SMUrban

Just looked over the final design for the park again and it is going to be amazing. Great job with the budget, limited space, etc. Truly a unique setting for this part of the country.

Unfortunately your stats don't mean squat to retailers. It is a generally accepted rule of thumb that it takes a base of 10,000 residents in an urban/downtown setting to support general retail. The sad fact is that daytime population is meaningless because the people are there to work and not shop. They will eat and buy stamps and run small errands (tunnel businesses), but they do not make significant purchases such of soft goods (clothes) and certainly do not buy appliances and furniture. Everyday retail will not exist nor thrive until Houston reaches that magical number of 10,000 residents. These retailers will not (and should not from a business standpoint) take the risk of opening a store in the urban core when they can plop down a cookie cutter store with the stock design, stock sq ft and stock clientele in suburbia and make a nice profit. They only open stores in urban areas such as Chicago and NYC because that is where the population is. I don't like it, but these are the rules and Houston has to play by them.

I understand your point about the amusement aspects of their projects, I dislike the Disneyfication of a lot of town center type developments, but that is what Cordish is known for and this is supposed to be an amusement type property. You might as well make the project what it is intended to be. If by class you mean deserted with a constantly rotating roster of tenants, then you're right, Bayou Place does have class.

Naming rights don't automatically go to the largest tenant in a building. Some landlords offer it as an incentive or perk to lure a large tenant, but in most cases when a building has low vacancy levels, the naming rights are leased or sold to the highest bidder. If the building is leased up and the landlord doesn't have to give it away to lure a tenant, it becomes a lucrative income stream for the building's owner.

I hope Cordish gets rid of the lease they hold from the city. Overall the projects the company has done have been outstanding, not so much in Houston. Browse their website and see how Houston got screwed. Cordish

My general thoughts on this project are good. It's hard to complain when you get an announcement like this for Downtown Houston. Not only is this more residential units for DT, but it is NEW construction. Even Dallas which is experiencing a major boom in both for sale and rental high rise construction, cannot claim a new residential building in the CBD, not to mention one that is 37 stories (I only use Dallas as the example because I'm very familiar with the development there and it has been a very active and hot market for new residential high rise construction, I'm not trying to start a pissing match. Also, I'm aware that the new 7-11 headquarters will have residential, but since this building will be exclusively residential that is the criteria I was using). Another huge thing for DT is getting the market. It's been said by people who know that is takes 2500 residents to support a grocer and 10,000 to support general retail. To get from one to the other you need that grocer in there. The Chron article said that DT has 3000+ residents but as far as I know there is no real grocery store. Since that is the case, the amount of residents in DT was probably not going to grow larger until that grocer moved in. It remains to be seen what kind of market will open, if it is similar to the Urban Market in DT Dallas, that would be a great step. http://www.urbanmarketdallas.com/ The negatives of this project as I see them are location and architecture. With the new park, this site becomes probably one of the top three development sites in the entire city. I say it's a negative because I wish this building was a for sale project. I realize there is a ground lease involved so ownership is out of the question, but I believe having a true condo tower in the premier part of the city would do more for DT than having a rental building. My second gripe is with the architecture. I realize Mr. Finger is taking a big risk right off the bat with this project, but I wish he took a greater risk with the architecture. A monumental building in this location as the front door to the park and with the back drop of the city, he had an amazing opportunity to create something truly unique in this city and quite frankly this country. I would have preferred something more modern in shape and material. Masonry buildings (brick) don't look right when they are built as skyscrapers. I'm all for masonry mid-rises and townhomes, etc, but I believe high-rises are the domain of steel and glass, to each his own... The two negatives are minor and one is a matter of my personal taste. I will say one more thing about the architecture though, Houston has some great buildings in the skyline and that spirit of cutting edge architecture has been lost. The last architecturally significant building built was the Enron addition and although I love it, it wasn't that risque. It simply complemented the tower that was already there. I hope the next generation of buildings in DT are more cutting edge. The positives far outweigh the minor negatives of this project. It is a great day for Houston and hopefully this will be a sign of things to come.

According to the above link and article from Oct. 24 2005, construction is scheduled to start in 4Q of 2006. Has anyone heard anything? By now, or very at least soon, we should see plans or more definite plans at least.

Trump said he was "scouting" locations in Dallas. This came out in the paper a few weeks before he was to speak at a motivational seminar. The general thought was that he did this to get his name in the paper and it has been documented that he has pulled the same trick in other cities before similar seminars. The condo market in Dallas is white hot, but there are no firm or even preliminary plans for a Trump branded development.

Judging by the website, they don't seem to be a developer. They are more of a land investment firm so I imagine they try to flip the land for a nice profit. That's a shame because for the price the land sold for, a developer could have done something amazing.

It's actually a substation, and it is not owned by the city so I believe there is little they can do. I agree that it has to go. The costs associatedwith moving it under ground are probably astronomical and only work in cities like NY. The only hope of it going anywhere is when land values increase such that the company is compelled to sell and move to another location. I will say that as substations go, it is dressed up quite nice. It has decorative lighting that changes color and actually adds to the street scape at ground level.

You make a good point. In an ideal world we would build an amazing park in an area of town where there can be redevelopment in an unimpeded 360 degree radius around the park. However, after studying the parcels that are around the park site I think this will work well, if not better than having the park in a rundown area. You have the convention center and hotel on the front door of park which guarantees you a steady stream of built in users (assuming they venture out of their rooms, meeting and otherwise). You also have the TC which is a block away. I don't believe the TC will directly effect attendance at the park, but people going to the games will notice the park and that may translate into more users on following visits to downtown Houston. The most exciting thing about the location is the open lots around the park. If the lots surrounding the park are developed and prove to be successful, I predict that the area between the park and MMP fills up next. On the opposite side of the park in the TC, HP and Park triangle you have a very desirable area to build residential. Not only does it have the cache of being near the Four Season, but you have a nice pocket park (forgot the name, Root - Brown?) which is always nice to walk out the front door too. The amenities that developers look for when they are building in Urban areas are all there, parks (quality of life issue), entertainment (TC and HP) and you have the first substantial quality commercial downtown in HP. All developers want critical mass and traffic, even without HP this site has it. All it takes is one developer to take a leap and build a quality product and the area from Leeland to Texas could become a great livable neighborhood. I'm afraid land prices (I hate speculators) might prevent this from happening, let's hope a developer has some foresight (and some land already under his control) to start this thing off.

I would have liked to attend the unveiling, but I live in Dallas, if anyone could give a recap I know it would be appreciated. As for the timing of projects in Houston, for being fans of development and spending lots of time talking about it, there are a large number of clueless posters as to project costs and time lines. Just because a project is announced, doesn't mean it will break ground the next month. There are tremendous lag times involved in any development. And we are lucky in Texas, try developing on either coasts and you are in for a major shock. As for the cost, I think the park is a bargain. This park is not simply throwing out some grass seed and creating open space, there are buildings, real landscaping and water features that start adding up real quickly, especially in this day and age of sky rocketing construction materials. This is by no means the perfect park, it is however unlike anything else in the city of Houston and Texas in general.

Anybody have an update on the park? According to their website they should be going out to bid fairly soon, if not already, and construction is to commence this summer and finishing Fall '07. I'd expect to see a final site plan before they go out to bid, right?

The idea that the city should do something is a good one. Here in Dallas, they passed an ordinance that requires parking lot operators to put in and maintain landscaping separating the public right of way from the parking. While this won't send owners scrambling to sell at any cost, it would be a dis-incentive to develop parking lots and hold them long term if this was implemented along side a tax. Developers say it's cost prohibitive to build high rises? Make it prohibitive to maintain and develop surface lots.

Sometimes if enough projects are announced they create their own momentum. People tend to feel comfortable if they know other projects will happen. On the flip side, you don't want a glut of available stock. But I believe for the immediate future, new projects will only help create a better residential environment. I'm not saying commercial services wouldn't help the situation.

I think what MMP needs is a neighborhood around it. The bars and restaurants will come once the people live there. Ideally 20 years from now the area is a vibrant neighborhood and MMP is an afterthought that becomes an amenity for four months a year. Nothing flashy, just mid-rises with active street levels is what it would take.

That's my point. If an institutional investor owned the property they would be more inclined to sell. The individual investor who hopes to fund his retirement off the property and has no immediate timetable is willing to hold on for the elusive pay day... It flies in the face of logic, but happens everyday, everywhere.

In regards to the alcohol thing, as I recall there was a problem with the ballpark being to close and they had to change the "official" or physical address of the ballpark so that it met the criteria (300ft. or whatever it is). I assume the same thing happened with the hotel. Regarding development around the ballpark as well as the light rail line, the problem has been land speculation. The success of the Jacobs Fields of the world hurt our park. Speculators and not developers, bought up the land around MMP thus making development that could make a neat neighborhood cost prohibitive. From what I understand (tours and seminars I've been to) the same has happened along the LR line in Midtown. Hopefully the market will correct, but that could be 10+ years down the line. What also hurts is if these tracts are owned by individual investors they are more apt to stick it out and hope for the payday they once envisioned, even if those expectations are unfounded.

They also got rid of what looked like a 2nd Residential tower closest to the rail.

http://www.simmonsvedder.com/ You can check out some of the other developments by this company. They seem to have the Urban Living - New Urbanist - Mixed-Use genre down.

Bayou Place is such a disappointment, especially considering the other developments the company has done. Look at the the website, it's just pathetic... http://www.bayouplace.com/ . Everytime I've been down there it's been dead, that facility has so much promise. I almost wish they had been delayed a few years and borrowed from similar projects that came online after Bayou Place. Check out Cordish's website and click on "New Developments" to see the other projects they've been involved with. http://www.cordish.com/

I wish the HOB would bring a more vibrant live music scene in the way of new venues for Houston. Part of having a city that is attractive to the citizens as well as tourists is a vibrant music scene. I love cities such as Austin and New Orleans, where you can pop into 5 or more clubs/bars a night and see different kinds of live music. I think Houston lacks this scene, at least in a concentrated area (I don't live in Houston, nor have I since I was two, so if this exists please correct me). With the influx of musical talent from New Orleans I was hoping this would change. Aside from Sammy's right outside of downtown, I haven't been to any other bar or club that has live music. If we could have 10-12 Sammy's in a 2-3 block area that have different genres of music live 5-7 nights a week, I believe that would go along way to creating a desirable neighborhood in or around downtown.

The HOB in Dallas was announced in the original plans for Victory (around 2000). After Palladium dropped out, the entire Victory master plan was scrapped, including the tenant list (included ESPN Zone). The Victory as is being built today has no plans for a HOB. There are rumors that they are looking for a place in Dallas and the rumor is it will be near the Southside on Lamar lofts and Gilley's (why can't they come up with their own stuff?). The dark horse location is Deep Ellum which has fallen on hard times. http://www.dallasobserver.com/Issues/2006-...ws/feature.html

Here is the webiste for one of the partners in the project, Entertainment Development Group. The good news is that they have the Houston project listed under the projects section. The bad news or just slightly odd is that it is a website for their Korean counterpart. It seems that most of the development they have done is overseas. They noted somewhere that the US site is under construction...time will tell. EDG

I know this topic was talked about in another thread (Pavilions, I think), but I don't believe it has it's own thread. Anyways I was in Houston for a wedding last weekend and I was staying at the Four Seasons, so I wandered across the bridge to the shops to check them out. Very pathetic, horrible tenant mix, nobody was there (granted it was a Sat.) but there was definitely A LOT of potential. It was very similar to the Galleria..design wise and obviously on a much smaller scale. I was thinking if they opened it up to the street more and/or the outside in general it would be a very enjoyable experience, as I wandered around I found a newspaper like receptacle that had the Houston Center's "Magazine", anyways it was basically all about the planned renovation. They plan to make it an "Urban Park" inside, in fact they used that term A LOT. They have some of the info. on their website if you want to check it out, but it's much more in-depth in the mag, I'd scan it if I had the technology and the knowledge, unfortunately I have neither. Construction Update