building, 1/4th a plaza to maintain some of those trees and then two point towers. Holding out hope.

[wwmiv]

As the above picture makes clear, unfortunately anything here won't make an impact on the skyline unless tall. This parcel fills no major gaps in the skyline at all, and is in fact surrounded in all directions by skyscrapers.

I doubt the office tower, if rectangular (a possibility mentioned above), would rise more than 350 feet. The residential tower probably would be similar in height, even on 1/4 of the block. So, I'm hoping for something decent in design but not expecting much with respect to addition to the skyline. All of the action here is going to be making sure the street level interaction is good and design is visually pleasing.

[The ATX]

It might have a foot print similar to 500 W. 2nd St. That project is 400' tall with with 500,511 sq ft. this one will have 665,000 sq. ft. So it'll be about 1/3 larger. Third + Shoal has 345,000 sq. ft.

[Jdawgboy]

The office tower would have to be taller than 350' with 665,000 sq.f proposed. If the 40 story count is a vague guide at this point in the planning process, then we can assume for now that it will change either increasing or decreasing floors once more details come out.

I'm not sure the entire half block will be used for the office tower anyways. From what I understand, is that they want to create a mixed use block which will also help bridge the gap between the E.6th and W.6th entertainment districts. Then there is the plaza to consider. It wouldn't be a bad idea to incorporate that as part of the entertainment portion.

Given that we already have some numbers on the office tower. 665,000sqf and 40 stories, then chances are that the office tower will only take 1/4 of the block. So depending on floor to ceiling ratio, a 40 story office tower should defiantly make an impact on the skyline from that location being taller than the One American Center and any of the other buildings in that part of the CBD maybe by up to 200'.

[AusTxDevelopment]

I like the night rendering that shows how much taller the proposed building is than 600 Congress - aka the artist formerly known as One American Center but the owners are trying to rebrand it. I realize that rendering was spec work and the tower will ultimately look nothing like it, but I'm hopeful something cooler than a glass box will go there. I have more faith in Trammell Crow's chops than I do Sutton Company tbh.

[The ATX]

What might have been. Nelsen Partners' website now features their proposal for the site which would have been the winner if Endeavor was chosen over Trammell Crow.





http://www.nelsenpartners.com/portfo...idential-tower

[GoldenBoot]

Yes. Awesome design.

However, Trammell's final design could be similar. At least in height. So far they are saying ~40 stories for the office tower (which may have 15,000 more SF than the Endeavor proposal above) plus a ~30-story residential tower. Considering Trammell cannot build on the entire block, these towers could be tall and relatively slender.

[Jdawgboy]

Well considering that the Endevor tower was a single building with hotel/office component and it would have been 46 floors (imagining a 46 story office tower in Austin), if there's going to be two towers with Trammell's proposal, I'm having a hard time picturing 650K possibly more for the office tower portion with only 40 stories.

Looking at the Endevor footprint, it takes up half the block. With two towers, each footprint would have be 1/4th of the block assuming that the plaza will stay. It doesn't add up so I think it's quite possible that the office tower will have more than 40 floors.

Hopefully we will get to see renderings before too long.

[AustinGoesVertical]

That Nelson Partners design is simply amazing. Is it a mere fantasy to hope Trammel Crow topped that?

What if we're looking at a ~30-story (340 ft) residential building and a thin 50+ story (600+ ft office tower). Looking at that the renderings, I don't see how they could fit a 600,000 square ft office tower and another building in there while keeping the historical building without going significantly vertical.

Question Two:

Doesn't Endeavor own the post-office site? Why can't this Nelson Partners design be built in a plethora of other places.

[ahealy]

I loooove all the designs for this site and will take em' all!

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by ahealy

I loooove all the designs for this site and will take em' all!

You've seen them?

[wwmiv]

http://www.utsystem.edu/news/2017/02...s-revenue-city

This is the latest news I can find.

[We vs us]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

http://www.utsystem.edu/news/2017/02...s-revenue-city

This is the latest news I can find.

"The new development, which will maintain the façade of Claudia Taylor Johnson Hall, means that for the first time in more than 100 years, the property will generate property tax revenue for several public entities, including Travis County, the City of Austin, Austin Independent School District, Austin Community College District and Central Health."

That's the first I remember hearing that they'll keep the facade only. I was under the impression that the entire hall wouldn't be touched. If they take the plaza out of commission, too, that's pretty much an entire city block for redevelopment.

More footprint up for grabs than I thought.

[lovethecity]

I actually work in Claudia Taylor Johnson Hall occasionally and the interior has been redone several times and seems to offer no historical value. Much of what exists is remnant of a '70s office building.