Jump to content
Ron4tx

1111 Rusk: Texaco Building Renovation

Recommended Posts

My sister told me she worked in the old Texaco building, once, in a banking branch. She kept talking about the very old elevator she had to take (to get to the basement, I think she said), and how scary it was. I couldn't believe she actually worked there. I just thought wow, how cool! She talked about how old the records (papers) were, everything was old style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sum additional data/info. The old hisorical 12 story (no #10 noted from source, mechanical maybe?) Bldg. had a (710-20) San Jacinto address w/no address noted for Rusk. It is sited on the S/E corner of Rusk/San Jac w/a compass oreintation as north to south.

In the lobby of the Bldg. was Eddie Rapp Cigar Store.

The 4 adjacent streets are as follows: Capitol (1100 blk) w/Southwestern Bell Telephone across the str.

San Jacinto (700 blk) w/old Sam Houston Post (now US Customs House) across the str.

Rusk (1100 blk.) w/Alright Auto Park across the str. &

Fannin (700 blk.) w/Houston Post, Tx. State Hotel, & Walgreen's across the str.

Sources: 1940 Donwowner map w/specific details of ALL merchants/Bldg's.

1945-46 City Directory w/specific details a to ALL known tenents w/n each Bldg. etc.

Respectfully

DMac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, i read that article this morning... great news. hopefully it transpires. downtown could use all the residential it can get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, i read that article this morning... great news. hopefully it transpires. downtown could use all the residential it can get.

Agreed, I know I posted 1111 Rusk pics in the past, but mostly under different topics, so I took these new ones yesterday:

th_P1010617.jpg

th_P1010618.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the pictures from the bizjournal article, it appears they are also planning on constructing a new building in the vacant lot next to the old structures:

http://www.bizjourna...-1111-rusk.html

While the pics look sweet, pity you couldn't give more of a rundown on it then the quick blurb before the HBJ asked for a subscription.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phase I-

240 apartments in the original buildings

commercial and retail space on floors one and two

heavy focus on 1 bedroom apartments

roofdeck, special events venue, and corporate housing will be offered

modeled after a successful project called Metro67 in Memphis but will be more upscale

rental rates expected to come in just under One Park Place

Phase II-

120 additional units in a new tower (no indication of size but rendering appears to be around 15 floors)

new parking garage

Project groundbreaking on phase I within a year.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the place in Memphis. Looks nice. Hopefully this will go forward and the third time will be the charm (after the Ritz and Renaissance failed to materialize).

http://www.metro67.com

Edited by KinkaidAlum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While the pics look sweet, pity you couldn't give more of a rundown on it then the quick blurb before the HBJ asked for a subscription.

I don't have a subscription there either, so all I could tell you is what is in that blurb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 new apartments in the plans for downtown houston in addition to old Texaco Building? I first saw the tip on skyscraper page then found this article.

http://mckenziedrakerelocation.com/2011/05/new-life-for-downtown-houston/

"Indeed, Laura Van Ness, business development director at Central Houston Inc., said the downtown organization is hearing rumblings from two other developers considering the downtown market for apartment projects.

“Now that One Park Place is open and successful and the credit markets have started to loosen a little bit, I think we’ll see more developers starting to ride that wave,” Van Ness said. “We are seeing other serious developers coming back and looking at the market.”

Van Ness, who would not elaborate on the pair of potential new projects, said that before the credit crisis hit a few years ago, there were two other apartment projects under consideration downtown. Both of those deals later disappeared off the drawing board, essentially bringing activity to a grinding halt."

But with One Park Place reaching 90 percent-plus occupancy, Bruce McClenny, president of Houston-based Apartment Data Services Inc., which tracks apartment activity, said a new wave of downtown apartments would likely be met with strong demand."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, thats great that OPP has 90% occupancy, great news for enticing new development downtown. But, OPP also is on Disco Green so other apartments downtown or condos may not do so well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, thats great that OPP has 90% occupancy, great news for enticing new development downtown. But, OPP also is on Disco Green so other apartments downtown or condos may not do so well...

Post Rice Lofts and the Humble Tower are also doing well, and are much better indicators than One Park Place. The renovation of Houston House may destabilize the downtown market a bit, but if this project were to hit the market in another 18 or 24 months, they'd be able to bleed Houston House while it tries to renew leases without concessions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems unquestionable positive. The only way downtown can contine to improve is if people actually move there. This initial subsidy should pay for itself as long as the city continues to encourage development. On top of that, this is currently a derelict building that, once renovated, will become a gorgeous historic landmark downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would the city not eventually make their money back through property tax and such?

What is proposed is an $82 million project of which the current taxable value is $16 million, so that any yield on investment would be the difference of the two, $66 million. However, if the project is not viable without $14 million of subsidy, then its contribution toward fair market value would be only $52 million. (Remember, the only value that is taxable is a building's fee simple fair market value, meaning that value of the building alone without any financial agreements such as leases, debt financing...or direct government subsidy, especially when that subsidy is a non-recurring event.)

The City's (and thereby the TIRZ's) current property tax rate is 0.63875%, so annual tax revenue would be $332,150. It would take 43 years to recoup the dollar amount of its investment. However, that does not account for the time value of money. If the City (or more accurately, the TIRZ) were willing to give up a dollar today for a riskless dollar and three cents a year from now (which given its cash-strapped budget and the undeniable fact that HCAD's appraised values are inherently risky and chronically below actual market value, seems unlikely) then a perpetuity of $332,150 would be worth approximately $11 million. But then...perpetuities can be sold for liquid cash. Direct one-time subsidies to developers in Dallas are forever!

The savvy HAIFer might rebut that the sales tax would make up a portion of the difference, however the TIRZ would be funding the subsidy and the TIRZ does not collect a sales tax. A differently-minded savvy HAIFer might also point out that 1) "workforce housing" is unlikely to spur any economic windfalls in the downtown area, and that 2) to a large extent, this expensive housing for poor people in the downtown area would only undercut the market for inexpensive housing for poor people in the rest of Houston, hurting the remainder of the City's tax base, not that the TIRZ would care, and nor should support this project in the first place for reasons previously stated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is proposed is an $82 million project of which the current taxable value is $16 million, so that any yield on investment would be the difference of the two, $66 million. However, if the project is not viable without $14 million of subsidy, then its contribution toward fair market value would be only $52 million. (Remember, the only value that is taxable is a building's fee simple fair market value, meaning that value of the building alone without any financial agreements such as leases, debt financing...or direct government subsidy, especially when that subsidy is a non-recurring event.)

The City's (and thereby the TIRZ's) current property tax rate is 0.63875%, so annual tax revenue would be $332,150. It would take 43 years to recoup the dollar amount of its investment. However, that does not account for the time value of money. If the City (or more accurately, the TIRZ) were willing to give up a dollar today for a riskless dollar and three cents a year from now (which given its cash-strapped budget and the undeniable fact that HCAD's appraised values are inherently risky and chronically below actual market value, seems unlikely) then a perpetuity of $332,150 would be worth approximately $11 million. But then...perpetuities can be sold for liquid cash. Direct one-time subsidies to developers in Dallas are forever!

The savvy HAIFer might rebut that the sales tax would make up a portion of the difference, however the TIRZ would be funding the subsidy and the TIRZ does not collect a sales tax. A differently-minded savvy HAIFer might also point out that 1) "workforce housing" is unlikely to spur any economic windfalls in the downtown area, and that 2) to a large extent, this expensive housing for poor people in the downtown area would only undercut the market for inexpensive housing for poor people in the rest of Houston, hurting the remainder of the City's tax base, not that the TIRZ would care, and nor should support this project in the first place for reasons previously stated.

Where do you get "housing for poor people"? These are slated to be approximately 1,000 square foot apartments renting for $2,200/month.

Edited by Houston19514
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where do you get "housing for poor people"? These are slated to be approximately 1,000 square foot apartments renting for $2,200/month.

Poor is a relative term. Without the subsidy from the city the rent would have to be higher. If the city subsidizes the development of this project then they are helping to pay the rent for people who are too "poor" to afford a 1000sf apartment downtown. If people that can pay $2200 a month for an apartment downtown aren't poor then this is could be considered welfare for the "rich". It's too bad we can't all get help from the city with our rent or mortgage payments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where do you get "housing for poor people"? These are slated to be approximately 1,000 square foot apartments renting for $2,200/month.

Nancy stated that a tax credit developer was backing the project. I'm not trying to imply that qualifying applicants would be "poor", but they sure aren't rich.

As for $2,200/month on 1,000-square-foot units ($2.20 PSF), I'd be interested in knowing where you get that! That's very aggressive. Post Rice Lofts averages $1.51 and Humble Tower averages $1.72. The only redeveloped historic building that gets rents like you've described is 1414 Congress, which gets $2.22 PSF...but they're all 207-square-foot SRO housing units operated by a non-profit. True enough, Finger does better at One Park Place, but this is no One Park Place. Finger's market for tenants is altogether different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nancy stated that a tax credit developer was backing the project. I'm not trying to imply that qualifying applicants would be "poor", but they sure aren't rich.

As for $2,200/month on 1,000-square-foot units ($2.20 PSF), I'd be interested in knowing where you get that! That's very aggressive. Post Rice Lofts averages $1.51 and Humble Tower averages $1.72. The only redeveloped historic building that gets rents like you've described is 1414 Congress, which gets $2.22 PSF...but they're all 207-square-foot SRO housing units operated by a non-profit. True enough, Finger does better at One Park Place, but this is no One Park Place. Finger's market for tenants is altogether different.

I got the rental and square footage numbers from the Chron.

You have apparently jumped to the conclusion that the tax credit financing is for low-income housing. Not likely. It is almost certainly an historic rehabilitation tax credit.

Why have you assumed that this is "no One Park Place"?

Edited by Houston19514
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is he thinks this is no OPP because OPP is new construction and this is rehab of space and structure not originally designed for this purpose. Thats why he compared it to Rice, Humble, etc.

Edited by JJxvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the rental and square footage numbers from the Chron.

You have apparently jumped to the conclusion that the tax credit financing is for low-income housing. Not likely. It is almost certainly an historic rehabilitation tax credit.

Why have you assumed that this is "no One Park Place"?

Thank you for posting the link to the full article. You may be right about the historical tax credit component, however some people may still see it as controversial that the City would provide subsidy to enable State-administered federal subsidy.

JJxvi nailed it as to why I don't think that this project can rely upon One Park Place as a rent comp. But in addition, I'd point out that One Park Place has better view corridors, a nice large new park that seems to flow from it, and that it is within an easier walking distance to the Houston Pavilions and the Park Shops. Its probably the best single-block site in all of Houston. I'd argue that Humble Tower and Post Rice Lofts have better locations too, one fronting Main Street and across from the Pavilions, the other nearer to Market Square Park.

So yeah, I think that the pro forma rents are too aggressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for posting the link to the full article. You may be right about the historical tax credit component, however some people may still see it as controversial that the City would provide subsidy to enable State-administered federal subsidy.

JJxvi nailed it as to why I don't think that this project can rely upon One Park Place as a rent comp. But in addition, I'd point out that One Park Place has better view corridors, a nice large new park that seems to flow from it, and that it is within an easier walking distance to the Houston Pavilions and the Park Shops. Its probably the best single-block site in all of Houston. I'd argue that Humble Tower and Post Rice Lofts have better locations too, one fronting Main Street and across from the Pavilions, the other nearer to Market Square Park.

So yeah, I think that the pro forma rents are too aggressive.

I never suggested it would not be controversial. No doubt it will be. (The Dallas developer may be surprised at that, since up in Dallas they just upon the city vaults for anyone who whispers the words "downtown residential".)

You may be right on the pricing. I have to agree the location is not quite as nice as One Park Place, but not so sure it's much lesser of a location than Humble or Rice (perhaps a little quieter location than either of those). Depends on what one is looking for. Finished out correctly, it could be a VERY attractive property, IMO.

It may depend on the amenities (which they are saying will be high-end) and finish levels. Probably a significantly different product than the loft-like Rice apartments and probably higher-end finsishes than Humber Tower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A more up-to-date fit and finish and an amenity deck on top of the parking garage probably would make this a best-in-class property. Certainly, developers are willing to get creative to one-up the last property that got built. That said, I'm still having difficulty with the location. I don't think that people who want to lease apartments downtown are generally looking for quiet and solitude; if that's their preference then affluent renters-by-choice have many options.

Houston House (averaging $1.89/sf) is similarly constrained, even though it has some fantastic views, recently-redone amenities, and much smaller easier-to-lease units (averaging 665 sf). Granted, it is ugly to look at from the street, but I feel like their pricing is much closer to reality. I feel like $2.00 psf is a better place for pro forma rents. The only way I can figure that the developer would make it nice enough to support higher rents would be if they build it to condominiums specs with a conversion as their exit strategy...but that would be a bad idea, too, because 270 units would be too many condos in one place at one time. Fifty units might work at some point in an ill-defined future, but that doesn't seem like it would work here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this area is going to suffer from body clubs and such. The way I see it, it is a relatively quiet section on dt that has ready access to the med center, reliant, theater, employment centers, nearby arenas and some decent dining and entertainment.

Not everyone wants to have a bar across the street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everyone wants to have a bar across the street.

Right, and those people move to the Museum District, where there is also a good selection of new and old housing stock (at better price points), a walkable urban environment, cultural amenities, fewer beggars, good proximity to all the regional destinations you just mentioned, etc.

My sense is that the typical person that wants to live downtown either wants to experience the hustle and bustle of urban grit...or that they just moved here and doesn't understand Houston's geography or housing market well enough to make a better decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really close to where the new train station will be.

There will be a station (east-bound) directly across Rusk Street from this building and a (west-bound) station adjacent to the property on the Capitol side.

Edited by Houston19514

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be a station (east-bound) directly across Rusk Street from this building and a (west-bound) station adjacent to the property on the Capitol side.

Wow, then they'll have quick access to 3 stations, well 4, if you count the new Main station as 2 (1 station, 2 directions).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could happen fourth quarter 2012.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poor is a relative term. Without the subsidy from the city the rent would have to be higher. If the city subsidizes the development of this project then they are helping to pay the rent for people who are too "poor" to afford a 1000sf apartment downtown.

I'm paying $950 for 850 square feet one block away at St. Germain. $2200 is actually quite high compared to: St. Germain, Hogg Palace, Post Rice, Bayou Lofts, Franklin Lofts, or even Commerce Tower.

So no, $2200 is not "too poor" for 1000 sq ft downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since I didn't get my dream house, part of me is getting a little bored and fed up with owning a house and wants to go back to renting -- preferably in a cool downtown loft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some renderings on my phone I found on Bing. Posted them on my facebook a month or so ago. Will e-mail them to myself and post them on my computer at home. They look fairly new, but the only way you can tell it's the old Texaco Building is the buidling itself. The background looks like a completely different place. Anyways, will post them later!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither one of those backgrounds look anything like Houston, but you're right, that is 811 Rusk.

It Looks like Kirksey's Confidential urban project. http://www.kirksey.com/project/confidential_urban_mixed_use_plan

But this one is 23 acres, that's huge! How could that fit downtown? How many blocks would that be?

Edited by lockmat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...I wonder if this was the 38 story residential building my friend alluded to.  

 

 

lockmat: But this one is 23 acres, that's huge! How could that fit downtown? How many blocks would that be?

 

Maybe it was an error and is supposed to be 2.3 acres? That's pushing it too though because a downtown block is about two acres.

Edited by brijonmang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. I counted 38 floors.

 

I hope this is real. Opening up that block would be huge and I like the idea of residential over hotel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...I wonder if this was the 38 story residential building my friend alluded to.

Maybe it was an error and is supposed to be 2.3 acres? That's pushing it too though because a downtown block is about two acres.

2.3 would make more sense. But I just noticed for the first time that at the bottom left is a train, so that would eliminate texaco :(

Not to hijack the thread, but i think the building in the background resembles Continental?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TexacoRend2_early2013.jpg

Conversion of Houston's historic Texaco Headquarters into upscale, market rate apartments, adding new building space, ground-level retail and structured parking. The project will also be added to the Houston Tunnel system.

http://www.hbginc.com/news/projects/multihousing-and-mixed-use/historic-texaco-building-apartments/#.UaVX2Pq9LCQ

Edited by Urbannizer
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You dirty dog super sleuth!

 

The sad thing is, it's not even on their "on the boards" link. Plus, Pearl Realty is the developer now, not Provident Realty.

Edited by lockmat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You dirty dog super sleuth!

 

The sad thing is, it's not even on their "on the boards" link. Plus, Pearl Realty is the developer now, not Provident Realty.

 

Source?   I think you might be confusing this project with the JW Marriott, which is Pearl Realty project. 

Edited by Houston19514

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...