BigBlueContractor

On 5/3/2017 at 9:29 PM, mattyt36 said:

 

When was the award made and to whom? I can't find anything on HFC's website.

Over two years ago. Very Odd deal. The developers needed changes to the structure for different support for what they wanted to do. The "quazi PM firm" that was managing the job the office building/garage project that was going on at the time (who was a developer that lost the hotel project) rushed the contractor to make it impossible (or very costly) to make any changes to the structure. I just can't see one more hotel going over there right now or in two years. 

18 hours ago, mattyt36 said:

Did they ever even issue an RFP? I'm not sure you can call it a failure if they didn't.

The did and made an award. It is a quazi ground lease deal with HOT Taxes and block availability - very complicated deal. Will it ever happen - I would say Yes, when is the answer. I can tell you that Marriott getting lured to build what they did by Houston First - then subsequently Houston First wanting to put another hotel together probably didn't go over so well. 

27 minutes ago, Sparrow said:

What's all this talk of separating anyhow? I thought the jury building for the county was more of an organizational convenience than a need to isolate the populace from the law.

 

I served for nearly 2 months on a trial at the Bob Casey Federal Courthouse a few years back, and on many occasions walked in thru the metal detectors right behind or in front of the guys that were on trial or lawyers from either side. We jurors exercised good practice (as did they) and didn't ride in the same elevator up with them--we would just wait for the next one.  

 

Correct... It was more of preventing from you waiting outside in the rain when they have a pool they are picking from. Let's say it is more of convenience and knowing that your tax dollars are being well spent. 

They learned their lesson! Especially with the Jury Issue. They had to build a separate building just to house the jurors before they could go in. 

But you have to remember that was all master planned and their are tunnels that go from jails to criminal courthouse - it allows for seperation. 800 Bell would not allow that. They were also talking about 800 Bell housing the police HQ at 600 Travis. The original deal that was in place was a really complex delivery. 

The bottom line is that the COH needs new "social infrastructure", but they do not have enough money to pay for it. They would have to go to the voters asking to get 500+ to rebuild their jails, courthouses, and police center into a "campus". It is spread out right now, where Harris County is bundled together nicely. 

Not sure what the voters appetite would be on a large bond program for those types of facilities?

The study was done, high rise court facilities do not work. Major problems with conveyance of people, i.e. inmates and jury members. Also parking becomes a headache, people end up being late, etc... 

The top level is structural steel, long steel trusses, to eliminate columns. I believe the majority of the holding of the "processe's" will be on the top level. 

On 8/26/2016 at 4:23 PM, Luminare said:

 

No. This is pretty good pricing for a project like this. I've been on projects for large high schools that price at $145 mil. and they are enormous. They were also masonry. From the renderings it looks like they are going with much better and much cheaper contemporary materials. The scope seems like something that would be at around $500 mil.

You need to look at the whole market. Softening conditions might make it close to that. Especially, since it does not look like they are going underground for parking!

On 11/16/2016 at 1:01 PM, cloud713 said:

This possibility is very exciting.

However, there is no way this site would be the location for a Texans practice facility/HQ/mixed use development.

A football field by itself is over 1.1 acres. This site is 6 acres. If there weren't any attached facilities, the practice field would take up 1/5th of the site (assuming the building dimensions are the same size as the field).

And to compare a similar development concept, The Star in Frisco cowboys practice facility/HQ/mixed use development is 91 acres..

I'm not doubting the legitimacy of these rumors, I'm just saying this site couldn't fit such a development. Maybe they are in talks with the owners of the portion of the Astroworld site that doesn't belong to the Houston Livestock Show & Rodeo? Otherwise, I wonder if they would look towards the suburbs for such a development?

Never said the practice facility was going to this location, I stated a Mixed-Use that includes Texan's offices would be included. The practice facility would be elsewhere - there are two options with a mass amount of acerage.

Looks like that giant metal building may block a nice view.....

4 hours ago, Urbannizer said:

 

http://www.chron.com/sports/cougars/amp/UH-to-begin-construction-of-indoor-football-10617011.php

 

 

 

 

 

On 11/10/2016 at 0:26 PM, Houston19514 said:

 

Where did you see this news of a practice facility relocation?

Good connections. I can say it is very hush hush - by the time we publicly hear about it, it will be halfway built. 

Time will tell if it does happen - I side with Monarch. It is is a lot of talk and little action, it has been discussed for about 2-3 years now and nothing to show. 

I will believe it when I see it. 

Yes. That inflatable bubble has to go. 

Have you seen what Jerry did in Dallas, or what was done in Denver? This has some justification of why Mcnair is looking to relocate and create partnership "permanent" facility - not a inflatable balloon. 

This development being most likely a destination for a "Texans Headquarters" in post oak, would also put the practice facility location into question. Truly, the model that just happened in Dallas is one that other owners across the NFL may look at as the best way to earn extra revenue, but also provide world class facilities to their team, i.e. not a big bubble.

No updated renderings available. ZCA to my understanding is no longer involved, a international boutique architect has been selected. 

The red box on the map, might be one of the partners that were in discussions early on. They were planning on handing off the "apartment" component to a builder/developer combo. I would suspect that this will go, but with the news of practice facility relocation, etc. the rest of the space could be a ways out.

Merely looking at the facade vs. structure production for high rise construction. They have challenges. 

Would be so curious to see if there was a time lapse video showing the start of construction - I would be curious to see how 609 Main looks in a time lapse video - for some reason I think that 609 Main was built extremely fast....

This project is so far behind schedule, just looking at the pictures there is a lot of signs showing either poor construction management or a fiscally challenged project. 

With the sign that says Fall 2016......There is still a crane up - If I am not mistaken Fall is about to start. I would be shocked if they had anything open by the end of Fall (even just a few floors). 

It still could change again. The renderings show still density, but not as large of buildings. I would also state that it looks less "plain"  than the rendering from ZCA. The right group is leading the project, it will be better than the lot that is vacant!

That is not what it is going to look like, a lot has changed.....

I would say that it is 50/50 it will go anytime soon. With the crane being removed it provides a sign that it might not happen any time soon. The hotel being built above will impact the tenants of the new office building. It was a challenging ground lease deal, we shall see. 

It is not Midway. It is a company out of California, they own one more property in Sugarland. The renderings shown are old and might be getting updated, but I have a feeling based on Market conditions that nothing will get built for the foreseeable future. This property could change hands once the everything is cleared and cleaned up.