Houston19514

14 hours ago, Highrise Tower said:

From today, South Loop near Holcombe Blvd.

 

I'm trying to locate this.  Did you mean something other than Holcombe Blvd?  I don't think Holcombe Blvd ever gets near the South Loop.

14 hours ago, BEES?! said:

Interesting! Green space is always a nice addition! :) Hopefully they can move on to Phase II. The HAIF Penthouse notwithstanding, I wonder how sales are going here? 

Sales appear to be going very well.  Per a recent Chronicle article, there were only 20 units left (out of, I think, 115).

It’s been reported on airliners.net that “Terminal B North is closing January 7, 2024 for demolition”

19 hours ago, strickn said:

You can see how far below the downtown average this building has listed a full floor sublease:  https://www.commercialcafe.com/commercial-property/us/tx/houston/three-allen-center-1/

Not an expert in accounting but I would also expect that renting to yourself depresses the value more than it elevates the market clearing price.  I would expect, even when you are involved with a third party CBRE/JLL leasing agent/broker, that there are tax rules about how hard a bargain you can agree to when a transaction isn't arms' length.  If there were none then private equity vulture capital could even more easily strip cashflow from one subsidiary to another, under the guise of holding the keys to one asset or another that the first one has agreed to lease back.  

Not seeing how it would depress the value.  They may indeed be required to charge their sister company a market rent.  But by definition, charging market rent neither depresses nor elevates the value of the building.  And more to the original point, renting to a sister company tells us nothing about the softness of the building.  Again, if the lessee sister company is going to pay market rent for office space, why would they not pay it to their lessor sister company, rather than to a third party? It would be kinda odd to do otherwise.

16 hours ago, strickn said:

Smacks of a soft building, since Toronto-based Brookfield also controls American National (the same company that the Moody family of Galveston built, and which a Brookfield subsidiary BAMR acquired last year).

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/brookfield-asset-management-reinsurance-partners-105500010.html

Interesting, but I don't think it smacks of a soft building.  Why wouldn't they want to pay rent to their sister company, rather than to someone else?

15 hours ago, Bassclef said:

I would be surprised if this happens.

Why do you say that?

2 hours ago, mfastx said:

It is kinda sad that Houston hasn't built a supertall in like 40 years. 

Or, kinda cool that, for like 40 years, Houston has been the only city in Texas with a supertall (and Houston has 2!)

28 minutes ago, Ross said:

If Trump had not committed crimes, he would not be indicted. It's really that simple. I would hope that any politician that did what he did would be indicted and tried.

So much for "innocent until proven guilty", eh?  😉

On 8/21/2023 at 2:05 PM, strickn said:

Has the rebuilding of the burned Governors' Mansion completed or can we still move it to a new one in San Angelo (to cut down on the amount of temptation of spending one's years in office attending many press conferences to announce to gratified Austinites that the state's public PUF endowment is funding them even more local tchotchkes)?

Yeah, I think it was completed ten or so years ago

12 minutes ago, Amlaham said:

https://chi.streetsblog.org/2023/06/20/chicago-deploys-its-first-tdm-requirements-for-new-construction-in-rail-station-tod-areas

https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/city/depts/cdot/CDOTPRC/TDM Strategies 6.16.23.pdf

This is what i'm referring too, its related to a "Connected Communities Ordinance" in Chicago. It has to do with how new buildings are constructed, eliminating free parking for employees, there's more information in that link above. It doesn't sound like they're just manicuring a package thats merely something the IRS offers. It's obviously much more than that. 

After a quick perusal of your linked articles and a little Googling, I have not found any "incentives for big companies to persuade employees to use trains/ public transportation when traveling home/ offices!"  They might be buried in there somewhere, but I couldn't find them.  Interestingly, the StreetBlog article you linked tells us:  "Worth noting: One major way to reduce single-occupancy vehicle trips is not having on-site parking, which the Connected Communities ordinance did not address for non-residential uses, allowing them to still have an unlimited amount of on-site car parking outside of the D zoning districts."

A lot of what the Connected Communities ordinance does looks pretty similar to Houston's TOD Development ordinance. 

21 hours ago, Amlaham said:

A little off topic, but I believe a lot of other big cities have adopted incentives for big companies to persuade employees to use trains/ public transportation when traveling home/ offices! The incentives even includes discounting gym memberships within the immediate area to push more employees to stay local and not drive if they don't have to. I think Chicago just passed something like that. Maybe one day we'll get there (but I doubt it)

I think what Chicago "offers" is merely the federal (IRS) allowing pre-tax payroll deductions of up to $300 per month to be used for transit.  The same program is available in Houston.

21 hours ago, cspwal said:

And it's possible on a larger scale - the DC metro was automated originally, and I think the Paris might be now. I know any with doors are automated - In Houston that means stations a/c

Yes, it was automated, but there was still a driver/operator on board.

The listing of subways and other such transit systems that may or may not operate without drivers tells us pretty much nothing about the potential for fully autonomous vehicles operating on streets.

On 8/19/2023 at 4:16 PM, The Hills said:

It's Austinites. 🙂 I was one of the skeptical posters on SSP. The fence was put up prematurely for the groundbreaking.  It had to be removed because the ROW closures weren't permitted until 08/14.  I can't confirm if the fences are back up.  Someone who works for the development team informed me that demo is still happening.  They'll be a lot of time spent on asbestos abatement.  The site plan was split in two - one for demo/site prep which was approved, and one for the tower which is not yet approved.  This is not high up on the list of the most significant projects in the works.  So I don't have any real interest as to whether or not this actually gets built. But I still like it even though it's not a supertall.

Per the locals posting on SSP, as of yesterday, no fence.  The Austin Business Journal reported yesterday that the developer said demolition of the existing structure on the site will start in the "next week or so", and they "aim to start construction in November" -- FWIW.

15 hours ago, cspwal said:

It has painted tracks for the autopilot to follow, similar to how new cars do automatic lane keeping. Cost wise, you’re removing the driver of the vehicle, and depending on the quality of the automation you reduce the platform gap and can even allow for platform gates. 
 

the paint I feel would wear quick in Houston though, and I doubt it can run in the semi mixed traffic that the BRT and light rails deal with in Houston 

Except, at least so far, they appear to still have drivers on board, even in China.  And whether it has a driver on board or not, does not affect the functionality from the passenger point of view.  I still don't see any functional difference between this and BRT.

How is this functionally different from BRT?  I don't see anything that distinguishes it (other than the outer appearance looks a little more like a light rail car).

I think it's far more likely an example of journalistic incompetence not being  new thing.

Per St. John the Divine's website, the congregation held its first service in 1940. In December of 1940, just nine months after organizing the church, the inaugural service was held in the beautiful limestone chapel, which is still in existence and used today [on the campus at Westheimer and River Oaks Blvd].  

On 7/13/2023 at 5:51 PM, bobruss said:

With all of the growth and density in the neighborhood, it makes sense to start adding more restaurants. The only problem I see with that site is egress. I pass by their twice a day and its always a pain with the rail and the cars trying to enter the valet drop off at the medical arts building. They often block Binz awaiting pick up. Hopefully this is on the Caroline side of the building and not on the Binz side.

It is on the Caroline side of the building.

15 hours ago, Caribomoa said:

Prada just reopened but they’re opening a second store? Or just a larger store and the recent opening was temporary?

 

The latter. I believe the recent opening was a temporary location.

On 7/31/2023 at 11:55 PM, The Hills said:

The site is fenced off for demo and site prep, and a ROW closure permit lists an 08/14 start.  But the developer only has approval for Demo and site prep at this point.  The tower is still going through the approval process.  The new height is 519'.

Austonians on SkyscraperPage reported in early August that the fence was all taken down.  I think the smart money is still against this one happening any time soon.

18 hours ago, monarch said:

^^^ all that we in houston can do is... DREAM...

.  That's all that Dallas is doing too... this is well short of being under construction...

1 hour ago, southerncrj said:

Not sure how to interpret the news, but the hotel has been listed for sale:

https://www.loopnet.com/Listing/3401-N-Main-St-Houston-TX/28962433/

Hope it's not the result of occupancy being below expectations. It has been open for just over a year. 

It's almost impossible to know without more information.  It could just as easily be the the result of occupancy being above expectations.

19 hours ago, mattyt36 said:

Wrong, the new D pier was designed in no insignificant part to give UA additional international gate capacity (it should be obvious they have no other options to implement their "massive" growth plans on the international side at the peaks, which is when you want to add new international destinations to maximize connectivity) instead of building the 2008-era proposed FIS at Terminal B.  They will be using it--just like they use D today, although I am sure to a higher degree.  The fact that they don't use the opportunity to build a build-to-suit flagship club is, indeed, pathetic, given how crowded the existing clubs are.  The closest club to those gates will be the already pathetically undersized C-North club.  There were plans for a Star Alliance lounge at one point, but I'd think we'd have heard about it by now if it was still the plan.

I am not saying they don't have growth plans at IAH because, as you say, they continue to pour money into facilities here and at least pay lip service to growing here.  That said, in the last decade (i.e, from 2010 to 2019), UA grew 25% in seat capacity at DEN, 9% at ORD, and shrunk 4% at IAH.  Since 2019, it has grown a further 19% in DEN and shrunk another 4% at IAH.  Does not scream major growth plans to me.  If you say they are sitting out waiting for the construction of D to be over, well, then we can only assume they'll sit out waiting for B to over, which will probably be another 5+ year redevelopment program.  Chances are pretty decent there will be another major recession that will upend the existing growth plan and we will still be waiting.  IMO IAH is a big hedge for them because they essentially control the facilities, unlike at DEN and ORD.

No doubt United will make some use of the "new" Terminal D, just as they do now, but it is quite clear Terminal D will not be anything close to the core of their operation, or of their international operation. United will only have preferential rights to 3 gates on the west side of the new Terminal D West pier. Preferential rights; not exclusive rights.  THREE gates, out of, I think, 23  or 24 gates in Terminal D.  And only for 10 years. 

When the Terminal B rebuild is done, one imagines they will be able to move some purely domestic mainline operations from Terminal E over to Terminal B, thus making more room in E for International growth.

The "C North" Club, of course, is right at the base of the new Terminal D West Pier, pretty perfectly-located for use by their terminal United's D-West passengers.  I'm certain all United clubs at IAH are in line to be refurbished and possibly expanded. I guarantee there will be one or more new/expanded clubs in the refurbished/expanded Terminal B.

It's a little . . .  pathetic, if you will, 😉 to claim United is only giving "lip service" to growth plans. They have recently spent, and are spending, hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars upgrading and expanding  their facilities at IAH. Probably wouldn't be doing all that if they didn't have real growth plans.

Any chance you can share your sources for the seat capacity statistics?

By the way, United plans to complete the Terminal B rebuild about 3 years from now, not 5+.

20 hours ago, mattyt36 said:

 

We'll see if there is any major expansion once the new international gates open, but I'm not holding my breath.  I don't think UA is even building a club in the new terminal (we would've heard about it by now from UA, which telegraphs things like that 2 years in advance), which is absolutely pathetic.

United clearly has growth plans for IAH.  See their plans for massive rebuild of Terminal.B.   It is not pathetic or even surprising that they may not be building a club in Terminal D, as it will continue to be primarily for non-United carriers.

On 11/21/2022 at 12:05 PM, mattyt36 said:

You are indeed correct, not sure where I got that idea in my head.

Regardless, it is likely to happen in 2022--if it doesn't, for all intents and purposes they will be at the same level.

A far cry from IAH historically being a good 25% busier internationally than DFW.

HOU is to blame for some of it.  AA not having a true hub on the West Coast or East Coast probably proportionally more responsible, but UA has lost a lot of ground to Mexico in particular. 

If you have a theory as to how this will revert in the future, I'd love to hear it.

Otherwise, the substantive point remains the same.

Good news, while DFW international traffic did indeed surpass IAH's in 2022, by 1/4 million (2.67%), for the first six months of 2023, IAH is back in the lead, by 164,000 (3.04%).

And, as you allowed, when HOU international traffic is added, Houston still led Dallas-Fort Worth in international air passenger traffic in 2022, by about 2/3 million (and the 1st Half/2023 lead widens to more than 2/3 million (12.39%)).