Convention Center Expansion - Page 2

KevinFromTexas · #21 Posted **Aug 24, 2015, 7:15 PM**

I like that they're planning to keep Trinity Street open and connect the two sections with skywalks. It would be nice to get some retail along the street so there isn't three blocks of dead zone.

Anyway, the main roof parapet of Four Seasons Residences is 382 feet, so the hotel looks to be somewhere around that height, or even a hair taller.

I like the design so far. It sort of reminds me of some stuff in Boston, London and Frankfurt. I really like the green roof idea. Hopefully they keep it.

The ATX · #22 Posted **Aug 24, 2015, 7:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I like that they're planning to keep Trinity Street open and connect the two sections with skywalks. It would be nice to get some retail along the street so there isn't three blocks of dead zone.

Anyway, the main roof parapet of Four Seasons Residences is 382 feet, so the hotel looks to be somewhere around that height, or even a hair taller.

I like the design so far. It sort of reminds me of some stuff in Boston, London and Frankfurt. I really like the green roof idea. Hopefully they keep it.

Another good thing about this is that the city is not planning a bond election to finance it which always put big projects in doubt. They are using a redirect of the hotel tax. But that apparently still requires voter approval.

JAM · #23 Posted **Aug 24, 2015, 8:41 PM**

"The convention center in its current phase is like a fortress, and there’s really nothing on at the street level,” said Alan Colyer, a Gensler principal and design director, during the Aug. 24 committee meeting."

Could not agree more. This is often a problem in other cities. They MUST find a way to integrate the facility so it has life surrounding it when there is no convention going on. Like the JW Marriot did with their street level scene. Wow, what an amazing job they did!

The ATX · #24 Posted **Aug 24, 2015, 11:30 PM**

The Statesman has the story now. This link should get past the paywall:

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/busi...3948020.735834

drummer · #25 Posted **Aug 24, 2015, 11:42 PM**

^^ from the Statesman article:

"The convention center expansion would likely include retail and restaurant space, plans indicate, meaning it’s possible some of the displaced businesses could relocate."

drummer · #26 Posted **Aug 24, 2015, 11:46 PM**

Do y'all think that with this expansion they would also need the lot(s) next to Waller Creek - across Red River Street? I would love to have those lots utilized for something more exciting than a convention center expansion - and potential dead zone along the new area. Plus it could tie the Rainey St. district to the 6th street area a bit more.

The ATX · #27 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 1:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

Do y'all think that with this expansion they would also need the lot(s) next to Waller Creek - across Red River Street? I would love to have those lots utilized for something more exciting than a convention center expansion - and potential dead zone along the new area. Plus it could tie the Rainey St. district to the 6th street area a bit more.

Well, that site is already spoken for - it's the future site of the Le Meridien Hotel & Residences.

drummer · #28 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 2:43 AM**

Haha, true....forgot all about that sure thing.

JoninATX · #29 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 3:57 AM**

This is layed out as one big site. Could you image staying inside The Fairmont and had to walk all the way to the new Convention Center by using the skybridges to get to your destination.

The ATX · #30 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 8:51 AM**

Here's an industry article listing the top 20 U.S. convention markets. Austin moved up more (3 places) during the past year which was more than any of the top 20 cities. No surprises concerning the top 3 cities - Chicago, Las Vegas and Orlando.

http://skift.com/2015/08/11/top-thre...and-las-vegas/

From the article:

drummer · #31 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 9:17 AM**

Is Dallas all of DFW or just Dallas? That's insanely high if it's just Dallas proper - more than NYC.

The ATX · #32 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 9:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drummer

Is Dallas all of DFW or just Dallas? That's insanely high if it's just Dallas proper - more than NYC.

Those numbers are only for hotels with meeting space.

paul78701 · #33 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 4:41 PM**

I'm surprised that the renderings show the Railyard Condos will be left standing on it's under utilized half block just north of this expansion. They had no qualms with taking out some of those condos for the current convention center.

KevinFromTexas · #34 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 7:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul78701

I'm surprised that the renderings show the Railyard Condos will be left standing on it's under utilized half block just north of this expansion. They had no qualms with taking out some of those condos for the current convention center.

I think details are still being worked out, because this other rendering here shows the different scenarios. One of them puts the hotel on the north end of the convention center expansion. I really can't imagine the hotel not facing 4th Street if it were on the north end of the expansion. So the the Railyard Condos may still go away. Plus, that would put the hotel closer to the MetrRail station, and I would imagine that would be more favorable.

GoldenBoot · #35 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 9:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul78701

I'm surprised that the renderings show the Railyard Condos will be left standing on it's under utilized half block just north of this expansion. They had no qualms with taking out some of those condos for the current convention center.

They may still go away.

I may be incorrect, but it is much easier to deal with one land owner of a particular parcel than several. What I mean is, the parcels of land to the south of the Railyard are owned by a few land owners. It would be easier to negotiate a "fair" price those parcels of land than it would be to negotiate with every owner in the Railyard (since they each own a tiny piece of that land).

The last thing the city wants to do is acquire the land via eminent domain (which is what I believe they did for the 2002 expansion). However, it would still seem to be the simplest and least time consuming way to acquire the land under the Railyard. Negotiating with all of those owners on a "fair" price could take months or years to accomplish.

paul78701 · #36 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 9:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I think details are still being worked out, because this other rendering here shows the different scenarios. One of them puts the hotel on the north end of the convention center expansion. I really can't imagine the hotel not facing 4th Street if it were on the north end of the expansion. So the the Railyard Condos may still go away. Plus, that would put the hotel closer to the MetrRail station, and I would imagine that would be more favorable.

Rightly or wrongly, I get the impression that a lot of those units are being used for short term rentals. So it would only be fitting to see them turned into a hotel. Being that White Lodging is already planning a hotel that would be at the south end of this...maybe the north orientation is chosen and we end up with hotel towers at both ends.

AustinGoesVertical · #37 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 10:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul78701

Rightly or wrongly, I get the impression that a lot of those units are being used for short term rentals. So it would only be fitting to see them turned into a hotel. Being that White Lodging is already planning a hotel that would be at the south end of this...maybe the north orientation is chosen and we end up with hotel towers at both ends.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the White Lodging hotel proposal incorporated into this expansion, as some people pontificated when the White Lodging one was initially announced?

paul78701 · #38 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 10:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinGoesVertical

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the White Lodging hotel proposal incorporated into this expansion, as some people pontificated when the White Lodging one was initially announced?

Nope, I think it's just been pontification. Nobody has posted evidence of such an arrangement. Being that White Lodging announced their plans only a short while ago, I highly doubt that they've had time to come to any sort of arrangement to build the hotel as an actual part of this expansion.

AustinGoesVertical · #39 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 11:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul78701

Nope, I think it's just been pontification. Nobody has posted evidence of such an arrangement. Being that White Lodging announced their plans only a short while ago, I highly doubt that they've had time to come to any sort of arrangement to build the hotel as an actual part of this expansion.

I was just wondering because I think the White Lodging parcel is squarely in the expansion zone.

paul78701 · #40 Posted **Aug 25, 2015, 11:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinGoesVertical

I was just wondering because I think the White Lodging parcel is squarely in the expansion zone.

It is in the expansion zone. So it will be interesting to see how this all pans out. It's in the exact location shown in the rendering which shows a hotel tower on the south end of the expansion.

I'm betting White Lodging's timeline isn't as far out as this is though. So I could see it being built and then incorporated into the expansion. It could also be built but not incorporated entirely. In the latter case, maybe the expansion has a hotel built into the north end. Or maybe no hotel is incorporated at all. I'm sure there will be plenty of talks/negotiating that will ultimately determine what happens.