Jump to content

Luminare

Full Member
  • Content Count

    3523
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Luminare last won the day on February 18

Luminare had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

5896 Excellent

1 Follower

About Luminare

  • Rank

  • Birthday 11/03/1989

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Montrose

Recent Profile Visitors

11304 profile views
  1. Its good knowledge to know about change in leadership, but why do people automatically register a change in leadership as a bad thing? This is a pattern that I've noticed for awhile now. Like do you think of it as bad news when a friend of yours goes to another company and gets a better job somewhere else or gets a promotion to a different position? To me this seems like a logical fallacy, or a zero-sum fallacy. Change in leadership is a good thing. It means maybe a better person is coming in or moving up, and a change in leadership means the organization doesn't get stilted and rigid. Maybe this actually benefits projects like East River because someone with different ideas can have input on the project. You would need to supply evidence that the company is at a financial loss or there is bad office culture, etc... to justify that position.
  2. Actually the more incredible statistic is 25k older units that are going to now be at a cheaper price than the newer luxury units will soon be available to those who originally couldn't afford them. You build luxury units because they are easier to get money for, and you will get a better return on the investment. People with money are always looking to move up to the next best thing. People with money will spend the money. This is why you build for those kinds of clients, and that movement by those who go to the newer units does have a profound effect that allows more access for those with less means to have access to areas they couldn't before. So if you are concerned even a little that the initial statistic, think about what isn't being said. There are meta numbers underneath that matter the same if not more. Plenty stand to benefit with more luxury units being built and its not just the people that can afford the newer stuff.
  3. It's go time for this one y'all. Found this on the latest commission agenda.
  4. This project, is a testament to what I've said in other threads where people cry value-engineering or the fact this is Houston, and we can't have nice things are wrong, and superficial explanations at best. Architects are really important. In an economic climate such as this, the posers will fold, but the actual creative and innovative ones will pull through. OMA is one of the best because they don't fold, and they press on. This really got going during this the time the economy was going into the gutter and they could have easily cut a lot of things especially this set piece type stairways. Oh just make a regular stair, its a stair who cares. That could have been the case, but it's clear the Architect on this job has found ways to work around it and keep their promises in what they have proposed. Maybe not everything will turn out exactly as they wished given the current constraints, but at the very least they are giving it a shot, and will keep the biggest of promises they made which were some very beautiful stairway spaces, and cool rooftop garden. If they can pull those things off then this will be a success.
  5. Two things can be true at the same time. In this case I would say both are a possibility. This is objectively the case. Again look at their portfolio of work. One notices a pattern of nearly zero curvilinear buildings. So the former is true, which is this was a bad architect choice. Then you compound that with the economy on top of the bad architect choice, and therefore you get the resulting design we see now. I know this from professional experience. I've seen project architects cave to financial pressures and fail to keep the "promises" they made because they don't know how to work within the constraints, and so say to hell with it, just cut everything and box it up. I've seen others in that same situation say, well maybe we can't do it this exact way, but maybe we can make it work another way. Ok cut here, thats fine, but here this is where we make a stand and figure out with our means how we can get this done. These situations really highlight who are actually good architects who are creative and are able to pivot out of a bad situation, and who are just posers. There is a legitimate argument to be made that during really good economic climates, more middle of the road, or mediocre outfits will start to extend themselves and try new things to get ahead and change. Maybe Preston was on the heels of trying new types of design that they aren't experienced at. I've seen this as the case as well. It's a challenging process to break a pre-established mold and do something different. I have a lot of experience in this. They maybe thought they could pull off the original, and then the economic sunk, and that made them revert to previous habits. That happens too. Great questions though.
  6. Going out on a limb here. I think this community literally willed this one into existence.
  7. Putting that aside, and just real talk about design, looking at Preston's portfolio, is this really a shocker? Even with the current climate. I can buy the argument that the economy chopped the building by about 10 stories, but design wise that's all on the architect. I constantly have problems with architects who are like this. If you can not achieve it then don't sell it. It would have been better if they had undersold and then delivered the version they currently have. Nothing in Preston's portfolio tells me they excel with anything curvilinear. I see a few buildings with some stock "Oh lets place a gentle bezier curve here," but that's it. What this should tell people, at the end of the day, is that sure there was some obvious value engineering, but overall design wise this firm oversold and under delivered, and that is on them. Not the value engineering. Look at what Michael Hsu does, or Munoz Albin, etc... Those are just examples of firms that make sure what they sell is actually what gets built keeping in mind that at some point the budget in every project gets trimmed. Let's not let the architects potentially get away from this penalty free with an excuse of...it was the economy, and so we had to value engineer. No this is a pattern. They can not do curvilinear work. Just a bad choice in architect, and I hope Caydon learns from this.
  8. Speaking from experience with rendering. This is a reflectivity setting being set too high. Pavers, even white ones, aren't that reflective. Sometimes a render engine will make even things which aren't that reflective or glossy a lot more reflective or glossy than what they really are. Actually I was kinda put back by @Montrose1100 comment, but then I was like, "ok wait a second, I know clients that make the exact same statements even though its a render because they want to make sure what they are getting is what they are getting." So after taking a step back, and reflecting on it, I could understand why Montrose1100 would say that, and he does have a point. In this image it is way to reflective. I would say its probably not going to be that reflective in real life. I could be wrong. I have been before, but the only time you get a paver/brick that is that reflective is if its a glazed brick which you don't really ever put on the ground. Occum's Razor would suggest that its a flaw in the actual rendering of the material, and not a reflection of what it will actually be. It happens. I don't think its bright, but I can see why Montrose1100 says its bright, and its a comment to keep in mind. If he thinks that there might be others that think that as well.
  9. @j_cuevas713 As an optimist myself its certainly possible, but I'm also a realist, so its important that we don't look at this in a naive or even a hopeful way. By the way I want to make sure I'm clear I'm not here to attack you as a person or to discredit you, but what I am going to say should be something to think about. I don't know about you, but a politician seeming "optimistic" about anything doesn't exactly get anything done. They said this last time, and the time before that, and the time before that. I can't see what actions they have taken as leaders for ME to be "optimistic" about THEIR "optimism". This persons words ring hollow at this point. I'm not going to simply take this at face value, and it would be wise you don't take it at face value either. Fine the criteria has change. How does that help? What makes this project a better candidate before than it did in the past? Again its merely words framed in a way to make sure one doesn't ask questions if they don't want to ask them. However if you are someone that asks a lot of questions, like I do, it opens a pandoras box of questions. Its not only that, then I have to ask, well you knew the criteria before it was change and you were still unsuccessful. Do you submit even though you knew it would fail, and this was just one making themselves look like they are getting something done, and now that the criteria has changed now its covering up for your previous failures? Or is it actually something different? I don't trust this person, I don't know this person. It would be one thing if I didn't know them, but they actually acted out what they were saying and got things done, but I'm even more skeptical and mistrustful when you add the fact I don't ever get to see this council person ever. This. This is why it isn't getting done because people throw statements like this and sacrifice what they need for what others need, and at the same time it makes what they want neglected, and it makes them worse off. How long do we prioritize others until we feel they are sufficiently "well off" arbitrarily, so the city can focus on our community again? If ever. This moment when you step back and cede your wants and needs is the moment when others who don't care about your wants and needs, and won't think about others will just take it for themselves, and push you aside. You want better infrastructure and better roads. Fine that is something one selfishly wants, but it also benefits others greatly as well, so its really not that selfish. If its not that selfish then its something to not cede and to fight for. If you don't cede and you fight for it then you at least have a chance to win. We aren't even putting up a fight. We are let others take funding because we want to feel like we are self-righteous good people, but we are just weak, and can't stand up for ourselves. And then after you cede the argument to them, you then say, oh its not the cities fault its the property owners fault and they should do more. So now were going to let the city and authority figures get off scot-free, but the people that will benefit from these improvements...no we should just blame them. Do you see the contradictions here? As if us not getting funding is a direct result of property owners not being sufficiently clean operators, or pure people who are without sin in some sense is the problem for our rejection, when we know full well areas that are actually look worse get funding, so its cleanliness isn't a prerequisite for funding. The prerequisite is not backing down when you want something and pushing for it until you get it. The squeaky wheel gets the oil, as they say. We don't even let our wheels squeak because we think it will be rude until we have no more wheels because they fall off. And here its not like you are hiding that you want this to change. Just for some reason you think its rude to ask? The only reason why Durham/Shepherd is getting fixed is because its an important utility corridor. Thats it. Its not some virtue of helping the people. Its utility plain and simple, and that is ok, but it would be wrong...more like naive to frame it otherwise. West Alabama is taking forever. They are dragging there heels on that, and I haven't seen movement on this at all. The only movement I've seen on this is for Upper Kirby...because they actually fight for what they want, and aren't afraid of making a little bit of a ruckus to get it.
  10. I will continue to say this, Montrose's voice in city government sucks right now. It sucks because we don't have people that actually get what Montrose needs. While I like the independent nature of a lot of Montrose's neighborhoods, it also leaves the rest of the district vulnerable because if a neigbhorhood is able to secure funding and agreements with the city to upgrade there streets one by one then there isn't really a need to give funding to Montrose as a district. Montrose TIRZ for example is only the major thoroughfares and commercial areas that line them, and very few people actually live on those corridors currently. Most people live in these independent neighborhoods which flank the corridor and that is where the majority of voices are, and its where most of the tax payers are. Think about it, with all the above setup as it currently is, it stands to reason that anything Montrose TIRZ wants will be secondary to what each independent neighborhood wants. Midtown gets what they need because they can effectively talk to city government as a block. The Heights can get what they want because they can talk to the city as a block. Same with Upper Kirby. Even East End and 3rd Ward get more resources because they are able to form as a block to get what they want. Montrose doesn't approach the city in this way. This effectively leaves Montrose TIRZ to fight for itself which will put it at the back of the line. If people want this project to work then Montrose needs to start acting more like a district and not as a collection or confederation of independent neighborhoods because while neighborhoods might be able to get new streets they don't include major roads as part of there realm which will leave them out of funding.
  11. Dude Microsoft has seriously stepped up there game when it comes to maps. Been also keeping up with there soon to be released Flight Simulator 2020. The map tech in that is absurd haha Like very close to reality its scary.
  12. If y'all really want to see something cool. I haven't seen my google update yet for Downtown. While searching for it I ran into this site: https://zoom.earth Its a live satellite that is constantly updating. Check it out.
×
×
  • Create New...