Embassy Suites By Hilton Houston Downtown At 1515 Dallas St.

[fatesdisastr]

I thought it was going to be 19. I wish and hope it won't be. It is going to look so tiny next to OPP DT and the Hilton which is at 24 stories

[LTAWACS]

The taller the better.

[Urbannizer]

Update by Phtolitherland

Edited May 14, 2010 by Urbannizer

[LTAWACS]

Thanks for the updates!

[Urbannizer]

Update May19th

JohnMe

[mfastx]

So what's the floor count now?

[LTAWACS]

I was there but i missed it. Sorry.

[Urbannizer]

May 26th , JohnMe

[Urbannizer]

May31st - dey37

[LTAWACS]

looks good.

[Arternative]

looks good.

What looks good specifically? Progress on the hotel or your post count?

[Gary]

What looks good specifically? Progress on the hotel or your post count?

LOL! His post count.

[mfastx]

How many more floors to go? I believe on another thread someone said it was already at 21 stories.

If that's true, it's almost topped out.

Not bad, it fills in nicely and doesn't look THAT short.

That's what she said.

[Triton]

LOL! His post count.

lol.

And it cant be the flags for the fallen soldiers that look good.

[fatesdisastr]

How many more floors to go? I believe on another thread someone said it was already at 21 stories.

If that's true, it's almost topped out.

Not bad, it fills in nicely and doesn't look THAT short.

That's what she said.

I highly doubt that it is almost topped out. According to the rendering we have all seen on here and is at the construction site, the building recesses 4 floors with another floor for the ES logo and name sitting on top of that. My guess is 5 floors.

To me it seems like they just poured floor #18. I count the whole base as floor 1.

[barracuda]

This is from last weekend. Sorry for the bad image quality (phone camera).

[Urbannizer]

As of now.

[mfastx]

How many floors to go? I think it's already past 22, but it seems as if there's still some more to go.

[Pumapayam]

Is there some random news of more floors being added?

I love that I am posting on my iPhone BTW. The mobile site is amazing from where it once was.

[fatesdisastr]

From the webcam this afternoon

If there is more floors to go (which the rendering shows there should be) they have really slowed down. They were averaging 1 story a week. This floor was paved a week ago today.

[Urbannizer]

Yesterday by JohnMe

[King Owl]

Today, it appears they are lowering the containment box onto the Embassy Suites. Hopefully it works better than the one in the Gulf!

[Subdude]

This is from last weekend. Sorry for the bad image quality (phone camera).

I wish something would be built to fill in the block between this and the Four Seasons.

[barracuda]

I wish something would be built to fill in the block between this and the Four Seasons.

Agree. Looking down from the Hilton, there are still an embarrassing number of surface lots that side of DT.

[TheNiche]

Agree. Looking down from the Hilton, there are still an embarrassing number of surface lots that side of DT.

You're embarrassed over literally nothing. Aren't there other extant things more worthy of your shame?

[barracuda]

You're embarrassed over literally nothing. Aren't there other extant things more worthy of your shame?

Thanks for reminding me why I've been keeping a distance from HAIF lately.

[fatesdisastr]

Can anyone tell me what the box container is that they unloaded on top of ES?

[bachanon]

Can anyone tell me what the box container is that they unloaded on top of ES?

if you look at the original rendering, there is a "box" with the "E" on it facing dallas. from the rendering, it looks as if the hotel faces dallas rather than the park. check out the picture on the mgmt company's website: http://www.amliberty.com/Projects/tabid/74/Default.aspx

[sargento03]

I don't know if the city is really hurting for hotel rooms, last i read in the HBJ, the city's hotel revenues have actually decreased(and predicted to so for the 2nd year in a row), definetely not a sign that more hotel rooms are needed. We're also expected to perform worse than the nation. In the Downtown area, however, you are correct, it does need more hotels.

http://houston.bizjo...29/daily31.html

What's nice is that this area of DT looks like it will be the hotel district, with the Four Seasons, Hilton, Embassy Suites all close together, and OPP, I really see the potential for more resiential and hotels here to create a more virbrant downtown.

I agree, I work for a hotel consulting firm and do quite a few assignments in the Houston area. Most houston submarkets are not hurting for hotel rooms. Houston has had one of the biggest increases in supply compared to other US cities during this downturn (all those little Holiday Inn Expresses that no one ever sees or thinks of). I believe the number is like 7% increase, but can double check.

Personally, I'd like to see less hotel rooms, higher occupancies, so that rates can begin to increase... and most may disagree, but i'll explain why. Houston has some of the cheapest room rates. I've seen the Four Seasons offer rates as low as $129 on the weekends, which is bordeline depressing. Until Houston sees some rate increases, we will never get new and sexy hotels, because it is financially unfeasible to build a new four seasons that will be forced to offer $129 rates. (my firm actually completed the study for this Embassy Suites -not me- and I don't remember, but did this property had some incentive from the city??)

I just finished doing an appraisal of a limited-service hotel in the medical center (one of the best performing markets) and this limited-service hotel had an average rate of $115 (actually very good for that type of property)....so considering building costs and earning potential, most people end up building the limited-service properties.

I've had calls from hotel brands (sorry can't disclose a lot of info), telling me that they've had a developer approach them wanting to build that hotel company's signature brand (think competitors to Four Seasons, St. Regis, etc.) in the Houston area, and they wanted to get my thoughts on the market. I love this city and tell them all the plusses, but as soon as we talk about numbers and what other properties are doing, the conversation ends. Numbers don't lie, the city's top two hotels (four seasons and st. regis) have an ADR (average daily rate) slightly above $200. They know what is going to costs them to build that signature property and the ADR that is needed to support those construction costs, which is way above $200. Some Marriotts and Westins in other US cities do better than that. :-(

Just to clarify, because I know this question always pops up: ADR is not to be confused with the rate you see on the hotel's website, also known as the rack rate. Many people ask: how is it that the XYZ Luxury Hotel has an ADR of $200 but when I go on their website their cheapest room is at $400? This is because XYZ Hotel, like all other hotels, set up contracts with their top accounts. They end up offering major companies rates of $130, because by doing so they guarantee themselves that business, which can be many many room nights in a year. Thus, they end up with a lower ADR at the end of the year.

[ricco67]

I agree, I work for a hotel consulting firm and do quite a few assignments in the Houston area. Most houston submarkets are not hurting for hotel rooms. Houston has had one of the biggest increases in supply compared to other US cities during this downturn (all those little Holiday Inn Expresses that no one ever sees or thinks of). I believe the number is like 7% increase, but can double check.

Personally, I'd like to see less hotel rooms, higher occupancies, so that rates can begin to increase... and most may disagree, but i'll explain why. Houston has some of the cheapest room rates. I've seen the Four Seasons offer rates as low as $129 on the weekends, which is bordeline depressing. Until Houston sees some rate increases, we will never get new and sexy hotels, because it is financially unfeasible to build a new four seasons that will be forced to offer $129 rates. (my firm actually completed the study for this Embassy Suites -not me- and I don't remember, but did this property had some incentive from the city??)

I just finished doing an appraisal of a limited-service hotel in the medical center (one of the best performing markets) and this limited-service hotel had an average rate of $115 (actually very good for that type of property)....so considering building costs and earning potential, most people end up building the limited-service properties.

I've had calls from hotel brands (sorry can't disclose a lot of info), telling me that they've had a developer approach them wanting to build that hotel company's signature brand (think competitors to Four Seasons, St. Regis, etc.) in the Houston area, and they wanted to get my thoughts on the market. I love this city and tell them all the plusses, but as soon as we talk about numbers and what other properties are doing, the conversation ends. Numbers don't lie, the city's top two hotels (four seasons and st. regis) have an ADR (average daily rate) slightly above $200. They know what is going to costs them to build that signature property and the ADR that is needed to support those construction costs, which is way above $200. Some Marriotts and Westins in other US cities do better than that. :-(

Just to clarify, because I know this question always pops up: ADR is not to be confused with the rate you see on the hotel's website, also known as the rack rate. Many people ask: how is it that the XYZ Luxury Hotel has an ADR of $200 but when I go on their website their cheapest room is at $400? This is because XYZ Hotel, like all other hotels, set up contracts with their top accounts. They end up offering major companies rates of $130, because by doing so they guarantee themselves that business, which can be many many room nights in a year. Thus, they end up with a lower ADR at the end of the year.

From what I understand (and I think I posted this several years ago), most of the hotels that are going up or built over the past couple of years have been in the pipeline for some time before the downtown. Houston (or the convention bureau) has been aggressively seeking more rooms for hotels to try to more medium and larger sized conventions, but they (the various conventions) have complained about the lack of rooms available in the downtown area. It is that reason why the new Convention Center Hotel has been looked at.

I don't have the figures on the various conventions that come through the GRB or Reliant on a year or biannual basis, but I assure you that it is rather significant impact to the local economy.

[totheskies]

I agree, I work for a hotel consulting firm and do quite a few assignments in the Houston area. Most houston submarkets are not hurting for hotel rooms. Houston has had one of the biggest increases in supply compared to other US cities during this downturn (all those little Holiday Inn Expresses that no one ever sees or thinks of). I believe the number is like 7% increase, but can double check.

Personally, I'd like to see less hotel rooms, higher occupancies, so that rates can begin to increase... and most may disagree, but i'll explain why. Houston has some of the cheapest room rates. I've seen the Four Seasons offer rates as low as $129 on the weekends, which is bordeline depressing. Until Houston sees some rate increases, we will never get new and sexy hotels, because it is financially unfeasible to build a new four seasons that will be forced to offer $129 rates. (my firm actually completed the study for this Embassy Suites -not me- and I don't remember, but did this property had some incentive from the city??)

I just finished doing an appraisal of a limited-service hotel in the medical center (one of the best performing markets) and this limited-service hotel had an average rate of $115 (actually very good for that type of property)....so considering building costs and earning potential, most people end up building the limited-service properties.

I've had calls from hotel brands (sorry can't disclose a lot of info), telling me that they've had a developer approach them wanting to build that hotel company's signature brand (think competitors to Four Seasons, St. Regis, etc.) in the Houston area, and they wanted to get my thoughts on the market. I love this city and tell them all the plusses, but as soon as we talk about numbers and what other properties are doing, the conversation ends. Numbers don't lie, the city's top two hotels (four seasons and st. regis) have an ADR (average daily rate) slightly above $200. They know what is going to costs them to build that signature property and the ADR that is needed to support those construction costs, which is way above $200. Some Marriotts and Westins in other US cities do better than that. :-(

Just to clarify, because I know this question always pops up: ADR is not to be confused with the rate you see on the hotel's website, also known as the rack rate. Many people ask: how is it that the XYZ Luxury Hotel has an ADR of $200 but when I go on their website their cheapest room is at $400? This is because XYZ Hotel, like all other hotels, set up contracts with their top accounts. They end up offering major companies rates of $130, because by doing so they guarantee themselves that business, which can be many many room nights in a year. Thus, they end up with a lower ADR at the end of the year.

Wow thanks for the expert opinion from an industry insider!!

I suspect that much of the issue lies within Houston's layout which affects our hotel needs. The issue isn't that there is a lack for number of rooms total, but number of rooms in an area like the CBD. As long as the number of CBD visitors continues to increase, then we have a reason to want more hotels in the area. I agree... the city may be saturated for hotel rooms, but there are a disproportionate number of rooms within the CBD.

I'm of the opinion that the CBD rooms could also be more expensive, but precedent is helping to keep the prices low.

[TheNiche]

I'm of the opinion that the CBD rooms could also be more expensive, but precedent is helping to keep the prices low.

It's competition, not precedent.

['Stonian]

Hey guys, I'm afraid this Embassy Suites building is turning out alot like the 35-story Memorial Hermann MONTROSITY out on I-10. After studying the renderings and the recently updated construction photos here showing the installation of the ES logo "Containment Box", I've figured out the discrepancy in floor count from the original announcement of 22-stories to the later 19-story references. I could be wrong but it seems to me that ES will indeed be ONLY 19 stories. These jokers have scrapped 3 of the top 4 recessed floors (the ones with the circular balconies) and have instead placed the architecural box and "spire" (hopefully it's still in the plan!) directly on top of what appears to be the 18th floor hence forming the 19th floor!!! I count the base of the building to be 2 floors with 16 standard floors of hotel rooms topped with 1 penthouse/mechanical floor above totalling 19 stories.

I'm extremely disappointed that this hotel will not stay true to its rendering because I think this new design is a considerable "step down" from an architectural standpoint. IMO the recessed floors on top made the entire design attractive even considering its rather smallish stature next to OPP & Discovery Tower. Now we're going to be left with a cheap flat-roofed stucco-clad building that looks like the whole crown/spire thingy was placed on top as an afterthought similar to the control tower contraption the top of Memorial Hermann Tower on I-10.

The only consolation prize (according to today's Houston Business Journal) will be that the ES Logo Box will be lit up as a beacon at night...., but overall still a disappointment nontheless! I will admit that appreciate the night-time lighting on the Memorial Hermann complex but actually I'm pissed about ES-Downtown..., I know Houston is notorious for having limited zoning (I say "limited" because I beleive any sort of developmental ordinances is a form of zoning), but does the City of Houston atleast have an Architectural Controls Committee that approves building designs and subsequent changes during construction. I mean who lets these developers get away with this shyt just to save a buck or two?? ..., & Niche I realize 3 entire floors cost considerably more than "a buck or two", but you get my point!

[TheNiche]

...does the City of Houston atleast have an Architectural Controls Committee that approves building designs and subsequent changes during construction. I mean who lets these developers get away with this shyt just to save a buck or two?? ..., & Niche I realize 3 entire floors cost considerably more than "a buck or two", but you get my point!

Changing the prints in mid-course is a rather mundane procedure so long as the structure already in place is adequate to the task. That's a good thing, too, because draftsmen do make mistakes from time to time, and holding up an entire project on account of it can become very costly very quickly.

As for the aesthetics, unless the City contributed land or money to the project, a tax abatement, or some related variance, where the developer would've entered into a covenant with the City regarding the size or appearance of the building, then the City has no reason to deny the changes. Moreover, in the wake of the Ashby controversy and a pending lawsuit, the City would probably not want to overstep its bounds and either risk further litigation or the perception among developers that the City is an unfriendly entity. Downtown development is risky as it is; you don't want developers pro forming an allowance for the possibility of getting screwed by the City.

['Stonian]

Well it was my understanding that the City did give a tax abatement/incentive for this project because it was within 4 blocks of the GRB convention center, however I'm not sure (& seriously doubt) that the C. of HOU entered into a covenant to control design changes.

This argument that a city becomes "unfriendly" if its planning dept. requires certain features/aestethics is pure hogwash to me because obviously the overwhelming majority of cities demand improvements. Otherwise how would such great projects CONSISTENTLY get built in those places? I mean why would developers elsewhere (Atlanta, Seattle, Chicago, NY etc.) include the added expense of aesthetic upgrades if they were not required or at the very least encouraged to do so? I'm not advocating that Houston start strong-arming developers into conforming, but something has got to be done to change this "Take-whatever-we-can-get" mindset that has infiltrated my hometown in the last 20 years.

Now this is not to say that Houston has not added any cool projects recently (MainPlace, Enron 2, Discovery Tower & OPP come to mind) but they are too few & far between! The majority of recent projects are strictly ulititarian especially many of the bland boxy mid-rises out on I-10/Energy Corridor. I can live with these mundane functional

structures out in the suburbs, but I believe our urban core (downtown, med center, uptown) should be held to a higher standard.

Development in general is inherently risky, but I would not single out downtown Houston as any more risky than any other city for that matter. In fact, right about now, Houston is probably one of the safer bets in the country. Here in Atlanta we are so overbuilt with new hotel, condo, and office towers that it will probably be another 5-7 years before we see another crane dotting the skyline.

Although Downtown Houston has more than a few absolutely stunning architectural gems , I believe its still overun with a lot of the run-of-the-mill 20-40 story unimaginative towers. Therefore (IMHO), every new building constructed should add a distinct architectural element (as well as serve form/function) to break up the monotony. Again, just my opinion, but after such initial promise, this Embassy Suites is turning out to be a real disappointment!

[TheNiche]

Well it was my understanding that the City did give a tax abatement/incentive for this project because it was within 4 blocks of the GRB convention center, however I'm not sure (& seriously doubt) that the C. of HOU entered into a covenant to control design changes.

It has been a long-standing policy of the City of Houston not to provide subsidy or tax abatement to residential projects. That's how Houston Pavilions ended up mostly as a retail center. What likely happened here was that they (wisely) downsized on the condo component (because condos are stupid!) without modifying the tax abated hotel component.

This argument that a city becomes "unfriendly" if its planning dept. requires certain features/aestethics is pure hogwash to me because obviously the overwhelming majority of cities demand improvements.

I've worked on developments where a municipality stalled out a project for over a month because they wanted the color of the trim changed to something puke-colored. And a month's worth of delays on a $40 million property translates to several hundred thousand dollars of added direct costs and opportunity costs. Don't tell me that developers won't pay attention to that.

Otherwise how would such great projects CONSISTENTLY get built in those places? I mean why would developers elsewhere (Atlanta, Seattle, Chicago, NY etc.) include the added expense of aesthetic upgrades if they were not required or at the very least encouraged to do so? I'm not advocating that Houston start strong-arming developers into conforming, but something has got to be done to change this "Take-whatever-we-can-get" mindset that has infiltrated my hometown in the last 20 years.

Show me a photo or rendering of a "great" Embassy Suites. Seriously. I dare you to type in "Embassy Suites architecture" on a Google image search.

I believe our urban core (downtown, med center, uptown) should be held to a higher standard.

Let's say that you could dictate your standard to the Houston city council. What would it be? How do you think that that would contrast with their groupthink standard? Don't get me wrong; places like Uptown Park are hideous, but at least it isn't derivative of CoolTown, USA. You know that that's what would happen, and it'd have the opposite of the intended effect.

[UrbaNerd]

Let's say that you could dictate your standard to the Houston city council. What would it be? How do you think that that would contrast with their groupthink standard? Don't get me wrong; places like Uptown Park are hideous, but at least it isn't derivative of CoolTown, USA. You know that that's what would happen, and it'd have the opposite of the intended effect.

What do you mean by "CoolTown" USA? Just wondering. Your definition of this would probably be quite amusing to me.

[TheNiche]

What do you mean by "CoolTown" USA? Just wondering. Your definition of this would probably be quite amusing to me.

Initially I was going to write in "The Woodlands" to emphasize how boring it would be. Then I realized that the aesthetics of "The Woodlands" are more or less dictated by one entity, the Woodlands Development Corporation, and that that was not only not an instance of groupthink...but that boring actually seems to work out for them pretty well, all things considered.

Then I thought of Portland, OR, the poster-child for over-planning, activism, and obstructionism. For all the hype, well...look at it. No groundbreaking architecture to be found, here. Inoffensive is the name of the game.

Don't get me wrong, Houston has numerous plain-jane buildings. Every city does. The point is not that I don't think that many designs couldn't have been improved, just that aesthetics determined by committee are a worse fate.

[RedScare]

Otherwise how would such great projects CONSISTENTLY get built in those places? I mean why would developers elsewhere (Atlanta, Seattle, Chicago, NY etc.) include the added expense of aesthetic upgrades if they were not required or at the very least encouraged to do so? I'm not advocating that Houston start strong-arming developers into conforming, but something has got to be done to change this "Take-whatever-we-can-get" mindset that has infiltrated my hometown in the last 20 years.

Development in general is inherently risky, but I would not single out downtown Houston as any more risky than any other city for that matter. In fact, right about now, Houston is probably one of the safer bets in the country. Here in Atlanta we are so overbuilt with new hotel, condo, and office towers that it will probably be another 5-7 years before we see another crane dotting the skyline.

Interesting that you compliment and denigrate Atlanta at the same time. If Atlanta is so overbuilt that it will be years before another building is built, why should Houston attempt to emulate them? And, did you really just complain that a single building was built 3 stories shorter than the initial press release stated, and further indict a city of 2.25 million for its complicity in allowing it?

Edited July 3, 2010 by RedScare

[UrbaNerd]

Initially I was going to write in "The Woodlands" to emphasize how boring it would be. Then I realized that the aesthetics of "The Woodlands" are more or less dictated by one entity, the Woodlands Development Corporation, and that that was not only not an instance of groupthink...but that boring actually seems to work out for them pretty well, all things considered.

Then I thought of Portland, OR, the poster-child for over-planning, activism, and obstructionism....

Ah, gotcha. Would you say the same thing about say, Denver? Their skyline and overall architecture isn't exactly impressive, and they are also trying to "urbanize" and go dense like Portland. I am not too familiar with the regulations and economic conditions in Denver, but I have this one friend who constantly crows about how "progressive" they are up there.

[TheNiche]

Ah, gotcha. Would you say the same thing about say, Denver? Their skyline and overall architecture isn't exactly impressive, and they are also trying to "urbanize" and go dense like Portland. I am not too familiar with the regulations and economic conditions in Denver, but I have this one friend who constantly crows about how "progressive" they are up there.

I don't know enough about Denver to judge. They're not exactly a hotbed for growth, so my experiences there are limited.

[scarface]

I've been to Denver a couple of times and It does appear to be more progressive than Houston, at least in its downtown area development and mass transit. However, it probably lacks when it comes to restaurants, shopping, diversity, and culture.

[KinkaidAlum]

Hopefully they finish off the top of the Embassy Suites to look like the rendering becaue right now, the light box does seem awkward.

[lockmat]

You guys are gonna just love this.

I had a wild and wishful thought that since there is so much room on the east side of this block that it could be a potential expansion site for another hotel. Big time wishful thinking, I know. But I thought, "who knows"...until now.

See below the site plan which features a spectacular view from discovery green towards the hotel, a row of parking spots, most likely flanked by bubbly green bushes.

I also thought this was interesting since it shows how much everything costs:

http://www.gentrymillscapital.com/PDFs/Property_Summary.pdf

[lockmat]

Or maybe those parking lines are just the pre-existing ones? *fingers crossed*

[Urbannizer]

July 6th

JohnMe

Edited July 7, 2010 by Urbannizer

[citizen4rmptown]

Flickr Grant Tucker

[fatesdisastr]

That is an awesome photo, it almost looks like it was drawn with pastel with the colors the way they are.

[Urbannizer]

Taken yesterday:

Photolitherland

[Urbannizer]

more of embassy suites:

Link

Edited July 17, 2010 by Urbannizer