Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Connecting the dots here.. 

 

Mill Creek Residential Trust will begin three projects by year’s end and another three to four in 2014.  All projects will use wood frames as the developer feels it’s the most cost efficient. Ground breakings later this year will include a five-story mid-rise project in Houston’s EaDo Station area. The transit-oriented development will be adjacent to a light-rail station and encompass 310 units with an 840 s.f. average.

 

http://apmanagement.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/The-Apartment-Report_APC_7.8.13_PRESS-BREAK.pdf

 

EaDo Stadium Apartments - A 316 unit, 5 story Apartment Complex, to be located adjacent to the Dynamo Stadium Construction to begin Nov. 2013
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 263
  • Created
  • Last Reply

premium_gallery_landscape.jpg

 

premium_gallery_landscape.jpg

 

premium_gallery_landscape.jpg

 

premium_gallery_landscape.jpg

 

"Mill Creek Residential is developing EaDo Station, which developers said it will be the first high-density complex built in the area in a decade. It could be open by the time the light rail extension is completed by August 2014."

 

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/real-estate/article/Some-big-doings-may-make-EaDo-a-go-to-place-4870376.php#/13

Link to comment
Share on other sites

premium_gallery_landscape.jpg

 

premium_gallery_landscape.jpg

 

premium_gallery_landscape.jpg

 

premium_gallery_landscape.jpg

 

"Mill Creek Residential is developing EaDo Station, which developers said it will be the first high-density complex built in the area in a decade. It could be open by the time the light rail extension is completed by August 2014."

 

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/real-estate/article/Some-big-doings-may-make-EaDo-a-go-to-place-4870376.php#/13

 

 

nice..but i thought light was for east end had a 2014 march date

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh, closing off the street doesnt bother me since its still open to pedestrians and cyclists, especially since it dead-ends into the stadium anyway.

 

How about the skybridge over the park, so that residents don't have to be burdened by crossing 50 ft of greenspace to get between buildings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about the skybridge over the park, so that residents don't have to be burdened by crossing 50 ft of greenspace to get between buildings?

 

Not sure why that should bother anyone.  It appears all the parking may be in the south block, so the bridge provides access for the north block apartments to their parking. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still cringing at the name.

 

It is truly cringe-worthy.

 

 

 

 

I neither love it or hate it but the "EaDo" name is not going away any day soon so the incessant complaining in almost every HAIF thread related to "EaDo" named projects or the EaDo area itself, is frankly, a waste of time. It's just a name, time to get over it 

 

I don't think it is time to "get over it".  That made-up word doesn't stop being obnoxious because it has been obnoxious for a while now.  

 

 

 

Anyway, in general I'm opposed to closing off streets in a grid system, but here it dead-ends anyway because of the stadium so it's OK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I would think that traffic might be a problem on game days though.

 

I don't think this will impact traffic much at all come game days.  I have been to probably 30 games and have never had issues with traffic before a Dynamo game.  Not saying closing off the block will help at all but most of the traffic is coming from the highway side anyway.  I like the design and location and expect more to follow suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why that should bother anyone.  It appears all the parking may be in the south block, so the bridge provides access for the north block apartments to their parking. 

 

Do they not have access walking through the park? I could see it if there were something awful like a street to cross - no way I'd expect the residents to put up with that - but a park??

 

We can have different opinions, but to me a skybridge over a park is a relic of the Houston we're trying to get away from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sky bridge is surely to connect the parking garage (in the south block) to the units in the North Block.  This prevents residents from having to leave the relative security of the parking garage cross a "park" and re-enter the security of the other building.  It also reduces time spent in elevators or stairs and gives covered access in poor weather.  It's reasonable, you see it in other similar developments all over the city and something that many (if not all) residents living in the the other builing would want/requrie.  Think about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sky bridge is surely to connect the parking garage (in the south block) to the units in the North Block.  This prevents residents from having to leave the relative security of the parking garage cross a "park" and re-enter the security of the other building.  It also reduces time spent in elevators or stairs and gives covered access in poor weather.  It's reasonable, you see it in other similar developments all over the city and something that many (if not all) residents living in the the other builing would want/requrie.  Think about it. 

 

Thought about it. I realize it's status quo for Houston. Just doesn't make for good urbanism. Sky bridges and tunnels are detrimental to pedestrian life. Sky bridges are worse, because they add a mild stigma to whatever is underneath them. In a very subtle way, it robs the park of its sense of place.

 

It's not too much to walk another flight of stairs down and brave the weather for 50 feet. You could even put a covered walkway at ground level. If walking on the ground is a security concern, then we have not embraced the urban, walkable-city mentality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they don't put the sky walk then they're going to put a covered walkway. I think the sky walk is nicer. It's an amenity. If I lived there I would appreciate going from my car to the apartment with groceries without getting wet in the rain. These people will be driving anyway, so it's not taking away from any pedestrian experience. When these residents go without a car they won't be using the sky walk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that skyways and tunnels tend to detract from street traffic, I don't think this particular example is a problem.

 

This is *specifically* for people who live in the north building to park their cars and then walk in a protected corridor to their apartment, exactly the same as people in the south building would do. This *only* applies to trips made by car. People in the north building will still likely walk to the bars, clubs, restaurants, stadiums etc that are/ will be within easy walking distance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought about it. I realize it's status quo for Houston. Just doesn't make for good urbanism. Sky bridges and tunnels are detrimental to pedestrian life. Sky bridges are worse, because they add a mild stigma to whatever is underneath them. In a very subtle way, it robs the park of its sense of place.

 

It's not too much to walk another flight of stairs down and brave the weather for 50 feet. You could even put a covered walkway at ground level. If walking on the ground is a security concern, then we have not embraced the urban, walkable-city mentality.

Part of good urbanism is to protect people from the elements (ex. the Rice Hotel sidewalk overhang on Texas). How is providing shade robbing the park of a sense of place? Shade is a good thing! How about the fact taht this provides another perspective of the park that was only available to folks with apartments facing the park; now everyone who lives there has this view. Also it's a waste of energy to have wheelchair bound residents take the elevator down and then back up again, ADA compliance is a huge factor in determining egress and I'm sure if people wanted to go down the stairs and walk across at ground level that option will be available to them as well in addition. Imagine how people will be able to get out of the bldg in the case of a major fire, more options is always better than fewer options.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of good urbanism is to protect people from the elements (ex. the Rice Hotel sidewalk overhang on Texas). How is providing shade robbing the park of a sense of place? Shade is a good thing! How about the fact taht this provides another perspective of the park that was only available to folks with apartments facing the park; now everyone who lives there has this view. Also it's a waste of energy to have wheelchair bound residents take the elevator down and then back up again, ADA compliance is a huge factor in determining egress and I'm sure if people wanted to go down the stairs and walk across at ground level that option will be available to them as well in addition. Imagine how people will be able to get out of the bldg in the case of a major fire, more options is always better than fewer options.

 

So you're saying that having a skybridge over a park gives it a sense of place because the skybridge provides shade? Is that tongue-in-cheek?

 

As far as providing another perspective of the park to residents who don't have park views, why don't they just go down into the park???

 

Sorry, but quality parks with a sense of place don't have skybridges over them. The skybridge, no matter how benign and pragmatic its intent, always gives off a sense of "we're above/better than the park." It casts a pall on the atmosphere below. 

 

To the arguments of, "Well, they're just going to/from their cars anyway," no one is ever just going to/from their cars. They may think they are, but everything in the built environment enforces a certain habit of thinking, a certain sense of what's immediate and what's separated. The person who has to walk through the park to get to their car is more likely to come back and hang out in the park later when they don't have to be somewhere. The park becomes part of their environment, not relegated below it. Anything you walk through twice a day becomes connected to you. They might have a chance encounter with a neighbor who's sitting in the park. They might notice the plants. The bridge enforces an isolated, sterile, get-out/get-back-in mentality.

 

I realize it sounds like I'm making a mountain out of a molehill, but the molehills add up. Skybridges here and there, like the one in the apartments on the other side of the soccer stadium, quickly start sucking the pedestrian feel out of the neighborhood. If you want a quality urban environment, everyone must be forced to occupy and share the same plane - the plane given by the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not really sure we can call this a "Park".  It really is just more a passage way...anyway.  I rather like the renderings.  I am grateful that it doesn't use all the suburban style ques that many, many of the other Apartment blocks are using.  I think it'll look great with Dynamo Stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just not sure I'm convinced that this skyway is meaningfully different from the interior hallways in either building. Now, if multiple developments started to connect to each other be skyway? Then i'd be complaining.


I am not really sure we can call this a "Park".  It really is just more a passage way...anyway.  I rather like the renderings.  I am grateful that it doesn't use all the suburban style ques that many, many of the other Apartment blocks are using.  I think it'll look great with Dynamo Stadium.

 

Just to be super obnoxious:

 

Cues, not "ques"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...