Jump to content

Luminare

Full Member
  • Posts

    3,960
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by Luminare

  1. Happy New Year everyone! 2023 was definitely a grind. Hopefully I can hang around more this year! Good Luck to everyone in 2024!
  2. I'll give it my best shot. They won't know what hit them haha. Thanks!
  3. Same here. Looks like some work has been done? If you compare the recent photo to the posts in February it looks like they have started adding some metal coping to some of the parapets? From looking at the photos it looks like everything has been floated decently on the roof, the larger deck on the next level, and the balconies, but the bigger problem is this project, unfortunately, stopped before most water protection elements like flashing and gutters were finished. I think the "community space"?? on the left will need be refinished since that one wall still has its studs exposed. My biggest concern in a building like this that's unfinished are all the connection points of materials. Would there be anything in this structurally that would be a concern? If I were running this project the first thing I would do is take all that stucco out. Some of it has held up okay, but I will always be against using stucco in this region. There is just to much moisture in the air in Houston, for stucco to hold up well. Though it wouldn't look the nicest, to keep the budget lean, and to get this back up as quickly as possible, I would probably just go with a fiber cement panel. I'm just wondering what was going to be the finish material that would have been applied to the CMU. Anything could go on that. The CMU doesn't look load bearing, but instead looks like infill. Again water would be a concern right? I don't see a lot of flashing to prevent water from entering any parts of that wall. I just hope they have hired a good Building Envelope consultant to evaluate everything before closing up this baby.
  4. Better than the "AIA" title anyday! I'm honored! Cheers to everyone who liked, commented, and the kind words!
  5. Greetings fellow HAIFers, I've been on this forum for over 9 years! My first post here was on May 10th, 2014 in the Hannover Southampton thread: Remember when we were all excited about that project? Incredible how much time flies! As of yesterday, HAIF's very own Luminare, is officially a licensed architect! My first license is in the state of Colorado. But wait, aren't you in Utah? Yes I still am in Utah. That license will come soon, as that and many others require a few more things to take care of which I can follow up on in this thread if people are curious. Yes I do plan on nabbing that Texas license at some point as well! I just wanted to tell this community, thank you. For years this forum was a great home for me to talk to everyone interested in Houston construction, development, architecture, and design (among many others). Thank you for taking an interest in what I'd had to say, whether extremely long word salads about specifics in architecture, to fun meme's, support for the currently discontinued Project Astropolis (which I had to sideline for my licensure efforts and move to Utah), to support throughout this process going back all those years. This forum is an important place, and I hope it continues to remain so in the years to come! Special Thanks: @editor For giving people a place to have these discussions! To the entire mod/admin team! In particular @Urbannizer @Subdude @Montrose1100 @Triton @Highrise Tower @lockmat To all those whom continue to field report, fly drones, investigate, provide information which keeps those in the construction, engineering, and architecture disciplines, and laymen informed. Please continue your great service! I certainly appreciate it! @hindesky HighriseTower @Paco Jones Urbannizer @IntheKnowHouston @cityliving @ChannelTwoNews @trymahjong brijonmang, among many many others as well as the many who post on the more local neighborhood threads! Keep it up! To those whom I've meet in real life! @BigFootsSocks @mollusk @bobruss @brijonmang @Purdueenginerd To all those whom I've had very good, and even not so good conversations with haha. I enjoyed all of them! You know who you are! To those who helped with Project Astropolis before being discontinued! purdueenginerd urbannizer hindesky highrisetower channeltwonews triton subdude brijonmang @BeerNut pacojones. And don't worry for those on that list who were interested but couldn't because of other obligations (same with me) just your interest was enough. Thanks for those who supported. If I left anyone out, I didn't do it on purpose haha! Just let me know! Finally, if you're a young aspiring architect reading this on the forum, and wondering if you really can do it, to be licensed, just know this guy did it! The only person that can hold you back from getting licensed is yourself! Long live HAIF! As for me, I'll continue to post, give my perspective on the industry, post silly meme's, and conversations with any who want to have them! Take It Easy everyone, Luminare, Architect
  6. The first part is probably true, which I pointed out a while back. The second part is half right. At this point they probably have rebid the project and selected a new contractor, or if that hasn't happened then the current contractor / owner have renegotiated the existing contract. As for the last part, thats not what would take place. Often times that info is simply passed on to the next contractor, though I could be wrong in specific circumstances. It is true that if the project has been rebid then that means a bunch of sub-contractors, possibly manufacturers for products which will require a new round of submittals for most things anyway. Everything that has already been processed though should be backed up by the Architect, so it can crossed referenced if their are any questions. No doubt whatever is going on its a mess. Changing Contractors mid-project is always crazy and a mess.
  7. Interesting. Looking at photos posted here in May, it looks like they choose Butt Glazed Curtain Wall. This is when the Curtain wall is supporting the glass structurally from the inside and the glazing on the outside is married together with a kind of epoxy that binds both ends of the glazing. Its a much more expensive form of curtain wall than your typical standard curtain wall. There are a number of reasons why they could be dismantling the system: - During the process of installation, costs to erect the rest of the system would go over budget, and now they are in the process of subbing this system with a move cost-effective system. - During the process of installation, it was notified to the architect that while part of the order arrived on time, the rest of the system still has a long lead time which would further delay the project, and in order to get the project on schedule it might have been decided between the Architect, Contractor, and Owner to sub the system for one which has less lead time. - Upon installation of the system, the architect reviewed the system, found that either the system was installed not in accordance with the contract documents (construction documents) (this can be for any reason btw), and has ordered the system to be dismantled either to be reattached or find a system that matches better with the contract documents. - Upon installation of the system, the structural engineer reviewing the system, found either structural deficiencies (bad connections, poor quality construction, or the construction was not in accordance with the contract documents, and has ordered the system to be dismantled. - There are so many RFI's related to the erection of the system, or how the system is attached to the framing, that the architect has concluded that the contractor does not have the staff or experience to finish the system and has chosen to replace it with a system that is easier to construct. - There are so many RFI's related to the depiction of the system or its details (either because there is a lack of details, not detailed correctly, or there was a failure in coordination between architecture and structure), that the architect has decided to replace it with a system that is easier to construct. - Upon review of the system, or glazing, or structural connections via submittals, the architect has noticed that either the system itself, or the glazing, or the structural connections do not meet the requirements noted in the specifications, and has rejected the submittals (which in this case would have included shop drawings.) - The owner on a whim (yes this does happen), after seeing the partially constructed system, has decided to unilaterally replace this system with another system to there liking. It could also be that even though everything is on the up and up construction wise its not just the owner who wants to replace this system on a whim, but also the architect wants to replace the system on a whim. These are just a few of possibly many different reasons why this might be dismantled. While this is a pain to watch for everyone in this forum, including myself, take this as crash course in building construction, both what to do, and what not to do. With all this being said, I have no internal knowledge of what is going on. All of what I have said is an educational guess from inferring what I see in photographs, and from my professional experience. It could be all of these, other less common reasons, or none of the reasons.
  8. wow. Buffalo Bayou is FULL. Y'all been getting that much rain?
  9. They have to cover that roof with something. Remember you are using a drone, and are seeing in a perspective that most people will never see, especially in everyday life. The structure is interesting, sure, but it is there to serve the purpose of that space, and service the architecture finish that the architect, and client want. Lightweight concrete is used a lot in combination with metal decking for both floor and roof. Its also relatively easy to poor concrete to float the slope needed to drain water off the building. So I'll get back to your question with a question? If not concrete, what else? Do you have a greater affinity for extruded polystyrene rigid insulation sloped with a single ply membrane on top? Nothing at all and rain just leaks through the deck, then the structure, and then onto people below?
  10. hmm I don't know why I never saw this one, been pretty busy since January. I actually don't know much about insurance related to cities or institutions. I do know a little bit about insurance regarding architects, consultants, owners, and contractors. There is such a thing called "Fire Districts" which cities will impose on a particular district. Usually the central business district is labeled "Fire District 1", and typically is the most highly regulated in terms of fire protection, such as you can only design buildings of a certain type of construction (of course if you go a certain height you are already likely doing Type I or Type II construction anyway w/ fire sprinklers, so not like it matters what restrictions are set by a "fire district"). Thats about the extent of my knowledge at this moment. Simply haven't looked into it, but I could look into it another time. Might be interesting.
  11. I'm not. A lot of people flooding into those cities. Denver last time I drove through felt a tad crowded. An amazing city, but growth is outpacing development. Atlanta has always been hot. A lot of entertainment studios are setting up shop.
  12. Wow. That is a very strong red brick color on that big boy haha
  13. Its pretty crazy how dense these few blocks have become. Those traditional styled townhomes seem to look better to me each year too.
  14. While Hannover rarely "wow's", at the very least they maintain this level of quality and design aesthetic consistently.
  15. Closing the gaps with development at Discovery Green will probably go down as one of the most consequential as far as achievements this cycle. At least that's what I think. Plenty of others of course. Starting to think about these things more as this cycle comes to a close, and what are goals for next cycle.
  16. The Layne's Chicken Fingers from College Station, Texas?
  17. This is one of the reasons why a few months ago I moved from a mostly residential firm to a firm that pretty much does zero residential. Houston is a development unicorn right now, everyone should be appreciative the amount that is going on up. Hopefully this company can find some funding, but liquidity for residential building is very close to dry. At least that's what I've seen. People need to understand. Every single time the Fed raises interest rates it takes about a year for each one to take affect from the time of the raise itself.
  18. Agreed. Now we need a development in Sugarland called "SugarRush" or SugarHigh". That would be fun.
  19. Wow. They are slip-forming the entire building? You don't see that everyday
  20. I can't think of anything more Texan than a 9 story BBQ building. Truly, in Texas, everything is bigger.
  21. Hmm this thread is interesting. I have some questions as this hasn't been clearly stated, and we probably don't have enough information, but what is actually happening here? Is it a hotel as someone mentioned? Was the property purchased by someone else? One post says the law firm is now in Uptown? Here is another question, does anyone have photos, or images, or old plans/elevations of what this building looked like prior to the pebble slip screen cladding? I see people in here talking about the merit of whether this building should have been demolished or not, but before that conversation could go forward we should have a better idea of what the state of the existing building actually was. So here is how an architect would look at this. The client (lets pretend Gulfstream is my client, they aren't, but lets pretend) proposes reusing the building, and wants to explore preservation, but when someone says that they really mean rehabilitation if its a remodel of an existing building as preservation (and even restoration) in technical jargon is very difficult, limiting, and expensive. First thing explored would be what is the official status of this building. If I had to take a guess this building wasn't listed as a historic building at any level Federal, State, or Local. So now we don't have to worry about any of those heavy requirements, nor does that mean the client can get tax credits to assist them in preservation, rehabilitation, or restoration. With that out of the way the architect would likely start exploring what can actually be rehabilitated. From photos posted on here, my analysis is that the exterior cladding on top of the brick was compromised. You can see the moisture could not escape the slip screen in places. Some panels looked dry and absent of moisture while other panels weren't. That means the slip screen could not be relied upon to hold its own weight into the future, so you would have had to replace that entire slip screen system outright. So we can eliminate even keeping the slip screen from the equation which also eliminates preservation from the possibilities of this project. Now lets go to rehabilitation. If through a process of rehabilitation that means we would have to take the slip screen as being an important characteristic with historical impact on the building and that means each individual panel would have to be taken off piece by piece, then cleaned with moisture taken out of each, and then reapplied. Some panels probably wouldn't have survived that process. This means we would need new panels. Okay, who makes panels like this anymore? I'll tell you right now, probably not many. Where is a contractor with experience with a system like this? Probably not many. Even if you figured all that out, what does this slip screen look like with old and new panels...probably mismatched and odd looking. Now think about all the costs to do this, which would have been a lot. This means in any situation, unless the client had a true emotional attachment to that slip screen, would mean regardless of any approach the slip screen is gone. The end. Next step. Slip screen has to be removed. Okay what does the existing brick facade underneath look like, or how has that held up over the years. From demo photos it doesn't look like the brick held up that well as the slip screen was directly applied on top of the brick with a backing to adhere it to the brick. That means that if there were moisture problems with the slip screen that could mean its affecting brick in places as well. As you are taking the slip screen off you might also take grout off from the existing brick, and replacing original grout on existing brick is expensive. Not only that you would have to rehabilitate the brick to take off the adhesive from the slip screen. No you can not pressure wash this off, and you could use chemical treatment, but the brick is probably already in rough shape, so you would likely need to use some very delicate techniques by a specialized contractor...which is very expensive. Then after that process you would need to repoint all the brick on the entire facade. Like the slip screen, some of the brick will not make it through this process and again you will need to figure out if you can find a brick similar in color and look. So after that I would present the client with the cost of rehabilitating the brick facade and it wouldn't be cheap. We haven't even gotten to the marble, or the other monolithic stone, or the fact the existing soffit, fascia, and coping are garbage and are compromised. Let say the client is like, okay that is expensive, but we really want to explore what a full renovation + remodel of the exterior and interior could look like if we went forward with that. So then that is done and its why we got someone like below: Then the client likely came back after this process and said, okay that is indeed really expensive. We will need to do an analysis of the benefits of simply demoing the building, and doing a new building. Meanwhile the client on their side is likely doing a study of what the costs would be to simply relocate. I'll save everyone the suspense as this seems like what happened, but after internal investigations by the law firm its likely they came to the common sense solution which was to relocate, and plus they can sell the land at a profit! What a steal. They get to save money, move to a better facility (maybe we get an interior rebuild later), and the client gets to make a profit off the property. Who doesn't take that? Now the new property owner before purchase also probably got the same info from "my client" and now knows the status of this building too as well as subsequent investigations, and likely they will conclude as well that the building has outlived its usefulness, and its more productive, cheaper, and makes sense to demo. No. No. No. No. I remember thinking this way a long long time ago when I was at university. It doesn't work. Wonder why its incredibly difficult to develop in San Francisco, or New York City? This is why. Why is it incredibly difficult to develop in a lot of European cities...this is why. You being overly focused on dis-incentivizing one use will affect the ability to do other uses. This line of thinking has had a lot of unintended consequences in clients abilities to build. It just does. It simply doesn't work. Clients are always going to look for the most direct way to redevelop, and any scheme proposed like this lends to exponential costs to redevelop a property...period. Well it wouldn't be any better if the building was abandoned and left to stand. At that point the building becomes a HAZARD to pedestrians. No replacing this building with a surface parking lot is not "catering" to cars, its "catering" to what the client wants and will make the property useful, until they find a better use for it. Anytime I hear this argument this always ends with...this property isn't catering to what "I want". Well yeah its not catering to what you want because you don't own the property! If you want this property to cater to what you want then buy the property, and make it the property cater to what "you want". I guarantee this myth that property owners just love their property to become surface parking lots, or that they just hate world around them is simply not true. Each and every person that owns a property that is a surface parking lot right now wants something else to be on it. The only question is, what should it be? With a surface lot you know exactly what you can make, and get out of it. A building? Way more complicated, and more expensive. These decisions come down to costs, not greater ideals about pedestrian experience, or heat island effect, or whatever buzz word someone wants to use. I don't like surface lots either, but its what the economics in our time has deemed the default use if you don't know what to do with the property. At some point lets hope that a clever individual with capital can build something nice here.
×
×
  • Create New...