Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Potential Expansion of the Omni Fort Worth Hotel

Downtown Omni Hotel Convention Hotels Meeting space Tourism Conventions

  • Please log in to reply
239 replies to this topic

#201 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,423 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 30 September 2023 - 04:48 PM

JBB, honestly, I have not.  You may be right about the market conditions changing.

 

Roverone, since I am a complete outsider I don't know if there are any legal views.  I realize that if someone purchased a condo on the lower levels, they would have no control over the views if a developer purchased the block across the street and built a high rise building there.  In this case, it is the same owner of the Omni Hotel and Condominium Building, which might have some bearing.  Again, this was just a guess and I was throwing out the possibility. 



#202 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 909 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 30 September 2023 - 05:27 PM

Of course, I understand it is just all of us contemplating what drives project changes from concept to more committed designs.  I think the reason that we all feel more sensitive about it is that these design changes will be with us for a long time to come.  Things have this phase of malleability when ideas are thrown about, but eventually it becomes steel and concrete and glass and we will be looking at it for decades to come.  They are not just making decisions about what not to do for today, they are making decisions for decades forward.

 

I really would like to understand the financing mechanics of large commercial real estate projects better.  It is very counterintuitive to me that short-term fluctuations in material and labor costs, demand, and interest rates seem to have a outsized impact on an asset that is expected to be performing for 30 or 40 years.  Not just performing, but taking up land opportunity (not that we don't have too much of that).

 

It seems like the formulas to work out return on investment are either very short term, or there are handoffs between different parties that are choking making those long term investment decisions.  Is it impossible to refinance x years down the road if interest rates get better?  Is it really all that terrible if 5 floors just sit empty for a few years until demand builds up?  (it is not like you {normally} can build more all-new floors later when demand picks up -- you have committed the smaller project to not be able to meet the needs of 5 years from now)

 

The money is in a steel and concrete and glass asset that has a value.  Sure, it is not super-liquid, but it is a pile of money in a different form.

 

And these things do eventually have some kind of residual value when it it time to change hands way down the road.  Is it seems like that number will be better out there in the future if it is not value-engineered so much today.

 

I know it is not only way things work: places like the new Museum Place buildings look better the closer you look at them: the thoughtful design, the quality of construction.  Those buildings are going to be of high value for a long time to come.  Obviously you need to be willing to tie up a lot of money for a long time, and be willing to stay involved from groundbreaking through the life of the project.

 

It just seems like that is the way all projects of substance should be.  Maybe it doesn't matter for some stick apartments, but we are talking about large important structures in our city.



#203 Crestline

Crestline

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 30 September 2023 - 07:10 PM

 Is it impossible to refinance x years down the road if interest rates get better? 

 

I think that's the million dollar question. The financial viability of multi-decade projects is contingent on the answers to questions like these, and if no one can answer them today the projects don't start.



#204 Big Frog II

Big Frog II

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 392 posts

Posted 01 October 2023 - 10:43 AM

Loved he original concept.  Newest rendition is just average.



#205 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,516 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 01 October 2023 - 01:27 PM

Going back to Jeriat's and Volare's comments, I would almost bet that the condominium owners above the hotel had some major issues with the hotel owner building something that partially blocks their view.

If you don't want your view to potentially be blocked than you shouldn't live downtown.



#206 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,091 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 01 October 2023 - 01:58 PM

 

Going back to Jeriat's and Volare's comments, I would almost bet that the condominium owners above the hotel had some major issues with the hotel owner building something that partially blocks their view.

If you don't want your view to potentially be blocked than you shouldn't live downtown.

 

 

I mean, the only view that would be blocked (and from the looks of it, only partially) would be the southeast portion of the city. 

It's not blocking any sunrise/sunset views and, to be honest, it's not like we have mountains and beachfront property, so what "view" is really being blocked, here? 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#207 arch-image

arch-image

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 243 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ft Worth
  • Interests:Gary Morgan - Historical preservation, zoning and growth issues, Serious but not professional photographer, been in construction and design since late 70's

Posted 01 October 2023 - 02:58 PM

I can try to answer some of this. Lest get a few things out of the way first. Yes, you can refi later but that has NO bearing if you can't make the numbers work to begin with.

 

"5 floors sitting empty" ... depending on what percentage of space that 5 floors is, yes it can make a huge difference. Most buildings generally are say, ten to fifteen floors, so that's 1/3 to 1/2 the space. SO let say your building a 15 story hotel, typically 30 rooms a floor, that's 450 rooms, so cut 135 rooms off right off the bat, 5 floors, then count on occupancy being 75% of the remaining and your down to 220 rooms paying your bills, it wont cash flow. 

 

On the issue of Materials and labor have value, sure they do. But lets look at costs right now, using pre-covid prices I could buy concrete around $100 a yard, right now its running 155 at best assuming you can get it due to the cement shortage. Lumber, steel, copper, anything oil related, conduit, roofing etc..., it is all up 25-40%. So yes it has value but with the cost now, its value will be LESS in a few years as costs come down. Don't get me started on labor, people are already starting to see that no, you aren't worth 75 an hour to drive a dump truck but I'm paying it right now because there is no choice. As construction starts are crashing labor rates are already coming down and will accelerate soon so I hope you have been putting some of that money into savings! 

 

Now for the big question, are the the short term increase in costs "counterintuitive" , no, not at all because at the end of the day on most projects you have 18-24 months to get a project stabilized and cash flowing. Rental rates, room rates etc... are not much different now then 4 years ago but costs are 30-40% higher and interest rates are almost triple. The project's numbers still have to work for todays market at the elevated costs and on MANY projects that's just not possible. You can try and scale down but then do the numbers work because the land cost has gone up thru the roof. In some cases it actually works to go go bigger as you have more SF or rooms, to spread a lot of the more or less "fixed costs" over. I have a project I am involved in that the only way to make it work was to INCREASE the room count from 130 to 180 it is a huge balancing act that right now is a big moving target. All that to say at the end of the day the numbers have to make sense that the project will cash flow at market rates today, 5 years down the road doesn't matter. 

 

Not sure if that answers the questions but thought I would give it a shot! 

 It is very counterintuitive to me that short-term fluctuations in material and labor costs, demand, and interest rates seem to have a outsized impact on an asset that is expected to be performing for 30 or 40 years.  Not just performing, but taking up land opportunity (not that we don't have too much of that).

 

Is it impossible to refinance x years down the road if interest rates get better?  

 

Is it really all that terrible if 5 floors just sit empty for a few years until demand builds up?  

 

(it is not like you {normally} can build more all-new floors later when demand picks up -- you have committed the smaller project to not be able to meet the needs of 5 years from now)

 

The money is in a steel and concrete and glass asset that has a value.  Sure, it is not super-liquid, but it is a pile of money in a different form.

 

And these things do eventually have some kind of residual value when it it time to change hands way down the road.  Is it seems like that number will be better out there in the future if it is not value-engineered so much today.

 

 



#208 roverone

roverone

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 909 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW
  • Interests:Modern Architecture, City Issues

Posted 01 October 2023 - 03:46 PM

Thanks arch-image -- I really appreciate you taking the time with that reply.

 

It seems like commercial developers sit on land for a long time, and it has a value.  It seems like those 5 unused floors could be like that undeveloped land, just a little further along and with more value.  I'm not suggesting that they would never be productive, just delayed a bit.

 

I think another layer of why I think about this is that it is one thing to sit and not do anything at all because of an apparent uncertainty / risk.  But it is another thing to make a decades-long commitment to something less.  Something that loses its ability to be more, because it is steel and concrete and glass of a certain size for a long time to come.

 

Are you basically saying that even though these are assets with decades of useful and productive lives, the cost of initially borrowing the money exceeds the future revenue generating ability?  Are there businesses that are in the business of building and owning buildings that could use their own money and formulas to decide what a reasonable upfront investment could be for something that will be around for decades so their borrowing thinking is not mixed into the same thinking as a business that needs to borrow some money now to buy parts to make a product they will sell in a few weeks or months?

 

I'm editing this to add this to get more at what I'm trying to say:  Over the decades-long lifetime of a large building, when looked at as a business model, what proportion of total costs is the initial construction cost relative to the decades of operational costs and maintenance that all combine together to support the rental income for those decades?  And how does the value of the asset as collateral change over those decades?



#209 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,516 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 03 October 2023 - 12:10 PM

Has anyone actually heard, seen, read, etc. anything about the view being a factor in the change?  I know some of you love your conspiracy theories, but it's entirely possible that it's simply an issue of market conditions changing.  Construction costs are high, borrowing costs are through the roof, the housing market has shown some signs of slowing down. 

I heard from someone I know with DTFW Inc. that it was the major factor and it was also apparent at the Open House meeting in August when someone asked about the height of the new building and then the same group of people cheered when the Omni representative said it was going to be about 10-12 stories.  No conspiracy here nor is it a theory.



#210 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,434 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 03 October 2023 - 12:24 PM

I was not trying to be accusatory by using "conspiracy theory".  You said "I think" in your post that brought up the view and that offers very little indication of anything other than speculation.



#211 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,516 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 03 October 2023 - 01:19 PM

I was not trying to be accusatory by using "conspiracy theory".  You said "I think" in your post that brought up the view and that offers very little indication of anything other than speculation.

No worries.  I understand.  Actually I was trying to be somewhat cryptic so I can understand that being misconstrued as speculation on my part.



#212 arch-image

arch-image

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 243 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ft Worth
  • Interests:Gary Morgan - Historical preservation, zoning and growth issues, Serious but not professional photographer, been in construction and design since late 70's

Posted 03 October 2023 - 02:21 PM

I edited your comment down a bit to get to what I think is the bottom line question w2hich is why you cannot JUST look at how a project may perform in the future. 

 

On using their own money. Every developer puts up hard money into a project up front. Currently most lenders require a MINIMUM of 20% Had cash into project, Sometimes, lenders wont even count the land value even if you own it clear, they want to see hard cash in the bank dedicated to the project. Your actually usually better off financing the land so you can have the cash into the project. I have a couple of clients never finance more than 60% because at that rate their planned occupancy can drop to 50% of what is hoped for and still be able to make all the payments. 

 

On The whole aspect of value in future to a very large degree, while it may seem counterintuitive, does not matter a whole lot. It makes no difference if a job looks like it will do great 5 years down the road if for the first 5 years you cannot make your loan commitments. As an example, in a Hotel, you normally will have 12-18 months maximum to get the project stabilized and up to expected occupancy and room rates and some money is usually built in to the proforma to accommodate this early period but after that the project has to be able to stand on its own. 

 

And your welcome, i am a numbers nerd so never mind trying to explain the basics of how and what it takes to make a deal work. 

 

Thanks arch-image -- I really appreciate you taking the time with that reply.

 

 

Are you basically saying that even though these are assets with decades of useful and productive lives, the cost of initially borrowing the money exceeds the future revenue generating ability?  Are there businesses that are in the business of building and owning buildings that could use their own money and formulas to decide what a reasonable upfront investment could be for something that will be around for decades so their borrowing thinking is not mixed into the same thinking as a business that needs to borrow some money now to buy parts to make a product they will sell in a few weeks or months?

 

 



#213 Stadtplan

Stadtplan

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,949 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 04 October 2023 - 08:54 PM

Jenny Rudolph with S-T reports on the latest rendering:
https://www.star-tel...e280130679.html

#214 Crestline

Crestline

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 05 October 2023 - 08:11 AM

 

Who owns the abandoned Lancaster right of way?  I assume that and the TCC property would be very attractive to the Omni or any developer.

 

This is still an issue too, right? The city still needs to convey the abandoned Lancaster right of way to RBR Real Estate Holdings, LLC in a different transaction?

 

Lol if this project doesn't go all the way to Lancaster it sucks. What the heck Omni, build this 2020 rendering!

 

The abandoned Lancaster right of way doesn't appear on the TAD interactive map or lot PDF. Do we know who owns it? It'll be truly heartbreaking if the Omni doesn't use this lot to expand all the way to Lancaster. A tremendous fumble.



#215 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,698 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 05 October 2023 - 08:32 AM

The city owns it - At one point I beleive they planned to convey the land to the Omni ownership.



#216 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,698 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 12 October 2023 - 09:05 AM

A few low-res screengrabs from the DDRB meeting

 

0B8Jgs5.png

AaiTfoK.jpg

 

ptHrkvt.jpg

 

mm5trHP.jpg

(Note the garage visible on the left)

 

nP5wOzn.jpg

 

IgEH22t.jpg

 

8kZVXWP.jpg



#217 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,516 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 12 October 2023 - 12:03 PM

Yawn.  It's even more boring that I thought.  I guess the only bright side is that we will have more hotel rooms for conventions.



#218 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,091 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 12 October 2023 - 07:28 PM

Still trying to figure out what "views" are being blocked, preventing a 2nd tower. 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#219 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,516 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 12 October 2023 - 10:12 PM

Still trying to figure out what "views" are being blocked, preventing a 2nd tower. 

about a week ago I got a bit more context from someone at the FW Club who is close to the project.  From what he explained to me it came down to the condo owners not wanting hotel rooms at or above the units because "they will have strangers that are able to see inside their units"



#220 FortWorthBorn

FortWorthBorn

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Location:Oakhurst Neighborhood - just outside of downtown on northeast side

Posted 13 October 2023 - 06:51 AM

 

Still trying to figure out what "views" are being blocked, preventing a 2nd tower. 

about a week ago I got a bit more context from someone at the FW Club who is close to the project.  From what he explained to me it came down to the condo owners not wanting hotel rooms at or above the units because "they will have strangers that are able to see inside their units"

 

I find this interesting because you would think that Omni would have approached the condo owners about the new addition, but I asked a friend that has a condo in the Omni building and he said that they have never been approached about anything concerning the new addition. Unless the Omni approach the condo owners board only and the board hasn't said anything to the other owners. My guess si that the height really comes down to cost versus actual number of additional rooms and space needed.



#221 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,434 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 13 October 2023 - 07:21 AM

I tend to believe that the finances of building another condo tower played a far bigger role than anything to do with view blocking or concerns about peeping toms.



#222 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,516 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 13 October 2023 - 10:46 AM

 

 

Still trying to figure out what "views" are being blocked, preventing a 2nd tower. 

about a week ago I got a bit more context from someone at the FW Club who is close to the project.  From what he explained to me it came down to the condo owners not wanting hotel rooms at or above the units because "they will have strangers that are able to see inside their units"

 

I find this interesting because you would think that Omni would have approached the condo owners about the new addition, but I asked a friend that has a condo in the Omni building and he said that they have never been approached about anything concerning the new addition. Unless the Omni approach the condo owners board only and the board hasn't said anything to the other owners. My guess si that the height really comes down to cost versus actual number of additional rooms and space needed.

 

If I'm not mistaken they seem to have the same number or rooms but I think construction costs were probably an major issue.  However, when I was at the Public Meeting and when the group cheered for the news that the tower height was being lowered and was only going to be 10-12 stories that does not give me the impression that it was just about construction cost.  That showed me a group of people believed they had skin in the game and were as receiving the outcome they wanted.

Not sure who was giving the pushback but maybe it was just a small group of condo owners who formed to push the agenda.  Maybe some of the other condo owners didn't care about a new tower next door and so they did not feel the need to get involved but let's be honest, not all people keep themselves up to date or engaged with these types of issues. 

 

I guess when it all comes down to it, the whole discussion is moot because they are building a smaller tower than they initially proposed so it's just crying over spilled milk.



#223 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,434 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 13 October 2023 - 03:25 PM

However, when I was at the Public Meeting and when the group cheered for the news that the tower height was being lowered and was only going to be 10-12 stories that does not give me the impression that it was just about construction cost.  That showed me a group of people believed they had skin in the game and were as receiving the outcome they wanted.


Or it was just a group of people who think their influence went way further than it actually did. I have trouble believing that they would leave money on the table over a small group of owners having an issue with their view being blocked.

#224 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,516 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 16 October 2023 - 02:45 PM

 

However, when I was at the Public Meeting and when the group cheered for the news that the tower height was being lowered and was only going to be 10-12 stories that does not give me the impression that it was just about construction cost.  That showed me a group of people believed they had skin in the game and were as receiving the outcome they wanted.


Or it was just a group of people who think their influence went way further than it actually did. I have trouble believing that they would leave money on the table over a small group of owners having an issue with their view being blocked.

 

Or you are not aware of the power and influence high end luxury condo owners have.  How do you think projects around town get blocked by NIMBY groups? Most of the time they are a very small but "vocal" group.



#225 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,434 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 16 October 2023 - 03:45 PM

Once again, we're back to a conspiracy theory and I'm interested in seeing the evidence.  Lots of circumstantial.  Little direct.  There's plenty of evidence that there are financial concerns that could have shut down a new condo tower.  I just don't buy that businesses leave money on the table for flimsy reasons as much as others do.  If they thought they could make money on a new condo tower, they would find a way around obstructed view concerns. 



#226 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,516 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 17 October 2023 - 12:26 PM

They were planning on building a hotel tower not a condo tower.  That may sound like semantics but those are 2 different animals and not an apples to apples comparison.  I know what I was told by someone who is a major player downtown who is very close to the project but at this juncture I don't need to provide evidence because It's a moot point.  If you think it's a conspiracy theory then you are free to believe so.



#227 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,434 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 17 October 2023 - 07:44 PM

Hotel or condo tower, I just don't buy that these complaints were enough for a company to leave money on the table.



#228 Presidio Interests

Presidio Interests

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Location:Cultural District

Posted 18 October 2023 - 12:14 AM

Think this might have been covered, but building tall and thin is more expensive than short and fat.

Also, I assume its a bit more efficient for the janitorial teams to have larger # of rooms on floors vs spread more vertically (crews going up/down elevators more).

 

Yep, construction costs and operating expenses have risen relentlessly.  I haven't tracked hotel ADRs though. 

 

Regarding the patience of building owners to "stabilize" it depends heavily on the capital partners and structure.  Most equity investors are not patient.  Im not very familiar, however, with typical equity terms for full service downtown/convention center adjacent hotels though.  

 

Real estate debt is largely on hold, and if it can be obtained, its obviously very expensive.  Projects with very deep pocketed, more patient equity like sovereign wealth funds, might be able to avoid construction debt and go with all cash and just refi when debt becomes cheaper.   I think those funds typically prefer gateway cities.



#229 Shanedallas76

Shanedallas76

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth, Tx
  • Interests:Economics, Downtown Fort Worth, Economic Development, Doctrines of Grace

Posted 18 October 2023 - 11:08 AM

Think this might have been covered, but building tall and thin is more expensive than short and fat.

Also, I assume its a bit more efficient for the janitorial teams to have larger # of rooms on floors vs spread more vertically (crews going up/down elevators more).

 

Yep, construction costs and operating expenses have risen relentlessly.  I haven't tracked hotel ADRs though. 

 

Regarding the patience of building owners to "stabilize" it depends heavily on the capital partners and structure.  Most equity investors are not patient.  Im not very familiar, however, with typical equity terms for full service downtown/convention center adjacent hotels though.  

 

Real estate debt is largely on hold, and if it can be obtained, its obviously very expensive.  Projects with very deep pocketed, more patient equity like sovereign wealth funds, might be able to avoid construction debt and go with all cash and just refi when debt becomes cheaper.   I think those funds typically prefer gateway cities.

 

Downton hotel's ADR = $156 as of Aug 23. Also, the YoY ADR growth has been on a pretty sharp decline since Jan. the last two months being negative. 

source: STR



#230 arch-image

arch-image

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 243 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ft Worth
  • Interests:Gary Morgan - Historical preservation, zoning and growth issues, Serious but not professional photographer, been in construction and design since late 70's

Posted 19 October 2023 - 03:23 PM

Downton hotel's ADR = $156 as of Aug 23. Also, the YoY ADR growth has been on a pretty sharp decline since Jan. the last two months being negative. 

source: STR

 

I'm a little surprised it isnt a little higher downtown, I would have expected it to be around 180 at least if not 190



#231 Eastsider817

Eastsider817

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts
  • Location:East Fort Worth

Posted 29 October 2023 - 10:59 AM

A twin tower would been lovely. I wonder in the future if they could build a condo tower over the hotel expansion. All & all this expansion looks really nice. It passes the eye test.

#232 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,698 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 05 December 2023 - 04:26 PM

The project is going back to the DDRB to request approval of conceptual footprint and massing of a new parking garage. Updated rendering from the map:

 

Omni__1701810767518__w1034.png



#233 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,091 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 05 December 2023 - 07:58 PM

The project is going back to the DDRB to request approval of conceptual footprint and massing of a new parking garage. Updated rendering from the map:

 

Omni__1701810767518__w1034.png

It looks better... but now, it doesn't match. 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#234 rriojas71

rriojas71

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,516 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belmont Terrace - Historic North Side
  • Interests:Real Estate, RE Development, Geography, Team Sports, Restaurants, Urban Exploring, Gaming, Travel, History

Posted 05 December 2023 - 08:33 PM

 

The project is going back to the DDRB to request approval of conceptual footprint and massing of a new parking garage. Updated rendering from the map:

 

It looks better... but now, it doesn't match. 

 

100% agree.  I like the hotel tower portion but the piece on the end looks bizarre.  I did like the amenity portion better on the previous rendering sans the bucking bronco.  Why do I feel like the DDRB said it looks too modern and they needed to make it more small town charming.   Is Cheescake Factory changing locations?



#235 Big Frog II

Big Frog II

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 392 posts

Posted 06 December 2023 - 09:55 AM

Looks nice.  Will look good on Lancaster.  Will bring more visitors to our city.  Disappointed we don't get a second tower mimicking the original condo tower.


  • TLA likes this

#236 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,434 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 06 December 2023 - 12:08 PM

I like it better than the October renderings.  The new design is more complementary of the convention center than the original Omni.



#237 txbornviking

txbornviking

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 06 December 2023 - 03:01 PM

The project is going back to the DDRB to request approval of conceptual footprint and massing of a new parking garage. Updated rendering from the map:

 

Omni__1701810767518__w1034.png

 

 

remember this is only for "conceptual footprint and massing of a new parking garage"

 

the rest of what we see here is try to increase the likelihood of approval for the footprint and massing... it is not a promise of what to expect on the visual streetscape



#238 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,671 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 06 December 2023 - 03:19 PM

Hotel base (southern end):

If that new brick-clad base is located directly under the glass curtain wall section that will look ridiculous. 

If, however, it is not directly under the curtain wall glass corner, it could maybe read/appear like a separate structure, which I think would make it fine and maybe even visually undo some of the super-block problem. 

>> So I suppose that's my recommendation:  only apply the brick design scenario where the glass curtain wall corner part is not over it - make it read like a narrow independent building that's connected w/ the hotel base. 

 

If the architects can avoid letting the brick scenario look gimmicky or Disney-like, that scenario would probably age better than the previous design.  I say this b/c think the glass/steel version shown earlier looks really fresh & crisp.  It likely would within its first few years.  If that ever became even slightly discolored or dirty, it would look pretty bad.  The brick scenario, on the other hand, should tolerate dirt/discoloration and likely wouldn't be something that hotel owners (and DFWI) would want to totally rebuild and rebuild in 15-20 years when it would be accused of looking "too 2020s". 

 

Building corners:

Also, I think the glass corner is not a good idea.  I think encasing the corner in GFRC/cast stone material would make the edge age better.  Sure, change the pattern from the pattern in the building center to create an end element.  Just don't make the corner materials 100% window & spandrel glass.

My logic: think 30+ years in future when those edges won't be as crisp, a couple become discolored and it becomes impossible to replace individual panels (they won't make that glass anymore), so they tolerate the no-longer-crisp glass building edge.

 

Garage:

Given previous recommendations to cover garages with green roofs and the heavy cost and structural load of those, building a new garage is the PERFECT time to run irrigation and install planter beds at openings & in places on the top level..  Not recommending a full green roof but a garage with vertical and horizontal landscaping.  A garage hotel guests wouldn't mind facing.



#239 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,698 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 16 December 2023 - 04:18 PM

I dont know if it had been posted the architect on the project is RJTR: https://rjtrdesign.com/portfolio/

#240 arch-image

arch-image

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 243 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ft Worth
  • Interests:Gary Morgan - Historical preservation, zoning and growth issues, Serious but not professional photographer, been in construction and design since late 70's

Posted 14 February 2024 - 04:15 PM

 

Building corners:

Also, I think the glass corner is not a good idea.  I think encasing the corner in GFRC/cast stone material would make the edge age better.  Sure, change the pattern from the pattern in the building center to create an end element.  Just don't make the corner materials 100% window & spandrel glass.

My logic: think 30+ years in future when those edges won't be as crisp, a couple become discolored and it becomes impossible to replace individual panels (they won't make that glass anymore), so they tolerate the no-longer-crisp glass building edge.

 

 

 

What, you don't like a Bead of Silicone caulk being your only defense against the outside elements? 







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Downtown, Omni Hotel, Convention Hotels, Meeting space, Tourism, Conventions

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users