Jump to content
Urbannizer

Museo Plaza: Mixed-Use for the Museum District, 58-Story High-Rise

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Texasota said:

I also think that the argument for abandoning a street that dead ends into a major street really only makes sense in the context of cars and buses. If you're on a bike or walking, having a cut-through to a major street like Main can be really valuable.

 

But can't a bike or a walker use the private street?  (For that matter, so can a car.)  Based on the renderings, this isn't going to be gated street.  The developer just wants a grander driveway for the circle drive.  

 

What is the neighborhood's objection to closing the street, other than they just don't want this built?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the site plan we've seen looks fine, but it's an old site plan and could very easily change.

 

And that's the thing. The moment it becomes private, the developer can do whatever they want with it. They can gate it. They can fill it in. They can covert it into a pit full of spikes. Making it private makes anything possible. 

Share this post


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

I agree that the site plan we've seen looks fine, but it's an old site plan and could very easily change.

 

And that's the thing. The moment it becomes private, the developer can do whatever they want with it. They can gate it. They can fill it in. They can covert it into a pit full of spikes. Making it private makes anything possible. 

 

I like this project, but your point regarding abandonment is well taken.  I favor to abandoning the right of way to the extent it makes something close to what we have seen in the renderings happen.  However, I think it's perfectly reasonable and indeed advisable for the city to demand concessions for the abandonment as you suggested.  I have not looked into the ordinances and procedures for abandonment, but, the city might demand the project not significantly depart with what has been proposed through an agreement with the developer.  The city might also require the developer contribute to the continued addition of bikeshares and improvement of green space for the public.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-- I believe in almost all cases of street abandonments requested by developers, the developer has to pay the city for the abandoned right of way.  The documents in this case refer to an "abandonment and sale", so I presume the developer is paying in this case as well.

 

-- This abandonment was initially denied because Traffic said the street was needed for area circulation.  There is a later email that says Traffic later withdrew their objection after learning the ROW will be open to the public for pedestrian traffic.

Edited by Houston19514
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Discography 114 said:

Forgive my ignorance. Does filing a plat (whatever that is) mean that it is likely to be built? If anyone feels like taking a guess, about what percentage of buildings get built after a plat has been filed. Oh, and one more important question: what is a plat?

Thank you.

 

I'd love for fellow HAIFers to chime in on this, but I think when they file it's a very good chance it gets built. I would say at least 75%? And a plat is just a defined piece of land. Maybe lot and plat may be synonyms? At least you could probably think of it in that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Game changer!

 

Holy hell, I love this project. Its also going in my favorite part of town (Museum District/Montrose/Third Ward/Midtown/Alameda Corridor).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Filing a plat is one of the very first stages of a project; it usually means the surveying portion is complete, and all Civil-related documents require a filed/recorded plat on the construction documents.

 

It DOES NOT mean a project is 100% moving-forward. It's still very early in the design phase, however; surveying a design happen at the same so there's a better chance that a project does move forward. 

 

Plenty of plats have been filed and not made it to construction, and seeing as this particular plat has no signatures (City, County, Owner, Engineer, Surveyor, County Commissioner, etc) it's still going through design, and thus, is not close (though not very far) from the construction phase. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tres-chic-2.png

tres-chic-clipart-006.png

^^^ this is what this area shall become once MUSEO PLAZA is completed... MAGNIFIQUE!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Houston? said:

Please tell me that this is going to get built.

This is going to get built.

also your but doesn't look big in those jeans.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be Johnny Raincloud here, but I have to wait to see an announcement on construction and some shovels in the ground (or at least, some wrecking crews) before I can get too excited.  A replat is a very good sign, to be sure, as it indicates the project is still moving forward.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2016 at 8:17 AM, HOUCAJUN said:

Visitors are really going to be confused as to where downtown is. I'm loving this building!

 

I have a friend from Austin who once said, "Houston cant seem to decide where it's downtown is, y'all have skyscrapers everywhere." 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jmitch94 said:

 

I have a friend from Austin who once said, "Houston cant seem to decide where it's downtown is, y'all have skyscrapers everywhere." 


At least this one is right on the straight line of Main street. In fact, I think it would give the whole downtown-medical district a sort of centripetal cohesion, pulling towards the roundabout.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike Austin, we are a big metropolitan city. NY, LA, Chicago, Miami, Atlanta, DFW, Seattle, etc... all have multiple skyline districts. 

 

Portland, Louisville, Austin, Sacramento, etc... do not.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, KinkaidAlum said:

Unlike Austin, we are a big metropolitan city. NY, LA, Chicago, Miami, Atlanta, DFW, Seattle, etc... all have multiple skyline districts. 

 

Portland, Louisville, Austin, Sacramento, etc... do not.

kink, I do not approve of this skyscraper city-like post.

 

Austin kind of does... UT & Downtown. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't meant to be a slam. Portland and Austin are two of my favorite cities but they are much smaller, less cosmopolitan, and don't have multiple skylines. That's simply a fact and not a matter of opinion.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Where is this development relative to Hines Southmore?

 

Across the street to the north (I think "catty corner" is the term). The main tower is an additional block east and north.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, KinkaidAlum said:

It wasn't meant to be a slam. Portland and Austin are two of my favorite cities but they are much smaller, less cosmopolitan, and don't have multiple skylines. That's simply a fact and not a matter of opinion.

 

Oh I don't care if you were slamming them, just poking fun at you for listing cities like Pitbull does on every song.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Aprils meeting, Trammell Crow is the developer. Also, the approval to abandon Palm St. for a pedestrian plaza/green space has been revoked by the COH due to neighborhood concerns.

 

 More here: http://www.museumparkna.org/resources/ Documents/MPNA.MPSN%20Meeting%204.27.16.pdf

 

 

Quote

The project is presented as a unique, one-of-a-kind mixed use neighborhood development on three city blocks bounded by Main St., Fannin, Southmore and Wichita. The project will include a hotel at the current site of Mann Eye clinic with 150-180 keys, a residential tower with 300 units north of the hotel, and a medical office building east of the hotel. All will be linked by a pedestrian plaza/”green space” replacing Palm Street. A restaurant is planned on Palm St. along with a Performance Pavilion on Palm St. facing Main. Green space is considered the primary driver for success because a successful green space gives more opportunity for restaurants and retail to succeed. Parking will be above ground and Southmore will be required to be widened by the developer for the length of the project. Private ownership should deter the transient population.

 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really don't understand the motive behind opposing the abandonment of Palm Street; it ends at Main Street so it's not like they're asking to abandon a thoroughfare

Share this post


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

 

I'm glad this is a legit project moving in the right direction. I also agree with the neighborhood concerns 100%. I see no reason they can't make a great project without closing off a street. Houston needs MORE connectivity, not less.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intriguing.  The point regarding proceeds for the land from the abandonment is well taken.  We have some dismal sidewalks here that could use upgrades, along with improved drainage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The chevron station to the north of the Mann Eye Institute has become a homeless hangout at all hours of the day (can't imagine why the station allows this, but they do).  Good call by the "neighbors" protesting this new development.  Perhaps instead, the greyhound station will relocate to this property.  Would serve the "neighbors" right.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BigFootsSocks said:

Really don't understand the motive behind opposing the abandonment of Palm Street; it ends at Main Street so it's not like they're asking to abandon a thoroughfare

I completely agree.  Palm ends at Main  and it is blocked off from through traffic one block east, at Fannin, because of the light rail.  It's essentially a one-block-long dead street that wouldn't be missed if it were gone.  Boneheaded move on the part of the neighborhood and city.  I hope this doesn't jeopardize the project. That would be a big loss to that area, which would see a huge improvement if this development is realized.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BigFootsSocks said:

Really don't understand the motive behind opposing the abandonment of Palm Street; it ends at Main Street so it's not like they're asking to abandon a thoroughfare

An argument can be made that abandoning streets is at the expense of creating a less automotive, more pedestrian and bicycle friendly city.
This is evident in Midtown, where 'superblocks' of apartments have intruded on the street grid, and force pedestrians to walk a considerably further distance.
I have no problem with closing Palm St. to automotive traffic, but we need to open up the city for pedestrians instead of creating barriers.
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the members of HAIF frothing at the mouth for this development. Not only does it have all of the bells and whistles of an exciting mixed use multi leveled residential / office / hotel, mix with Ground Floor retail and a nice green space. 

Not only that it looks really exciting design wise, and it also fills in a big gap between downtown and TMC almost fulfilling everyones dreams of a continuous skyline from I-10 on the North side down through the med center to 610 south. Add in a few midrises in midtown and the TMC3 and bingo its there.

It sounds like the neighborhood association has also been worked up into a frenzy by someone who took lessons from Afton Oaks during the Richmond Rail debate.

They also seem to have created a lot of fear and anger using Mr Trumps method of scaring people with not always the most accurate information. Hence the dumb questions.

Like the homeless argument, the green space privacy, the loss of a major thoroughfare, more rail lines. These are all manufactured arguments that would normally bring more questions as to the validity of this vote against the development. It would be interesting to see who the main players on the against side are an find out their true motivation.

This isn't in the most heavily trafficked areas of the museum district and I don't find their argument standing up, although they did get the city to say no for the moment. 

Hopefully things will change. This isn't Trammel Crows first rodeo. I for one hope it eventually gets final approval. Besides the rail will never create development!

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least there is a plan to develop even if the street isn't abandoned. Or that's how it seems. Just leave Palm St, keep the neighbors satisfied with their win and build the thing.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even with road cutting though it, there is still some green space and this development remains flawless. I'm salivating for this development either way. If having that tiny narrow street to nowhere keeps the neighbors happy and shuts them up so the project can move forward, I'm all for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will still be happy if the development goes through without the abandonment of Palm. But... to me, it's more sensible/usable if the street is closed to automobiles and bikes because it would be safer for customers, pedestrians and especially for families with young kids.

 

I do strongly support bike lanes but wouldn't want a bike lane where Palm would be abandoned. The distance between Wichita and Southmore is 0.1 mile, seem inconsequential especially on bike.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wxman said:

Is the highrise portion of this development still in the mid 50s-story range?

 

They don't know yet but they are planning for a high-rise.

Share this post


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...