AUSTIN | Fairmont Hotel | 595 FEET SPIRE/456 FT ROOF | 37 FLRS | Complete - Page 36

migol24 · #**701** Posted **Jul 21, 2014, 5:15 PM**

What I wish is that developers shut their piehole and not get too greedily ambitious if they can't find the money to back up their plans. I find that it is ruining Austin's potential for a bid at a significantly tall tower. I wonder, how many spots do we have left that is not in the CVC restrictions?

GoldenBoot · #**702** Posted **Jul 21, 2014, 7:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by texboy

I was speaking about the Austonian.

My misunderstanding...

GoldenBoot · #**703** Posted **Jul 21, 2014, 7:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hill Country

And another thing. This is still a five star Fairmont Hotel, and they only attach their name to nice looking projects from what I can tell. Hopefully that will keep this from becoming ugly.

They could back out of the project!

GoldenBoot · #**704** Posted **Jul 21, 2014, 8:06 PM**

I think this bears repeating...It would be interesting to learn what Hunt Construction was told when they signed a $247 million deal to construct the tower this past March. According to all the press regarding the deal with Hunt, as of late March through May (2014), was that the building was a go in its original form.

What has happened since? A budget will not blow this far out of whack (purportedly) in roughly three-to-four months. The Manchester clan has been working on this project since the beginning of this decade.

I have not heard back from my contacts as of yet. As soon as I do, I let you know.

I beginning to believe that this may be a trolling job...to get a rise out of us on this thread?!? The available information just doesn't seem to add up. But, it could be true. We shall see.

Jdawgboy · #**705** Posted **Jul 21, 2014, 8:07 PM**

I'm not sure how many lots are left, but I don't think we are running short just yet. The biggest issue I see right now is FAR: as well as expense to build up really tall. It shouldn't be a whole lot more to build higher and I'm sure others here can get into more detail as to why developers seem to be hovering around the 380-450 foot range. It's not like we haven't broken the imaginary glass ceiling.

My question to Spaceman is why is the Waller Creek/Rainey area troublesome? Granted the flood tunnel is not yet complete but it won't be much longer before it is even if the intake facility has to be rebuilt (though it shouldn't need to, it's idiotic and a waste of taxpayer money for a CVC that is already partially blocked and is useless.) What other issues are there?

The only other troublesome issue I can think of is the MACC's history of fighting against highrise development near the center but even that is a minor inconvenience.

_Matt · #**706** Posted **Jul 21, 2014, 10:46 PM**

Just posted 3 hours ago. Lots of quotes from the forum.

Manchester’s size-matters debate rivets Texans

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2...rivets-texans/

Quote:

"Construction on the 1,054-room Fairmont Austin, which will be linked to the Austin center via a sky bridge, is expected to get under way by September," a U-T news story quoted Manchester as saying about the voluble developer's latest hoped-for project, a soaring convention hotel in his favorite Texas city.

...

Since then, according to contributors to an online forum maintained by SkyscraperPage.com, there's been increasing talk of cost overruns and downsizing the building.

...

"Wonder how long before the San Diego Reader picks up on this breaking news from Skyscraperpage," wrote "hookem.”

cvalkan · #**707** Posted **Jul 22, 2014, 1:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Matt

Just posted 3 hours ago. Lots of quotes from the forum.

Manchester’s size-matters debate rivets Texans

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2...rivets-texans/

Wow, how meta.

MichaelB · #**708** Posted **Jul 22, 2014, 2:02 AM**

What a pile of crap. Really? It's newsworthy to quote a bunch of anonymous "i heard" posts.
It's hard enough to sift thru the info here.... but to actually relay on it as a new soruce it just nutz. I mean it's taken me years to understand who is more reliable here. ( and some are)
But to just take anything that is said on a forum on line as "pirintable" is laughable.

ahealy · #**709** Posted **Jul 22, 2014, 6:41 PM**

aaaaaand the topic is derailed yet again due to passive aggressiveness

Jdawgboy · #**710** Posted **Jul 22, 2014, 7:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahealy

aaaaaand the topic is derailed yet again due to passive aggressiveness

Its all the Sandiegoreader's fault!!!!!

One thing that I think needs to be brought up is the quote about Chinese investors. Correct me if I am wrong but that was just a joke, as far as I know that never happened but in that article it's stated.

jngreenlee · #**711** Posted **Jul 22, 2014, 8:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Its all the Sandiegoreader's fault!!!!!

One thing that I think needs to be brought up is the quote about Chinese investors. Correct me if I am wrong but that was just a joke, as far as I know that never happened but in that article it's stated.

At least none of us dispute that the Manchester family is funding this project with drug money from Chinese cartels.

Jdawgboy · #**712** Posted **Jul 22, 2014, 8:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jngreenlee

At least none of us dispute that the Manchester family is funding this project with drug money from Chinese cartels.

Do you have proof of this? Because at this point these are just statements being thrown around with no backing or evidence. I think caution should be taken when making comments such as that because as we are quite aware there are definitely more people viewing this thread than us local forumers.

Jdawgboy · #**713** Posted **Jul 22, 2014, 9:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by austlar1

Hill Country, I think you mean the San Diego Reader hates on the Manchester family. The San Diego Union is owned by the Manchester family and is the daily newspaper out there. The Reader is kind of like the Chronicle. a local weekly with mostly arts and music coverage and some local reporting.

I'm not sure I agree with the comments being made regarding shoddy reporting. It seems newsworthy that the Manchester group may be pitching the project as an investment opportunity to Chinese nationals interested in participating in the visa program (EB-5??) that requires the investment of a substantial amount of money in the US as a prerequisite for obtaining green cards and resident permits. If this information is true, it constitutes a real news scoop regarding the financing for this project.

Okay this is where it started from and it was apparently reporting from the San Diego Reader and not from this thread.

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2...plan/#comments

austlar1 · #**714** Posted **Jul 22, 2014, 10:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Okay this is where it started from and it was apparently reporting from the San Diego Reader and not from this thread.

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2...plan/#comments

Yes, the original reporting that Manchester might be trying to attract Chinese investors through the visa program was in an earlier Reader article. You'd think that they would be clear about that rather than attribute the speculation to SSP forumers. Maybe we should all stop commenting about this project and let events run their course. It is kind of absurd when our speculation (and I have been one of those speculating) becomes fodder for grudge journalism coming out of San Diego.

East7thStreet · #**715** Posted **Jul 22, 2014, 11:03 PM**

"Grudge Journalism coming out of San Diego" would make a great sub-header for the San Diego Reader.

spoonman · #**716** Posted **Jul 23, 2014, 12:44 AM**

The Reader is a steaming turd of a paper. The paper claims to "tell it like it is", but is more biased than the SD Union-Tribune, which the Reader rails against for being biased.

The Reader should be embarrased by the lengths that they go to throw dirt on the Manchesters. I am embarrased for the Reader.

MightyYoda · #**717** Posted **Jul 24, 2014, 2:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Do you have proof of this? Because at this point these are just statements being thrown around with no backing or evidence. I think caution should be taken when making comments such as that because as we are quite aware there are definitely more people viewing this thread than us local forumers.

Pretty sure this is a joke to see how stupid the San Diego Reader is and if the next article we read about will be "MANCHESTERS IN LEAGUE WITH CHINESE CARTEL! SUPER SECRET SSP FORUM SOURCES SAID SO!!!!!"