Austin | 6G | 874 Feet | 65 Floors | Complete

[AusTex]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

...That glass roof awning also gives them a large space outside for even while it's raining, and even it looks like a large space.

I never noticed that cover before. I've seen it on the renderings but it never registered as covered space. Thanks for pointing it out.

[AusTex]

Originally Posted by We vs us

Give us five years and we’ll have some major/interesting towers up and functional. 6x, The Republic, Google Sail, Indeed Tower. Not to mention all the infill that’s currently moving dirt.

It’s not a stretch to say we’ll be as iconic as any other city our size with what’s in the pipeline.

Which building are you referring to as "Indeed Tower." Where is it proposed / being built?

And Agreed, we will have an imposing skyline for a metro our size in a half dozen years. Assuming these towers are built and others keep moving along the pipeline. The skyline we have right now is astounding compared to six years ago! It has really changed. I am impressed that we have not had any real bombs built. Our skyline is impressive right now!

[Echostatic]

Indeed Tower = Block 71

[Jdawgboy]

Our skyline is definitely one of the more impressive skylines in the US now, though I personally split skylines in tiers with Austin being in the second tier, but we are one of the more impressive second tier cities no doubt and it will only get better.

[We vs us]

Yep, Indeed Tower is Block 71. I had a momentary blank on its block designation.

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by Dale

Uh, no.

I don't know how many high rises those other cities truly have, but I did a count recently of Austin's - including built, proposed and under construction/site prep, and we're at 272 high rises at the moment. That puts Austin above Seattle, Minneapolis and Detroit in SkyscraperPage's database. I don't doubt that Seattle and Minneapolis at least have more than us, but we have enough now that if we count all of them it's possible to pass some cities that haven't done complete counts of theirs. I never would have imagined that would be possible, but it is now. Not only that, but we have about 100 more high rises on that list than Las Vegas, Baltimore and San Diego have. Cities like Portland, Pittsburgh, Nashville, New Orleans, Charlotte, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Cleveland and possibly St. Louis and Kansas City have long been in our rear view mirror for total count and we've passed a few of those in the height ranking, too. I'm not competitive about either. It's just a bit surprising to see who we're running neck and neck with these days. I never would have guessed it in the past, but here we are talking about it. We're even closing in on Dallas in the 400 to 500 foot range, which is insane.

*Disclaimer - by the way, if you go look at Austin in the SkyscraperPage database to verify what I just said and note that we're only at 143, that's because I haven't finished adding all of the buildings yet. I have my own database in OpenOffice that I've been working on for over 20 years. Every height either came straight from the elevations, an email from the developer or architect, or I measured it with Google Earth when those other sources weren't available.

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I don't know how many high rises those other cities truly have, but I did a count recently of Austin's - including built, proposed and under construction/site prep, and we're at 272 high rises at the moment. That puts Austin above Seattle, Minneapolis and Detroit in SkyscraperPage's database. I don't doubt that Seattle and Minneapolis at least have more than us, but we have enough now that if we count all of them it's possible to pass some cities that haven't done complete counts of theirs. I never would have imagined that would be possible, but it is now. Not only that, but we have about 100 more high rises on that list than Las Vegas, Baltimore and San Diego have. Cities like Portland, Pittsburgh, Nashville, New Orleans, Charlotte, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Cleveland and possibly St. Louis and Kansas City have long been in our rear view mirror for total count and we've passed a few of those in the height ranking, too. I'm not competitive about either. It's just a bit surprising to see who we're running neck and neck with these days. I never would have guessed it in the past, but here we are talking about it. We're even closing in on Dallas in the 400 to 500 foot range, which is insane.

*Disclaimer - by the way, if you go look at Austin in the SkyscraperPage database to verify what I just said and note that we're only at 143, that's because I haven't finished adding all of the buildings yet. I have my own database in OpenOffice that I've been working on for over 20 years. Every height either came straight from the elevations, an email from the developer or architect, or I measured it with Google Earth when those other sources weren't available.

Thank you for all your hard work, Kev. Out of curiosity, when obtaining data from developers and/or architects, have you confirmed that the heights provided to you were from the lowest entrance to the pennicle of said tower? Most of the time, they'll provide you the height from average/median grade level. Just look at the most recent article regarding Block 185 - where the height of the tower was quoted as being 575'. We've already measured that tower as 589' based on the most recent elevations and taken from lowest entrance to its pennicle.

Thanks again, Kevin!

[KevinFromTexas]

Yeah, I always ask for the lowest elevation possible at grade to the highest elevation on the building. Actually, I haven't had to do that in a long time now that we're able to see the elevations so easily through the site plans. I also tend to go back and verify what they sent me either with elevations I've come across later on or else I measure it with Google Earth. I know some people likely disagree with using Google Earth as a source, but I've seen that they're pretty accurate when compared to the elevations.

Some elevations don't list the lowest sea level elevation either listing the base number simply as 100 feet, or they list the average, and in those cases, you either have to figure out what the lowest was based on whatever other numbers they included or measure the location in Google Earth.

Elevations also don't always show the mechanical penthouse height, so you either have to measure that in the elevations, or else measure it in Google Earth.

Also, some of those rooftop structures go through modifications in the design process that aren't reflected in the building elevations, and that can change the height. That's where I usually rely on Google Earth the most often. Windsor on the Lake was one building that had some changes made to its mechanical penthouse after the elevations were released, and I had to go back and measure it to be sure. It was also easy then to verify that the design was different since I was looking at two different ones.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by We vs us

Give us five years and we’ll have some major/interesting towers up and functional. 6x, The Republic, Google Sail, Indeed Tower. Not to mention all the infill that’s currently moving dirt.

It’s not a stretch to say we’ll be as iconic as any other city our size with what’s in the pipeline.

I'm inclined to agree with you. What sets those cities apart from Austin...IMO...are the signature office towers they have and we don't. At least not yet. What sets us apart from them...IMO is the wide spread, north to south, east to west of towers and the growing infill density. A bunch of cities seem to have their towers bunched together. Once we get more taller office towers...like Republic, our skyline WILL rival any city around our size. For me, our skyline extends from just south of the river to the UT campus area, and from just east of Mopac to I35 and just east of that. So in my eyes, our skyline is more spread out than a plethora of other cities and eventually will be big league. We'll be there in a few years. For the sake of avoiding any major conflict of facts and opinion, please note that this is just my personal opinion.

[We vs us]

You’re definitely right. I think the Rainey development boom is going to be as important and visually important as what we’re seeing downtown. The design isn’t necessarily there yet, but the height and jump-ups in density are really amazing. Our skyline is already hard to get into a single photo frame... as Rainey grows that’s going to continue to be more and more of a challenge.

[AusTex]

The previous posts highlight the amazing skyline we have here in Austin. All the depth and breath and the future proposals are stunning. Just in the Rainey Street area alone the proposals are really breath-taking. Really, breath-taking.

I am not a fan of this building, 6 x Guadalupe, however, just by the size of it we will have a mountain of a skyline for a metro our size when / if it gets built. (Please do not throw tomatoes at my last sentence.) I think we have been become complacent or stunned here in Austin over the last dozen years. The amount of construction is truly mind boggling. For those who live in other cities, I am not sure they are aware of the rapid pace of construction we are seeing. I had to ask what the Indeed Tower was. Oh, yeah, Block 71. My head keeps spinning.

I moved here 25 years ago from a very big metro to live in a Big Town / Small City. Nothing pointed to the fastest growing metro for over a decade and a skyline that is truly REMARKABLE.

I just wish I could say this building will be remarkable, but I can not. It is just two nice buildings, with some sexy angles, stacked on top of each other with an huge ugly parking podium facing a very Historic 1800's Bremond Block. We are talking horse and buggy historic district meets suburban 15 story automobile storage facility, that looks like like a suburban automobile storage facility in downtown Austin! And the whole building is topped with a flat roof. For me, not very remarkable nor sensitive to its older historic neighbors. Money speaks. History and connection.....? At least clad the parking as if it is part of the office tower. That is at least respectable. A suburban parking podium pooping on the Bremond Historic Block is a disgrace. There, someone said it!

[Sigaven]

Originally Posted by AusTex

At least clad the parking as if it is part of the office tower. That is at least respectable. A suburban parking podium pooping on the Bremond Historic Block is a disgrace. There, someone said it!

Preach! Again, another tallest tower with a parking podium treated as an afterthought. Again, what happened to putting effort into making those things look nice? (Frost tower, austonian).

Although I am still sort of unsure of the parking podium design of this tower since we have seen so many iterations.....can we please do glass and make it match the rest of the tower? It's going to be the most conspicuous tower in Austin for years to come, everyone's going to look at it.....give us something nice to look at!

[We vs us]

I would like to point out that Block 71 is now OFFICIALLY named the Indeed Tower, per the latest Towers blog post. I scooped that announcement by a full 3 days, with NO prior knowledge of said announcement, or of any contacts within any of the relevant organization. Only a sharp eye for details and a keen ear for standard Austin naming conventions.

https://austin.towers.net/yes-indeed...as-a-new-name/

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by We vs us

I would like to point out that Block 71 is now OFFICIALLY named the Indeed Tower, per the latest Towers blog post. I scooped that announcement by a full 3 days, with NO prior knowledge of said announcement, or of any contacts within any of the relevant organization. Only a sharp eye for details and a keen ear for standard Austin naming conventions.

https://austin.towers.net/yes-indeed...as-a-new-name/

Ha. I almost posted that "news" a few weeks ago when I noticed that was what CBRE was calling it on their listing site. Since we were already calling it the Indeed tower, I didn't bother to post it.

[KevinFromTexas]

Every time I hear that name I think of pocket watches, monocles, top hats, and pipe tobacco.

[lzppjb]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

Every time I hear that name I think of pocket watches, monocles, top hats, and pipe tobacco.

Indubitably.

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

Indubitably.

I was absolutely going to say that but I couldn't spell it and was too lazy to google it so I just said f it.

[deerhoof]

These two new buildings in Edmonton remind me of 6 X Guadalupe:

JW Marriott (left) is 630 feet & Stantec Tower (right) is 823 feet. Both look very tall and 6X is taller, so it gives you a good idea of how massive 6X will be.

https://twitter.com/dbotwickries/sta...67748260401152


https://twitter.com/alannakyee/statu...81711500533760

[the Genral]

Especially the JW Marriot. I'm glad you posted those. Somehow I'm even more accepting of the stacked design.

[AusTex]

Nice buildings. Stacked towers can look nice.

Do the curtain glass walls stop on one side and expose their hind quarter automobile storage floors to a Historic Block? Just wondering.