Moore713 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I was Just curious if I am in the minority here. While I love the construction planned for downtown, I can't help but wonder if a the next phase should go toward uptown.. This rumor 102 would look great in ither site really, but I think a super tall would really stand out in uptown along side william tower IMO. BTW any history buffs know why Hines picked uptown for the tower , were they hoping to spark a supertall build in the area or just wanted to be different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 i dont know the history behind it, but im impartial to where the next supertall should go. either way i would be ecstatic Houston is getting a 3rd supertall.. it would be nice if it were in downtown though, between JP Morgan and Wells Fargo, and a bit taller, to fill in the gap between those two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowerSpotter Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Kind of a hard choice but I would say downtown slighty because its rumored to go near minutemaid. Edit: Referring to 102 story tower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Downtown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Not a hard choice at all. Downtown. I hope to never see a building taller than Transco in Uptown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moore713 Posted August 1, 2013 Author Share Posted August 1, 2013 Not a hard choice at all. Downtown. I hope to never see a building taller than Transco in Uptown. Why is that ? You don't like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 what if another district got a supertall? like Upper Kirby, the EC, or another of our many skylines. i kind of like Williams Tower being the tallest in uptown. i guess if they moved the beacon to the taller building i wouldnt be opposed to the idea of a supertall in uptown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowerSpotter Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I wouldn't mind a supertall being anywhere inside the 610 loop. Either way it will change our skyline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moore713 Posted August 1, 2013 Author Share Posted August 1, 2013 what if another district got a supertall? like Upper Kirby, the EC, or another of our many skylines. i kind of like Williams Tower being the tallest in uptown. i guess if they moved the beacon to the taller building i wouldnt be opposed to the idea of a supertall in uptown. I was hoping that those districts would try to put their stamp on the area by creating a signture tower like williams did for uptown but no bite, when philps 66 announced they were moving to westchase and building a new building that was going to be their flagship, I had hoped they would go big and do for westchase what Williams did for Uptown.. But no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Stone Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I vote for placing the 102-story skyscraper some place near the intersection of Bissonett and Ashby or maybe somewhere in the Heights or Afton Oaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator80 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Downtown gets my vote but does anyone seriously think that there is a market for the higher rents that would have to be charged to offset increased construction and operating costs for 80+ stories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totheskies Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Uhh... Downtown all the way. Anywhere else just wouldn't look or feel right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 You can have a supertalls that's "only" 70 stories, or less if there is an architectural feature/spire on top. I could see it being a fully pre leased building for one large company, or a statement tower, which would most likely be for just one company too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citizen4rmptown Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Downtown, easily. Even with the upcoming construction, Downtown's skyline will not radically change because the new Chevron Tower is so similar to the former Enron complex. And the other towers at the other bookend of Downtown appear to cover up the other in certain angles. So from the well-known "skyline district" angle, a supertall behind our famous frontline skyscrapers is really the only height that would be able to be make an impact(unless it's a skyscraper that is built in the gaps of the district)Although it makes for different angles from every direction, which is neat, the fact that the most famous angle of downtown is dominated by enormous and tall skyscrapers in the forefront, it makes it difficult for new towers to make a noticeable impact. Look at BG Place/MainPlace, a 600 footer is almost entirely masked from this angle. Just think how much more dense our skyline would appear if the tallest DT towers were in a central core, instead of concentrated linearly on one half of DT. But I do appreciate having so many different looks to DT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xsatyr Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Def downtown. I just want something over 700ft in Uptown to bridge the gap to Williams Tower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Chevron may not have a huge impact on the skyline but its another step towards street level densification. One less parking lot, er, grassy field, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbates2 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Downtown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinkaidAlum Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Downtown for sure. 1) Because a 102 story tower would absolutely dwarf the rest of Uptown, including the Transco 2) Because of downtown's street grid and access to better public transit. A 102 story tower anywhere in Uptown would be a cluster (& of traffic. Seriously, imagine a 1,400 foot office tower with thousands of employees and nearly everyone of them driving in and out of a garage facility and pouring out onto Uptown roads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shasta Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Downtown, easily. Uptown does not have anywhere near the infrastructure to handle the increased traffic caused by a 102 story building. Downtown is designed for it, Uptown is NOT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purdueenginerd Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Downtown. It'd look better there even if it was a 1960s box design. Imagine if Williams tower was built near minute maid, or where Allen center 5 was supposed to be. That tower would look so much better downtown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 agreed, maybe there will be one in uptown in the next decade once the light rail system is built out toward the west, and i guess the BRT system could help, especially knowing light rail will come in not long behind it. but anytime soon and it would be a nightmare for the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowerSpotter Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 agreed, maybe there will be one in uptown in the next decade once the light rail system is built out toward the west, and i guess the BRT system could help, especially knowing light rail will come in not long behind it. but anytime soon and it would be a nightmare for the area.That seems like a logical timeframe but I don't think there would be a supertall but maybe something around 40 to 50 storys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
august948 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I'll go contrarian and say put it in the Energy Corridor. Right on I-10 where people can see it for miles around, especially coming into town from the west. Something like that would say to the world, "we're so wealthy we can afford to put a big-a$$ tower anywhere we d@mn well please." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 that would be nice, and a very plausible idea. one would hope that uptown would get a tower over 40 stories in the next 10 years, given the boom were going through. id say more likely less than 5. it will obviously be along post oak. William is lonely and needs some taller company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I'll go contrarian and say put it in the Energy Corridor. Right on I-10 where people can see it for miles around, especially coming into town from the west. Something like that would say to the world, "we're so wealthy we can afford to put a big-a$$ tower anywhere we d@mn well please." i think "F*** ZONING!!!" would be the better statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
largeTEXAS Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Downtown. As many have said, it's all about the infrastructure. Uptown can hardly handle the current density there. In downtown the block grid, transit streets, freeways, and light rail are all designed to support density. Uptown was never designed for the amount of density it is seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Downtown for sure. 1) Because a 102 story tower would absolutely dwarf the rest of Uptown, including the Transco 2) Because of downtown's street grid and access to better public transit. A 102 story tower anywhere in Uptown would be a cluster (& of traffic. Seriously, imagine a 1,400 foot office tower with thousands of employees and nearly everyone of them driving in and out of a garage facility and pouring out onto Uptown roads. Agree 100%. Uptown's traffic is already bad enough as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Downtown. There are still way too many vacant lots. Honestly I would prefer downtown to uptown for almost *any new construction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HtownWxBoy Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 Downtown! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecar(a.f.f.) Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 Downtown...bring back the Bank of the Southwest Tower! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.