houston-development

No, number 3 is incorrect. The standard is "ANY VEHICULAR ACCESS from an abutting two-lane street with two-way traffic" (emphasis added)

where are you getting your information? mine is from the final draft, dated 10/29/07, which reads:

Is proposed to take primary vehicular access from an abutting two-lane local or collector street with two-way traffic

and then goes on to say:

; and

4) Is either:

a. A high-rise structure, as defined in the City of Houston

Building Code; or

b. Constructed on a tract containing eight acres or more.

but that was a given, so posting it would have been slightly redundant.

edited to add screen shot, just because..

there are too many posts and not enough time to review them all. so if this was already covered, i apologize in advance.

this proposed ordinance, which has not been approved, means the project would have to go through an approval process if all three items are triggered:

1) if the density would increase by 100%+

2) comprise of more than 100 units

3) primary car access is from a two lane street

so if the development does not impact ALL THREE POINTS, the city cannot do a thing about it. if all three are triggered, it doesnt mean the deal is dead, just means you have to go through some red tape.

in other words, if this development were on kirby, main, westheimer, whatever, the proposed ordinance will NOT effect the development.

hanover has pushed back ground breaking to next summer; however, they fully anticipate closing on the land in january.

sorry for the delayed response, i normally stick around the going up section.

farb is still moving foward. ive seen the renderings and its going to be a gorgeous project.

there was a possibility of him selling a chunk a while ago but the potential buyer realized it wasnt feasible.

sorry if this has been covered before...

1) this deal is faaaaaaaaaar from being a "done deal".

2) as an example: the land that LSR owns (monaco) has zero restrictions. in theory and by the letter of houstons law, they can build a highrise on their site. their current model could be built without any setback variances and they could hit their number. the reason why they havent is because anyone's name involved in that deal will become mud in houston. from social to business partners to anything.. for a lack of better words, they will be considered a leper in social circles.

3) im not saying this is right or wrong BUT the surrounding neighborhoods have very deep pockets and even more politically connected .

i do not foresee this deal going foward without it getting very, very, very ugly and bloody. honestly, it doesnt affect me one way or the other because i have zero personal interest either way. however, its going to be fun to watch.

Unless the billboards are located INSIDE their areas, I think that's a really bad idea.

i agree 100% with your point. i believe they are area billboards (ill double check into that, if possible).

surrounding neighborhoods have $1MM+ legal fund put together and 20 area billboards reserved.

true story.

if you thought monaco or shakespeare was ugly, just wait for this one.

hanover is planning to break ground in december.

It looks simply like they and the lenders decided to take an "unconventional" risk, and now it's looking like they'll be rewarded for that risk. Conventional wisdom doesn't become conventional until the unconventional people break new ground, which allow the copycats to flood in, and that's the part that I'm looking forward too.

thats not the case at all. im too lazy to search but i said this was the route they were most likely to take. build as apartments and then sell as condos. you dont need the presales, earnest money, deposits, etc; only market data supporting the project as a rental.

i still dont understand why they built the first phase closer to downtown. phase 2 is going to be tougher sell without the view.

do it in reverse and you can somewhat ethically sell the view twice.

Maybe we should have a "Predictions" from our quotes to see who has the best track record. Maybe put it on the wiki forum!

i would win by a landslide.

oh geeze, i can already anticipate the responses. so before you say anything, lighten up.

thats a subsidiary of simmons vedder. think it's their gc/construction company.

home page

i agree with red scare. think you got some bad info but i could be mistaken.

picture from globest.com

even though i am absolutely disgusted with the tenants, im impressed with the design.

link to article -> here

Houston-Development, your post in the HV thread states that the hotel proposed for that site is 5-10 stories. Isn't that kind of small for a W-hotel (or any hotel from that matter if it is on the 5 story side?

correct.

but as i said earlier, the w will NOT be a part of highland village:

uh, back on topic and away from this "my pee pee is bigger than yours".

i was told that the W and barney's will be a part of westcreek / river oaks district development.

construction is to begin oct '08

again, barbouti wants a small boutique hotel on top of 2 or 3 levels of retail where the gap was.

I heard from a friend who works in Highland Village - Harold Powell is moving across the street next door to Pottery Barn. The entire building where Harold Powell is, and The Gap was, is being torn down and will be a hotel. Kind of a small plot for a hotel - but would not doubt be a boutique hotel. W? Another one?

Also, the addition above Waterworks is going to be a Wine Bar.

you don't say..

link

i know whats happening at HV but limited on what i can disclose. MAJOR changes coming (relocations, expansions, vertical developments) within the next 12 months.

expect a 5 to 10-storey hotel with 2 or 3 levels of underground parking where the gap was.

that is all i can say for now.

In the words of REO Speedwagon, I heard it from a friend who, heard it from a friend who, heard it from another..

actually, i know the bathroom attendant at treasures. he overheard some guys talking about it last night while relieving themselves.

credible enough for me, so figured i should pass it along.

uh, back on topic and away from this "my pee pee is bigger than yours".

i was told that the W and barney's will be a part of westcreek / river oaks district development.

construction is to begin oct '08

Discussions were more than I would consider preliminary. The groups were working together on this project for quite a while, but Trademark would never ultimately pull the trigger.

think about it rationally.

westcreek has significant frontage on westheimer and some on san felipe, its about 20a and owned free/clear, and they have a stop light.

the former ford dealership is narrow and long, on a 99-year lease, only has frontage on westheimer with no light, and closer to the railroad tracks.

they may have discussed it for a while but highstreet wanted a premium, even though it has numerous negatives.

as i said, it never went beyond perliminary and the ball was not in trademark's court.

It seems that ithis article is one more indicator that this is more of a sure thing.

may take a while to break ground but i would be absolutely shocked if blvd place fell through.

seriously.

if i had to put a number on it, 99.9% sure it will eventually happen.

Correct. This is the development formerly known as Westcreek (or maybe it was only known as Westcreek when they were doing the combined development with High Street. The combo development fell through. Now High Street and River Oaks District are two separate developments. High Street being immediately to the east of River Oaks District.)

its the westcreek apartments, hence the westcreek redevelopment (which i guess will be called the "river oaks district"? moo..).

there were some preliminary discussions but nothing of substance ever materialized between the two.

you are correct, they are two seperate developments.

Tootsies (rumor has them leaving Highland Village in '09 as this center opens)

ive been told they are staying in highland village. perhaps not in the same spot but will still make out checks to barbouti.

...Back to the W Hotel

Check this out. It looks like the newest version of Highstreet.

River Oaks District

i could be mistaken but looking at the aerials, this is the westcreek redevelopment, not highstreet.

First off, cut the attitude, sister.

wow, pot meet kettel.

let me ask you... what industry do you work in and how many years have you been doing it?

you are constantly over-critical of posts from reputable people who specialize in a certain product/industry. when your OPINION differs from their "real world" experinces and insight, you attempt to berate them into submission. the information we provide isnt always 100% accurate and you should take it FWIW. however, more time than not, its pretty much on the money. i never see you post inside information; only questioning and belittining the poster who does.

go back and count how many times you've bashed tnj in this thread... geeze, look at all of the threads in which bash inside intel with your opinions..

its almost napoleon-like.

maybe im wrong. you could have years upon years of experience in all professions. perhaps your opinions are based upon vast first hand knowledge and from people in the know. if you do and im mistaken, you have my sincere apologies.

to make a long story short, this isnt a trial, so stop badgering. your constant shooting of the messenger will inevitably hurt this fine forum because some people, myself included, are already becoming tight-lipped.

and before insight a flame war, please think twice prior to replying. nothing good will come out of it and the mods will step in.

And I am not going to answer questions about it. This is a project that NONE of you have come close to knowing anything about. I know a great deal about this project, yet cannot discuss it.

i asked you to confirm if W closed the land, which is something you alluded to earlier. you are not providing any additional information; only making a clarification.

if you cant answer, then it is what it is. this has nothing to do with who knows more than the other.

again, thanks for the insight in advance.

edited to add the question i asked earlier:

just for clarification, are you saying they have closed the land, without any drawings/renderings, and will break ground sometime within the next two years?

thank you in advance for the insight.

: applause :

well said tnj!

hopefully, people will take your post as gaining insight rather than looking for a way to be overly critical of your real world experiences.

and edited to add:

i am personally not aware that W closed and funded a sight.

engcons hasnt directly answered my questions, for whatever reason.. however, not saying he's right or wrong.

i just dunno...