Jump to content
HAIF - Houston's original social media

Camden McGowen Station + New Park (Midtown Superblock)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The park is open! The park is open!! There were already people in the dog park and a camp gladiator set up!               

IMG_8365 by Andrew Rebman, on Flickr   IMG_8367 by Andrew Rebman, on Flickr

Posted Images

17 hours ago, hindesky said:

Sucks I have to ride on the street on Main with cars tailgating me till I get to the open sidewalk.

ydnDoBh.jpg

eu05njs.jpg

 

I think we can all agree that, yeah its taking forever to finish, but at least the whole superblock looks really good, and they are taking their time to get it right. Would suck if it took 10 years and it look terrible.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On 4/17/2017 at 8:29 AM, urbanize713 said:

Yep, two actually. One restaurant and one kiosk.

HnlSiO5h.jpg

 

@gclass In the original drawings, it was supposed to be a "tree grove" and plaza.  At the corner of Travis and McGowen was supposed to be a restaurant, which they haven't even started by the looks of it

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2019 at 6:30 PM, rechlin said:

After slowly laying bricks for what seems like a year, it looks like they've finally pretty much finished the brickwork around the fountains.  Not pictured -- the concrete for the sidewalk along Main has finally mostly been poured:

 

uQ6ZKN3.jpg

 

 

There's no way that's the finished product. It's an entire plaza of trip hazards...

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cspwal said:

 

@gclass In the original drawings, it was supposed to be a "tree grove" and plaza.  At the corner of Travis and McGowen was supposed to be a restaurant, which they haven't even started by the looks of it

 

If you look closer at that area and then the picture its pretty much exactly what they were intending. Instead of grass inside the brick loops they choose to make it an actual plaza instead. Probably a better move in the end.

 

4 minutes ago, phillip_white said:

 

 

There's no way that's the finished product. It's an entire plaza of trip hazards...

 

at most the loops are extruded by maybe 1". Doesn't really look like a tripping hazard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

If you look closer at that area and then the picture its pretty much exactly what they were intending. Instead of grass inside the brick loops they choose to make it an actual plaza instead. Probably a better move in the end.

 

 

at most the loops are extruded by maybe 1". Doesn't really look like a tripping hazard.

As someone who has tripped on a polished concrete floor, anything can be a tripping hazard

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, cspwal said:

As someone who has tripped on a polished concrete floor, anything can be a tripping hazard

 

True. I don't think they count "chronic feet-shuffliing" as a disability though. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess when I saw it was that they were laying out the contrast paving blocks and will cut them into the base paving blocks for a flat surface. Unless someone there is looking to subsidized the local lawyer community, you can't leave it as is now.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Brooklyn173 said:

My guess when I saw it was that they were laying out the contrast paving blocks and will cut them into the base paving blocks for a flat surface. Unless someone there is looking to subsidized the local lawyer community, you can't leave it as is now.

 

From my professional opinion. This is a whole lot of nothing

 

27 minutes ago, phillip_white said:

Speaking of disability, wheelchair access might be a better point than tripping hazard.

 

Considering that this must have passed TAS review (Texas Accessibility Standards), my original hypothesis of 1" was probably wrong and it probably is 1/2" transition with a 1:2 bevel at the top or this is a 1/4" with no bevel. Seeing as its being built and it probably passed review then its neither a tripping hazard nor is it inaccessible to wheelchairs. Case closed.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Timoric said:

In my are in Washington DC, we have a crumbling metro platform that isn't level with the trains and wheelchair users have an issue, it is long and expensive fix

https://www.wmata.com/about/news/Platform-Improvement-Project-Metro-announces-travel-options-website.cfm

 

Yeah, but what does this have to do with the price of tea in China? There is a misnomer that for something to be "accessible" than it means everything. That would be like saying every seat a Minute Maid Park has to be wheelchair accessible which would be insane as there are never going to be 25000 Handicap people in a given situation...ever. Same goes for plaza's, etc... The plaza in this case needs to be full ADA accessible from one point of entry and that is it (which is normally the closest approach from a given ADA parking spot). Thats about it. The transitions between blocks is (as I've stated before) most likely ADA compliant. Now this isn't targeted at you specifically @Timoric. All this hullabaloo just smells of people wanting to complain about something. Its fine to be critical, but this is a bit ridiculous, and I rather presume one of innocence until proven guilty than the reverse. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Brooklyn173 said:

My guess when I saw it was that they were laying out the contrast paving blocks and will cut them into the base paving blocks for a flat surface. Unless someone there is looking to subsidized the local lawyer community, you can't leave it as is now.

 

Upon further inspection, you are likely correct about cutting the darker blocks into the pavers below. If you look at the picture that launched a thousand comments, they have already installed concentric rings of pavers. So they probably laid the darker blocks out to mark the pavers, pull them out, and cut them. CASE CLOSED.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phillip_white said:

 

Upon further inspection, you are likely correct about cutting the darker blocks into the pavers below. If you look at the picture that launched a thousand comments, they have already installed concentric rings of pavers. So they probably laid the darker blocks out to mark the pavers, pull them out, and cut them. CASE CLOSED.

 

That would be an enormous waste of time. That is not something that is done in the field. Those are finished pavers. They aren't coming back up. You 'want' there to be something wrong. Its ok to be wrong. Does this have to be a conspiracy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dbigtex56 said:

Perhaps this space is strictly for appearances sake and not meant to be open to pedestrians (much like the sunken Zen garden formerly at 611 Walker).

 

I was thinking this as well and hoping I was wrong. I would not put it past the MRA to split a huge park into two sections and then close off one to the public.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DrLan34 said:

I drove by yesterday and thought I saw the west portion of the plaza had the rings flush with the brick pavers. 

 

Probably an aesthetic effect where the center is more flush and as it goes out towards main it gets more extruded.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Twinsanity02 said:

Good visual answer.

 

and if you shift that camera view over some more then the stone starts to extrude from the brick. Its obviously a design feature. I've walked around here several times since this all started to be discussed.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Twinsanity02 said:

Good visual answer.

That's the western portion. Still unsure what's going on with the eastern side. The bricks are raised a full inch above grade so it might be a section that's inaccessible for pedestrians with retention for the fountain water?

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just going to leave this here. If you care more about facts than simply being right about everything then here you go. If this isn't how you care to conduct yourself then you can believe whatever you want to believe, and continue to live in your protective bubble where you are never wrong and conspiracies are everywhere:

 

These are the parts of TAS (Texas Accessibility Standards) which apply to this situation. Which this plaza passes. Every project above a certain sqft has to submit plans to TDLR (Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation) which this project most certainly had to do. The flattened part of the plaza constitutes as the arrival point for the plaza and therefore by complying with that part of the code it can do whatever they would like with the rest especially if its not something that is radically different in experience for from those that are handicap.

 

EDIT: if anyone would like to share this with phillip_white than please feel free as I'm sure I've been blocked at this point.

204 Protruding Objects

204.1 General. Protruding objects on circulation paths shall comply with 307.

EXCEPTIONS: 
1. Within areas of sport activity, protruding objects on circulation paths shall not be required to comply with 307.
2. Within play areas, protruding objects on circulation paths shall not be required to comply with 307 provided that ground level accessible routes provide vertical clearance in compliance with 1008.2.

206 Accessible Routes

206.1 General. Accessible routes shall be provided in accordance with 206 and shall comply with Chapter 4.

206.2 Where Required. Accessible routes shall be provided where required by 206.2.

206.2.1 Site Arrival Points. At least one accessible route shall be provided within the site from accessible parking spaces and accessible passenger loading zones; public streets and sidewalks; and public transportation stops to the accessible building or facility entrance they serve.

EXCEPTIONS: 
1. Where exceptions for alterations to qualified historic buildings or facilities are permitted by 202.5, no more than one accessible route from a site arrival point to an accessible entrance shall be required.
2. An accessible route shall not be required between site arrival points and the building or facility entrance if the only means of access between them is a vehicular way not providing pedestrian access.

Advisory 206.2.1 Site Arrival Points. Each site arrival point must be connected by an accessible route to the accessible building entrance or entrances served. Where two or more similar site arrival points, such as bus stops, serve the same accessible entrance or entrances, both bus stops must be on accessible routes. In addition, the accessible routes must serve all of the accessible entrances on the site.

Advisory 206.2.1 Site Arrival Points Exception 2. Access from site arrival points may include vehicular ways. Where a vehicular way, or a portion of a vehicular way, is provided for pedestrian travel, such as within a shopping center or shopping mall parking lot, this exception does not apply.

206.2.2 Within a Site. At least one accessible route shall connect accessible buildings, accessible facilities, accessible elements, and accessible spaces that are on the same site.

EXCEPTION: An accessible route shall not be required between accessible buildings, accessible facilities, accessible elements, and accessible spaces if the only means of access between them is a vehicular way not providing pedestrian access.

 

Edited by Luminare
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2019 at 9:29 AM, Luminare said:

I'm just going to leave this here. If you care more about facts than simply being right about everything then here you go. If this isn't how you care to conduct yourself then you can believe whatever you want to believe, and continue to live in your protective bubble where you are never wrong and conspiracies are everywhere:

 

These are the parts of TAS (Texas Accessibility Standards) which apply to this situation. Which this plaza passes. Every project above a certain sqft has to submit plans to TDLR (Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation) which this project most certainly had to do. The flattened part of the plaza constitutes as the arrival point for the plaza and therefore by complying with that part of the code it can do whatever they would like with the rest especially if its not something that is radically different in experience for from those that are handicap.

 

EDIT: if anyone would like to share this with phillip_white than please feel free as I'm sure I've been blocked at this point.

204 Protruding Objects

204.1 General. Protruding objects on circulation paths shall comply with 307.

EXCEPTIONS: 
1. Within areas of sport activity, protruding objects on circulation paths shall not be required to comply with 307.
2. Within play areas, protruding objects on circulation paths shall not be required to comply with 307 provided that ground level accessible routes provide vertical clearance in compliance with 1008.2.

206 Accessible Routes

206.1 General. Accessible routes shall be provided in accordance with 206 and shall comply with Chapter 4.

206.2 Where Required. Accessible routes shall be provided where required by 206.2.

206.2.1 Site Arrival Points. At least one accessible route shall be provided within the site from accessible parking spaces and accessible passenger loading zones; public streets and sidewalks; and public transportation stops to the accessible building or facility entrance they serve.

EXCEPTIONS: 
1. Where exceptions for alterations to qualified historic buildings or facilities are permitted by 202.5, no more than one accessible route from a site arrival point to an accessible entrance shall be required.
2. An accessible route shall not be required between site arrival points and the building or facility entrance if the only means of access between them is a vehicular way not providing pedestrian access.

Advisory 206.2.1 Site Arrival Points. Each site arrival point must be connected by an accessible route to the accessible building entrance or entrances served. Where two or more similar site arrival points, such as bus stops, serve the same accessible entrance or entrances, both bus stops must be on accessible routes. In addition, the accessible routes must serve all of the accessible entrances on the site.

Advisory 206.2.1 Site Arrival Points Exception 2. Access from site arrival points may include vehicular ways. Where a vehicular way, or a portion of a vehicular way, is provided for pedestrian travel, such as within a shopping center or shopping mall parking lot, this exception does not apply.

206.2.2 Within a Site. At least one accessible route shall connect accessible buildings, accessible facilities, accessible elements, and accessible spaces that are on the same site.

EXCEPTION: An accessible route shall not be required between accessible buildings, accessible facilities, accessible elements, and accessible spaces if the only means of access between them is a vehicular way not providing pedestrian access.

 

 

Hey there, I haven't blocked you (I try not to live in an echo chamber made up of only those who agree with me) but I decided to not to reply to your previous post as you seemed to be certain of an unpredictable outcome. I appreciate your further info on building codes; I will likely look more into this as I find this kind of stuff interesting. You and I have no beef. I appreciate your contributions and perspectives on urban design/architecture.

With that said, I drove by again today to get a better idea of what is going on. It seems they have removed the darker bricks that were laying on top of the pavers and somehow (perhaps using an industrial router or tile saw?) cut out the pavers. It's not 100% certain, but I'm still betting the whole plaza will be at the same grade with the darker bricks.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, phillip_white said:

 

Hey there, I haven't blocked you (I try not to live in an echo chamber made up of only those who agree with me) but I decided to not to reply to your previous post as you seemed to be certain of an unpredictable outcome. I appreciate your further info on building codes; I will likely look more into this as I find this kind of stuff interesting. You and I have no beef. I appreciate your contributions and perspectives on urban design/architecture.

With that said, I drove by again today to get a better idea of what is going on. It seems they have removed the darker bricks that were laying on top of the pavers and somehow (perhaps using an industrial router or tile saw?) cut out the pavers. It's not 100% certain, but I'm still betting the whole plaza will be at the same grade with the darker bricks.

 

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.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rechlin said:

Well, it looks like all the debate above about accessibility ended up being irrelevant, because they now have made it so all the pavers are flush:

 

w7iQMhu.jpg

 

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.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 9:08 AM, Luminare said:

 

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.

 

TheNiche, is that you bro?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Luminare said:

 

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?

Either way, I'm just glad they're almost done. We've been waiting to use this plaza for almost a year now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phillip_white said:

Either way, I'm just glad they're almost done. We've been waiting to use this plaza for almost a year now.

The sidewalk construction along Main Street is still ongoing. . . FOUR YEARS after this project broke ground.  Astounding!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, phillip_white said:

Either way, I'm just glad they're almost done. We've been waiting to use this plaza for almost a year now.

It's far from done, the western portion is barely touched.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hindesky said:

It's far from done, the western portion is barely touched.

I think that is where the restaurant or food truck or whatever they decide to put in there will go.

It has taken forever, but look what was there before.

Crickets............

I love to remind the naysayers about their comments that the rail wouldn't produce any significant developments. 

So it took twenty years. Does anyone have a clue how much money has been spent on developments and how that has affected the tax base.

A drive up Main, from Alabama to as far north as you can go looks incredible and so dense.

Edited by bobruss
  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, bobruss said:

I think that is where the restaurant or food truck or whatever they decide to put in there will go.

It has taken forever, but look what was there before.

Crickets............

I love to remind the naysayers about their comments that the rail wouldn't produce any significant developments. 

So it took twenty years. Does anyone have a clue how much money has been spent on developments and how that has affected the tax base.

A drive up Main, from Alabama to as far north as you can go looks incredible and so dense.

Tax base is pretty irrelevant, since there's a revenue cap. Much of this would have happened without rail, and we would still have Main as a two way street through the heart of Downtown and Midtown. Besides, density is overrated.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...