HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted May 23, 2008, 9:40 PM
Saddle Man Saddle Man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,154
Very true M1EK. Very true.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted May 25, 2008, 9:51 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: AUSTIN
Posts: 36,333
Ok, so here is the first round of photos of the models. They actually weren't models, just posters. I've mixed in a few of the actual renderings (screen shots) from the PDF file presentation.

Stratus Properties Inc.

Building heights:

650 foot, 54 floor residential tower
425 foot, 40 floor residential tower
385 foot, 36 floor tower
292 foot, 26 floor office tower
257 foot, 20 floor residential tower
223 foot, 18 to 20 floor hotel tower

Overview:












223 foot, 18-20 story hotel tower.


425 foot, 40-story residential tower.




292 foot, 26-story office tower.


257 foot, 23-story residential tower.


650 foot, 54-story residential tower.








Museum Tower (Intel Site) included in the rendering. The tower behind and to the right is the 40-story Block 51 tower.
__________________
I like the Raleighs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted May 26, 2008, 2:26 AM
greenbelt's Avatar
greenbelt greenbelt is offline
hike and bike
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 344
Gosh Almighty. My head is spinning, just now seeing this link. Can you say downtown Dubai It would be great to see an HEB or Central Market downtown. I'd venture to say it would have way more walking traffic from the area condos than WF's. The concentration of towers in that vicinity along with all in the Rainy district leaves Whole Foods as more of a West Austin deal.

I'd also like to see a more family centered idea, as in Vancouver. As on site child care (extra $ of course), a play area for kids/families, etc...maybe some sort of incentive for families. I read a Vancouver article on urban family's there and the parents by having on site child care and certain security measures, can walk right out on the town for a great evening and enjoy the city without the commute. I then could see us moving downtown play'in the Jefferson's theme song (yeah we mov'in on up...). That would be a super cool day.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted May 26, 2008, 2:46 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: AUSTIN
Posts: 36,333
By the way, this rendering that I posted, shows the Museum Tower. I'm loving the design now. I have to say, I hated the design before. I was really let down about the height. I wanted no less than 600 feet, but was hoping for 700 or more. Now though it looks like the Green site will have something big, so I'm sort of over that by now. May even taller than what they've shown. Who knows. I wasn't crazy at first about the boxy design of the Museum Tower with so much glass, and not a lot of character. But I have to say, if this is the direction they're going, then it'll be beautiful. Really like the facade here. That crystal blue color. Also, check out the design for the Central Library. Very, very cool. This rendering also shows the Seaholm Hotel & Condo tower to the left. And if you look you can see the base of Spring, as well as the Gables apartment building. Even the federal courthouse. Incredible amount of projects.
__________________
I like the Raleighs

Last edited by KevinFromTexas; May 26, 2008 at 8:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted May 26, 2008, 3:54 AM
greenbelt's Avatar
greenbelt greenbelt is offline
hike and bike
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 344
This is the most detail I've seen all in one image. Awesome stuff. So what's the timing for some of these? Gables, Spring, etc... are in the works, but what about the Central Library, Museum Tower, Water treatment, Seaholm hotel complex --- those projects. Kevin if anyone knows you do. What's the magic 8 ball say?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted May 26, 2008, 2:07 PM
SecretAgentMan's Avatar
SecretAgentMan SecretAgentMan is offline
CIA since 2003
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 331
Elevate the debate

-

Last edited by SecretAgentMan; Feb 16, 2009 at 7:00 PM. Reason: Classified
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted May 26, 2008, 5:48 PM
MichaelB MichaelB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North edge of Downtown
Posts: 2,321
SecretAgentMan.... thanks for posting that criteria. Fortunately it looks like we have several projects that are by companies that will do well in the "Team Qualifications" and have good designs. But it is certainly set up in a way that someone could rock all the qualidications and have a crap design and get the gig. That would suck.

Still liking Stratus the best in terms of design.... need to look closer.... Do like the fact that Tramell Crow has all the solar panels...especially on the transformers that will be left.... but don't like how homogenous it looks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted May 26, 2008, 7:41 PM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is offline
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,697
I love it, very impressive.
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted May 28, 2008, 6:02 PM
tildahat tildahat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 193
I'm glad that Stratus does more than just <80% affordable housing, with "workforce housing" for 80%-120% MFI, though only 5% of units. And I'm glad that they have some more reserved for people above that level.

But does anyone else find calling 220% of MFI, "moderate" a little off. I mean by definition if you make 100% MFI + $1 your household makes more than half of the other households in the area. If you are making 220% MFI you are making well more than double what households who are already in the top half are making. That makes you affluent by any sane person's measure, not "moderate income".

The fact that 220% MFI might need set asides to afford it just shows the degree to which we are not meeting demand for urban living. The ONLY way we'll ever do that is to allow infill in the neighborhoods around downtown too...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted May 28, 2008, 6:29 PM
ATXboom ATXboom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,257
^^^ strongly agree on your last point Tilda.

The economics of downtown property simply don't allow for affordable housing on that spot. What we can do as a Community is to get the best tax return possible on downtown land and use the majority of that to fund low/mid rise affordable infill in the neighborhoods that surround downtown.

The only thing stopping this type of thinking would be Nimby's and folks like laura morrison. Really too bad for the greater community.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted May 29, 2008, 1:15 PM
priller's Avatar
priller priller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,894
Hi guys, back in town from vacation (Cabo!). Wow, the Stratus project looks really nice. I'll definitely go by City Hall today and take a look at the models. This is stunning:



I know I gripe about random bits on buildings but in this case I think it looks great. And I love the burgundy color. Is there another skyscraper that color?

The word that comes to my mind when I look at this proposal is "sophisticated". Man, I would love to see this become reality.

I really liked seeing the models of the other proposed buildings, too. If the model of the Museum Tower is accurate, I'm finally excited about it. I hope the Block 52 proposal is accurate, too. We need something a little different from Novare.

The Stratus guys went all out on this proposal. Great job!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted May 29, 2008, 1:31 PM
chancla chancla is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 105
I know I'm in the minority on this but I'm not on-board with the Stratus 650 footer. It looks too weird. What's with the "diving board" platform on the top?

Or is that the place where God is supposed to rest his iron so as not to burn his ironing board?

The rest of the project looks good, though. I LOVE the downtown HEB.

My pick as the best plan is the Trammel Crow project. I think they nailed it. I love the point towers to the west with the solar panels and unlike some on the board, I love the overall unified look of the project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted May 29, 2008, 1:45 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: AUSTIN
Posts: 36,333
Goldenboot tells me Trammell Crow's proposal includes a 675 foot, 55-story tower, and a 600 foot, 52-story tower. So if it's about height, they've got plenty too. Designwise and for usage though, I'm rooting for Stratus. It's like we're getting a new downtown on just 5 blocks of land.
__________________
I like the Raleighs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted May 29, 2008, 4:42 PM
jmanh jmanh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 53
I realize that if height is your thing then undoubtedly the Stratus proposal will be to your liking. However, from my perspective, those huge towers appear rather cold and uninviting. They seem to announce: "Stay away -- this is the realm of the rich condo owners."

I prefer the Catellus design -- I like the way it positions two relatively small buildings on Cesar Chavez in a way that frames Nueces and virtually beckons one to venture down the street and check out what's there.

Well, to each his own.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted May 29, 2008, 4:56 PM
Raining Inside Raining Inside is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: ASATex Megaplex
Posts: 528
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmanh View Post
I realize that if height is your thing then undoubtedly the Stratus proposal will be to your liking. However, from my perspective, those huge towers appear rather cold and uninviting. They seem to announce: "Stay away -- this is the realm of the rich condo owners."

I prefer the Catellus design -- I like the way it positions two relatively small buildings on Cesar Chavez in a way that frames Nueces and virtually beckons one to venture down the street and check out what's there.

Well, to each his own.
Yeah, you're right to each their own. I find the tall towers more beckoning than the short ones.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted May 29, 2008, 5:11 PM
MichaelB MichaelB is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North edge of Downtown
Posts: 2,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by priller View Post
I know I gripe about random bits on buildings but in this case I think it looks great. And I love the burgundy color. Is there another skyscraper that color?

The word that comes to my mind when I look at this proposal is "sophisticated". Man, I would love to see this become reality.
you are funny..... we still need to do that downtown walk... a few beers and talk about design!... anyway.... I wonder if what you are seeing as burgundy is copper? And, yes.... I love that building.... of course that big ass cantilever (cantileverus maximus!) on top is probably not possible! (well, maybe possible, but not affordable!)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted May 29, 2008, 5:34 PM
ATXboom ATXboom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,257
Pics, etc: http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrob...d=oid%3A629487


Green With Ambition
Why we need a master developer – not a project developer – to mastermind Seaholm East
BY KATHERINE GREGOR


Catellus: HOK Planning Group, Environmental Resources Management, RVI Planning + Landscape ArchitectureCan we have it all?

Watching the five idea-rich pitches made last Thursday by the five redevelopment teams wooing City Council to win the Green Water Treatment Plant job, many viewers were excited, even dazzled, by all the public-benefit goodies proposed. Create a "magic" people-place inclusive of everyone? Turn the entire Seaholm East District into a giant solar power plant by cladding the buildings in photovoltaic panels? Cool! Add affordable housing, senior housing, and a subsidized child-care center? Sweet. Create a carbon-neutral model of sustainable development? Wrap the ugly Austin Energy transformers in an arcade sheltering farmers' and artists' markets? Fatten the city budget with $7 million in new annual tax revenues? Sign us up!

With its guiding vision for the project, City Council wisely alerted developers in February that it seeks a project of "unparalleled excellence and high values." The city's request for proposals challenged master developers to creatively compete with one another to propose the most attractive "community values, public facilities, and/or public benefits." Key goals established for the roughly 6-acre redevelopment: first-rate urban design and architecture, public spaces, sustainable/green building, pedestrian/bike/transit connectivity, ample parking, affordable and work-force housing. All of those Austin values – and other intriguing possibilities – are captured in the five proposals from submitting teams.




Forest City Residential Group: Andrews Urban, Bosse & Turner, Black + Vernooy, Gromatzky Dupree & AssociatesUnfortunately the public can't see the developers' corresponding financial proposals, which include competing bids to buy the city-owned land – appraised at more than $55 million. To some, excluding citizens from this financial analysis represents a troubling lack of transparency. Why sell off our land at all? To get it on the tax rolls – 40% of the annual millions in tax revenue a successful redevelopment could generate would go to the city's Housing Trust Fund. (Alternately, council could have chosen to keep at least part of the land and build needed affordable housing right on the site.) Worth noting: The city has retained consultantEconomic & Planning Systemsto provide a standardized "net present value analysis" of the financial terms of each proposal – an apples-to-apples comparison. EPS lists two proposers – Catellus and Forest City – as clients; the consultant assured the city it was not on their teams and did not assist in their submittals.

At first blush, each of the developer pitches sound peachy. But in sifting deeper, a clear and critical distinction emerges among the proposers. Only one candidate is a true master developer: Catellus. The city had anticipated receiving more proposals from national master developers than materialized; ideally, the city would have several to select from. (While Ohio-based Forest City has done plenty of land development, the core of its $10 billion business is real estate.) Catellus has earned Austin's trust as the master developer for Mueller, a complex public-private redevelopment unfolding to local and national accolades. Mueller has been held up as a model for Green, because of the deep and successful way it embodies our community values.

The Seaholm District site (which includes both the Green Water Treatment Plant and an adjacent Austin Energy property) is nowhere near as large as Mueller – only about 6 acres to Mueller's 711 acres. But Seaholm East makes up in pivotal significance what it lacks in raw acreage. The finesse with which this site gets developed will affect a huge chunk of Down­town. It's at the hub of so much: the Second Street retail district, soon-to-be redeveloped Seaholm proper, Austin's new central library, Shoal Creek and a potential greenbelt park along it, Lady Bird Lake, a transit and Great Streets corridor, an emerging arts district. For the good of Austin – and precisely because council has identified so many public values and goals for this project – Seaholm East cries out for a master developer, rather than a conventional profit-driven development team.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Retain Our Leverage
Here's the key distinction. A project developer negotiates with the city just once, in order to win the job and the land. If it purchases the land outright, a developer's financial motivation to fulfill community values – i.e., spend money on expensive things that benefit all of us – changes the moment the ink is dry on the deal. From that point forward, its primary mission is to deliver a financial return on the project. Its interest is containing costs – which can lead to cutting corners. If the city sells in haste, it may repent at leisure, after it's lost its bargaining leverage.




SIVE Urban II Inc.: Simmons Vedder Partners, Cotera+Reed Architects, Monarch Consulting (LEED Design)A pure master developer, on the other hand – one not profiting directly from developing individual projects on the site – is in an altogether different role. Catellus said it would partner with the city to ensure that its interests remain aligned with the public interest throughout the redevelopment. (At Mueller, Catellus has continued to raise the bar for affordable housing and sustainable building practices with each phase, beyond its contractual obligation.) Somewhat akin to a general contractor, a master developer first creates a master plan and detailed design guidelines, then invites "vertical developers" and architectural teams to bid competitively on individual projects. That creates a fresh opportunity to negotiate for maximum public benefits on each building and public space. As project goals and conditions evolve over time, Austin retains its leverage and flexibility.

The downside: A master developer must get paid, too. To avoid a financial drag, the burden is on the master developer to create value (and enhanced property values, plus creative financing structures) that fully compensates for its fee. In its pitch, Catellus promised a transparent, open-book fee approach.

A related key financial distinction: Under a public-private partnership agreement (such as the one Catellus proposes), individual parcels are subsequently "flipped" to individual project developers. If the value of the property has increased, which is likely, the city and its residents share in the bounty. That's not true with a one-time sale.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Limit Our Risk
The five Downtown blocks of Seaholm East easily could take seven to 10 years (or more) to fully develop, depending on market conditions. On each block, one or more "vertical developers" and any number of architects could take on individual projects. In fact, the more architectural variety the better; the best solution will have a mix of building types and styles, like a cityscape that's evolved over time. A master developer, under a public-private partnership agreement, would remain Austin's advocate, pushing each project developer to give back more.




Stratus: AMLI Residential, Canyon-Johnson Urban Funds, PageSoutherlandPage, Center for Maximum Potential Building SystemsThis approach also would demonstrate greater prudence on the city's part. Commit­ting the entire project now to a single developer-architect team is far riskier. The city could significantly limit the jeopardy of a stalled, delayed, compromised, or bankrupt project by engaging a master developer, staying involved as a partner, and spreading the multiple projects across several developer/architect teams. (This is what's happening at Mueller.) If one developer falters, we haven't put all our eggs in one basket.

(Forest City made unsettling references throughout its presentation to its many large projects nationally that had run in to trouble. In its pitch here, the behemoth company appeared wedded only superficially to its local partners and talked more about itself than about Austin values.)

More risk management: The local architects competing for Green don't have anywhere near the capacity required to execute an entire district on this scale. While architects Cotera+Reed, PageSoutherlandPage, and Black + Vernooy each could do well on one project at a time, none could come close to handling a half-dozen high-rises and public spaces simultaneously. (On the former Concordia University site, PSP – the largest of the three – became overwhelmed recently by multiple projects. That firm's weakness as a master planner – e.g., an unresolved site plan that left too many details unaddressed – also contributed to the long, painful neighborhood battle over Concordia's redevelopment.) Perhaps the overwhelming scope explains the monolithic, uniform architecture shown for the entire district by Cotera+Reed – a look unhappily reminiscent of failed utopian modernism.

Mithun, a Seattle sustainable-design leader (on the Trammell Crow team), would be an exciting match for Austin, but as local team member Perry Lorenz clarified, Mithun was cast only as the master "vision" architect, which is smart. Several proposers said the city's superfast selection process (and the need for a master plan) had prevented working out little details like who would design the actual buildings.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Make a Thoughtful Plan



Trammell Crow: Constructive Ventures Inc., USAA Real Estate Co., MithunDid we mention a master plan? That critical component still is missing. Critics such as City Council candidate Laura Morrison have called for a community planning charrette for Green. Catellus committed to an inclusive, consensus-based planning process in crafting the master plan. Greg Weaver, who earned respect leading Catellus' initial phase at Mueller, also committed to hands-on leadership for Green. Weaver noted that the company's corporate parent, ProLogis, had embraced innovative sustainable development – a key part of the council vision.

For the Green proposal, Catellus is teamed with HOK Planning Group to create the master plan. (ROMA Design Group, which played this role on Mueller, was not a candidate due to its work on the Downtown Austin Plan.) In presenting to council, Colin Greene of HOK spoke engagingly about optimizing "360 degrees of opportunity" on the site and creating a place that "exudes a memory that's enduring." He laid out four themes for a master site plan: context, connectivity, authenticity, and the public realm. Sketches showed features like a new Second Street bridge over the river coming into a "portal" – "the most spectacular civic moment." It aspired to a public realm with an intense, engaging social life: tree-shaded, comfortable, relaxed, and inclusive.

Interviewed after the presentation, Weaver said the computer-simulated image Catellus showed was "very conceptual." (See it and a slow-to-load virtual tour at www.meetaustingreen.com.) The scheme shows five high-rise towers of 16 to 36 stories over midrise bases. Weaver said the image was offered only to help Austinites envision the site's potential. If selected, the Catellus/HOK team would start from scratch with a full-scale master-planning process – again, to include substantial community input. After finalizing a master plan, they would invite developer-architect teams to bid (competitively) on pieces of the project. Local developers submitting proposals – Constructive Ventures, Andrews Urban, Stratus Properties, Simmons Vedder Partners, Trammell Crow – and other firms each could play an important role. So could proposed team members such as HEB and local building-integrated photovoltaic innovator HelioVolt. Certainly, it would be gracious of the city to invite all proposers to the table, given their expensive investment in generating so many terrific creative ideas for Seaholm East.

That's Austin's best shot at "having it all."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your Thoughts?
Hurry – the public's window to comment on the five Seaholm East proposals closes Sunday, June 1. Austinites can review the developer presentations on the city's website (www.ci.austin.tx.us/seaholm/green.htm) and find a link to Channel 6 rebroadcasts. Or view the presentation boards on display in the City Hall atrium and media room, then submit comments on the form provided online. Ideas that prove most popular with citizens will be considered for the final project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted May 29, 2008, 5:46 PM
jmanh jmanh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raining Inside View Post
Yeah, you're right to each their own. I find the tall towers more beckoning than the short ones.
Do the tall towers beckon you to venture inside the development? Or do they beckon you to gaze at them from a distance?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted May 29, 2008, 5:47 PM
Raining Inside Raining Inside is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: ASATex Megaplex
Posts: 528
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmanh View Post
Do the tall towers beckon you to venture inside the development? Or do they beckon you to gaze at them from a distance?
Both.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted May 29, 2008, 7:42 PM
tildahat tildahat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 193
Recycling my comment from the Chron website regarding Gregor's article:

Um...there has only been one phase at Mueller so far. And it had about 19% affordable housing. They'll have to do over 25% in the future just to meet their minimum. Plus there is a HUGE gap between the affordable and market housing which in practice means middle class families are excluded from Mueller. Sure, this might be addressed in Phase 2, but I hope no one is holding their breath...
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 1:41 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.