lockmat

Randall Davis 99-unit Arabella, 33-floors (Westcreek)

423 posts in this topic

Cosmo is 80 units. Astoria is 75.

So either this is a wide project, very tall or about the same height as the others with much smaller units. If the latter, it would probably be a rental.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cosmo is 80 units. Astoria is 75.

So either this is a wide project, very tall or about the same height as the others with much smaller units. If the latter, it would probably be a rental.

That link said Astoria has 53 units?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cosmo is 80 units. Astoria is 75.

So either this is a wide project, very tall or about the same height as the others with much smaller units. If the latter, it would probably be a rental.

#16 in your link says it's a condo tower. I believe Randall Davis only builds condos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#16 in your link says is a condo tower. I believe Randall Davis only builds condos.

Oops you're right, duh.

Which plot Did he get? They're all about the same size right? They're all a pretty decent footprint I thnk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the information in the brochure looked a bit dated, and there were odd errors throughout (Giorgio Barlenghi?). I'm curious that HFF had to push that hard to get a partner for a development with a Wal-Mart and a Marriott onsite.

 

But some of the proposals intrigued me. The two separate office towers proposed on Post Oak Boulevard, none of which are in the database? Awfully quiet promotion for two buildings, each exceeding 300,000 sf in space. I also see the Apache Tower is advertised as 900,000 sf of development; that's bigger than the Capitol Tower downtown, and that's 35 stories. The Randall Davis residential property is on the same block as the Skyhouse; I think one's going to top out before the other starts, and the individual units in the Davis property will be smaller than the units in the Cosmo or the Belfiore. Also, where's the Westcreek property map? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The plot doesn't seem that big. The Randall Davis condo tower could be quite tall.

I don't recall it being any bigger than the sky house plot. There was a plot layout on one of the first pages in the thread I believe..

But if they have a big detached parking garage it might only be in the 20 story range like SH?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Office tower, multifamily mid-rise, townhomes, etc projected for Westcreek.

Westcreek Complex Plans Unfold, Two More Tracts for Sale: http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/breaking-ground/2014/01/westcreek-complex-plans-unfold-two-more-tracts-for.html

12193101975_45530f7a3c_b.jpg

Never mind.. Randy's tract is plot D, and it is a bit bigger than SkyHouses plot, so this will have a little room to sprawl

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never mind.. Randy's tract is plot D, and it is a bit bigger than SkyHouses plot, so this will have a little room to sprawl

 

au contraire:

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2014/09/29/exclusive-new-luxury-condominium-high-rise-planned.html

 

Davis is building his high-rise on a little less than half of the 1.8-acre parcel he purchased. He plans to sell off the remaining 45,000 square feet to other developers.
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good it's on a small parcel, sad it's not 125 units as the flyer stated.

I'll take it.

Looking forward to the design

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm the only one but I think three Randall Davis buildings in such close proximity are two too many.

I was sad to hear this and had hoped he was selling this tract to someone who might do something stunning.

I don't like his style and think they have a real cheap poorly designed look. I don't like his choice of

materials, details or the colors of his exteriors. I don't think they will age very gracefully.

I know its all about infill and high rises for the most part, but there has to be a point

where we begin to think about aesthetics.

I don't think Randall has any.

Thats just my opinion and I'm sticking with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm the only one but I think three Randall Davis buildings in such close proximity are two too many.

I was sad to hear this and had hoped he was selling this tract to someone who might do something stunning.

I don't like his style and think they have a real cheap poorly designed look. I don't like his choice of

materials, details or the colors of his exteriors. I don't think they will age very gracefully.

I know its all about infill and high rises for the most part, but there has to be a point

where we begin to think about aesthetics.

I don't think Randall has any.

Thats just my opinion and I'm sticking with it.

You don't like the Astoria, or the old Titan proposal? Randy was responsible for renovating the Rice Hotel into residential..

At least he does something different and it doesn't look like every other high rise. I think an RD design is better than another similar ZC residential design.

Edited by cloud713
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

85-100 units on such a small parcel should make for a fairly high tower. The Astoria has 75 units and measures in at 28 stories. I think we'd see something at least 30 stories high.

 

I recall the two-story McDonald's on Post Oak had to be demolished and the new McDonald's built at its current site to accommodate the Astoria. It was not that big a plate. Does anyone know if 1.8 acres is larger or smaller than the parcel accommodating the Astoria? If smaller, we might see something 35 stories+

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just throwing this out there:

1.8 acres is 78,408 square feet, or (roughly) the size of a downtown or midtown block (depending on whether you include sidewalk ROW etc in the calculation)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm the only one but I think three Randall Davis buildings in such close proximity are two too many.

I was sad to hear this and had hoped he was selling this tract to someone who might do something stunning.

I don't like his style and think they have a real cheap poorly designed look. I don't like his choice of

materials, details or the colors of his exteriors. I don't think they will age very gracefully.

I know its all about infill and high rises for the most part, but there has to be a point

where we begin to think about aesthetics.

I don't think Randall has any.

Thats just my opinion and I'm sticking with it.

I completely agree. Of course the renderings of his buildings look nice but the end product not so much. I mean look at how the Cosmopolitan turned out. Looked good on paper not so much in real life. Titan looked great but it was never built. The jury is still out on Astoria the renderings are amazing but will the tower turn out the same ? Just have to wait and see. But I think it will end up being a disappointment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm the only one but I think three Randall Davis buildings in such close proximity are two too many.

I was sad to hear this and had hoped he was selling this tract to someone who might do something stunning.

I don't like his style and think they have a real cheap poorly designed look. I don't like his choice of

materials, details or the colors of his exteriors. I don't think they will age very gracefully.

I know its all about infill and high rises for the most part, but there has to be a point

where we begin to think about aesthetics.

I don't think Randall has any.

Thats just my opinion and I'm sticking with it.

I agree with most of this, except I would say that three Randall Davis buildings in such close proximity are three too many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most of this, except I would say that three Randall Davis buildings in such close proximity are three too many.

I concur. Let's bet on how ugly and cheap looking it could be? He absolutely is the lowest common denominator on looks, materials and design. What he does get, unfortunately, is location location location. As we say "dammit it all".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see nothing wrong with the Cosmo besides the bland beige garage.

The top ends abrubtly, in my opinion. If it had a spire or something it would have been a big improvement. That being said, there is a clear market for his stuff - not much I can add to that.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now