Jump to content

Luminare

Full Member
  • Posts

    3702
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Luminare last won the day on February 18 2020

Luminare had the most liked content!

3 Followers

About Luminare

  • Birthday 11/03/1989

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Salt Lake City, UT

Recent Profile Visitors

12350 profile views

Luminare's Achievements

(24/32)

6.6k

Reputation

  1. Seems like these latest moves is Kirksey Architecture's attempt diversify. Kirksey for the past 10 years leaned very heavily into Educational facilities both K-12 and Higher Ed. Either that market is cooling off, or they aren't getting the kind of projects to only lean on that particular industry.
  2. To my knowledge there isn't any for the cap itself, and they don't need too. They simply have to engineer the retaining walls before hand to bear the load among other things. This happens all the time with phased projects big and small. If the city is exhibiting to the state what they are considering then the engineers just need to over engineer these sections for what will be placed later. It is high in costs on the front end, and if there was a plan and executed at once then it would be cheaper, but it will allow for greater flexibility later. I don't understand this idea that if it isn't there now, right now, it won't ever be there. These things take time. Thats all which is required at the moment. Difficult to fully invest in a project when the basis for it hasn't put a shovel in the ground yet. The actual infrastructure needs to be approved and finally get underway. Once its a real project that will likely push people to further invest once they see its a reality. Again its a factor of time, and this needs time.
  3. We both agree on this, but for others looking at this. Imagine if, I Luminare, finally get my architecture license and now I have the ability to practice architecture, design buildings, stamp drawings, etc... The argument against TCR would effectively be like saying...Luminare you aren't an architect because you haven't built anything yet, therefore you aren't allowed to practice architecture, design buildings, stamp drawings, etc... I can't believe this has even made it to court. Its absurd.
  4. Well showing is always better than telling. Ironically TCR can't show anything because tellers won't allow them to show because they think (the tellers) that TCR (those that want to show) are the real "tellers". Imagine being stuck in this crazy circular loop of nonsense: TCR: Your honor we are a railroad, but how can we prove it if our opponents keep suing us preventing us from building it in the first place Opponents: Ha see your honor! They just admitted that they aren't a railroad because they don't have any tracks yet. TCR: Then stop suing us and we will get to work building our railroad Opponents: No we won't because we don't think you are a railroad because you don't have any tracks. TCR: We will have tracks if you just let us be. Opponents: But you aren't a railroad company, so how can we trust you to lay track because if when you do lay down tracks then you will have to be recognized as a railroad and we don't want that. TCR: ...what?
  5. This is an example of "concept creep" which happens when small or minor shifts in semantics ends up pushing or expanding the boundaries of a defined concept, idea, word, etc... If River Oaks is the place that many people want to be, but the space available is limited then overtime you will have those on the periphery who will then attempt to link themselves with River Oaks by simple association just so they can say they "live in" River Oaks. Over time as more and more people start naming themselves as River Oaks the boundary that once was the actual River Oaks begins to be diminished. As the name River Oaks expands the name will get further diluted over time to a point where nobody really understands what River Oaks even means anymore, and its at that point you would then start to see a shift or change. Its a natural and emergent phenomena that's really interesting once you look into it.
  6. Traditionally, when your opponents arguments come down to semantics that not exactly a good sign. Also when your opponent continuously has to keep moving the goal post in effort to claim victory, that also isn't a good sign. When you have to push the courts to "fix" a definition of what is defined as a "railroad" in order to keep your narrative going, that is also not a good sign. We have seen this play out in my spheres over the past few years. It doesn't matter what side of any issue, or whatever tride is pushing whatever narrative. When you see these sorts of points playout and stack up, the side that is at this point usually loses.
  7. I actually agree with both statements here. Both of true in different ways. @editor You are right. We currently don't have enough of a sample size from the pool of developments currently on going/ completed, etc... to really acknowledge that the totality of what @Big E said is correct, but at the same time Big E is correct in that in regards to how Houston functions as a city, if the city were to start step in and muck around and do things to these developments with the lack of experience they have it would only result in problems. Has every development faired greatly from this approach? No, but these companies, developers, architects, and contractors are learning from one another, and whats important is, on average are these developments getting slightly better over time? I would say yes. As long as the mean is improving relative to where things were at before, then I call that a success, and if this is without bloating central government to achieve that incremental improvement, then that is a wild success.
  8. Unless you aren't familiar with current parking space regulations in Houston then you might not, and if you settle for this just being what it is without any context to external forces which creates building forms in the first place, then yes your conclusion that this is merely an aesthetic problem would be correct, but it isn't. Below are the parking regulations for the city of Houston by use classification: https://www.houstontx.gov/planning/DevelopRegs/docs_pdfs/parking_req.pdf The amount of spaces required in each category across the board are some of the highest totals for parking you will find anywhere, and as development is concentrated on smaller and smaller lots then you will start to get more and more ridiculous results. This is like look at the "skinny"scrapers in NYC, and just say "Oh I guess thats the latest fad. I didn't know that this was in such high demand." It isn't though. The space those buildings are being built on are in high demand, but the skinnyscraper itself is direct result of some of the more ludicrous zoning regulations and requirements in the nation. Each city has their extremes in regards to development. For Houston, its parking requirements. Ask any developer, contractor, or architect, and the majority will tell you they wish they didn't have to build so much parking, but parking is one of the few things that the city of Houston mandates are included in every development, and these requirements have a drastic consequences on building forms in this city, so if you want to fix this building aesthetically with design standards for parking garages, then start with the number of spaces required in the first place. This building has 337 parking spaces. 2/3rds of this building is for parking while the other is for actual rentable space. Now really think where the problem is, and yes if there is political will to do something then it can be done. I'm not against parking by the way, I'm against the heavy hand of government mandating something they have no clue or understand what is required for each site in each particular circumstance. You change these requirements and you will see a lot of drastic changes to building form in this city.
  9. Totally get it. For us we need a term which at least gets a dialogue going between both sides, or at least signals to the client to not jump the gun on taking something out of a project. As far as "here is the stuff I can actually find in 2022" you are right, and I've experienced this on projects I currently work on and describing this process as a "triage" is spot on. Heck I'm familiar with a job where a contractor literally took stuff off of one job just so they could fill a need on another. Its ridiculous. If anyone after hearing what is going on in construction right now thinks the economy is "okay" they I have serious doubt they have the ability to think critically. No reason why a particular gas burning fireplace for an outdoor portion of a clubhouse should take 6-12 months in lead time...
  10. Go ahead! Spread it far and wide. I'd rather use this term which is us describing what is actually happening, and not simply seceding territory or narrative to contractors.
  11. There might be rules, but with every rule there is an exception. That exception would be finding a way to talk to higher ups on site or those building this, and pitch your flights as part of an advertising opportunity from which you would get a cut. All of this is of course hypothetically speaking. Maybe team up with @brijonmang? Just spitballin an idea. Remember where there is a will there is a way.
  12. More impressive is that its private companies doing this themselves rather than specific city planning. Although good city planning helps properly stitch these large developments together in a seamless way (that will be the next step if that could be achieved), its better than what was on offering before. Now the only thing thats missing is obviously retail, and people. Lets see how this space works once those start up.
×
×
  • Create New...