AUSTIN | Block 16 | 590 Feet | 41 Floors | Approved

The ATX · #1 Posted **Oct 1, 2019, 8:12 PM**

Here's part of the ABJ story:

Quote:

Another high-rise office tower could be in the works for downtown Austin.

Austin-based Manifold Real Estate and other partners have proposed a tower for a prominent site just west of the Austin Convention Center.

A site plan application filed with the city of Austin Development Services Department on Sept. 25 lists the address for the office building as 201 San Jacinto Blvd., the current site of P.F. Chang’s restaurant. An actual site plan, which could shed more light on the project, hasn’t been filed yet.

That entire half-block that includes P.F. Chang's, Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Café Blue is owned by longtime real estate developer Sandy Gottesman and some partners. Gottesman said they leased the half-block to Manifold last year.

Tyler Grooms, a principal at Manifold Real Estate, declined to comment on the project. Gottesman said he didn’t have details on what was being planned for the half-block.

Given there are no height restrictions on the site, the half-block between San Jacinto Boulevard and Trinity Street and along East Second Street currently occupied by low-slung buildings is prime for redevelopment.

One big caveat, though, is the site is potentially in the path of the proposed convention center expansion.

https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/n..._news_headline

KevinFromTexas · #2 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 5:01 AM**

The site plan was posted for this today to the AULCC page. The elevations don't show the mechanical roof height, but the main roof is 557 feet with 40 floors. The first 18 floors are parking. The 19th floor is an amenity level, and the first office level is on the 20th.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...to%20Blvd..pdf

masonh2479 · #3 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 5:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

The site plan was posted for this today to the AULCC page. The elevations don't show the mechanical roof height, but the main roof is 557 feet with 41 floors. The first 18 floors are parking. The 19th floor is an amenity level, and the first office level is on the 20th.

ftp://ftp.ci.austin.tx.us/ATD_AULCC/...to%20Blvd..pdf

18 floors for parking....that is excessive.

The ATX · #4 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 5:15 AM**

Here's the site plan for it that was posted in the update thread. The project is referred to as "Block 16" on the site plan application.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/perm...ertyrsn=625418

I view this as a small consolation prize if voters/City Council kill the CC expansion plans.

eguidry · #5 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 5:28 AM**

This one reminds me of this sketch George posted on his Instagram but a bit toned down sadly. I might be grasping here though it is a Gensler design so… https://www.instagram.com/p/B3Dsz25B...d=h4r445jgyw76

GoldenBoot · #6 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 6:45 AM**

Those parking levels are designed to be converted (if necessary) to office space. The tower's total height is in the neighborhood of 614'. Gensler is the architect.

KevinFromTexas · #7 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 7:02 AM**

Yeah, I measured the mechanical box above the main roof, rough estimate, mind you, and I came up with 611 feet 8 inches. I used the numbers they provided detailing the tower's width to compare using a sheet of paper. Hopefully, we'll see some more detailed elevations showing the very top. Right now this is looking to be our 4th tallest proposal.

This would also be the first 600 foot office tower outside of Houston and Dallas.

urbancore · #8 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 3:18 PM**

My source confirms this one is good to go.

---wrong property---- my bad

myBrain · #9 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 3:50 PM**

I can't be the only one who hates scrolling through PDFs.

This looks like a tall version of Gensler's Domain towers.

ILUVSAT · #10 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 4:17 PM**

Alternatively, this could be a push by Gottesman (and team) to increase the value of his land prior to CC expansion. The city will have to pay him fair market value for it should the expansion move forward as currently planned. His land is far more valuable with an approved 600' tower on it rather than warehouses with restaurants.

Myomi · #11 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 4:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Alternatively, this could be a push by Gottesman (and team) to increase the value of his land prior to CC expansion. The city will have to pay him fair market value for it should the expansion move forward as currently planned. His land is far more valuable with an approved 600' tower on it rather than warehouses with restaurants.

I don't really think it is. As long as he can build this structure by right (which I think he can because it's CBD with no view corridor), then the property inherent value is the same. The land value will have that right built taken into account.

However, if he has to get zoning variance to do this, or has to do some environmental mitigation, and he goes through the process to do that, then he increases the value. Because then the right to build goes up, and the value would need to compensate.

Austin1971 · #12 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 5:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbancore

My source confirms this one is good to go.

This won't break ground until the CC expansion is resolved right? Do they have a time frame for construction? It looks like they have already invested a considerable amount of time and money into the project. This came out of the blue. Wow!

zrx299 · #13 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 5:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by masonh2479

18 floors for parking....that is excessive.

That made me dizzy just thinking about having to spin all the way up and down every day for the top level parkers.

Geckos_Rule · #14 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 8:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbancore

My source confirms this one is good to go.

---wrong property---- my bad

Well which building is good to go?

Jdawgboy · #15 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 8:49 PM**

I'm confused.... So is the the shorter of the two (possible) proposed towers that we saw in the main thread or is this on a different block??

Another boring box... can't they at least try to create a more architecturally significant design?

The ATX · #16 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 8:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I'm confused.... So is the the shorter of the two (possible) proposed towers that we saw in the main thread or is this on a different block??

Another boring box... can't they at least try to create a more architecturally significant design?

Are you referring to the Railyard Condos marketing vision? This is closer to the Marriott.

ILUVSAT · #17 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 8:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I'm confused.... So is the the shorter of the two (possible) proposed towers that we saw in the main thread or is this on a different block??

Another boring box... can't they at least try to create a more architecturally significant design?

Different site. The two-tower "proposal" is for the Railyard Condo site. This one is the block on which P.F. Changs sits.

The ATX · #18 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 8:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geckos_Rule

Well which building is good to go?

He meant 321 W. 6th.

Jdawgboy · #19 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 8:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

He meant 321 W. 6th.

And which one is that? The 16 floor one that's kinda like IBC?

I think it's time for a forum meetup to tour all of these sites just so we can keep track of them all.

Jdawgboy · #20 Posted **Oct 4, 2019, 8:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Different site. The two-tower "proposal" is for the Railyard Condo site. This one is the block on which P.F. Changs sits.

Okay, actually not a bad location for a tower. Wish it would be taller given it doesn't have height restrictions.