The 1 Hotel | 215 FT | 17 FL | Proposed
 

Proposed for Fifth and Colorado

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/conte..._deal#comments

http://www.austintowers.net/Austin_D...announced.html

There are some renderings of the washington dc "1 hotel" when you click on the link.

not sure about the hotel 1 name, but it appears the new starwood franchise has been using the hotel 1 slogan for a number of other planned hotels.

austintowers says the last hotel announced was over 2 years ago. This isnt corrent though, right? I thought westin was like a year ago, or maybe college is just going by a lot faster than it seems...

Looks like this hotel will rise 20-stories, per Austin Business Journal article today:

http://austin.bizjournals.com/austin...7/daily19.html

I don't understand why Starwood Capital is building one brand, 1Hotel, while their subsidiary, Starwood Hotels & Resorts is starting up another environmentally friendly hotel, element.

Why wouldn't Starwood Capital just focus on Starwood Hotels' element brand? I think Starwood Hotels has proven it can do a good job with managing hotel brands. What's the advantage in having two competing brands?

I believe Starwood is also the owner of the ALoft hotel concept at the Domain

Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide' brands are: Le Méridien, Four Points by Sheraton, Westin, Aloft, Sheraton, element By Westin, St Regis, W Hotels, and "The Luxury Collection" (The Joule in Dallas).

The 1Hotel Brand is overseen by Starwood Hotel's parent company, Starwood Capital.

so i know there are a few businesses there that would be affected.. why can't they build across the street (they are building on the southwest corner of 5th and Colorado) in the parking lot or take the old cap metro building (is that the right building i'm thinking of?) there at 6th? hm.

Because that isn't their land. The owners of those properties are either happy with what they already have, or have their own development plans already. I do understand where you're coming from, though. I absolutely despise seeing vacant or underutilized blocks in our downtown.

Zero Displacement
 

The property in question is a vacant 2 story office building and surface parking lot. There are no existing businesses affected.

Here's the rendering of the hotel.

The article posted above says the building will be 215 feet tall with 17 floors. The taller part will face 5th Street. The hotel will only take up half the block, with the podium level rising to 60 feet along the alley on the block.

Sorry for the blurriness, this was a screenshot from their video presentation.
http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/8...radohotel2.jpg

Found here: Under Boards & Commissions/Planning/11/10/09/Item 9
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/channel6/

looks like there is some "green wall" space in there. Hope so! We need more of that "trend".

By the way, it looks like it will cannibalize 3 buildings on that block. The one on the corner which is the largest, then two more to the west of it. The farthest west building on the block would remain. The southern end of the block wouldn't be affected by the project. An alley would separate it from the project.

By the way, here is the video for the planning commission meeting. Again, it's Item 9.
http://austintx.swagit.com/player.php?refid=11102009-63

They said they wanted it to step back from 5th Street, but that's the one place this tower should be flush up against. And it will be far more pedestrian friendly and attractive than the brown Chase Bank parking garage across the street. All in all, I think this is a decent project. I really like the green elements. We do need more of that. That block will probably have more vegetation on it with this tower than it had before it! More green vegetation equals cooler temps and a softer environment. I also like the base, and I'm interested in seeing more detailed renderings that show the overhanging cantilevered tower.

They're also guaranteeing public access to the green roof/terrace level. That will be nice, especially for photos of the view! No more getting kicked out of the Chase parking garage. :haha:

I think will work nicely in that area. Building does not look bad either.

Does anyone know why the Planning Commission couldn't muster support for the project -- I think it was a tie vote, thus no recommendation. I don't believe anyone testified against it, and it complied with the new Warehouse District regs. Any thoughts?

Did you even watch the video? The ANC controls enough votes on the PC to do this - backing up precisely what I told you in other threads about the WHD and "density elsewhere" somehow making up for it. They used affordable housing as their justification this time, which is, of course, a load of crap as they resist new housing units anywhere and everywhere. It's all about fighting density with these people - they're doing what I and others told you they would do.

I did watch it. It was troubling. On many levels.

I would be sympathetic about their decision, but come on, how many of the people on the board really hit the warehouse district on a regular basis? Just remember, there's motivation behind every action, and if they aren't the type of people to go there, then why were they so keen on protecting it? Those folks don't exactly strike me as club goers. LOL

Of course I do want there to be some preservation on some level in that area, but don't squash all development. That's not productive either.

I moved the warehouse density discussion posts to the warehouse thread where they should be.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...=173862&page=6