HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #321  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 3:39 PM
We vs us We vs us is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,149
On the city council agenda for next week is the following:

Quote:
ITEM 9: Authorize negotiation and execution of an exclusive negotiation agreement with Aspen Heights Partners, for terms governing a master developer contract for the redevelopment of 1215 Red River and 606 East 12th, the former HealthSouth tract. MBE/WBE: This solicitation was reviewed for subcontracting opportunities in accordance with City Code Chapter 2-9B Minority Owned and Women Owned Business Enterprise Procurement Program. For the services required for this solicitation, there were no subcontracting opportunities; therefore, no subcontracting goals were established in this solicitation phase, but will be negotiated in the contracting phase.
https://www.austintexas.gov/edims/do....cfm?id=350672

So -- looks like Aspen Heights was selected to redevelop the Health South buildings.

From the attachment:

Quote:
Our proposal promotes a compact and connected city though a strong mix of uses, and significant density on the site through the redevelopment of the existing Health-South Rehabilitation Hospital. The project will feature a 36-story apartment and condo tower with over 420,000 square feet of living space, which includes 348 apartment units and 160 condo units, a 15-story, 170,000 square foot office tower, with a 22,000 square foot programmed elevated plaza between the two carved out by the 12th Street Capital View Corridor and over 25,000 square feet of retail space.




Reply With Quote
     
     
  #322  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 5:55 PM
Echostatic Echostatic is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Austin
Posts: 801
Wow, those are nice.
__________________
Advocating for a wider I-35, Project Connect (passed!), and a denser Austin
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #323  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 7:23 PM
clubtokyo's Avatar
clubtokyo clubtokyo is online now
クラブトクヨ
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,348
Looks great!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #324  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 8:03 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Remember
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Here
Posts: 52,300
It's funny hearing the HLC complain about Block 150 on 12th Street when you realize what the Brackenridge Campus has the potential to look like in a decade. Potentially, there could be more than a dozen towers in that area at buildout. With these two, we're already at 6 including Alexan Waterloo, Symphony Square, Hotel Mirabeau, and Block 164. I could see up to 8 more being built there for a total of ~14 with how much room there is.
__________________
I heard we had the best mortality rate. - President Donald Trump, July 19, 2020

To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful. - Edward R. Murrow
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #325  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 8:54 PM
freerover freerover is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
It's funny hearing the HLC complain about Block 150 on 12th Street when you realize what the Brackenridge Campus has the potential to look like in a decade. Potentially, there could be more than a dozen towers in that area at buildout. With these two, we're already at 6 including Alexan Waterloo, Symphony Square, Hotel Mirabeau, and Block 164. I could see up to 8 more being built there for a total of ~14 with how much room there is.
And if Biden kicks up the federal transit funding the gold line LRT can come back into play with a stop on either Trinity or Red River serving both this development and the new medical schools.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #326  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 10:50 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 2,697
Outstanding. Another 300+ footer and more infill!

Anyone know who the architect is? Rhode Partners again?
__________________
AUSTIN (City): 978,908 +23.85% - '10-'19 | AUSTIN MSA (5 counties): 2,227,083 +29.76% - '10-'19
SAN ANTONIO (City): 1,547,253 +16.56% - '10-'19 | SAN ANTONIO MSA (8 counties): 2,550,960 +19.06% - '10-'19
AUS-SAT "CSA" (13 counties): 4,778,043 +23.82% - '10-'19 | *SRC: US Census*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #327  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 10:54 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Where the lights are much brighter
Posts: 9,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenboot View Post
outstanding. Another 300+ footer and more infill!

Anyone know who the architect is? Rhode partners again?
STG Design.


Nice find We vs us.
__________________
Follow The ATX on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/TheATX1

Things will be great when you're downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #328  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 11:12 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Where the lights are much brighter
Posts: 9,710
Here's an article from a couple weeks ago about 1215 Red River. Intracorp (44 East) was runner up and the 2033 fund (Block 164 and Block 167) & Gensler came in third.

https://communityimpact.com/austin/c...-redevelopment
__________________
Follow The ATX on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/TheATX1

Things will be great when you're downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #329  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 11:13 PM
urbancore urbancore is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Zilker
Posts: 1,306
That’s how you do a blank wall! I dig it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #330  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 11:19 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Where the lights are much brighter
Posts: 9,710
1215 Red River is separate from the Brackenridge Campus. We could change the thread title to "Innovation District" or start a new thread for 1215 Red River. Any thoughts?
__________________
Follow The ATX on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/TheATX1

Things will be great when you're downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #331  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2020, 11:35 PM
freerover freerover is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by The ATX View Post
1215 Red River is separate from the Brackenridge Campus. We could change the thread title to "Innovation District" or start a new thread for 1215 Red River. Any thoughts?
Innovation district sounds cool.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #332  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2020, 3:07 AM
We vs us We vs us is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,149
[DELETED]

I was trying to decide what that ghost tower is, and I think it's actually the Hotel Mirabeau (or whatever it's called these days). Definitely a nice cluster shaping up there.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #333  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2020, 3:36 AM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Where the lights are much brighter
Posts: 9,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by We vs us View Post
I was trying to decide what that ghost tower is, and I think it's actually the Hotel Mirabeau (or whatever it's called these days). Definitely a nice cluster shaping up there.
I was wondering that too. The architect BOKA Powell changed the name to Waterloo Hotel on their website. But they didn't update the renderings to reflect that latest one filed with the Plan Review. The last start date info I saw was September 1st. But its back to unknown start now.
__________________
Follow The ATX on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/TheATX1

Things will be great when you're downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #334  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2020, 3:49 AM
We vs us We vs us is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,149
Quote:
Originally Posted by The ATX View Post
I was wondering that too. The architect BOKA Powell changed the name to Waterloo Hotel on their website. But they didn't update the renderings to reflect that latest one filed with the Plan Review. The last start date info I saw was September 1st. But its back to unknown start now.
At first I thought the ghost was Block 164, but I think that one's out of view, behind the larger of the two towers in that first rendering. Pretty much has to be Waterloo.

That hotel is so vexing. It's been in development (in this iteration) since at least mid 2015. Plenty of time to get moving in earnest. From what I'd heard about it back before the pandemic, it had solid funding, a brand commitment, and was pretty much ready to rock. I'm not sure I'm ready to count it out based on that intel . . . but the delays are definitely concerning.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #335  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2020, 7:24 AM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 2,697
Looks like the initial name of 1215 Red River is "Park View Tower." At least that is what they are calling it in the current renderings.
__________________
AUSTIN (City): 978,908 +23.85% - '10-'19 | AUSTIN MSA (5 counties): 2,227,083 +29.76% - '10-'19
SAN ANTONIO (City): 1,547,253 +16.56% - '10-'19 | SAN ANTONIO MSA (8 counties): 2,550,960 +19.06% - '10-'19
AUS-SAT "CSA" (13 counties): 4,778,043 +23.82% - '10-'19 | *SRC: US Census*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #336  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2020, 10:34 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Where the lights are much brighter
Posts: 9,710
Filed today. We knew it was coming, but it's good to see it on permits.

Quote:
This work is to demolish, and replace and realign the exiting intersection at MLK and Red River Street to the new alignment with Robert Dedman to the north of MLK.
https://abc.austintexas.gov/public-s...rtyrsn=2019189
__________________
Follow The ATX on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/TheATX1

Things will be great when you're downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #337  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2020, 3:17 AM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,205
Austin wants more time to consider Aspen Heights' proposed HealthSouth redevelopment -- Council members ask for more affordable units

Quote:
Plans for the redevelopment of the former HealthSouth property remain in flux.

A week after city staff recommended Aspen Heights Partners to redevelop the city-owned site east of the Texas State Capitol, Austin City Council has postponed entering into a negotiation agreement with the developer.

Council members said this week they wanted more time to look over the proposal, and members have already pointed to changes they want to see in the project, such as more affordable housing units and additional public-oriented uses. The item was postponed until the next planned Council meeting on Jan. 27.

[SNIP]

City officials believe the redevelopment of the old HealthSouth building could be a "catalyst" project for the northeast part of downtown — and a prime opportunity to create affordable housing in Central Austin.
Also...

Rendering from the vantage point of an elevated park facing the Texas Capitol that Aspen Heights Partners has proposed for city-owned land at 1215 Red River St.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #338  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2020, 12:51 PM
H2O H2O is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 837
This is just typical of this Council. They should have been clear up front what they wanted out of the deal before it hit the street. They treat every deal like a zoning negotiation (which is actually even more inappropriate to be negotiating on - but that is another story). If I was Aspen Heights, I'd walk on the deal, or at most, agree to be a fee developer only. Who would want to own a property constrained by all the social goodies they want to load up on it? Even if it was massively subsidized enough to pencil, it would be an ongoing liability to operate!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #339  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2020, 5:04 PM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is offline
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,400
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by H2O View Post
This is just typical of this Council. They should have been clear up front what they wanted out of the deal before it hit the street. They treat every deal like a zoning negotiation (which is actually even more inappropriate to be negotiating on - but that is another story). If I was Aspen Heights, I'd walk on the deal, or at most, agree to be a fee developer only. Who would want to own a property constrained by all the social goodies they want to load up on it? Even if it was massively subsidized enough to pencil, it would be an ongoing liability to operate!
Honestly I like those "social constraints" I see nothing wrong with the city pushing for more public uses because after all, we the public should be able to have access and more interconnectivity to tie into the surrounding area and we desperately need affordable housing too. Developers shouldn't have cart blanch full control when this development will shape the entire northeast quadrant of DT Austin.
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #340  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2020, 5:13 PM
Novacek Novacek is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jdawgboy View Post
Honestly I like those "social constraints" I see nothing wrong with the city pushing for more public uses because after all, we the public should be able to have access and more interconnectivity to tie into the surrounding area and we desperately need affordable housing too. Developers shouldn't have cart blanch full control when this development will shape the entire northeast quadrant of DT Austin.
Who said anything about cart blanche?

The city put out an RFP asking for X, Y, and Z.

The developer came back with X, Y, Z _plus_ a public park/viewing platform.

If the council wanted more than x, y, z they should have asked for it originally.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:24 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.