MyEvilTwin

...and check-out the weird painting of the woman with her dress pulled up in Wulfe's office. Creepy. Am I seeing that right?

...On the potty? (I see what looks like a pedestal sink behind her)

Odd, indeed.

Nice photo angle. I'm very excited to see the asthetics of this particular corner after the completion of the new hotel. The location already screams vibrancy.

Indeed. The atmosphere is electric.

No, wait, that's just the substation.

Shame about that...!

Some people just need to get over their insecurities about religion in general. Its a free country, get over it already. If you want to burn a flag or a cross as protest you're free to do it, so if a cross on St. Joseph irks you that bad, go burn one in the lobby, just be prepared to show your face be on the 5 o'clock news.

Well that seems like a pretty weak analogy IMHO. I don't think anyone said that the big white cross should be illegal. Of course we're "free" to burn a flag, but any business owner who paints a big burning flag up the side of a 15-story building and light it up with red neon at night would be rather naive to think that wouldn't generate a little internet forum discussion... to say the least.

(And I don't think it would be legal to go to the St. Joseph's lobby and burn a cross. They're legal, but not on other people's property.)

I'm not generally a big fan of loud religion, but from a marketing perspective I don't really object to this. With the prominence of the Med Center, it's tough for other inner-loop hospitals to attract attention to themselves, and St. Joseph's has been struggling to survive over the years. Somehow I see this more as an attempt to draw attention to its differentiating characteristic (its Catholic affiliation) than to blast Houston with religious symbols.

What has always seemed strange to me about St. Joseph's is that its professional building is across the Pierce Elevated from the hospital. It's not exactly a dense section of downtown today -- when it was built, were all the blocks north of I-45 occupied?

Did you know that construction cam pic is not the building we are talking about?

Well, you CAN see the Methodist building behind the MDACC building. Not a lot of it, but enought to tell if it's lit up at night or not.

BTW, the "Time Lapse" feature on that construction cam is awesome -- especially because you can see both the MDACC and the Methodist buildings going up in parallel!

I'm not going to say that that's an impossibility, but I hadn't heard about it before now, and both sides of Westcreek were built exactly the same.

Hmm, I'll beg to differ on that point... The section of Westcreek Apts. that faces either side of Westcreek Lane is courtyard-style, basically several rectangular apartment buildings, each surrounding a pool area; the side with the entrance on Westheimer (Formerly Avalon Square) is not -- more of a snake of building(s). There were other differences too (the actual units are quite different), but that's the main one. I lived on the former Avalon Square side back in the mid-'90s, my wife then lived on the Westcreek side. There was even a fence between the two (though the fence was opened to connect the two parking lots). Maybe we're talking about two different things? Could Westcreek actually be three complexes now?? (To clarify -- I'm not talking about the east side of Westcreek Ln. versus the West Side... The old Avalon Square is behind the apartments that line the East side of Westcreek Ln.)

When I'm talking about the northwest quadrant of Midtown, I'm using Main Street and McGowen as my southern boundaries. This includes Camden Midtown, which I'd point to as a leading indicator of things to come.

Westcreek is kind of unique in that it was originally developed as one single apartment complex with 1,200+ units. These days it has two different owners and two different leasing offices, but the management company is the same one and they still run it pretty much like it's one big property. All together, it's probably one of the two or three largest apartment complexes in Houston. But if you view Westcreek and some of the other apartments that have been nearby in the context of the former Mid Lane "scene", then actually there's definitely something to be said for your example. The current tenant base is somewhat youthful, but not especially hip or cool, not nouveau riche, and is very practical. They don't scare people away from adjacent neighborhoods, but they don't add much to them either.

I think that Midtown has at least another decade of growth to look forward to. By that time, hopefully, the population will be sufficiently large to at least support critical neighborhood infrastructure. In the long run, the nature of businesses in transitioning neighborhoods may change, but history has shown that businesses of some form or another will continue to operate in the spaces available.

I don't think that's exactly correct... Westcreek started as two separate complexes (Westcreek and... Avalon Square, I think?), which were later merged (maybe in the early '90s?) and more recently re-split. I was also including the Park at Westcreek (a third complex, developed later) in the Westcreek set. But I can't argue with most of your points. Your characterization of the current Westcreek crowd seems about right... but was the original Westcreek tenant base something more like today's Midtowners? I don't know -- that predates me.

At least one of the complexes in Midtown (Post?) brought street-level retail with it. That's a plus for the neighborhood. It's too bad more didn't do so.

Very few parts of Houston have so many apartment complexes so densely clustered as the northwest quadrant of Midtown. There haven't actually been all that many new apartment complexes built within the Washington Avenue corridor or in the Heights (yet), and although there has been plenty of new construction in the Montrose area, individual apartment complexes are fairly well spread out.

...

All it would take is for a couple of badly-managed apartment complexes to age poorly, for rents to decline, and for demographics to trend in the wrong direction, and Midtown's fate could be sealed by way of a slow-motion domino effect. These kinds of things happen with apartments, and they're usually very predictable. Can you think of any other neighborhood in Texas with a very large concentration of apartments that has not declined over time? And it is important to clarify Texas as the geography of interest because we have very few geographic of political barriers to new development, unlike cities such as San Francisco or New York, where supply-side barriers ensure that inner-city neighborhoods will forever remain attractive to the yuppies.

Maybe Westcreek? At least in relation specifically to the "Northwest quadrant of Midtown" I'd guess the complexes centered around Westcreek Ln between San Felipe and Westheimer seem fairly comparable in units. Keeping in mind that much of the development in that area of Midtown was or became Condos... If what you're referring to as the Northwest quadrant is strictly west of Brazos, there aren't all THAT many units there, really. My office looks right over it.

Anyhow, the apartments themselves in the Westcreek area may have declined in value over time -- seems like just part of the natural process in our non-bubble Houston economy -- but they haven't exactly turned into a neighborhood of blight, nor have they pulled down the property values at Afton Oaks (right across Westheimer) with them, have they?

Not that I'd be all that comfortable investing in Midtown property myself... But my fear there wouldn't be the "lemming yuppie" apartments so much as the fact that it's been booming for a full economic cycle and there are still too many run-down / undeveloped areas to make me comfortable. I'm no real estate pro, but if I were hypothesizing, I'd worry as much about the long-term viability of key businesses like the midtown Randall's as the abundance of apartments in the area if I were considering a Midtown investment. Not that they're unrelated... Randalls needs the "lemming yuppies". (Feel free to correct me if I'm overlooking anything obvious!)

HP Fills Office Tower

NRG, the company that purchased Reliant Energy, has leased 10 of the 11 floors in the HP office tower. A law firm had already leased the 11th floor. NRG will put about 1,000 employees in the tower.

Anyone know if this is a net gain for downtown or just a move? I'm guessing the latter... from the Reliant Energy building?

Yeah, at 8pm they started tearing up the concrete. Goodbye surface parking lot!

The HAIF really ought to have a running countdown of CBD surface parking lots on its home page.

Granted, the countdown has slowed considerably in the last year or so... And the raw number would probably be depressingly high. But it'd be neat. I wonder how many there really are? Could be some room for subjectivity in any count, I suppose (half-blocks, blocks connected to freeways, etc.)

Went to the Rice baseball game last night and had beautiful sunset views of this building. The crown (well, in this case it's a bit more like a tiara) is taking shape, and really enhances the look. The new Rice Collaborative Research Center is nearly complete too -- and it's looking much better to me than it did in renderings (IMHO). Both make attractive additions to the Med Center skyline!

Did they make the building taller than planned? From Main Street, it definitely seems like the facility has 12 floors and not 10.

The top two aren't really floors, they're just walls built around the utilities. You can see them in the renderings as well.

I was just looking over it today from the Scurlock Tower across the street. It's looking a bit better than I expected.

Honestly, for a project of this scope, a $10 million subsidy arranged by the City may as well be loose pocket change. Unless GID is just following the advice of its political consultants and trying to squeeze every last dime from the City before they resume progress towards a groundbreaking (one way or the other), it's not likely to change anything.

That's what I thought when I heard about it... $10M seems like a drop in the bucket. But do you think the city would really be pushing for this deal publicly if they didn't already have some kind of tacit agreement that it would make a difference? There'd be egg on their face if they approve it but the developers still walk away, no? (I'm asking... I'm not expressing an opinion.)

Very interesting development. This gutted church is visible from my office, and any of the west-facing offices at the edge of downtown. It's surrounded by Larry Davis townhomes (the metal ones). I think this park idea is a pretty neat way to preserve what's left of it.

Needless to say, it'll do wonders for the property values of the surrounding townhomes. If I had one of them I'd be doing cartwheels. When these homes were under construction, this was an abandoned, decrepit church. Then it was a burned-out, eyesore of a safety hazard. Now it'll be a very unique park. What better turnaround could the homeowners have hoped for? Somebody must have a friend on the city council!

No kidding. About six or seven years back, I think, there was a proposal for a boxy office highrise which basically would've blocked or ruined views of the existing tower.

Are they still around? Could we get them to build it behind the Mercer?

Actually, the vacant half of that block was originally supposed to be a second phase to the tower, attached at the hip. Too bad it never got built; the massing made for a very interesting design.

Interesting... I didn't realize that. Well, I guess it could have been worse (I'm thinking of Mercer I, where we never got II ).

It looks like this will only be half a block. It will hide Wedge's parking garage and eliminate another surface parking lot.

Yeah the bigger factor of the two (for me) is hiding the Wedge parking garage. That ugly wall was clearly not built for public viewing -- I assume (?) it was put up when there was something else on this spot that was shielding it from view. To me it gives the impression that whatever was torn down on this surface lot was actually attached to the garage.

It will be nice to have what looks like an attractive hotel blocking this from view! (Keeping fingers crossed that it doesn't turn into another recession victim)

And just think, if it were Discovery Tower, GRB might re-name to Discovery Center...and Hilton Americas might rename itself Hilton Discovery.

Ugh. That's the first good argument I've heard for NOT keeping the Discovery Tower name. Do you want people thinking the GRB is some kind of children's museum, or what?

The Chronicle has a pretty long article following up on the dispute over that little bit of land that the city condemned to make a park that was very convenient for BLVD Place.

A couple of interesting excerpts...

Mayor Bill White and council members insist they condemned the land last year as a matter of good faith to taxpayers. The city needed some of the land to widen San Felipe and will turn the rest into the park.

But documents obtained by the Houston Chronicle show the move also helped BLVD Place developer Ed Wulfe, a major donor to White, seal the deal on a $12.5 million land sale related to his ambitious mixed-use development.

Councilman Peter Brown's vote to condemn the land next to BLVD Place is the kind of action the state's conflict-of-interest rules were meant to prevent.

Brown is married to oil-services heiress Anne Schlumberger, who is an investor in BLVD Place. Under Texas conflict-of-interest law, a public official should recuse himself from a vote involving a property if he, his spouse or close relative has a "substantial interest," valued at more than a $2,500.

In the end, the city condemned the land, offering the brothers $433,800, only $70,050 more than they paid for the property in 1982, and a million less than what Wulfe had offered.

My source told me that is exactly what Crescent did to accomodate the tenant beginning with H. check your sources pal.

Woo Hoo!

HAIF finally gets a physical home in a new tower befitting its extraordinary internet stature!!

Er... No?

This topic needs a third thread now?? And what exactly does it have to do with architecture? Sheesh.

yep

linens and things is closing!

the banners are up and at 10 to 30 percent off, they are still more expensive than target or walmart

anyway...please let it be a pappasitos coming to the plaza or the area.

working and living just a block away from a pappasitos would be a dream come true haha!

I can't imagine a Pappasitos moving into a newly renovated, bland shopping center like that. Don't they usually spend a lot of money making their restaurants look more... uh... antique? If they're moving into the area, I'd think it would have to be in a different location nearby, no?

This made it into today's Chronicle. Not much new, except to mention that they're trying to lease some space to some of the other Arts organizations who perform in the Theatre District (I'm not sure if that was in the BizJournals article or not).

It's pretty clear from the article that the design is far from finalized. Also, funding seems speculative at this point. I hope it goes forward.

Today's Chronicle reports that the Rodeo & Texans are sounding a little more open to the proposed Astrodome Convention Hotel project of late. Not surprisingly, it seems it was always about negotiating a better deal...

"Despite their previous staunch opposition to the project, the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo and the Texans signaled that they may be able to coexist with a convention hotel that would be built in the Astrodome...."

I thought the Westcreek Apartments were supposed to be torn down. My friend just signed a two year lease with them. It doesn't seem like they're goin' anywhere.

Does your friend live on the old Audubon Park side (the Westheimer side, no courtyards) or the Westcreek side (the courtyard-based side that actually faces Westcreek street)? It's the Westheimer side that's supposed to be going down to make way for the first phase of the River Oaks District (plus a little of the Westcreek side). Most of the Westcreek side is in the footprint of the eventual phase II of the River Oaks District. So if your friend is over there then the two-year lease would still make sense (without making us nervous about River Oaks District).

Anybody notice the "W" on one of the River Oaks District buildings in that High Street rendering? Is that an actual W Hotel logo? Have we noticed that before? I know there's been a lot of speculation about the W in the River Oaks District, but I didn't realize it was showing up in a rendering.