Jump to content

Luminare

Full Member
  • Content Count

    2335
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Luminare last won the day on February 13

Luminare had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2611 Excellent

About Luminare

  • Rank

  • Birthday 11/03/1989

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Montrose

Recent Profile Visitors

9783 profile views
  1. All that parking in that render is existing. Seems there focus completely on the reuse of the old building and not any new construction Not really surprised. Honestly I compare this to interventions and reuse in Sawyer Yards. Its not like those reuses did anything dramatic in relation to the bike trail or other buildings around it or even the railroad, but when I recently went down there I liked what was starting to happen there and it has lots of potential. This post office site has lots of potential and I'm guessing they need to start seeing a good return on their investment and the quickest way is to reuse the existing building as quickly as possible. Get people on site and interested. See what kind of companies you get into that little area and then develop the rest to cater to that area. No need to rush.
  2. Well I'd be damned haha. Something different happened. I'm wondering if its a look they wanted to go for. Maybe they used a good diamond saw to get a clean cut so it looks like a mirrored finish? Anyway. I was wrong. Would like to see it up close to see what the actual finish looks like.
  3. While driving yesterday I saw that they had demo'ed the older building completely. Guess they had a hard time getting it through permit or it just wasn't savable? No clue. Either way its gone now, so it will be all new construction.
  4. While driving yesterday I saw that they are already building the mound for the land bridge. There was a poster that said it will be ready by 2022. @Urbannizer can we move this whole thing to "Going Up". This park project is so huge. I don't see why it should be relegated to sub-forum. I feel we should have more eyes and ears on this one.
  5. @Urbannizer @intencity77 @jmitch94 @nate4l1f3 @CrockpotandGravel Two things can be true at the same time. I agree that people do respond more to development titles than address numbers, but Crock is right that threads do tend to die off or are hard to find without an address in the title. Lets just make both happen at once. Example: (address in question) - (development in question) (whatever the address is for this) - MKT New Retail; Apartments Both sides win in this situation. If things need to be updated, such as project info, or if the developer changes the official address then the mods can fix it. I also think it would be nice if there was a third identifier. Example: (address in question) - (development in question) - (project phase in question) (whatever the address is for this) - MKT New Retail; Apartments - UNDER CONSTRUCTION @editor any opinion on this? To everyone else, just zip it. This is why I don't go on Reddit anymore because I see stuff like this? Are we Reddit now? Why are we hanging out dirty laundry in what is the online equivalent to the town square? When slinging mud at someone beware that you are going to get dirty as well, so I don't recommend it. EDIT: So Crock. If you put the address then put the development name. For others if you put the development name then put the address in. If you only know the address or just the development name then (at) someone and they can help out.
  6. Was doing a long hike all around the city this past Sunday. Walked past....like wow. They threw down some serious dough for this Food Hall / Lobby / Tunnel area. Its gorgeous! So much marble...marble everywhere. The wood panel ceiling with recessed lighting. This is going to be a real gem in Downtown. I like how we now have so many Food Halls coming online, but all of them are unique and interesting. A wide variety of materials, and meal offerings. Can't wait to go inside.
  7. I think we have been discussing this on multiple threads, but its been fun seeing this sort of "free-market" urbanism take shape. It certainly hasn't been perfect, and we have had to really be patient while all these different developers tweak and reimagine various urban formulas, but it seems that from here on out things are going to start getting better and more sophisticated like this. Really cool stuff. Again Houston's formula for development can be frustrating, but its also really interesting and unique.
  8. General Contractors and Subs also do the same thing for architects. "Free consulting" is a good way to put it. Many forget that the Architect is a consultant, but for the client.
  9. The answer is...it depends. I'm still learning about this process as well, but I was recently part of a closed competition (closed RFP) with my current firm. Competitions are great, but come with significant risks. The biggest risk is the allocation of resources/manpower to design and produce something for said competition. This is mostly always out of pocket for whatever firm is participating, and its why if you ever look at the ones who win or lose and its because....well level of talent and design finesse/skill, but also allocation of resources and manpower to get something good out the door. There is a hierarchy here which I list below from bottom to the top: RFQ (Request for Qualification) (Low Risk): Any kind of Project, but not really High Profile. Normally renovations and smaller construction. Like an RFP, but minus the design idea. These are specifically asking for your name and experience level. Sometimes an RFQ can then turn into an RFP once the client has a top list of architects to proceed further. Think of it like sending out a resume for a job. When looking for a job you probably send out hundreds of resumes and see what sticks. RFP (Request for Proposal) (Medium Risk): Most every other type of Project The client normally already has a vague idea of what they want and what their needs are. RFP are either open or closed depending the specifics of the job. In any case you aren't just sending in your design, but also who you are and what is your experience level. This is especially the case for closed, and from my experience so far they tend to be closed because the client normally invites specific architects that they like or are interested in, but need them to develop an idea and provide experience that could qualify. If you win then you proceed. Sometimes they might select a few winners and then move on from there (some clients will pay for this further extension to the RFP). This is kinda like getting accepted for an interview where you then get to show yourself off. Open Competition (High Risk): High Profile Jobs and Clients Normally not in the format of an RFP, but instead your submission is the actual design product itself. This means you are being judge not by your brand/name and your experience, but simply if you have talent and design skill to do the job in the first place. An open competition is normally done when a client is either fishing for ideas on how to use a site and then move on, or to actually choose an architect for the actual job itself. In any case the client isn't sure what they really want, and are looking for an architect to tell them what they might want. If you win then they might proceed ...or not. That happens sometimes. Again its high risk/high reward. Imagine this as being called for The Voice or Americans Got Talent. EDIT: Formatting
  10. I don't believe we have any beef either. I'm glad you are interested in learning as much as possible. I would also say that just because I'm in the industry doesn't necessarily mean that I'm going to be right 100% of the time (but that doesn't mean that what I'm saying is just a "matter of opinion"). Currently I work at a firm that is not only a different building type of what I know, but also stylistically different from previous, so I'm in the same boat learning new things each day just as I hope you are. These are all good things. As far as replying to me or not, that is your choice. I can't compel you to reply or even accept the information that I present here. However, it is different when one is formulating a line of reasoning, or a hypothesis, and is intentionally excluding information from people who do this everyday (which I believe to be foolish) simply because it could derail a formulated hypothesis. This leads to this statement "I decided to not to reply to your previous post as you seemed to be certain of an unpredictable outcome." If your goal is to seek truth then its actually necessary that you do the opposite of this and engage with people who are going to get various different conclusions because only then will you get to a true point of understanding. Yes there is an 'infinite' amount of ways to perceive the world, but there are only a 'finite' amount of ways to actually proceed and interact with the world in a way that is actually worth it. Yes it technically is an "unpredictable outcome", but it also really isn't, and to someone with experience they have reasonable degree of certainty of where something is going which is very valuable info for those who don't know what is going on. Now if something unpredictable happens...then that becomes interesting, exciting, and new. Most of these situations are very very very predictable. We wouldn't even have codes if we couldn't come to a predictable outcome. This brings me to my opposition to the "tripping hazard" as its maybe fun to think about in an entertaining way, but in the end isn't a realistic outcome and some on here are only propagating this notion simply to keep this "unpredictable", superficially. I mean if we just want to spew hypothetical "unpredictable outcomes" then maybe the raised portions are stones you step on, they go down, and it activates an unexpected lava pit from below which sends unknowing pedestrians to their doom. Now that is unpredictable....but that ain't going to happen. Its fun to think about....for fun, but its not whats going to happen. Finally, I think a trap that we both have fallen into, which happens with many, is that two things can be true at the same time (which actually is normally what happens), but instead we get it in our heads that when one thing is true then the other HAS to be false. We could both be correct in that one area was saw cut to be flush while the other part of the plaza will remain raised. Anyway. We good. TDLR. For those who don't want to slog through it all: 1. learning new things is good 2. Don't be a sophist 3. While it might be "unpredictable" for you because you have never experienced something before, that doesn't mean that nobody has and is predictable to those who know from experience. 4. Two things can be true at the same time, contrary to what most think.
  11. Its amazing how far this neighborhood has come since this thread started (even a little before this thread started). Talk about a complete 180. Interesting to see its evolution in this thread alone.
  12. I think I've said in another thread that "Life is about tradeoffs". Fine-grain development is what we are after at this point, but this will lead to a "clash" of different styles, but this can lead to interesting variations in the environment that would make a walk in this environment more pleasing and interesting. Coarse-grain is also fine in certain instances when you want to holistic and integrated look. At this point we have enough coarse-grain development, and its time to start getting/accepting more variation. At some point we will want to switch back to coarse-grain when the variations get too chaotic to stomach. Normally from my experiences in Europe, fine-grain is great in areas which embrace variations, and non-conformity. They also work well for most situations in a given city (like your typical neighborhood block or street). Coarse-grain is great in areas that are centralized, or areas which are meant to convey a sense of authority or prominence. These areas embrace conformity, and consensus because its more about the integration of the whole rather than the sum of its parts.
×
×
  • Create New...