Austin | Waterloo Park Hotel (12th & Red River) | 335 FT | 27 FLRS | Cancelled - Page 6

GoldenBoot · #**101** Posted **Mar 21, 2017, 10:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by We vs us

They must be including pool deck, lobby, other public spaces in their 282k sq ft "space" count.

I believe that is either a misprint or this development will be more of a point tower.

We vs us · #**102** Posted **Mar 21, 2017, 10:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

I believe that is either a misprint or this development will be more of a point tower.

Yup. I'm betting it's a misprint. If it's truly a luxury hotel -- one that doesn't have much of a focus on group business -- it might have 10k sq ft in conference space. And that's a lot, to be honest.

The ATX · #**103** Posted **Mar 22, 2017, 7:11 AM**

That rendering from the Statesman article is a new one because it has the correct floor count. It looks like level 33 may be mechanical, so this one will probably be 32-stories officially.

http://www.mystatesman.com/business/...CeCB9phJy2OeL/

drummer · #**104** Posted **Mar 22, 2017, 8:57 AM**

The only thing that sort of makes sense for a luxury hotel in this area to me is that it is in relative proximity to a lot of the area as opposed to right next to one thing or another. UT, State Capitol, future Brackenridge development, future Waterloo Park (and Waller Creek development), and not too far from 6th street (some folks who can afford 5 stars still like that stuff).

We vs us · #**105** Posted **Mar 22, 2017, 2:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

The only thing that sort of makes sense for a luxury hotel in this area to me is that it is in relative proximity to a lot of the area as opposed to right next to one thing or another. UT, State Capitol, future Brackenridge development, future Waterloo Park (and Waller Creek development), and not too far from 6th street (some folks who can afford 5 stars still like that stuff).

You're right and I guess I'm amazed at how speculative it is. Choosing an area that will develop fully maybe within the next decade, but for now is pretty barren. It's true, I guess, that when Dell and Brackenridge are fully up and running, that side of town is going to be hopping.

The ATX · #**106** Posted **Mar 22, 2017, 2:24 PM**

The ABJ has the story now, and they end it with the sobering reminder that the proposed CVC expansion could be a roadblock.

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/ne...tin-trump.html

ATXboom · #**107** Posted **Mar 22, 2017, 2:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ATX

The ABJ has the story now, and they end it with the sobering reminder that the proposed CVC expansion could be a roadblock.

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/ne...tin-trump.html

Exactly. There will be no building on this lot. No chance. Council will delay final approval until cvc is in place.

hereinaustin · #**108** Posted **Mar 22, 2017, 2:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATXboom

Exactly. There will be no building on this lot. No chance. Council will delay final approval until cvc is in place.

I agree. The council will kick this one down the road and ultimately say no. Unfortunately, this is one of the proposed CVCs that is less contentious for the council.

The ATX · #**109** Posted **Mar 22, 2017, 2:50 PM**

The City Council has definitely become anti-growth and development. Both this and the Brackenridge Tract development would add a lot of life (and tax base!) to an ugly, under utilized part of Downtown. But they don't care, and they are not urbanists.

wwmiv · #**110** Posted **Mar 22, 2017, 5:13 PM**

They're clearly not anti-growth/anti-development, as the CVC that affected Brackenridge did not move forward with the rest precisely because it affected that development. If they were anti-growth/anti-development, that would have added fuel to their fire, not stopped them.

ATXboom · #**111** Posted **Mar 22, 2017, 7:12 PM**

I don't think they are anti development downtown... but I don't think they can comprehend opportunities that are out of box for government.

For instance - they will kill this project with CVC and we will have a red river st section that is never redeveloped and will continue to be a skid row with homeless support services adjacent. An opportunist might say how could we leverage developer desire in this area to provide more/better services for the homeless - almost like a tif zone. No chance the city could get their brains around something like this.

What's better for Austin - leveraging developers to tackle real social issues or protect a few views to ensure development can't move east of 35. Cause gentrification is going to happen with or without more dense development there - something some council members won't be able to grasp either.

Sorry for the rant but city council vexes me greatly.

The ATX · #**112** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 1:32 AM**

I like the looks of this project considering that it's a hotel. But the rendering is showing the front side facing Red River St. The back side will be highly visible since it's facing I-35. I hope it isn't a 33-story blank wall.

drummer · #**113** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 1:41 AM**

^ Huh, I hadn't thought of that. I hope the same...

wwmiv · #**114** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 2:39 AM**

This building is hideous whether it has a second blank wall or not.

corvairkeith · #**115** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 3:27 AM**

If it were painted beige and brown it could pass as a twin of the Hilton.

The ATX · #**116** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 3:38 AM**

I hope they stick with the blue & bronze colors (a la the JW) that the primitive rendering hints at. Even the ugly Hilton, Hotel Indigo and Hyatt House would look better without the washed out/earth tone look.

drummer · #**117** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 3:46 AM**

Yeah, this rendering does look like it was colored in with map colors by a child... I'd be interested to see something a bit more quality before I decide (though probably will decide) that it's ugly. Nonetheless, an ugly building with windows is better than a blank wall.

lzppjb · #**118** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 3:50 AM**

It's like the JW mated with a Soviet brutalist building.

We vs us · #**119** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 3:59 AM**

Just saying ... I wouldn't be surprised if the Hilton changed colors over the next year or so.

The ATX · #**120** Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 4:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by We vs us

Just saying ... I wouldn't be surprised if the Hilton changed colors over the next year or so.

That would definitely give it more curb appeal to go along with their shiny new sky walk to the CC. I would think the 555 owners would welcome that as well since it would help with their condo market value IMO. I personally would rather spend a million bucks on a condo in a nice looking high rise over a dated beige mess.