Jump to content

houstontexasjack

Full Member
  • Posts

    1489
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by houstontexasjack

  1. Maybe they’re using special materials to call Gozer the Gozerian like that building on the Upper West Side of New York.
  2. Happily, it looks like Levcor hasn’t updated its website. The parcel appears to have been sold by an entity affiliated with Levcor back in 2020: Edit: I do see vendor’s lien language in this warranty deed. Financing to the entity affiliated with Texas Central was provided by Frost Bank judging by a deed of trust from November 2021.
  3. I think of it as a 2010’s (yes, bleeding into the 2020’s now) version of what the Parklane, Spires, Houstonian hotel, and the Bristol were for the early 80’s. Similar design, not offensive, but not impressive either.
  4. The WSJ had an article as well: https://www.wsj.com/articles/chevron-to-downsize-in-california-remain-based-in-the-state-11656103820?st=0c596dvqujc5192&reflink=article_copyURL_share “Some of Chevron’s ex­ec­u­tives have long wanted to move the com­pa­ny’s head­quar­ters to Texas, but its lead­er­ship has held off, largely be­cause of the com­pa­ny’s long his­tory in Cal­i­for­nia and its as­sets there, such as its Rich­mond, Calif., re­fin­ery, ac­cord­ing to peo­ple fa­mil­iar with the mat­ter.” “Cal­i­for­nia law­mak­ers have pre­vi­ously con­sid­ered im­pos­ing a sev­er­ance tax that would tax oil pro­duc­tion in the state. If Cal­i­for­nia were to im­pose such a tax, that would likely prompt Chevron to re­con­sider keep­ing its head­quar­ters in the state, one of the peo­ple said.”
  5. I think it’s safe to say Texas Central is dead, despite their pronouncements to the contrary.
  6. I’m not sure if this has been shared, but it appears TXDOT is hoping to start construction on Segment 3a (the trenching of I-69 between Museum Park and Midtown) in 2024: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1c8eyTDoJIs7NerzNWVtzxC-3QSeiag6P/view
  7. 🎶The reflex is a lonely child, who’s waiting by the park. The reflex is in charge of finding treasure in the dark!🎶
  8. I can’t say I’d “die on this hill,” but I’ll return some fire to slow the advance and at least try to get some concessions for the skybridge. Heck, maybe we could get a replica of the Bridge of Sighs. That might actually go with the aesthetic in the lobby of the medical building.
  9. If the city wants to develop affordable housing on the vacant lot down Blodgett St from me in Museum Park, I’d welcome it. Or the vacant lots between San Jacinto and Caroline a bit further west. Or both.
  10. It’s a property right the city possesses. The default is that the builder has no right to build into the ROW without city permission. So, in light of the city’s goals with respect to walkable neighborhoods, I think the developer should be a good justification for how the the skybridge would benefit the surrounding area. (I do think, if the skybridge is a “must,” offering public realm improvements in exchange for the right to construct the bridge is a fair ask)
  11. They did the weird “ghost building” thing in the right of the rendering to suggest a building that’s there but, presumably, has not been conceptually finalized yet.
  12. You’ll see me pulling my son in a wagon along the sidewalk on Crawford as we head back from Hermann Park on some evenings.
  13. Ah, I stand corrected. Edit: The skybridge hasn’t been clearly depicted on the more recent rendering, which shows a different orientation for that plaza between Main and Fannin:
  14. From a property rights standpoint, skybridges over public rights-of-way are not “laissez-faire.” Those rights of way have been planned out and are part of the public “bundle of sticks” we get for living in the City of Houston. There’s no right to a skybridge over public ROW. This isn’t a building line or other restriction on Dr. Mann’s property. We are talking about a use of property (the ROW) in the public domain. There hasn’t been a skybridge in a single rendering of the development that’s been presented to the public. It certainly hasn’t been part of the attraction for this development on this forum as far as I can tell (and I’ve been a cheerleader for the Habitable Sculpture design to come through).
  15. FWIW, you’ve persuaded me to rally against the skybridge (they’d need city approvals with notice and a meeting no doubt), where I’d previously been indifferent to it.
  16. Following up on this, Regent Square finally got moving after Hanover started Autry Park. I award this prediction 50 points.
  17. I’m rooting for these lads to succeed. I’d love to see a residential conversion of 800 Bell, and we need something like this to show the concept can work in Houston.
  18. The habitable sculpture concept from Philip Johnson (on which the residential tower is based) back in the day had a bunch of different colors, but the base palette was red.
  19. I thought Tema Development was the owner of this site and Nitya was just a syndicator for capital—but I don’t see Two Hermann as an investment option with Nitya, so I’m not sure if Tema’s still using them to try to raise equity.
×
×
  • Create New...