AUSTIN | Project Updates Thread Part II - Page 46

The ATX · #**901** Posted **Aug 31, 2014, 2:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I wish they would include stuff in West Campus on that list. University House is going to be a sizable project on the skyline.

I know. MLK seems to be the northern limit of what they cover.

I also wish they would leave off some things. Block 52 (C47) has been dead for several years, and anything announced for that site would be a new project. Also, the hotel project (C96) at 6th & Nueces seems to be nothing more than something that was whispered about at a cocktail party.

In addition to Hyatt House they left off North Shore lofts.

Jdawgboy · #**902** Posted **Aug 31, 2014, 7:26 PM**

Hey did anybody notice what was put about Block 52 (old post office) That's news to me!!! Get a look at the proposed sq. footage... we could easily be talking about a new tallest in a prime location.

The ATX · #**903** Posted **Aug 31, 2014, 7:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Hey did anybody notice what was put about Block 52 (old post office) That's news to me!!! Get a look at the proposed sq. footage... we could easily be talking about a new tallest in a prime location.

Did you see my post above about Block 52?

Jdawgboy · #**904** Posted **Aug 31, 2014, 8:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

Did you see my post above about Block 52?

Yea, but the project I'm assuming you meant was the Novarre project. I don't remember previous updates with that wording specifically mentioning 800,000 SF. It is quite possible a new project is in the works.

http://m.statesman.com/news/business/developer-changes-plans-for-downtown-block/nRscX/

Only thing I found about them changing plans was this article. Definitely not 800,000 sq feet.

The ATX · #**905** Posted **Aug 31, 2014, 8:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Yea, but the project I'm assuming you meant was the Novarre project. I don't remember previous updates with that wording specifically mentioning 800,000 SF. It is quite possible a new project is in the works.

http://m.statesman.com/news/business/developer-changes-plans-for-downtown-block/nRscX/

Only thing I found about them changing plans was this article. Definitely not 800,000 sq feet.

That 800K number has been in the emerging updates forever. That's why I think Block 52 should be deleted until a real project is proposed.

Jdawgboy · #**906** Posted **Aug 31, 2014, 9:00 PM**

Hmmm, I Guess I must have missed it. At any rate the original project was not that large.

I agree if nothing tentative has come out they should remove it, however it's a pretty safe bet to assume something is in the works for a prime full block like that. I'd be very surprised if we don't hear something new over the next 6 months.

KevinFromTexas · #**907** Posted **Aug 31, 2014, 9:21 PM**

800K is a big building for sure, but that's a full block which would give them a lot of space to work with. I believe the W Hotel is about 900,000 square feet. The block sizes for those two are about the same. The tower would have to be considerably more slim than the W to be much taller. Granted, the W is one of the biggest towers in downtown.

It would pretty much have to be a point tower like Spring is for it to be in the 900 to 1,000 foot range. At that point it would probably be 80+ floors.

Syndic · #**908** Posted **Aug 31, 2014, 11:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

5th & Brazos is there.

No it's not. They're listing the parking garage as 5th & Brazos.

The ATX · #**909** Posted **Sep 1, 2014, 6:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Syndic

No it's not. They're listing the parking garage as 5th & Brazos.

You're right. I didn't read the description. This latest list was a bit sloppy.

Urbannizer · #**910** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 2:11 AM**

Lakeshore

KevinFromTexas · #**911** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 6:18 PM**

So far the comments to this are pretty much in favor of development there. Kind of a surprise, though, I suspect some of my SSP brethren commented. I did.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local/cultural-center-recommends-permanent-parkland-for-/nhFjr/

Quote:

Posted: 9:55 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 3, 2014
Cultural Center recommends permanent parkland for Rainey Street lots

By Philip Jankowski
American-Statesman Staff

The advisory board for the Emma S. Barrientos Mexican American Cultural Center wants several vacant city-owned lots in the booming Rainey Street area to become permanent parkland.

The lots include 64 Rainey Street, an 11,000-square-foot lot adjacent to the Cultural Center that the advisory commission has keenly watched since the city floated the idea of selling it to a developer in 2012 for up to $1.2 million.

wwmiv · #**912** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 6:47 PM**

MACC is really NIMBY lately.

MightyYoda · #**913** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 7:57 PM**

Not to be a jerk, but Rainey is right next to the hike and bike trail and Waller Creek. I love parks, but that isn't the place for one. MACC has gone full NIMBY lately.

The ATX · #**914** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 8:09 PM**

It's pretty clear that they are just trying to stop progress. I really hate their self righteous, we're so important attitude.

Digatisdi · #**915** Posted **Sep 4, 2014, 9:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

So far the comments to this are pretty much in favor of development there. Kind of a surprise, though, I suspect some of my SSP brethren commented. I did.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local/cultural-center-recommends-permanent-parkland-for-/nhFjr/

Yeah, it's definitely surprising to see a majority of comments both coherent and in favour of development on a Statesman article

I'm definitely irritated that PARD is even entertaining this given their skyline reasoning.

The ATX · #**916** Posted **Sep 5, 2014, 2:51 AM**

According to this Building ATX article anyone making less than $26.4K per year (or $12.70 per hour) is eligible to rent an apartment at Capitol Studios. That is an extremely good deal. People making a lot more money than that can't afford to live in the area. One has to try hard to not make $12.70 per hour.

http://buildingatx.com/2014/09/capital-studios-project-nearing-completion-photos/

austlar1 · #**917** Posted **Sep 5, 2014, 6:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

According to this Building ATX article anyone making less than $26.4K per year (or $12.70 per hour) is eligible to rent an apartment at Capitol Studios. That is an extremely good deal. People making a lot more money than that can't afford to live in the area. One has to try hard to not make $12.70 per hour.

http://buildingatx.com/2014/09/capital-studios-project-nearing-completion-photos/

I have a feeling that this project is going to be targeted towards relatively high functioning singles with disability incomes. Some may have part time or low paying jobs. That has been the target demographic of other Foundation projects like the former Ramada Inn on Ben White near S. First or the former nursing home (Garden Terrace) on William Cannon.

migol24 · #**918** Posted **Sep 5, 2014, 2:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

According to this Building ATX article anyone making less than $26.4K per year (or $12.70 per hour) is eligible to rent an apartment at Capitol Studios. That is an extremely good deal. People making a lot more money than that can't afford to live in the area. One has to try hard to not make $12.70 per hour.

http://buildingatx.com/2014/09/capital-studios-project-nearing-completion-photos/

I want to move in to this project.

MichaelB · #**919** Posted **Sep 5, 2014, 5:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by migol24

I want to move in to this project.

It's proof the "economical" does not have to be ugly!

Taste + $ are not the same thing.

( tell that to the folks who build the "G".... ugliest new building in the CBD!)

The ATX · #**920** Posted **Sep 5, 2014, 7:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelB

It's proof the "economical" does not have to be ugly!

Taste + $ are not the same thing.

( tell that to the folks who build the "G".... ugliest new building in the CBD!)

I agree that taste does not equal money. But the "G" is not horrible. It is simply very mediocre.

They have one of the better websites that I've seen for an apartment building. They have nice top down renderings of the floor plans.

http://thegaustin.com/