609 Main At Texas

[H-Town Man]

In regards to the old CityCentre Building...I received confirmation that it was a little more than a wetdream...I might be telling soemthing that people already know, but it did involve the Madrian Oriental, Residential component and office component, but I heard that it went bust when they couldn't close on any major corporation signing a lease for the office component.

That's pathetic.

Downtown's office market is doing so well that rents have shot upward. Land prices have gone up, reflecting the higher and better economic use, and in so doing, made it effectively impossible to develop residential unless it is paired as condos within a five-star hotel...but even those are tricky to pull off, and they are ultimately relatively few in number.

So much for a boom economy bringing innovative residential developments to downtown.

I'll echo shasta's comments... this is the most important undeveloped block downtown, at the city's most historically prominent intersection. This should have gotten premier treatment. Instead we get a tasteful but banal glass box, the best facade of which does not face onto Main our signature street, or onto Texas where it would add to the north view of our skyline, but Capitol! The ONLY reason I can think why they would put the best facade on Capitol is so it will look nice from their other development, MainPlace!

I say we create a HAIF Cinder Block Award for insensitive development and present the first one to Hines.

[Trae]

Yep, well that idea didn't exactly fly, and like I had already said, if any kind of new-build residential can work, that'd have been it. Why do you think that Hines (or anybody) ought to continue persuing a concept that couldn't even pass the sniff test?

First, Mandarin is having financial problems in many cities. Second, this thing wasn't even marketed. Just a rendering someone found on a architect's website.

[Triton]

The link for this project has been taken off the original website that was posted. Check the LEED section. It's not there anymore.

What does that mean?

[TheNiche]

So much for a boom economy bringing innovative residential developments to downtown.

That's pretty much what it comes down to (in Houston).

But strangely enough, Austin has a percentage growth rate that is even faster than ours, and their downtown area is growing by leaps and bounds, with most of it being residential/hotel/retail. There really isn't much in the way of new office space being built downtown; it's all out in the suburbs. Worse still is Dallas, where their downtown office market keeps on getting new supply but can't quite seem to fill it.

Personally, I strongly perfer our urban growth model. It draws a greater number and diversity of people downtown, as Red pointed out, and as our region grows, having a strong central business district in the context of an urban core with a dense residential population will make developing effective local and regional transit much easier than will be the case in a place like Austin.

I'll echo shasta's comments... this is the most important undeveloped block downtown, at the city's most historically prominent intersection. This should have gotten premier treatment. Instead we get a tasteful but banal glass box, the best facade of which does not face onto Main our signature street, or onto Texas where it would add to the north view of our skyline, but Capitol! The ONLY reason I can think why they would put the best facade on Capitol is so it will look nice from their other development, MainPlace!

Which is the best facade? It's not as though we know what it'll look like at street level, and it frankly doesn't matter which street its facing, per se, if you're looking at the tower as part of the skyline from a mile away.

First, Mandarin is having financial problems in many cities. Second, this thing wasn't even marketed. Just a rendering someone found on a architect's website.

That's kind of my point. It didn't even pass the sniff test.

The link for this project has been taken off the original website that was posted. Check the LEED section. It's not there anymore.

What does that mean?

It means that somebody at Wylie breached their CA, and Hines found out and got all pissy.

TOO LATE!!! They've already been scooped.

[H-Town Man]

Which is the best facade? It's not as though we know what it'll look like at street level, and it frankly doesn't matter which street its facing, per se, if you're looking at the tower as part of the skyline from a mile away.

I assume it's the one shown in the rendering. As to your second point, who said I was looking at the tower as part of the skyline a mile away? For pedestrians at most places pedestrians would be, having your best facade on Capitol does not help the effect much.

[TheNiche]

I assume it's the one shown in the rendering. As to your second point, who said I was looking at the tower as part of the skyline a mile away? For pedestrians at most places pedestrians would be, having your best facade on Capitol does not help the effect much.

For pedestrians at most places pedestrians would be, the facade of the tower doesn't really matter so much. Most people don't walk around downtown with their head held back at a 90-degree angle to the ground. With that in mind, it matters less which way the tower is facing, and more whether the building is articulated at street level and how the retail and lobby entrances are situated...but that's something that the rendering doesn't resolve at all, which is why I think that your comment may have been made prematurely.

[Jax]

...

Edited May 7, 2008 by Jax

[rsb320]

The link for this project has been taken off the original website that was posted. Check the LEED section. It's not there anymore.

What does that mean?

I saw the link earlier on the City Centre blog. If CC and Mandarine were the same project - I don't know. Nice building (rendering) though.

[rsb320]

I saw the link earlier on the City Centre blog. If CC and Mandarine were the same project - I don't know. Nice building (rendering) though.

Is this it?

http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...showtopic=10539

[lockmat]

The link for this project has been taken off the original website that was posted. Check the LEED section. It's not there anymore.

What does that mean?

You're right, it's not listed under the LEED link, but it still comes up when you click on the link that channel2news posted. That's interesting. You'd think they would have taken that one down too.

[Houston2010]

How about 2 MainPlace's?

[BigSky]

I think Finger Development has the correct model of renting units in Downtown once you have critical mass, then the market will appear that is willing to purchase a unit in the downtown market. If OPP is already 20% leased, then it tells you that their is a market for rentals, not purchases yet, and once that market hits compacity, then he can look at selling the units once he has recouped some the cost of his investment. Rental Towers for residential development is the way to go, until the residential market is strong enough to support some of the commercial entities that you need for a neighborhood.

[CALMSP]

bingo.

wouldnt be so many foreclosures if people were smart and realize that having an adjustable interest rate is the most idiotic thing i have ever heard of!!

[Triton]

The page is officially gone. Check the original website now and the project is no longer listed... haha... looks like someone wasn't supposed to announce that yet.

[shasta]

The page is officially gone. Check the original website now and the project is no longer listed... haha... looks like someone wasn't supposed to announce that yet.

Hopefully, Hines is reading the posts about its building getting bashed and is reconsidering the program, scope, and the design for this one. Houston deserves better than the sterile, unwelcoming skyscrapers we got from profit hording developers in the 70's and 80's. This is a new Houston and the architecture, both from the skyline and from the connectivity at the street, should reflect that. Of course you can make a profit but try to be sensitive to the complexities that make a project a success. Understanding the lot and the character of the surrounding buildings is a first step.

Sometimes I wonder if Hines has anyone with even a remote understanding in Architecture working for them. An adviser ...anyone?

[RedScare]

Houston deserves better than the sterile, unwelcoming skyscrapers we got from profit hording developers in the 70's and 80's. This is a new Houston and the architecture, both from the skyline and from the connectivity at the street, should reflect that.

Could you point me to a few clues that distinguish this new Houston from that 70s and 80s profit hording (sic) Houston? I only ask because I have been a resident of Houston during the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s, and it seems to be as profit hording (sic) as it ever was. Perhaps I have missed something groundbreaking.

[TheNiche]

wouldnt be so many foreclosures if people were smart and realize that having an adjustable interest rate is the most idiotic thing i have ever heard of!!

Its a catch-22. If you have ARMs, you have sales and homeowner foreclosures. If you have no ARMs, you don't have sales, and the whole project gets foreclosed. Downtown residential, for the most part, simply isn't viable at this time.

[TheNiche]

Sometimes I wonder if Hines has anyone with even a remote understanding in Architecture working for them. An adviser ...anyone?

You know, I once had an economics professor that lamented that he couldn't go to a cocktail party and not have some layman ask what he does, and thereafter not be assaulted with a hairbrained lecture in his own subject from someone who has no idea what they're talking about. I guess that anecdote applys to architecture, too.

I hope Hines doesn't see your comment. Associating it with your name devalues their perceived worth of my alma matter.

[lockmat]

The page is officially gone. Check the original website now and the project is no longer listed... haha... looks like someone wasn't supposed to announce that yet.

Well in case anyone still wants to look at it, it's still available inside this presentation: http://recenter.tamu.edu/speeches/TXDev08FrankMuller.pdf

[H-Town Man]

For pedestrians at most places pedestrians would be, the facade of the tower doesn't really matter so much. Most people don't walk around downtown with their head held back at a 90-degree angle to the ground.

Um, yes Niche, the facade of a building does matter to the pedestrians on the street. Architects don't just design facades for distant skyline views... if that were the case, then every building in Midtown Manhattan would have a banal, minimalist facade, since they aren't visible from a distance anyway.

With that in mind, it matters less which way the tower is facing, and more whether the building is articulated at street level and how the retail and lobby entrances are situated...but that's something that the rendering doesn't resolve at all, which is why I think that your comment may have been made prematurely.

If they do a good job at street level, then I'll be pleasantly surprised. But it still won't make up for putting the best side of their main facade on Capitol. Hopefully I'm wrong, but that's sure what it seems like from the rendering.

You know, I once had an economics professor that lamented that he couldn't go to a cocktail party and not have some layman ask what he does, and thereafter not be assaulted with a hairbrained lecture in his own subject from someone who has no idea what they're talking about. I guess that anecdote applys to architecture, too.

I hope Hines doesn't see your comment. Associating it with your name devalues their perceived worth of my alma matter.

lol, so only developers understand architecture? That's kind of like saying that only music producers understand music, and shouldn't have to worry about the opinions of listeners. Silly.

[lockmat]

lol, so only developers understand architecture? That's kind of like saying that only music producers understand music, and shouldn't have to worry about the opinions of listeners. Silly.

He may have been speaking to Architects, not developers.

But I agree with him to a certain extent. Most people see architecture and like it or they don't. They don't put much thought into it and normally can't put a good argument together for why they do or don't like it. Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Maybe. But I think an architect can usually better explain the significance of a design than can a layman. Doesn't mean a laymen or others have to like it b/c they said so, but at least they have a technical knowledge for what and why they did it.

-----------

edit: how far up in the public eye will this Hines Tower leak to? swamplot posted the photo on its website today. this is kind of funny. any chance our making it public will hurt the chances of it going up?

http://swamplot.com/the-secret-new-downtow...5-08/#more-1941

Edited May 8, 2008 by lockmat

[H-Town Man]

He may have been speaking to Architects, not developers.

But I agree with him to a certain extent. Most people see architecture and like it or they don't. They don't put much thought into it and normally can't put a good argument together for why they do or don't like it. Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Maybe. But I think an architect can usually better explain the significance of a design than can a layman. Doesn't mean a laymen or others have to like it b/c they said so, but at least they have a technical knowledge for what and why they did it.

He was referring to shasta's comment above. It doesn't matter how much thought people put into it. The point is that you don't have to be knowledgeable about real estate to say that a certain developer could do better with his architecture.

[rsb320]

This is interesting regarding local architecture awards going to smaller projects.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headli...es/5758979.html

[lockmat]

He was referring to shasta's comment above. It doesn't matter how much thought people put into it. The point is that you don't have to be knowledgeable about real estate to say that a certain developer could do better with his architecture.

And shasta's comment was about architecture:

Sometimes I wonder if Hines has anyone with even a remote understanding in Architecture working for them. An adviser ...anyone?

Regardless. Some people want flash and glitz in their architecture with spires and crazy angles. I think a 30 story L-shaped tower is a subtly bold statement.

[totheskies]

It does to me, as well. And, just to throw in my $0.02, a proposal to build a several hundred million dollar tax producing building in the Central Business District is not only not a HUGE loss, it isn't a loss at all, but rather a gain for the city in general, and downtown specifically. With new residential construction occurring immediately south and east of downtown, it is in no danger of withering away. For upwards of 25,000 residents, downtown attractions and amenities are no more than a railstop or $4.00 cab ride away....cheaper than valet parking.

I've read all of the same new urbanism articles that you all have, filled with all of the trendy buzzwords. The fact is, none of this hoped for residential development in downtown will be attainable for 95% or more of the population. And, if you can't live in it, who cares what is inside it? Amenities located in downtown, such as the theatres, stadiums, parks and convention centers....all things that draw consumers looking to be entertained....are going to put far more feet on the ground for people watching than a couple of 200 unit condo towers with 1.5 persons residing in each unit. Think about that. 600 rich people who you'll never see, versus 43,000 Astros fans, 18,500 Rockets fans, 5,000 convention attendees or 3,000 concert goers....and possibly 20,000 soccer fans. ALL of these events flood downtown with consumers. Rich condo owners do not. For proof, check out that WFAA "Victory Cam" that constantly shows the empty Victory Plaza....EXCEPT when American Airlines Center is in use.

I agree 110%. We have vast swaths of undeveloped land that surround DT in every direction, and yet everyone is crying about more retail in DT proper. Isn't it nice enough that the fast-developing midtown and East End will have downtown as their main entertainment venue, AND that it will be easily accessible by public transit. I am absolutely in support of the uber-rich young office upstarts having luxury living near their office, but downtown's health will not be affected by them at all.

Its a catch-22. If you have ARMs, you have sales and homeowner foreclosures. If you have no ARMs, you don't have sales, and the whole project gets foreclosed. Downtown residential, for the most part, simply isn't viable at this time.

Yep, let's keep celebrating the townhomes and midrises that are popping up all around DT, and then lure those residents in to hang out at Discovery Green and HP.

[musicman]

I am absolutely in support of the uber-rich young office upstarts having luxury living near their office, but downtown's health will not be affected by them at all.

when downtown businesses are being harassed for noise levels (la carafe, market square grill, deans, etc) because of the uber rich young office upstarts complaining, yes downtown's health can be affected. we all know how loud la carafe gets.

[H-Town Man]

And shasta's comment was about architecture:

Regardless. Some people want flash and glitz in their architecture with spires and crazy angles. I think a 30 story L-shaped tower is a subtly bold statement.

Shasta's comment was that Hines needs better architecture. Niche's reply as I understood it was that, not being a developer, he is in no position to tell Hines what it needs or doesn't need. My point to Niche was that one does not need to be a developer to decide whether architecture is good or not.

I suppose that Niche could respond that Hines knows better than any of us what is necessary to be profitable in their line of work, and if putting great architecture in downtown Houston is not going to improve Hines' profitability, then why should they care? But I think it could be argued that public opinion has led to better architecture in the past from developers, which is where people like myself and shasta come in.

[editor]

This is interesting regarding local architecture awards going to smaller projects.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headli...es/5758979.html

See the thread here.

Shasta's comment was that Hines needs better architecture. Niche's reply as I understood it was that, not being a developer, he is in no position to tell Hines what it needs or doesn't need. My point to Niche was that one does not need to be a developer to decide whether architecture is good or not.

I once joked with someone at Hines about how that company always seems to buy ugly brown stripey buildings (I didn't say "ugly" but I think it was implied). Strangely, I haven't had a contract out of Hines since.

[capnmcbarnacle]

edit: how far up in the public eye will this Hines Tower leak to? swamplot posted the photo on its website today. this is kind of funny. any chance our making it public will hurt the chances of it going up?

http://swamplot.com/the-secret-new-downtow...5-08/#more-1941

I looked at this area from this angle yesterday and just want to make the following observations about the building.

I think the Texas Tower is gone. What appears at first glance to be the Texas Tower, on the northeast corner of block 69, looks more like the back of the old Post-Dispatch building -- now the Magnolia Hotel. The Magnolia has that same L-shape. As far as I am concerned, the Texas Tower is gone in the rendering.

As for this building being L-shaped, why would it be if the Texas Tower is gone? Allow me to engage in rank speculation but when I first see this rendering, the building looks more like a T-shape. With the gentle curve on the facade that forms the top of the "T", you could have fun with the angles from the structure forming the base of the "T". You could have some pretty cool facdes and plazas along Main and Texas.

But regardless of what goes here, I'll always miss that McDonald's that gave one the experience of stopping off for lunch in downtown Grozny.

Edited May 8, 2008 by capnmcbarnacle

[rsb320]

I just walked by there on my way to Cafe Express. The Shamrock sign is still up. I just saw the back of the Texas Tower, but I was around the other side recently and I believe the tower is unoccupied. I also remember for sale signs and covered windows. This will probably be imploded.

You're right, there is no Texas Tower in the rendering. The building that appears to be in the L-shaped crevice of the new tower is actually across Fannin. I think the L-shape is an illusion. My first impression was that it steps back slightly from the 'face'.

Edited May 8, 2008 by rsb320

[KinkaidAlum]

Losing the Texas Tower would SUCK. That building has potential and they truly don't build them like that anymore. Oh well, I am sure progress and profits will doom it to rubble.

[KinkaidAlum]

You know, I once had an economics professor that lamented that he couldn't go to a cocktail party and not have some layman ask what he does, and thereafter not be assaulted with a hairbrained lecture in his own subject from someone who has no idea what they're talking about. I guess that anecdote applys to architecture, too.

I hope Hines doesn't see your comment. Associating it with your name devalues their perceived worth of my alma matter.

Yes, how horrible of you to have an opinion, Shasta. What's even worse is that you have chosen to express your opinion on an internet forum. The nerve!

You know, the world would be a better place if we left everything unquestioned and just relied on the expertise of valued professionals.

Shame on you Shasta, for devaluing my UH diploma with your outrageous behavior of questioning authority. Fall in line, and change your handle to subserviant sheep.

[capnmcbarnacle]

Losing the Texas Tower would SUCK. That building has potential and they truly don't build them like that anymore. Oh well, I am sure progress and profits will doom it to rubble.

As much as I would like to see the Texas Tower preserved, it is a shell of itself without all of the deco features that used to adorn the top of the building. 99% of the time I'm a knee-jerk preservationist, but I guess I feel like Texas Tower has already been dismantled -- at least the exterior. I have never been inside of it so I can't say what's there. I hoped for ages that someone would find something cool to do with it but I just hope that Hines or whoever follows my first rule of architecture which is that if you must tear an old building down, replace it with something as cool or cooler.

[desirous]

That's pretty much what it comes down to (in Houston).

But strangely enough, Austin has a percentage growth rate that is even faster than ours, and their downtown area is growing by leaps and bounds, with most of it being residential/hotel/retail. There really isn't much in the way of new office space being built downtown; it's all out in the suburbs. Worse still is Dallas, where their downtown office market keeps on getting new supply but can't quite seem to fill it.

Personally, I strongly perfer our urban growth model. It draws a greater number and diversity of people downtown, as Red pointed out, and as our region grows, having a strong central business district in the context of an urban core with a dense residential population will make developing effective local and regional transit much easier than will be the case in a place like Austin.

I agree. Besides, Austin's downtown is a totally different beast. Downtown Houston residential development is difficult because we don't have 80% of our nightlife crammed into downtown.

[H-Town Man]

I hope Hines doesn't see your comment. Associating it with your name devalues their perceived worth of my alma matter.

Misspelling 'alma mater' devalues the perceived worth of your alma mater.

[rsb320]

Misspelling 'alma mater' devalues the perceived worth of your alma mater.

Now that's funny!

[TheNiche]

Shasta's comment was that Hines needs better architecture. Niche's reply as I understood it was that, not being a developer, he is in no position to tell Hines what it needs or doesn't need. My point to Niche was that one does not need to be a developer to decide whether architecture is good or not.

I suppose that Niche could respond that Hines knows better than any of us what is necessary to be profitable in their line of work, and if putting great architecture in downtown Houston is not going to improve Hines' profitability, then why should they care? But I think it could be argued that public opinion has led to better architecture in the past from developers, which is where people like myself and shasta come in.

I guess that I was trying tactfully to make the comment that a lot of commentators on this architecture forum don't know a lick about architecture. It so happens that Hines does know a thing or two about architecture. And heck, I even took a couple courses there, myself.

And granted, some aspects come down to taste. I really like Hines' parking garage, specifically because it looks so skeletal, for instance, but I can see how others don't like it. But when it comes down to which direction the tower's facade is oriented, that really and truely does not matter; what matters is that the first few floors are articulated from the tower and that they are designed with the street level in mind. Whether that was done properly is not known to us at this time because we're only working off of one rendering.

[editor]

I think both sides have made their points. Now let's get back on topic.

[NewMND]

Is Texas Tower that building that smells really bad when you walk by it?

[capnmcbarnacle]

Is Texas Tower that building that smells really bad when you walk by it?

If you think urine smells bad, then yes.

[Subdude]

As much as I would like to see the Texas Tower preserved, it is a shell of itself without all of the deco features that used to adorn the top of the building. 99% of the time I'm a knee-jerk preservationist, but I guess I feel like Texas Tower has already been dismantled -- at least the exterior. I have never been inside of it so I can't say what's there. I hoped for ages that someone would find something cool to do with it but I just hope that Hines or whoever follows my first rule of architecture which is that if you must tear an old building down, replace it with something as cool or cooler.

Agree completely. Texas Tower/Sterling Building lost its architectural merit when the top was "modernized". What isn't clear is if it is going to be demolished. It looks like the new building wraps around that quarter block. Might it just have been left out of the rendering to give a better view of what the new tower will look like?

In the rendering the south wing of the tower looks impossibly thin. It looks nice, but I wonder if it is the final design. I can't wait to see how this is proposed to look at street level. Main and Texas was traditionally considered the center of downtown. I would really like to see something really special here.

Btw, it seems that the project has been yanked off the page at the link. Someone must have seen it on HAIF and panicked.

[bachanon]

it looks like the rendering has been removed from the original link. did anyone save it?

[TheNiche]

it looks like the rendering has been removed from the original link. did anyone save it?

See post #23.

[ChannelTwoNews]

it looks like the rendering has been removed from the original link. did anyone save it?

I did before the Wylie page was deleted. It's back up on the first post.

[Subdude]

As much as I would like to see the Texas Tower preserved, it is a shell of itself without all of the deco features that used to adorn the top of the building. 99% of the time I'm a knee-jerk preservationist, but I guess I feel like Texas Tower has already been dismantled -- at least the exterior. I have never been inside of it so I can't say what's there. I hoped for ages that someone would find something cool to do with it but I just hope that Hines or whoever follows my first rule of architecture which is that if you must tear an old building down, replace it with something as cool or cooler.

A good picture of it before the top was sheared off was just posted in this topic.

[Jax]

I also posted a photo of the building without the top cut off on the previous page of this thread.

[rsb320]

A good picture of it before the top was sheared off was just posted in this topic.

That's not at all the building in question at Texas and Main.

Actually, the building is on the northeast corner of that block at Texas and Fannin.

Edited May 12, 2008 by rsb320

[capnmcbarnacle]

That's not at all the building in question at Texas and Main.

Actually, the building is on the northeast corner of that block at Texas and Fannin.

There is a pic of it at post #32

[rsb320]

There is a pic of it at post #32

I was referring to the "this topic" link on post 95. That is not a picture of the Texas Tower. Also, on post 32, I just see a block map, not a picture of a building.

[strickn]

Agree completely. Texas Tower/Sterling Building lost its architectural merit when the top was "modernized".

In the rendering the south wing of the tower looks impossibly thin. It looks nice, but I wonder if it is the final design. I can't wait to see how this is proposed to look at street level. Main and Texas was traditionally considered the center of downtown. I would really like to see something really special here.

That's not what capnmcbarnacle was saying - in fact he took pains not to - and I would take pains not to have this sound abrasive, but as far as I can tell, you may as well be happy with whatever sterile prism pops up, because (the value of street-level accommodations notwithstanding) if the existing tower's architectural merit was so reducible, you have to that extent already bought into the postmodern thought that its substance is in its skyline statement.

And the present proposal (if you trace the perspective line of the rendering back two blocks onto Texas Commerce Tower, count the storeys down from the top, and divide the remaining storeys into 1002 feet) is noticeably over 500 feet (if you forget to trace the line back two blocks, and just do it straight across, it's 600' ), which will matter to some fans, as far as something special at the top goes.

(not far)

The public realm gets a bit of discussion, and I'm really glad you care about the pedestrian streetscape. I'll just take this moment to point out something else.

Ignoring tops, and ignoring interiors - which I can't speak about any more than capnmc can - just compare something as simple as its windows to what you see of Chase Center across the street. Besides rising on vertical folds, the openings in the older building are individually upright, but in Chase Center they're black oblong (horizontal) slabs. Could be futuristic mausolea for all we are able to relate to them. Mirroring the face entirely (MainPlace, etc) or stretching a facile grid up the thing like pantyhose (1000 Main, the rest of downtown Houston) are no more suited for acknowledging their function as places where people are spending millions of hours a year in close working proximity... All [of the recent strategies] are unsuited except maybe for being a bleak commentary on how forgettable and overstreamlined we have made the time we spend in such places. To inhabit a place is the most we can do for it, can say for it (since additive personal modification is NOT allowed, the more the place is supposedly "worth", and it seems all the world's an investment property). These new places ought to make that process dignified, but they don't.

Anyone can message me for a 'rest of the story'.

Edited May 13, 2008 by strickn