AUSTIN | 300 Colorado | 446 FEET | 32 FLOORS | COMPLETE

[wwmiv]

I'm just going to reiterate others above in that this one has a large blank wall. That doesn't usually end up as aesthetically pleasing.

[KevinFromTexas]

I'm hopeful this one will be nice. It seems to have some interesting details. A rendering would be nice, as we still haven't seen one yet.

[Syndic]

Hmm, this one seems to have gone under my radar. I guess I was getting it confused with the travesty that is 405 Colorado.

But this is way different! This looks to be a huge project that will be very visible in our skyline. That's exciting. However, it looks to be pretty boxy and unremarkable right now, from the sketches. Hopefully, there is some kind of defining feature to it, when it's all said and done.

Either way, due to its location and height, yeah, this is easily one of the most important projects in Austin now.

[MichaelB]

Happy for this one to NOT happen. Not worth it.
Bland. Boxy.
I think it's time we wait for building that are more than just tall.

[The ATX]

I'm withholding judgement until I see a rendering. This could be a twin to Fifth & West, since the size, developer and architect are one in the same. That would be far from terrible. On a side note, I recently had dinner at Sullivan's for the first time, and it was pretty damn good.

[Nickelplate]

So no one bit on my sarcasm but in a way the comments after supported it. Hopefully we can get some quality buildings in the future. Austin deserves it.

[myBrain]

http://austin.towers.net/details-arr...lorado-street/

[clubtokyo]

518ft! Nice!

[Jdawgboy]

Man, they really aren't trying in any way to push the boundaries of design. Looks like a cross between the W and 3rd @ Colorado. Are we forever doomed to be stuck with boxy flat tops?

[The ATX]

44-stories and 518 feet is better than expected. The link below the renderings has a lot of info from the Design Commission.



http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=280776

[AustinGoesVertical]

This was over a year ago now but remember when we saw just a street level rendering with just 6-8 floors visible of a corner high rise by GDA that just said "Austin, TX" We never knew the site and just forgot about it but the base of this looks very similar to that older rendering.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by AustinGoesVertical

This was over a year ago now but remember when we saw just a street level rendering with just 6-8 floors visible of a corner high rise by GDA that just said "Austin, TX" We never knew the site and just forgot about it but the base of this looks very similar to that older rendering.

I remember that one, but it was a different corner based on the background building. But it was GDA, and they seem to have a consistent look to their residential towers.

[AustinGoesVertical]

Originally Posted by The ATX

I remember that one, but it was a different corner based on the background building. But it was GDA, and they seem to have a consistent look to their residential towers.

Found it...

Originally Posted by LoneStarMike

What proposed building is this?



I found it on this page at GDA Architects. (Bottom row, far left) It just says Mixed Use Tower, but the url of the image is:

http://gda-architects.com/images/gda-6th---lavaca.jpg

At first I thought it might might be a different rendering for Block 71, but based on Lavaca Plaza behind it, it looks like it's something that is/was planned for the south side of Sixth St between Guadalupe & Lavaca Streets across from 300 W. Sixth.

This one... looks very similar and same architect.

[AustinGoesVertical]

The hobby building looks to be in the right location to make that the 3rd and Colorado site but the white building with the sky bridge is on 5th, isn't it? So it's that building that seems to be place wrong.

[Jdawgboy]

They should at the very least incorporate the existing building into the design.

That location deserves a more striking tower IMO.

Probably not everyone will like it but I'd love for a tower like this to be built DT. This is what I mean by pushing the boundaries of design.



I have no idea what building this is, the architect or the source, I took screen shot one day when I came across it. Maybe someone will know something about it.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

They should at the very least incorporate the existing building into the design.

That location deserves a more striking tower IMO.

Probably not everyone will like it but I'd love for a tower like this to be built DT. This is what I mean by pushing the boundaries of design.



I have no idea what building this is, the architect or the source, I took screen shot one day when I came across it. Maybe someone will know something about it.

A Google image search shows that it is in China. That would be awesome.

https://www.google.com/search?q=tian...w=1920&bih=950

[KevinFromTexas]

I like it. I'm glad it's not another broadly faced (east/west) building like the W is, otherwise that area of the skyline would have appeared walled off from the south. That would have been made worse considering we're liking going to see a large east/west tower at 308 Guadalupe (the old county courthouse block) on the other side of the W. That curtain wall "spire" on the south side means glass, which will be lit nicely no doubt, and I would definitely expect some accent lighting on that terrace overhanging the main roof. The amenity deck on the podium is also at 124 feet, no doubt higher than the roof of AMLI Downtown across the street, so there will likely be some twinkly patio type lights poking above its roof at night making that area a little more interesting at night. This is going to be a nice tower. Too bad it's not pink, though. Austin definitely has a favorite color.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I like it. I'm glad it's not another broadly faced (east/west) building like the W is, otherwise that area of the skyline would have appeared walled off from the south. That would have been made worse considering we're liking going to see a large east/west tower at 308 Guadalupe (the old county courthouse block) on the other side of the W. That curtain wall "spire" on the south side means glass, which will be lit nicely no doubt, and I would definitely expect some accent lighting on that terrace overhanging the main roof. The amenity deck on the podium is also at 124 feet, no doubt higher than the roof of AMLI Downtown across the street, so there will likely be some twinkly patio type lights poking above its roof at night making that area a little more interesting at night. This is going to be a nice tower. Too bad it's not pink, though. Austin definitely has a favorite color.

Now that's a color I can jump on board with. Yay for Pink!

[The ATX]

This project may have some push back in getting the needed 8:1 to 25:1 F.A.R. increase to move forward. This is from the Design Commission backup file:

We conclude that the project, as presented, is in substantial compliance with the
Urban Design Guidelines. However, we do have concerns that center on the
potential historic significance of the existing building. Research has indicated that
the building is considerably older than indicated by the applicant. The Historic
Preservation Office has concluded that the building is approximately 92 years old
and has a rich history. Given this, and the DAP priority, it should be made clear that
our conclusion of substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines does not
advocate that we support the demolition of the existing building. We would defer
this decision to the recommendation of the Historic Landmark Commission.

And this:

There are no Community Benefits being
provided onsite. The applicant has opted to pay the fee-in-lieu. Furthermore, the
relationship of the existing building to the Warehouse District, and potential for
local historical designation, as described in the Downtown Austin Plan (DAP) is of
note. The existing building is identified as a Priority in the DAP. The Working Group
also found the lack of a detailed landscape plan made it difficult to fully envision the
streetscape. Lastly, rooftop amenities are of private use only.
We are also curious about the perceived reduction of public benefits when a Great
Streets streetscape is already in place and existing trees are to be replaced with
younger ones. A future project could potentially seek to replace more mature
streetscape trees to allow the construction staging area.

Design Commission Backup File:
http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=280776

[ahealy]

Yes! Love the height and density for this area. BUT, this design needs something more. It's pretty basic to be that close to the Austonian