Jump to content

Pearl Marketplace At Midtown: Multifamily At 3120 Smith St.


DrLan34

Recommended Posts

Midtown is less than a square mile. There's no way that plus Downtown gets a congressional district. Congressional districts for Texas are currently around 700,000 population, not the 20,000 or so that live in the middle of town

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if Downtown/Midtown did increase its population enough to warrant being its own congressional district, it would never happen.
This is Texas, where liberal enclaves are chopped into mincemeat, and congressional districts are shaped to include both Kerrville and Austin.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
On 5/11/2018 at 11:37 PM, bobruss said:

So this is coming in off the spur.  

Seeing that image offers a whole new perspective and scale  to  the thought of coming into downtown. Ten years ago, this  image  would've been closer to the Webster, or W. Gray intersection, and way before you encountered any thing like this. And this density starts back at Herman Park.

It's amazing how much massing has occurred in such a short time. Midtown has almost filled in.

It will be interesting to see how  density numbers have changed in Midtown over the last 15 years. I think at some point in the not distant future, the Downtown/Midtown's, density levels will necessitate, and expedite +, the creation of a new congressional district.  I've always maintained that our Midtown, would become a smaller version of Manhattan's.

I see some similarities in the way our Downtown, Midtown, Hermann park, and Texas Med Center are laid out, in comparison to that of Manhattan's. I realize there's no comparison in scale, size, or sheer numbers.  I haven't checked to see what the size and scale difference is, in sq. miles, and park acreage. Or from tip to tip. 

 

It appears that most of Midtown will be  in the 5-8 story range residential blocks, with some mid rises and a few high rises.

A Williams Tower, height building would be a skyline Game Changer!

Can you imagine the view from one of those extremely high overpasses out on the beltway coming into 59, that allows you to see all three skylines in one sweeping panorama.

It's best to be a passenger, so you can take it all in, and not end up doing a high dive off the barrier.

Now picture that 65 story building smack dab in the middle of Midtown. It would become that central piece that would be like a beacon connecting Downtown to the Med Center. That skyline shot would be pretty spectacular, and rival just about any.

Speaking of our med center. It's turned into quite a  jewel box full of wonderful gems.

If you haven't driven up Bertner from O.S.T., all the way to Baylor you'll be in for a treat.

At OST,  just before turning onto Bertner your view of the southern end of the med center gives you a great spot to see how TMC3, will fit into the grid. Once  TMC3, is built TMC, will be solid to OST, with several U.T. and M.D. Anderson, buildings south. 

The first thing you'll notice is how expansive it's become, and  how modern and new everything is. Except for the imposing fortress like garage at Holcombe, which is probably the most stifling edifice in TMC, everything else is fresh and reflective. The landscaping, lighting, and water features provide a cohesive, public realm with nice sidewalks and abundant shade trees. 

A walk through the area is calming and recuperative. Flowers are abundant

The new Methodist is pretty much finished and it has some beautiful lines.

The architects did an excellent job of transitioning into the new Methodist, with the continuation of the dark glazing and undulating walls. The new Methodist has a very Modern look and I like the top. Something about the top of the building reminds me of the old Prudential building. Sure miss it and the Shamrock.  

 

+  Brooklyn 173

I read in some article that TMC is bigger than downtown Dallas in square miles.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Nice pics BeerNut. That last one makes me wish they'd keep all of that color. Now that would be such a great fun combination of colors It's a little reminiscent of a Mondrian. Although I like the skin and textures a lot, that red yellow and green would make it pop.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bobruss said:

Nice pics BeerNut. That last one makes me wish they'd keep all of that color. Now that would be such a great fun combination of colors It's a little reminiscent of a Mondrian. Although I like the skin and textures a lot, that red yellow and green would make it pop.

Thanks.  I totally agree on the color thing, I wonder which future Houston developer will be take a chance and expand their palate.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
7 minutes ago, urbanize713 said:

Love the development, hate that the power lines were not buried. If the City wont do it why don't they ask the developer to do it as an improvement on these new builds? Anyone have any insight? 

 

Many developers do bury them.  I'm surprised this one did not.   (Sometimes, I think it seems to be done in the later stages of development/construction, but I think it would have been done by this point...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, urbanize713 said:

Love the development, hate that the power lines were not buried. If the City wont do it, why don't they ask the developer to do it as an improvement on these new builds? Anyone have any insight? 

Underground is expensive 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
On 3/8/2019 at 4:24 PM, LBC2HTX said:

Underground is expensive 

True, and it can come with its own problems (especially in flood-prone areas).
Still, the rebuilding of Elgin St from Main St to Brazos St was a window of opportunity that is now closed. Now that that seemingly endless project has been completed, it's unlikely that anyone will propose digging it up to add underground utilities in the foreseeable future. 
Imagine downtown Houston with above ground utilities; the very idea is absurd. Given that Midtown is experiencing a rapid transformation into a densely developed area, it seems likely that someday utilities will be buried. IMO, it would have made sense to take the plunge while the street was being completely rebuilt. 
Could-a, should-a, would-a....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Water getting into the conduits...

 

 

Has that proven to be a large problem here in areas where lines are buried?

 

On balance (taking out the cost part of the equation, which is clear), when installed correctly to , over their life-cycle, are underground lines preferable to above-ground in terms of service availability?

 

https://www.tdworld.com/intelligent-undergrounding/flooding-and-underground-cables-myth-or-reality

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mattyt36 said:

 

Such as . . . ?

With above ground utility lines, often the source of a problem is clearly identifiable (i.e., a limb across a power line).  A short or break in an underground line can be difficult to pinpoint, and may require extensive digging to track down the problem. Obviously, repairs would be further complicated if the problem is in a flooded area.
Full disclosure: my experience with underground service is limited to residential areas and occurred several years ago. That being said, there were problems caused by Houston's gumbo soil, including degrading of the insulation covering the wires, and stress caused by the expansion and contraction of the soil.
edit: Didn't see your second post before making my reply. The shortcomings I described above can largely be eliminated if sufficient precautions are taken. 
We agree that these measures don't come cheap.

Edited by dbigtex56
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, mattyt36 said:

 

Has that proven to be a large problem here in areas where lines are buried?

 

On balance (taking out the cost part of the equation, which is clear), when installed correctly to , over their life-cycle, are underground lines preferable to above-ground in terms of service availability?

 

https://www.tdworld.com/intelligent-undergrounding/flooding-and-underground-cables-myth-or-reality

 

My uncle is an electrician and says it's not a matter of if, but when water will enter the conduit. This has more to do with the high water table and large amounts of rainfall than flooding.

 

I would take the link with a grain of salt; industry publications tend to promote and be overly optimistic about technologies and services in the industry. This is because they live on advertising and the advertisers are selling the products/services they write articles about. The article reads like an advertisement and does not include any stats on the historical performance of buried lines, just a bunch of explanation of how well the lines are designed, therefore they could never take in water.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, H-Town Man said:

 

My uncle is an electrician and says it's not a matter of if, but when water will enter the conduit. This has more to do with the high water table and large amounts of rainfall than flooding.

 

I would take the link with a grain of salt; industry publications tend to promote and be overly optimistic about technologies and services in the industry. This is because they live on advertising and the advertisers are selling the products/services they write articles about. The article reads like an advertisement and does not include any stats on the historical performance of buried lines, just a bunch of explanation of how well the lines are designed, therefore they could never take in water.

 

 

First part of this I get and understand.

 

The second part sounds like something I would read from some postmodern literary crit class. Of course they are optimistic. They wouldn't write about it or promote it if they didn't think it would be profitable nor be a benefit for others as well (yeah man this process really sucks lets write an article about how terrible this process or product is!). Thats like if in the Post Oak thread where I'm talking about needing to bury trees below grade because its better for pedestrian infrastructure and the take away from that would be that I'm not really advocating for what would be a public good or sound design, but I'm a shill for Big Tree companies and Big Dirt companies. Come on man. Give people the benefit of the doubt. The first part was legit info and the second was just speculative bs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Luminare said:

 

First part of this I get and understand.

 

The second part sounds like something I would read from some postmodern literary crit class. Of course they are optimistic. They wouldn't write about it or promote it if they didn't think it would be profitable nor be a benefit for others as well (yeah man this process really sucks lets write an article about how terrible this process or product is!). Thats like if in the Post Oak thread where I'm talking about needing to bury trees below grade because its better for pedestrian infrastructure and the take away from that would be that I'm not really advocating for what would be a public good or sound design, but I'm a shill for Big Tree companies and Big Dirt companies. Come on man. Give people the benefit of the doubt. The first part was legit info and the second was just speculative bs.

 

There should be nothing controversial about skepticism of articles in trade publications. I'm not saying they can't write the article and promote the technology, I'm saying that such an article shouldn't automatically override conventional wisdom on potential problems with burying electrical lines in soggy areas.

 

My sentence "I would take the link with a grain of salt" was pretty modest, nothing like how you're caricaturing me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The title was changed to Pearl Marketplace At Midtown: Multifamily At 3120 Smith St.

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...