AUSTIN | Fairmont Hotel | 595 FEET SPIRE/456 FT ROOF | 37 FLRS | Complete

[IluvATX]

Originally Posted by Austin1971

I think it's a bit deceiving to the general public touting this project as Austin's second tallest building when in reality it's not. They need to release the actual roof height so the public will have a true idea of how tall the building will be and what impact it will have on the city's skyline. I guess Manchester is trying to gin up publicity and touting it as the second tallest when it's really a 450 footer with a big flagpole on top. Just ranting since we've been talking about this project for over 2 years now......

The current second tallest 360 is 480' to top of roof and 581' to top of spire. The Fairmont looks to be similar To those heights and I doubt many people question 360's status. Frost Bank is and will remain second tallest to roof. I like Frost waaaay more than 360, but the spire always counts when measuring total height. BTW I'd like the Fairmont to be taller, but it looks high quality and the curved glass facade is pretty classy. I'd like to see the step ups and east view though.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by Austin1971

I think it's a bit deceiving to the general public touting this project as Austin's second tallest building when in reality it's not. They need to release the actual roof height so the public will have a true idea of how tall the building will be and what impact it will have on the city's skyline. I guess Manchester is trying to gin up publicity and touting it as the second tallest when it's really a 450 footer with a big flagpole on top. Just ranting since we've been talking about this project for over 2 years now......

Even provided with the information, I don't trust the general public's judgement or knowledge on the subject to really have a viable view on it. I mean, a perfect example of this is when NIMBY/neighborhood groups attack new projects for being too tall and come up with some kind of rendering of their own to show (inaccurately) how the building will impact the skyline. Most people have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to scale or the typical floor-to-floor heights of different building types.

You would be surprised. My mom once was even convinced that the Frost Bank Tower and The Austonian were the same height because they appeared that way from I-35. Obviously perspective was at play there.

Another memory I have is when I asked someone at the front desk of a hotel in San Antonio how tall the building was, they gave me quite the wrong answer. It was a 12-story hotel, and with some fuzzy math the girl told me, with a straight face, that the building was 1,200 feet tall. I just nodded and walked away as politely as I could.

Anyway, architects have been adding spires to their buildings for hundreds of years. Even the Empire State Building and Chrysler Building have them. The Chrysler Building wouldn't even be above 1,000 feet without its spire. I agree this spire could be more of an integral part of the building's design like 360's is or the Chrysler Building's, but it is what it is. As long as the spire isn't used for communication (it doesn't appear to be) then it probably will be counted. Antennas get removed every now and then. An example of this is San Antonio's Tower Life Building, which had its antenna removed a few years ago and replaced with a replica of the flagpole that was on the building more than 50 years ago. They also restored part of the building which had to be modified for that gargantuan antenna.

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Another memory I have is when I asked someone at the front desk of a hotel in San Antonio how tall the building was, they gave me quite the wrong answer. It was a 12-story hotel, and with some fuzzy math the girl told me, with a straight face, that the building was 1,200 feet tall. I just nodded and walked away as politely as I could.

Yes, I believe that's the same hotel I stayed in. Didn't care much for the echo effect with those 98' ceilings, and the overhead lighting was utterly useless. On the plus side, I've never stayed in another hotel that offered such great indoor bird-watching, although that came with its own predictable down side.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by IluvATX

Frost Bank is and will remain second tallest to roof.

Actually Frost does not have the second tallest roof height. Kevin will be able to confirm but from what I remember the top floor sits exactly at 400 feet with the roof being roughly around 420 give or take a foot or two. The crown adds another 90 to 100 feet giving it's total height which again Kevin can confirm because I've seen two different heights listed, one as 515ft the other 520ft. I think it has to do with what side of the building is measured as the ground elevation changes.

As far as spires go I don't mind them if they fit with the architectural design of the building. Buildings like the Empire State building and Chrystler Building. I agree that the spire on 360 works and enhances it's architecture.

As far as this Fairmont design goes, it doesn't fit. If the spire is built up from the structure itself such as the above mentioned buildings, thats one thing but if it looks like it's just plopped up on a flat roof with no transition then that's when I think it looks ridiculous.

[IluvATX]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Actually Frost does not have the second tallest roof height. Kevin will be able to confirm but from what I remember the top floor sits exactly at 400 feet with the roof being roughly around 420 give or take a foot or two. The crown adds another 90 to 100 feet giving it's total height which again Kevin can confirm because I've seen two different heights listed, one as 515ft the other 520ft. I think it has to do with what side of the building is measured as the ground elevation changes.

As far as spires go I don't mind them if they fit with the architectural design of the building. Buildings like the Empire State building and Chrystler Building. I agree that the spire on 360 works and enhances it's architecture.

As far as this Fairmont design goes, it doesn't fit. If the spire is built up from the structure itself such as the above mentioned buildings, thats one thing but if it looks like it's just plopped up on a flat roof with no transition then that's when I think it looks ridiculous.

I just figured the top of Frost's crown would be the peak of its roof. Aren't heights usually listed as top floor, main roof, mechanical roof, roof, then tip?

[arodela1]

Will Fairmont Hotel be 37, 47 of 50 stories high?

[Austin1971]

Anybody recall what the footprint for the JW is? It looks to be somewhat larger than the 1.74 acre footprint that the Fairmont has. Also I wonder if there will still be the 100+ luxury suites still include in the redesign with the separate entrance?

[Tech House]

Originally Posted by arodela1

Will Fairmont Hotel be 37, 47 of 50 stories high?

37 seems to be the final number. I had forgotten that there was an initial plan for 2 50-floor towers! Ground-breaking is only a week away!
http://austin.culturemap.com/news/re...breaking-date/

[KevinFromTexas]

Yes, the block that the JW Marriott sits on is larger than the block this hotel is planned for. All of the blocks that face Congress are larger.

The standard block size in downtown Austin is 275 by 275 feet, and this one will be that size. The block sizes along Congress are 275 by 335 feet.

Now of course, the JW Marriott doesn't cover its entire block since there are those old small buildings that remained on the block. I'm measuring the building now with Google Earth.

The Congress facing side is roughly 211 feet long.

It's 275 feet facing Brazos.

It's 335 feet east to west along 2nd Street.

The notch on 3rd Street where those old buildings are is 75 feet wide and 160 feet long.

Anyway, I've sent an email to Gensler today to find out for sure how tall the Fairmont will be.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by Tech House

37 seems to be the final number. I had forgotten that there was an initial plan for 2 50-floor towers! Ground-breaking is only a week away!
http://austin.culturemap.com/news/re...breaking-date/

The two 50-story tower plan was for the site where Millennium Rainey is going up.

[Austin1971]

Any news on the heights? Are they going to have a ceremonial groundbreaking on November 3rd? Can't wait to see the big Cats tearing up that parking lot.

[KevinFromTexas]

Ok, so I've been sending emails to Gensler and Manchester trying to get the heights. Someone from Manchester came back this morning with info from Gensler. The heights are:

595 feet to the spire. She said the spire is architectural, meaning no utility (communication) uses, so it will count toward the height.

456 feet to the "crown" - this should be the top of the mechanical penthouse.

It's listed as 37 floors, but in reality there are only 36 actual occupied floors. The reason for the discrepancy is it's tradition in the hotel industry to skip the 13th floor. So they go from 12 straight to 14.

It will also have 4 levels underground for parking. She said is breaks ground in November.

She said the design is complete, but that a different architecture firm is handling the skybridge to the convention center.

I'd still like to try to get the elevations from the city.

[Austin1971]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Ok, so I've been sending emails to Gensler and Manchester trying to get the heights. Someone from Manchester came back yesterday with info from Gensler. The heights are:

595 feet to the spire.

456 feet to the "crown" - this should be the top of the mechanical penthouse.

It's listed as 37 floors, but in reality there are only 36 actual occupied floors. The reason for the discrepancy is it's tradition in the hotel industry to skip the 13th floor. So they go from 12 straight to 14.

It will also have 4 levels underground for parking. She said is breaks ground in November.

She said the design is complete, but that a different architecture firm is handling the skybridge to the convention center.

I'd still like to try to get the elevations from the city.

Thanks for the info Kevin.

[KevinFromTexas]

While shorter, this will still be our 2nd tallest counting the spire. And it'll actually have the 4th highest mechanical roof - even higher than that of the Frost Bank Tower.

[tie_guy]

This is one of those cases where the spire looks like an antenna. I have never truly believed WTC is the tallest building in the western hemisphere (Sears Tower FTW!) because that spire also looks like an antenna (regardless of its function). To me, a spire is something like belongs to the structure, so to speak, like the Chrysler building. Officially will be the second tallest in Austin, but it will never mentally be taller than The W to me. They did the same thing to the Trump Tower in Chicago. The official height of that building is also to the "spire", not the roof/mechanical penthouse, eventhough it looks EXACTLY like an antenna, but at least that building is the second tallest in Chicago regardless of the spire so I wasn't bothered.

At any rate, super excited for this to break ground. It's going to look much taller from the east than other buildings (like the Four Seasons) due to it's very eastern location.

[Jdawgboy]

From a distance, spire or not, it will look like all the other mid 400 foot range buildings.

In the end, I am glad this is being built only just to vindicate to those who said it wasn't going to be built at all. We do need the hotel space and it will go a long way to increase our convention industry. It's amazing that the convention center is only used at 40% of its full capacity. That means it's going to be awhile before we need an expansion on it.

[midtownstarbucky]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

From a distance, spire or not, it will look like all the other mid 400 foot range buildings.

In the end, I am glad this is being built only just to vindicate to those who said it wasn't going to be built at all. We do need the hotel space and it will go a long way to increase our convention industry. It's amazing that the convention center is only used at 40% of its full capacity. That means it's going to be awhile before we need an expansion on it.

Very sound point.

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

It's amazing that the convention center is only used at 40% of its full capacity. That means it's going to be awhile before we need an expansion on it.

I was thinking about this the other day. At some point it will need to expand. However, the city will have to pay a pretty penny for the land or fight landowners when they try to take their land via eminent domain.

The two logical directions for expansion would be west (where the restaurants are between C. Chavez and 3rd Street) and to the east (north of the Waller Creek and south of 4th Street). They cannot go north or south.

[lzppjb]

The mayoral candidates were asked about a convention center expansion. I think all of them supported it and said it needs to be a plan for 20 years into the future (it's 22 years old now). Cole mentioned the possibility of needing to relocate historic buildings in order to expand (would that be North?) and closing off more streets.

[hookem]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Ok, so I've been sending emails to Gensler and Manchester trying to get the heights. Someone from Manchester came back this morning with info from Gensler. The heights are:

595 feet to the spire. She said the spire is architectural, meaning no utility (communication) uses, so it will count toward the height.

Thanks for getting this info. You should figure out how to be paid for this work