Jump to content
HAIF - Houston's original social media

New Chevron Tower for Downtown Houston: 58-Stories at 1600 Louisiana


Recommended Posts

Except it's not a box...

 

Neither are a lot of our existing buildings, but we still routinely hear that Houston has nothing but flat-top boxes.

 

For example, one has to go down to the 9th tallest building downtown before one encounters a plain box.  (And even that (One Shell) is not really just a plain box.)

Edited by Houston19514
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

From today.    

Well, I have some good news and some not as good news...   The not so good news: there is no target start time on the schedule.  As previously mentioned, the hold up is through Chevron as Skanska is

Someone with one post calling out someone with 3 post.   

Posted Images

Neither are a lot of our existing buildings, but we still routinely hear that Houston has nothing but flat-top boxes.

 

For example, one has to go down to the 9th tallest building downtown before one encounters a plain box.  (And even that (One Shell) is not really just a plain box.)

 

i agree with this for the most part. is 2IFC in Hong Kong just a boring box? its corners are squared, but its sides are rounded and has some distinct vertical lines running up the tower. im not saying this will be a 2IFC because it doesnt have a neat architectural feature at the top, but the corners of this tower are rounded off and the sides appear to be convexed outward, with two recessed sections on the north and south sides of the tower running up the length of the building. not "just a box".

Link to post
Share on other sites

The majority of the tallest NYC buildings are boxy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_New_York_City

 

true.. its just so much cheaper and more efficient to build a box and keep the floor plates the same shape all the way up the building. im sure the building will turn out much nicer than the rendering makes it out to me. that rendering does absolutely no justice to 1500 Louisiana or 1400 Smith and they are some of the nicest buildings in our skyline IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish there was a way to make a post persistent at the top of the thread so I didn't have to keep skipping back 5 pages to find the rendering. I thought I'd put it here again to save other people the trouble. I really wish we could see this from more angles. What's that groove along the one side? I wonder if the side facing the bayou where all of the Houston skyline photos are taken from has a similar feature or if it's just flat. At least it's a rounded rectangle floor plate rather than a simple box.

 

9204536268_404c236766_h.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish there was a way to make a post persistent at the top of the thread so I didn't have to keep skipping back 5 pages to find the rendering. I thought I'd put it here again to save other people the trouble. I really wish we could see this from more angles. What's that groove along the one side? I wonder if the side facing the bayou where all of the Houston skyline photos are taken from has a similar feature or if it's just flat. At least it's a rounded rectangle floor plate rather than a simple box.

 

Certainly would be nice to have an easily accessible picture of the latest renderings at the top of each thread. I come across that problem a lot.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish there was a way to make a post persistent at the top of the thread so I didn't have to keep skipping back 5 pages to find the rendering. I thought I'd put it here again to save other people the trouble. I really wish we could see this from more angles. What's that groove along the one side? I wonder if the side facing the bayou where all of the Houston skyline photos are taken from has a similar feature or if it's just flat. At least it's a rounded rectangle floor plate rather than a simple box.

here is a rendering of the base from the south east, showing the same recessed grooves on the south face of the tower as well. maybe they will implement some lighting in the grooves?

new-chevron-plinth-rendering.jpg

Edited by cloud713
Link to post
Share on other sites

true.. its just so much cheaper and more efficient to build a box and keep the floor plates the same shape all the way up the building. im sure the building will turn out much nicer than the rendering makes it out to me. that rendering does absolutely no justice to 1500 Louisiana or 1400 Smith and they are some of the nicest buildings in our skyline IMO.

 

As I've said before, those cool looking buildings in the Middle East are a pain for tenants, as it's difficult and expensive to design usable floor plans in a building that's not squarish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

here is a rendering of the base from the south east, showing the same recessed grooves on the south face of the tower as well. maybe they will implement some lighting in the grooves?

new-chevron-plinth-rendering.jpg

 

It doesn't look so much like a recessed groove as it does an offset. There may be an offset on the other side that matches this one.

 

The rendering in post #257 gives a better view of the offset. Look at the top of the building. It looks like one side goes inward, and the other overlaps it.

Edited by RedScare
Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't look so much like a recessed groove as it does an offset. There may be an offset on the other side that matches this one.

 

The rendering in post #257 gives a better view of the offset. Look at the top of the building. It looks like one side goes inward, and the other overlaps it.

 

agreed, its not just a "groove" in the side of a flat/curved? wall. the whole middle section is recessed in on both north and south sides. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may just be an illusion, but the far side of the grove (north-west side) appears to go slightly higher than the other side in the rendering. 

 

I think that's just a product of the groove.  The white line around the roof matches up exactly with it going from the recessed portion back to the standard facade.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

lol ricco.. can we all agree this is about a 58 story tower? assuming the rendering is correct.

It'd probably be better to just compare it to the Devon tower, same floor count with slightly less total space. Wouldn't be surprising if it were over 800 feet.

Edited by ClutchCity
Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the possibilities of the executives moving corporate headquarters to Houston in the near future? someone on another message board seems to be pretty sure it will happen within the next 5 years and those executives will be moving into the old Exxonmobil building, expanding Chevrons campus even further.

Not going to happen on the ExxonMobil building. Too far away from the other buildings to be able to meet face to face with people during a hectic work day. Odds are if there was a need for a 4th tower it would go where the current daycare building is as it could be connected via sky-bridge.

So on the relocation question... who knows...

Global Upstream is headquartered in Houston, but there is a great deal of benefit of having your HQ's on the west coast when Asia Pacific is where the future is. Again, who knows?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd probably be better to just compare it to the Devon tower, same floor count with slightly less total space. Wouldn't be surprising if it were over 800 feet.

im excited looking at the height of the Devon tower now.. 50 floors and 850 feet? i wonder if the floors go up into the ^ part at the top or if thats an architectural feature increasing the height. but if you look at the rendering of Chevron tower there are 50 floors on top of the podium, and the top and bottom floor of the tower are 2 floors high, and each floor of the podium is about 2 floors high, making 58 stories.

 

Not going to happen on the ExxonMobil building. Too far away from the other buildings to be able to meet face to face with people during a hectic work day. Odds are if there was a need for a 4th tower it would go where the current daycare building is as it could be connected via sky-bridge.

So on the relocation question... who knows...

Global Upstream is headquartered in Houston, but there is a great deal of benefit of having your HQ's on the west coast when Asia Pacific is where the future is. Again, who knows?

thats what i was thinking originally too. figured the daycare would be a great lot for the tower but then some dude came in saying there were anchors for the building preventing major development on those 4 lots. the guy who mentioned HQ relocations said Chevrons preferred situation would be to tear down Exxon and rebuild a tower, which makes me wonder if there are truths to the 4 anchors rumor and when they rebuilt they would put the tower on the daycare lot instead of running a huge podium across an entire city block.

as for your point on HQ relocations, true thats where a lot of future business will be, but a lot of the new oil is coming from places like Brazil and Venezuela (they have the largest oil deposits in the world) in south america, and Houston is sort of a gateway to the south. i guess it could go either way

Edited by cloud713
Link to post
Share on other sites

the guy who mentioned HQ relocations said Chevrons preferred situation would be to tear down Exxon and rebuild a tower, which makes me wonder if there are truths to the 4 anchors rumor and when they rebuilt they would put the tower on the daycare lot instead of running a huge podium across an entire city block.

No way they would tear down the ExxonMobil building. Too far. It would make more sense to purchase 1600 Smith.

as for your point on HQ relocations, true thats where a lot of future business will be, but a lot of the new oil is coming from places like Brazil and Venezuela (they have the largest oil deposits in the world) in south america, and Houston is sort of a gateway to the south. i guess it could go either way

Probably both. In Asia it is really about the natural gas markets and the tremendous growth that is occurring there.

I think what you will see is that as people retire their replacements (whenever possible) will be located in Houston. Chevron and all other energy companies need to maintain and grow earth sciences talent as they will see a large percentage of it retiring in the next 15-20 years. If I were in my teens today I would pursue a degree in Petroleum Engineering or Geology.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From ConstructionWire:

 

Plans call for the construction of a 1.7 million-square-foot, 50-story office tower for Chevron Corp. to expand the existing two-building campus. The development is to include common areas, parking facilities and a fitness center.

 

price tag - $238.8 Million

 

nothing new really, except they've published the project cost.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

From ConstructionWire:

Plans call for the construction of a 1.7 million-square-foot, 50-story office tower for Chevron Corp. to expand the existing two-building campus. The development is to include common areas, parking facilities and a fitness center.

price tag - $238.8 Million

nothing new really, except they've published the project cost.

Welcome back!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

From ConstructionWire:

 

Plans call for the construction of a 1.7 million-square-foot, 50-story office tower for Chevron Corp. to expand the existing two-building campus. The development is to include common areas, parking facilities and a fitness center.

 

price tag - $238.8 Million

 

nothing new really, except they've published the project cost.

 

Interesting.  Seems like a pretty economical price tag.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chevron's Revenue is 241 billion dollars per year.

Net Income: 26 billion dollars per year.

 

This building, is cheeeeeeap! 

 

Compared to the billion+ that Exxon is paying for their campus it's not much.

 

Of course if you invest money in Chevron you only get a 3.25% dividend so they can't just throw money away. They need a lot of profit to pay those millions of stockholders.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

there is no plan to move HQ to Houston on the horizon.  not saying it won't happen 20+ years down the road, but not in the immediate future

 

im just curious why your so certain about that? Chevron had been saying up until the tower announcement was made that only 800 people would be relocated to Houston over the next few years, and didnt acknowledge any of the new tower rumors until they made it official, just like Exxon did with their new campus. so these types of things have been proven to officially be denied by the companies many times in the past, even with there is truth to the rumors. not saying i think it will happen, but you never know? it would be nice to have such a large corporation relocate to Houston. im still bitter that Exxon is still in Dallas after building the huge campus in Houston.

does anyone have any idea how long until Chevrons current lease in their San Fransico buildings are up again?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would just like to point out to the poster who thinks Chevron would have gotten more buzz by building a large campus like Exxon... This thread already has more responses than the Exxon Campus Thread despite the Exxon thread having existed since 2010.

Oh, and the Exxon Campus is currently under construction but that thread has fallen off the front page. Nobody cares. I am willing to bet that when a 50 story tower starts going up in downtown, that thread will never fall off the front page.

Chevron is making a WISE choice. LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION.

Understand your point, but I don't think that the number of posts in an architecture forum is what OP was talking about in terms of buzz.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would just like to point out to the poster who thinks Chevron would have gotten more buzz by building a large campus like Exxon... This thread already has more responses than the Exxon Campus Thread despite the Exxon thread having existed since 2010.

Oh, and the Exxon Campus is currently under construction but that thread has fallen off the front page. Nobody cares. I am willing to bet that when a 50 story tower starts going up in downtown, that thread will never fall off the front page.

Chevron is making a WISE choice. LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION.

Don't use this forum as your window to the world. The Exxon campus is literally the big thing around town everyone is talking about. It's going to change Houston (populations) for better or worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think using the HAIF population is not a statistically representative body of people. All of us here are interested in Houston's architecture. The impact of a suburban campus versus a downtown, skyline changing highrise are of course going to warrent more discussion towards the latter. 

 

That being said, I still prefer the Chevron plan. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would just like to point out to the poster who thinks Chevron would have gotten more buzz by building a large campus like Exxon... This thread already has more responses than the Exxon Campus Thread despite the Exxon thread having existed since 2010. 

 

Oh, and the Exxon Campus is currently under construction but that thread has fallen off the front page. Nobody cares. I am willing to bet that when a 50 story tower starts going up in downtown, that thread will never fall off the front page.

 

Chevron is making a WISE choice. LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION. 

 

I believe this post is directed at me. Two things:

 

1) Reading comprehension is important and seems to have eluded you.  I said that Chevron missed the mark if this was their answer to XOM's campus, and that Chevron missed an opportunity to do something really cool that would get people talking.  My point was that they could have built something eye-catching and innovative they could have really created a buzz.  Their skyscraper, while fairly tall, won't stand out in the downtown skyline.  They are building a 1.7M sq ft tower -- for perspective that is larger than Williams Tower in terms of sq ft.  Why not build up to create a true titan of the skyline?  Why build a box?  Why use the same 30 year old glass concept simply for the sake of consistency?  They could have done better.

 

2) Logic is also important.  Using the metric of "pages on HAIF" is a weak metric that is not representative of oil company employees or the general public.  You have a group of people on here who value interesting architecture and height.  Yes, Chevron's tower hits on the latter, certainly much more than XOM's campus...therefore the page count difference on here.

 

Again, I do like Chevron's commitment to downtown and the location is good for them, I simply believe they missed an opportunity to do something truly great.  They gave us a mediocre effort that could have been better.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

DISCLAIMER: This is not meant to be taken as a personal attack on King Owl or anyone else. It is a simple friendly observation and opinion.  :)

 

...Of course they could have done better. Name one project that couldn't have been "done better" and I'll give you 10 reasons how it could have been done better. "Done better" is a rather lame position. It can always be done better.  And better to who? Just because some people are perfectly happy with this project (as per the rendering) doesn't necessarily mean that they have bad taste. Maybe YOU and your i-buddies have bad taste. Maybe if the tower you envision is built, it would ruin the skyline, maybe not. It's all subjective. 

 

King Owl, if people are allowed to be unhappy with this tower. They are also allowed to be happy with it too for any reasons they want. And if you have the right to repeat your objections until you feel that you have been perfectly understood, then so do others. 

 

'People talking' is also subjective. People ARE talking about it, maybe not the people you want to be talking about it, and maybe not for the reasons you want them to be talking about it - but they ARE talking about it, and I agree with Kinkaid, they will continue to be talking about it at Haif and elsewhere for a good long time (if built).

 

 

 

Edited by Mister X
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't use this forum as your window to the world. The Exxon campus is literally the big thing around town everyone is talking about. It's going to change Houston (populations) for better or worse.

 

Seriously?  I don't hear anyone talking about the Exxon campus.  In fact, I'm surprised at how many people I encounter who know nothing about it.  (Similar to my surprise at the number of people who know nothing or almost nothign about the under-construction rail lines.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Why use the same 30 year old glass concept simply for the sake of consistency?  They could have done better.

 

I don't think their goal is to create an architectural masterpiece or create buzz. Energy companies need less buzz, not more. Chevron's goal is to get oil and LNG projects done and make money for their shareholders. The only argument that could be made for spending big money on an archtiecural landmark would be if they could attract more and better employees with it. Most employees are more worried about their paycheck than working in a landmark though. At least the ones who are grown up and have sense are. Chevron and Exxon are very conservative companies. I've seen them do things like spend 100 hours at $130 an hour to save a couple thousand on a BOM. Every single decision these guys make is about the bottom line sometimes to the point of lunacy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear a few people talking about Exxon but much of the chatter isn't positive. This is what I am hearing;

 

1) Commercial real estate friend is stoked. He was able to buy up land in the general vicinity of the new campus a year before Exxon officially announced

 

2) A few Exxon investors I know are worried about losing a lot of young engineers who are currently working in Greenway to competitors because of the new location. There's been lots of buzz about people leaving Exxon for the competition

 

3) A 35+ year Exxon employee who is my Godfather is planning on an early retirement rather than make a move. He's lived in Tanglewood since the 1960s and belongs to the Houston Country Club and has no intention of moving up North or making that commute

 

4) My construction friends (architects, builders, suppliers) were chattering a lot about Exxon a year or so ago because it was such a huge project, but they aren't talking about it anymore because there's so many other things happening around town that are more visible (Regent Sq, Blvd Place, Buffalo Bayou master plan, Chevron, apartment explosion, Energy Corridor growth, etc...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically a lot of anecdotal evidence regarding xom. Ok thanks.

Many times a corporate move is a way to cut dead weight. The top performers will be compensated to make it worth their while to stay

Edited by King Owl
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I know an XOM engineer being moved to ...Tyler and its a good career move. I know another that recently moved to Brussels. I suspect some will leave the company but I don't think XOM is worried if that's what you're implying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously?  I don't hear anyone talking about the Exxon campus.  In fact, I'm surprised at how many people I encounter who know nothing about it.  (Similar to my surprise at the number of people who know nothing or almost nothign about the under-construction rail lines.)

 

Everyone on the far northside is talking about it. My family lives in Spring and I have a few friends that live in the Woodlands, and all of them have been talking about the Exxon campus and even a future UPS distribution center near the Exxon campus. It's more local buzz than city wide. On the other hand, when everyone sees this tower under construction while they're driving past downtown, they're going to at least wonder what's going up there. You can barely even see Exxon... just a boatload of cranes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have any anti-oil/climate change/occupy this ever protested any buildings Dowtown? Other than corporate espionage what is Exxon so afraid of?

 

Greenpeace entered and occupied ExxonMobil's head office in Dallas a few years back. i Seem to recall they also hung a banner on the building downtown, but I could be wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with exterior features is all related to the cost of curtain wall. About 5 years ago the bottom fell out of the glass market and something called unitized curtain wall started to become the norm. Unitized curtain wall has a ton of benefits beyond traditional stick built glazing including: (energy performance, structural performance, keeping water out performance).

Once unitized systems became the standard, it became cost prohibitive to do anything else in the spandrel portion of the facade. We can use metal panels, stone, etc but in order to keep cost down they are typically glazed into the curtain wall. Combine that with the fact that there are less than 10 proven unitized designs on the market right now leads us to the era of "the boring glass box"

Architects are fighting this like mad but they are up against significant challenges from developers (cost). We are seeing products start to compete but this glass box trend is going to be around for a while.

Funny how this "era of the boring glass box" phenomena only seems to apply to new construction in HOUSTON and not cities like New York or Chicago. :rolleyes:

post-9042-0-93169500-1373703601.jpgpost-9042-0-86219700-1373703610_thumb.jppost-9042-0-28267200-1373703630.jpgpost-9042-0-94023200-1373703646_thumb.jppost-9042-0-48019300-1373703659_thumb.jppost-9042-0-41991300-1373703670.jpgpost-9042-0-61340100-1373703681_thumb.jppost-9042-0-38360100-1373703691.jpgpost-9042-0-24995800-1373703703_thumb.jppost-9042-0-32533400-1373703711_thumb.jp

Lets get real here, its not like people aren't designing and building visually striking and unique architecture anymore. It's only the developers who want to cheap out and go "cost effective" that are building the boring glass boxes, which basically goes along with what you explained, in a nutshell.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

DISCLAIMER: This is not meant to be taken as a personal attack on King Owl or anyone else. It is a simple friendly observation and opinion. :)

...Of course they could have done better. Name one project that couldn't have been "done better" and I'll give you 10 reasons how it could have been done better. "Done better" is a rather lame position. It can always be done better. And better to who? Just because some people are perfectly happy with this project (as per the rendering) doesn't necessarily mean that they have bad taste. Maybe YOU and your i-buddies have bad taste. Maybe if the tower you envision is built, it would ruin the skyline, maybe not. It's all subjective.

King Owl, if people are allowed to be unhappy with this tower. They are also allowed to be happy with it too for any reasons they want. And if you have the right to repeat your objections until you feel that you have been perfectly understood, then so do others.

'People talking' is also subjective. People ARE talking about it, maybe not the people you want to be talking about it, and maybe not for the reasons you want them to be talking about it - but they ARE talking about it, and I agree with Kinkaid, they will continue to be talking about it at Haif and elsewhere for a good long time (if built).

First you say:

"DISCLAIMER: This is not meant to be taken as a personal attack on King Owl :)

Then you say:

"Done better" is a rather lame position"

and

"Maybe YOU and your i-buddies have bad taste"

and

"Maybe if the tower you envision is built, it would ruin the skyline"

All while calling King Owl out personally:

"King Owl, if people are allowed to be unhappy with this tower."

It's textbook trolling and baiting, it's off topic, and it's derailing the thread into a "Mister X versus King Owl" match. Cut it out.

King Owl simply gave his opinion that the tower could have been better, without quoting or directing it toward anyone in particular. He didn't cherry pick a Mister X post and say "Mister X's opinion is stupid, this tower sucks".

You on the other hand........

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how this "era of the boring glass box" phenomena only seems to apply to new construction in HOUSTON and not cities like New York or Chicago. :rolleyes:

attachicon.gif image.jpgattachicon.gif image.jpgattachicon.gif image.jpgattachicon.gif image.jpgattachicon.gif image.jpgattachicon.gif image.jpgattachicon.gif image.jpgattachicon.gif image.jpgattachicon.gif image.jpgattachicon.gif image.jpg

Lets get real here, its not like people aren't designing and building visually striking and unique architecture anymore. It's only the developers who want to cheap out and go "cost effective" that are building the boring glass boxes, which basically goes along with what you explained, in a nutshell.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Highrise Tower changed the title to New Chevron Tower for Downtown Houston: 58-Stories at 1600 Louisiana

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...