AUSTIN | Projects & Construction II - Page 174

AusTex · #**3461** Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 7:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickxter

I'm sorry to break the sequence.. but has anyone heard anything about the Kimpton hotel (Hotel Van Zandt)? I keep getting mixed reviews on the project and I've always said that this down town needs more hotels- ESPECIALLY with this population boom

What do you mean by "mixed reviews". If you have heard anything recently please let us know. I have hear nothing for months now.

priller · #**3462** Posted **Jul 10, 2008, 8:59 PM**

A few Spring and Gables Park Plaza photos from today.

Phase I of the Gables construction (the 8-floor apartment bldg) seems to be underway:

The Spring is up to the 18th floor now:

hismasterplan · #**3463** Posted **Jul 11, 2008, 12:35 AM**

I love the glass on Spring. I wish that tower was more centered downtown. That's the only thing I don't like about it. It would go great with the rest.

Myomi · #**3464** Posted **Jul 11, 2008, 2:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by priller

The Spring is up to the 18th floor now:

I noticed that Spring originally started counting their floor as the building started to rise, just as the Austonian is trying to do now. However, for whatever reason they seemed to have stopped at floor 9. Now, I don't know about you guys, but counting up to 9 floors seems pretty easy. I don't need signs for that. But I hope Austonian doesn't stop at 9 floors because I don't have enough toes and fingers to get all the way up to 56. I'm going to really need their help counting all the way to the top.

Nightfeed · #**3465** Posted **Jul 11, 2008, 3:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Myomi

I noticed that Spring originally started counting their floor as the building started to rise, just as the Austonian is trying to do now. However, for whatever reason they seemed to have stopped at floor 9. Now, I don't know about you guys, but counting up to 9 floors seems pretty easy. I don't need signs for that. But I hope Austonian doesn't stop at 9 floors because I don't have enough toes and fingers to get all the way up to 56. I'm going to really need their help counting all the way to the top.

I wasn't too thrilled with Spring at first (looked too small), but as they're putting the glass on I think it's turning out very sleek.

And as for Austonian... wow, 56 floors, I hadn't even thought about that until you just mentioned it. That's going to be one impressive looking building. By the time Austonian is done, is it safe to assume that Four Seasons and W will be complete? I know they're a bit behind, but they're also not as tall.

shanny · #**3466** Posted **Jul 11, 2008, 6:53 PM**

i stretched the rendering to make the condo tower 830'. this should be more realistic.

Jdawgboy · #**3467** Posted **Jul 11, 2008, 7:10 PM**

Now that looks sleek. The height finally gives it justice, I liked the design but again it seemed not to scale so it looked stubby. Now this rendering really makes it sleeker. Thanks for doing that shanny...

hismasterplan · #**3468** Posted **Jul 11, 2008, 8:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by shanny

i stretched the rendering to make the condo tower 830'. this should be more realistic.

Now hold on is that official? If so, wow.

GoldenBoot · #**3469** Posted **Jul 11, 2008, 9:21 PM**

Yes; and no... It's the rendering being passed around in capital investment request packets by a company promoting T. Stacy's parking garage.

I would assume that it is a very early rendering of the complex - and not necessarily meant to be construed as the overall final, or "official," rendering of the project.

hismasterplan · #**3470** Posted **Jul 11, 2008, 9:38 PM**

Well so far it's not far off from how I pictured it to look like. I'd be happy with that, but the only thing is the Bank Of America building would look too out of place.

JGFrisco · #**3471** Posted **Jul 12, 2008, 1:27 PM**

Guys, those are nice renderings, but in this market, if an 800' building gets erected, it will be a box, not some unusual shape.

Odd shapes and other (costly) unusual architectural details are important in an up market, where you want to differentiate your building and catch the eye of the public. But they cost a lot of money, and eat into the profitability of the project.

In a down market, they just don't get built. Investors want a return, and lenders question costly details like odd shapes. In Austin, if you are building an 800' building, you ARE unique, and you won't need unusual details to get attention. So if it gets built, most of the unusual stuff will go.

IF it gets built. I'm still not at all convinced it's a go, as it doesn't fit with the pattern of what is actually getting financing right now.

(same goes for 21c)

priller · #**3472** Posted **Jul 12, 2008, 1:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nightfeed

By the time Austonian is done, is it safe to assume that Four Seasons and W will be complete? I know they're a bit behind, but they're also not as tall.

Four seasons probably will catch up, they're up to the 5th floor already. W probably not. It started a good 6 months later, plus has a lot more site prep than Austonian. I've noticed these buildings generally add about a floor a week once they get to the tower stage. 6 months would be about 24 floors. W is not that much shorter. But it will be close.

hookem · #**3473** Posted **Jul 12, 2008, 5:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JGFrisco

In a down market, they just don't get built. Investors want a return, and lenders question costly details like odd shapes. In Austin, if you are building an 800' building, you ARE unique, and you won't need unusual details to get attention. So if it gets built, most of the unusual stuff will go.

IF it gets built. I'm still not at all convinced it's a go, as it doesn't fit with the pattern of what is actually getting financing right now.

(same goes for 21c)

Isn't Frost's crown an expensive odd shape? Wasn't that built in a down market? I know the height adds a lot of expense... not holding my breath that this proposal will happen... but the wavy and/or twisting building style I have seen in a LOT of other proposals in other cities, even in this down market. It seems to be some kind of trend.

shanny · #**3474** Posted **Jul 12, 2008, 6:07 PM**

for example, the chicago spire

Northcrossed · #**3475** Posted **Jul 12, 2008, 10:09 PM**

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/stories/2008/07/14/story1.html (story at link may have changed since posting)

Plan for Downtown Condo Dropped
Developer behind The Metropolitan files Ch. 11; condos would have been near Capitol

Austin Business Journal - by Jean Kwon ABJ Staff

A local developer has shelved plans for a $50 million luxury condo project in one of the first casualties of Austin's downtown condo boom.

The Metropolitan, a proposed mid-rise project two blocks from the Capitol first announced in February 2007, will no longer be built. Its developer, Mote Group Real Estate Partners LLC, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy June 30.

The condo's site, a surface parking lot at 311 E. 11th St., will be put up for sale, says Weldon Ponder, the attorney representing Mote Group in its bankruptcy.

Mote Group Principal Thomas Mote could not be reached for comment

JGFrisco · #**3476** Posted **Jul 13, 2008, 2:23 AM**

First off, Frost was completed prior to the current bear market. Second, while it has a crown, the building itself is still a box.

Boxes with crowns or spires aren't a problem. Odd-shaped floors and curves get to be expensive.

The Chicago Spire? An unusual building all the way around. But then again, it too has a uniform shape, so that there can be an economy of size.

KevinFromTexas · #**3477** Posted **Jul 13, 2008, 5:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hookem

Isn't Frost's crown an expensive odd shape? Wasn't that built in a down market? I know the height adds a lot of expense... not holding my breath that this proposal will happen... but the wavy and/or twisting building style I have seen in a LOT of other proposals in other cities, even in this down market. It seems to be some kind of trend.

I read in one of the Austin American-Statesman articles that came out just after the building wrapped up construction, that the crown's design and materials cost just over one million dollars.

hookem · #**3478** Posted **Jul 13, 2008, 7:03 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I read in one of the Austin American-Statesman articles that came out just after the building wrapped up construction, that the crown's design and materials cost just over one million dollars.

Ah, interesting. On something like a $50 million or so building (to construct), yeah, that's not much expense. I'd say that was the best $1M spent in DT Austin. Every building should spend that much if it can get a distinctive architectural feature like that!

But point taken, JGFrisco and Kevin. Not really expensive to build a box building with a crown.

JGFrisco · #**3479** Posted **Jul 13, 2008, 3:33 PM**

I guess I'm not being very clear...but let me try something different. The cost of an odd-shaped building is much more than that of a crown or spire.

With a large multi-story building, you get advantages of scale by making the stories the same. It makes construction faster, simpler, and easier. Plus, when you start making odd shapes and changing floor shapes, you start affecting your leasable or salable space, and you start creating black holes, meaning spaces that are difficult or impossible to lease.

So odd shapes would cost far more, both in terms of construction and in terms of expected income, and are much harder to sell to a lender.

The Chicago Spire is odd...but if you will look, they have lost the tapered look, and instead will just have a tall cylinder that is the same size on each floor. So they will get the economy of scale.

PS Architects can get away with making the building look different with changing elevations by using setbacks. This changes the look, but not the overall design and layout. Sears Tower and Burj Dubai have this.

Apple][ · #**3480** Posted **Jul 13, 2008, 11:50 PM**

Two points/questions here ...

1) I was looking at various floor plans and while most treat indoor and outdoor space separately, I noticed that Spring did not. Take a look at this http://www.springaustin.com/pdf/Spring_Unit_C.pdf does anyone know if the total listed includes outdoor and indoor, or if it's indoor only?

2) In looking at the costs of steel and other building materials (see: http://www.steelonthenet.com/commodity_prices.html) I'm wondering how it how this will effect Tremmel's plan for the water treatment site. I don't know exactly when 360 locked in building material prices, but I imagine it was in 2006. Based on prices at that time the lowest price for a finished unit worked out to be $270 sqft. The price of steel, glass and gas have doubled since and given that these commodities make up say 20% of the cost of the building (I just made that up, it may be more). You're looking at an instant 20% increase in construction costs. So, I would imagine that future construction proposals will either see the size of a one bedroom move to 500 sqft or see the price go up by 20%. 700 sqft for a one bedroom is small enough, will people really pay the necessary price premium to live downtown and scale their lives into 500 sqft of space?

Just eliciting opinions, reactions and other view points. For disclosure, I'm currently (and will continue to be) a resident of downtown Austin.