AUSTIN | Projects & Construction III - Page 22

KevinFromTexas · #**421** Posted **Jun 17, 2012, 7:22 AM**

I always thought a huge marketplace, (think farmers market, meat market, etc.) would be a nice use for the building. Republic Square Park is a nice place for our farmer's market, but it can only grow so much there.

I don't know why they don't just plan for office space inside the apartment tower they're wanting to build. The company said they want 115,000 square feet. That would probably add 4 floors to the 28-story apartment tower. It would likely turn into a 400 foot building then.

Austin1971 · #**422** Posted **Jun 17, 2012, 4:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I always thought a huge marketplace, (think farmers market, meat market, etc.) would be a nice use for the building. Republic Square Park is a nice place for our farmer's market, but it can only grow so much there.

I don't know why they don't just plan for office space inside the apartment tower they're wanting to build. The company said they want 115,000 square feet. That would probably add 4 floors to the 28-story apartment tower. It would likely turn into a 400 foot building then.

I agree. The city sold out on a great opportunity. Think of Faneuil Hall in Boston, Reading Terminal Market in Philly or Public Market Center in Seattle. What a horrible waste for an office building. Bad move and very short sighted.

nixcity · #**423** Posted **Jun 17, 2012, 5:01 PM**

I thought this was a done deal, is there still a chance to block this??

H2O · #**424** Posted **Jun 17, 2012, 5:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Im also not happy about Seaholm but whats done is done. At least in a couple of years the city will reevaluate the building for public use.

By the way do we have any idea on who is going to occupy Seaholm?

I think it is HomeAway, but that is just a guess.

MightyYoda · #**425** Posted **Jun 17, 2012, 6:09 PM**

Does anyone know how long it is for or if/when the city can reevaluate its use? Someone else mentioned the lack of continuation of 2nd street etc.. and I can agree in the short term, business office space might make more sense. But I want that as an open market once all these apartments get built and 2nd meets up with the power plant. I am ok with this only if it's to fill the building in the short term until the area fills out more.

KevinFromTexas · #**426** Posted **Jun 17, 2012, 6:41 PM**

I have to say I'm not liking it when companies build their new headquarters in DOWNTOWN in a FOUR STORY office building, and then 2 years later seek space elsewhere in another building. Whole Foods, Homeaway, ABC Bank, Cirrus Logic, etc. I know it sometimes just has to be that they build their own office space in a small building since the market isn't always supporting a major tower. I'm not criticizing these companies, I just wish there was a better way of doing it. I know it's possible to tear down some of those smaller buildings to make way for larger ones later, but that's not likely, and it has hardly ever happened in Austin. That would also go against the ideals of Austin since it would mean creating a lot of waste.

Of course, I don't want to criticize these companies since having them in downtown at all is a good thing. I just wish there was a bit more better planning.

The ATX · #**427** Posted **Jun 17, 2012, 9:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MightyYoda

Does anyone know how long it is for or if/when the city can reevaluate its use? Someone else mentioned the lack of continuation of 2nd street etc.. and I can agree in the short term, business office space might make more sense. But I want that as an open market once all these apartments get built and 2nd meets up with the power plant. I am ok with this only if it's to fill the building in the short term until the area fills out more.

I think it's 20 years.

ROCrot · #**428** Posted **Jun 17, 2012, 11:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I have to say I'm not liking it when companies build their new headquarters in DOWNTOWN in a FOUR STORY office building, and then 2 years later seek space elsewhere in another building. Whole Foods, Homeaway, ABC Bank, Cirrus Logic, etc.

Of course, I don't want to criticize these companies since having them in downtown at all is a good thing. I just wish there was a bit more better planning.

Yes... how DARE these companies be more successful than they had ever dreamed of being!

Syndic · #**429** Posted **Jun 18, 2012, 12:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROCrot

Yes... how DARE these companies be more successful than they had ever dreamed of being!

They could have gotten office space in an existing building instead of screwing up our city by building their own low-rise office building.

NYC_Longhorn · #**430** Posted **Jun 18, 2012, 1:11 AM**

I don't mind companies occupying low rises in Austin, I just mind them occupying Seaholm.... it is a colossal mistake.... I can't believe the residents of Spring and Monarch didn't revolt at the idea of Seaholm becoming offices... How did this happen? Does anyone know how to start an online petition or something?

Maybe we are all being duped? Maybe it's all just a bad dream.... maybe Chucky Cheese himself bought Seaholm and is planning on building offices full of fun, plastic ball pits, and slides.... if not, my black heart will fill with hatred for the company that leased out Austin's power plant of dreams....

Jdawgboy · #**431** Posted **Jun 18, 2012, 6:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

I think it's 20 years.

Actually from what I heard the city will look into it in 2 years. The 20 year figure is how long they could stay at Seaholm but that the does not mean they will. If in two years the city finds a better use or if Market dictates that it can be of more use fully used as a public building then hopefully we can see that changed.

Also unless somebody has solid information of what company will occupy the space, everything is just conjecture at this point as to who it will be.

WestAustinite · #**432** Posted **Jun 18, 2012, 11:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Actually from what I heard the city will look into it in 2 years. The 20 year figure is how long they could stay at Seaholm but that the does not mean they will. If in two years the city finds a better use or if Market dictates that it can be of more use fully used as a public building then hopefully we can see that changed. Also unless somebody has solid information of what company will occupy the space, everything is just conjecture at this point as to who it will be.

Actually, I believe the COA will review its status in 10 years. That makes sense because no tenant would every sign a lease, nor invest in interior finish out, with a risk they would be thrown out in a few years. So, put 2021 on your calendar to complain the City Council. In my opinion, the Council made an enormous mistake in feeling pity for this developer and granting the office use waiver. That mistake will be very evident once 2nd street is extended through, the Green water site is developed, and the Library is build. They will wish they had an anchor at the end of 2nd street to draw people all the way down the street from Colorado. That anchor, be it a museum, retail or market, would greatly benefit everyone along the way. Now, they will be left with a fabulous building nobody will ever see, and a so called "public plaza" nobody will visit except the tenants of Seaholm or that new apartment building. Short term thinking, what a pity...

AusTex · #**433** Posted **Jun 18, 2012, 2:24 PM**

Does any one know of any plan to reuse the water intake building at Seaholm? I think that was the use for the building on the lake directly across the street from the main building. I have always thought the building would be a great restaurant/concession area to anchor what will eventually be the extension of the Promenade along Cesar Chavez. The building could house an Austin Information Center and have first class restrooms on the trail! The views of the river and parkland must be fantastic. A cantilevered and covered deck over the water could be used for resting/viewing/eating. The location is perfect for use by downtown visitors/workers/residents who do not want to walk around the lake but still enjoy it. And the many folk using the trail, especially on the weekends would keep the restaurant/concession very busy.

If we have to wait at least 10 years for the main Seaholm building to become a Great Public Space, perhaps we can convince the powers that be, to turn the Intake Building into a Great Public Space sooner!

http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/def...gation_Web.pdf

I just found this 2012 March link...have not read it yet.

AusTxDevelopment · #**434** Posted **Jun 18, 2012, 2:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by H2O

I think it is HomeAway, but that is just a guess.

It's not HomeAway - got confirmation from their broker. Although it would be a perfect venue for HomeAway since they like funky space. Word on the street is that it's Whaleshark Media.

Jdawgboy · #**435** Posted **Jun 18, 2012, 5:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WestAustinite

Actually, I believe the COA will review its status in 10 years. That makes sense because no tenant would every sign a lease, nor invest in interior finish out, with a risk they would be thrown out in a few years. So, put 2021 on your calendar to complain the City Council. In my opinion, the Council made an enormous mistake in feeling pity for this developer and granting the office use waiver. That mistake will be very evident once 2nd street is extended through, the Green water site is developed, and the Library is build. They will wish they had an anchor at the end of 2nd street to draw people all the way down the street from Colorado. That anchor, be it a museum, retail or market, would greatly benefit everyone along the way. Now, they will be left with a fabulous building nobodyy will ever see, and a so called "public plaza" nobody will visit except the tenants of Seaholm or that new apartment building. Short term thinking, what a pity...

10 years does make more since if your the company wanting to occupy the space. Maybe the news got it wrong about the 2 year re-evaluation when they did the story about the council voting in favor of putting offices in Seaholm.

We all agree this was a very bad choice for use of the Iconic structure and I agree this will disrupt the pedestrian flow. But funny thing is if it is a media company I might be able to get a job there when I finish my schooling.

There have been several new forumers recently so I wanted to say welcome.

hookem · #**436** Posted **Jun 19, 2012, 2:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AusTxDevelopment

It's not HomeAway - got confirmation from their broker. Although it would be a perfect venue for HomeAway since they like funky space. Word on the street is that it's Whaleshark Media.

I can't believe it would be whaleshark. A venture backed internet company that's only 2 years old? That would go against all common sense and lessons learned by the city. Unless the developer has so much weight with the council that they will completely ignore the fact that the tenant potentially can't even stay in business 12 more months...

My money is still on a company that is more established and politically connected. One that comes to the table with enough clout that the city would even consider such a change in plans.

The ATX · #**437** Posted **Jun 19, 2012, 4:16 PM**

I don't know what to make of this. An anti-development group in San Marcos took a cash settlement from a developer in exchange for stopping their action against said developer, and they will use that cash to fight another developer.

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl...-for-cash.html

BevoLJ · #**438** Posted **Jun 19, 2012, 5:30 PM**

Ya, I don't know either. However when clicking through a few links in there to some other stories I found a map from the San Marcos Mercury that was very cool

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid...8f32728b&msa=0

It has a bunch of the developments planned for San Marcos. I really wish Austin had a map like that. Or at least Downtown. I imagine it can't be that hard to do.

BevoLJ · #**439** Posted **Jun 19, 2012, 6:29 PM**

I kinda sorta started a map like that for Austin. But I don't have the time right now to really do anything good, or to put everything on it. If anyone else wants to add stuff here it is: http://goo.gl/maps/Uycg

Anyone should be able to edit it if they want. I'll try to add some stuff when I can.

AusTxDevelopment · #**440** Posted **Jun 20, 2012, 4:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BevoLJ

I kinda sorta started a map like that for Austin. But I don't have the time right now to really do anything good, or to put everything on it. If anyone else wants to add stuff here it is: http://goo.gl/maps/Uycg

Anyone should be able to edit it if they want. I'll try to add some stuff when I can.

Great idea. The City of Austin has a downtown development map & listing of future development that is dated March 20, 2012 called "Emerging Projects", however it's sorely lacking some of the more ambitious buildings that have been recently covered in the papers. It may help fill in some of the blanks for you tho. Located here: http://www.downtownaustin.com/downlo...march_2012.pdf