Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Urbannizer

Anadarko Tower III

Recommended Posts

We've heard rumors, and this pretty much confirms it..

Speaking at a real estate conference earlier this week, the head of real estate for global oil and gas independent Anadarko Petroleum Corp. said the company had additional land for another building at its campus in The Woodlands.

“We’ve got another 600,000 square feet we can put up once we’ve designed it,” John Frere said Tuesday at ULI Houston’s Suburban Marketplace at the Marriott Westchase.

http://blog.chron.com/primeproperty/2014/04/anadarko-campus-in-the-woodlands-could-grow-again/

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A shame that they didn't combine this with their latest tower. But Perhaps it's better The Woodlands doesn't have such a tall building as it might not work so well with the mid and low rises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Allison Tower is north of 800,000 sq. ft. Hackett Tower is in the 600,000 range.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool, thanks. I would assume this one will be atop a garage like Hackett..

 

possibly.  the land they own on the south side of the waterway has a parking garage connected to another building they may still partially occupy.  i think they would have more than just the one option of building on top of a parking garage.  at least we know anadarko is prone to building something interesting, unlike the mediocre stuff howard hughes is throwing up (pun intended).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the possible locations for this tower? I had always heard the south side of Lake Robbins. Seems like they'd want the tower to be connected to the main campus tho. Seems like I saw a town center rendering showing two high rises on the east side of Dillards. Would they build it there and connect a sky bridge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they own the lot directly across the waterway from the new tower, on the south side.  they were also leasing the majority or part of the older building on timberloch place facing the lake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe they own the Timberloch building (11 story tower) just south of the waterway, along with 14 total acres, including land west of Timberloch building parking garage. At least, they're the sole occupant of the Timberloch building.

 

The way they're growing, though, I don't think just one more ~30 story tower will cut it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to this, there are going to be many more highrises to dot The Woodlands skyline before it is all said and done. 

 

1798764_10104459328342134_1516427927_n.j

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to this, there are going to be many more highrises to dot The Woodlands skyline before it is all said and done. 

 

1798764_10104459328342134_1516427927_n.j

 

Nice, but old.  No Anadarko-Deuce.

 

I would hope the Woodlands developers would realize the need to build a few buildings taller - 25 10 floor buildings really gets cluttered!  I would think a building the scale of Austin's 4th and Congress Building would be perfect for The Woodlands, plus some sort of architectural embellishment at the crown would be nice as well.

 

*but probably not that old!*

 

Edited by arche_757
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm extremely proud, as per the ongoing "big city" momentum vs glamour factor, that is arising from montgomery county.  but am i the only one, that finds this all a bit strange?  i mean, i don't even know what other word to use other than strange....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm extremely proud, as per the ongoing "big city" momentum vs glamour factor, that is arising from montgomery county.  but am i the only one, that finds this all a bit strange?  i mean, i don't even know what other word to use other than strange....

Houston is a beast!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm extremely proud, as per the ongoing "big city" momentum vs glamour factor, that is arising from montgomery county.  but am i the only one, that finds this all a bit strange?  i mean, i don't even know what other word to use other than strange....

It took me awhile to like your posts and sometimes I don't really understand them but damn yeah dude this is really weird but like the guy above me said, this is just the power of Houston. Shouts out to no zoning laws and all but wow. How much longer until the Woodlands becomes its own legitimate city? Would that ever happen? (within the next 50-75 years of course)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Woodlands does have zoning, as has been said about it being master planned from the beginning. There are legally binding design standards and covenants.  There are separate Commercial and Residential standards. In order for a project to go forward it has to be reviewed by a Design Review Committee as well as a couple others to make sure it fits with the standards in place.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Woodlands does have zoning, as has been said about it being master planned from the beginning. There are legally binding design standards and covenants.  There are separate Commercial and Residential standards. In order for a project to go forward it has to be reviewed by a Design Review Committee as well as a couple others to make sure it fits with the standards in place.

Oh okay interesting thanks for clearing that up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Woodlands will vote on whether to become their own city in 2014.

 

I don't think so.   That was planned at one time, but back in 2012, the Woodlands township board decided against proceeding with that election.  I don't think any election is planned.  They are continuing to discuss  and plan the possibilities of eventually incorporating.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so would this be 498' or 500'? it lists two different heights..

and what is the likelihood of this moving forward?

Edited by cloud713

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW!!!! That would be noticeably taller than the Allison Tower. Exciting stuff for The Woodlands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What will happen to all of the Anadarko properties. 

It sounds like they will be selling several of their jets and letting go of many of their employees. 

I'm guessing no more Anadarko tower projects and perhaps they sell off one  of their Woodlands towers since one of the executives quoted in the announcements today that they would be letting go of many assets and employees to make up some of the costs of buying Anadarko's  Permian basin rights which is pretty much all they wanted.

I'd hate to be working for Anadarko right now and not knowing where you'll be in three months.

I'm sure The Woodlands is a little nervous about their tax base and the loss of employees that will probably relocate.

It's also interesting that  both Anadarko and Oxy's stock went down, and Chevrons went up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bobruss said:

What will happen to all of the Anadarko properties. 

It sounds like they will be selling several of their jets and letting go of many of their employees. 

I'm guessing no more Anadarko tower projects and perhaps they sell off one  of their Woodlands towers since one of the executives quoted in the announcements today that they would be letting go of many assets and employees to make up some of the costs of buying Anadarko's  Permian basin rights which is pretty much all they wanted.

I'd hate to be working for Anadarko right now and not knowing where you'll be in three months.

I'm sure The Woodlands is a little nervous about their tax base and the loss of employees that will probably relocate.

It's also interesting that  both Anadarko and Oxy's stock went down, and Chevrons went up.

3

 

Link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Link?

 

Houston Chronicle today 

Direct quotes from chief financial officer

 

 

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Oxy-CEO-on-Anadarko-We-were-not-going-to-let-it-13837034.php

Occidental’s Chief Financial Officer Cedric Burgher specifically mentioned cutting jobs and selling real estate and Anadarko’s fleet of four corporate jets as means of cost reductions.

“We don’t think we need all of those (jets), and we can reduce that along with, obviously, people and duplicate offices and real estate,” Burgher said Monday in a conference call, although he didn’t specifically cite anything in The Woodlands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bobruss said:

 

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Oxy-CEO-on-Anadarko-We-were-not-going-to-let-it-13837034.php

Occidental’s Chief Financial Officer Cedric Burgher specifically mentioned cutting jobs and selling real estate and Anadarko’s fleet of four corporate jets as means of cost reductions.

“We don’t think we need all of those (jets), and we can reduce that along with, obviously, people and duplicate offices and real estate,” Burgher said Monday in a conference call, although he didn’t specifically cite anything in The Woodlands.

 

Wow, this guy needs to watch what he says. Sounds like he is desperately trying to defend this purchase. Selling corporate jets is one thing but announcing job cuts to the public at this stage is not wise. He just made every person that works for these companies start thinking about moving to another company. The best people will leave before the layoffs start and then you are left with the rest. Their competitors will now start actively poaching the best people they have. Anadarko staff will stop working and start polishing resumes and making calls. Amateur hour.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jgriff said:

 

Wow, this guy needs to watch what he says. Sounds like he is desperately trying to defend this purchase. Selling corporate jets is one thing but announcing job cuts to the public at this stage is not wise. He just made every person that works for these companies start thinking about moving to another company. The best people will leave before the layoffs start and then you are left with the rest. Their competitors will now start actively poaching the best people they have. Anadarko staff will stop working and start polishing resumes and making calls. Amateur hour.

 

Anyone who hadn't already figured out there would be job cuts is not a person they should worry about losing.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Anyone who hadn't already figured out there would be job cuts is not a person they should worry about losing.

I’m in the middle of my third merger/buyout in 2 years. We didn’t have any layoffs on the first one and upper management is telling us we won’t  have any on this one either. The current one is creating a company with around 60k employees. I have 60 who work for me, we’ll be merging with a group around the same size. We plan no layoffs and are in fact hiring right now. A big reason behind the merger is getting the employees of the other company. Good employees in the energy sector are extremely difficult to find. We’ve been told over and over again to make sure that our staff know that this merger does not pose a threat to their jobs. A company with 10s of thousands of employees can reduce staff through attrition in a merger that is probably going to last years. You don’t need to have mass layoffs and it’s really stupid to announce them far more n advance if you’re going to do it. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, jgriff said:

I’m in the middle of my third merger/buyout in 2 years. We didn’t have any layoffs on the first one and upper management is telling us we won’t  have any on this one either. The current one is creating a company with around 60k employees. I have 60 who work for me, we’ll be merging with a group around the same size. We plan no layoffs and are in fact hiring right now. A big reason behind the merger is getting the employees of the other company. Good employees in the energy sector are extremely difficult to find. We’ve been told over and over again to make sure that our staff know that this merger does not pose a threat to their jobs. A company with 10s of thousands of employees can reduce staff through attrition in a merger that is probably going to last years. You don’t need to have mass layoffs and it’s really stupid to announce them far more n advance if you’re going to do it. 

 

Neither "job cuts" nor "reducing people" necessarily mean layoffs.  

Edited by Houston19514
  • Like 1

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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...