IronTiger Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 39 minutes ago, Sunstar said: This is a very interesting article. The developer is claiming that the old facade was heavily compromised when they put up the current cladding 50 years ago, and there wouldn't be much left to restore. Then the Texas Historical Commission establishes a guideline that a building must be at least 50 years old to be considered historic, which I assume would help the developer apply for the redevelopment grant. I have an issue with taking the developers word for it, since not doing the full restoration and still getting the grant probably helps their business case quite a bit. Like I said, the "restoration" at the JW Marriott wasn't a "restoration", it was a re-creation. The original facade of that building was so messed up that they had to strip it down to the frame and rebuild it to a facade similar to the original. I suppose that the Marriott could've done a full restoration without just stripping everything and starting over, but it would've been uneconomically expensive. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 1 hour ago, Sunstar said: This is a very interesting article. The developer is claiming that the old facade was heavily compromised when they put up the current cladding 50 years ago, and there wouldn't be much left to restore. Then the Texas Historical Commission establishes a guideline that a building must be at least 50 years old to be considered historic, which I assume would help the developer apply for the redevelopment grant. I have an issue with taking the developers word for it, since not doing the full restoration and still getting the grant probably helps their business case quite a bit. I think the article states the developer went to the Texas Historical Commissikn and the State is the one who said that and recommended only restoring it to the 1966 look, not the other way around. so the blame goes to the state. I guess the developer doesn't want to do what the JW Marriot did. "Restoring" it like JW did is probably more expensive than pulling the new facade off and just touching up the original, even though the 1966 look is awful, even if it is a "period piece" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 I'd imagine the state recommended against doing what the JW Marriott did, which would almost certainly be cheaper than actually restoring the building to its original appearance. I actually don't think the 1966 skin is that bad, especially if they can brighten it up a bit. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunstar Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 (edited) There it is peeking out in the back right: http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/p15195coll2/item/186 Edited June 16, 2016 by Sunstar wrong side 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 31 minutes ago, Sunstar said: There it is peeking out in the back right: http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/p15195coll2/item/186 Thanks for sharing, but can you one from 1966 or newer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunstar Posted June 16, 2016 Share Posted June 16, 2016 5 minutes ago, lockmat said: Thanks for sharing, but can you one from 1966 or newer? Isn't that what's there now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted June 17, 2016 Share Posted June 17, 2016 5 hours ago, Sunstar said: Isn't that what's there now? If you look at the top, you can see the old structure. It's also for the year the photo was taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoustonIsHome Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 The more sq footage taken out from the commercial side and converted to hotel or residential, then the lower our vacancy rate for office space which gives us more chances for new commercial building. It's a win win. Preservationists get to keep our history and modernist get new shiny buildings. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 And we get more people downtown, even if its just visitors, which will help make it a real neighborhood and drive demand for retail. That's at least two more wins. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Urbannizer Posted June 24, 2016 Author Popular Post Share Posted June 24, 2016 21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Hard to tell if it's just the rendering that makes it look better or what, but it looks pretty clean. The street presence seems to be improved quite a bit? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cspwal Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 It looks like there's no more wrought iron gates 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adr Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 I guess Venue and La Bouche are not long for this world. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollusk Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Getting some light under the awnings and having windows with activity behind them adjacent to the sidewalk works wonders. I was looking at it earlier today and noticed that the white marble looks to be in pretty rough shape. With any amount of luck fixing that won't take as long as it took to reskin the Chron. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbannizer Posted September 21, 2016 Author Share Posted September 21, 2016 http://archpaper.com/2016/09/houston-architectural-preservation-hotels/ The developers claimed to be surprised that the Texas Historical Commission recommended not to go back to the 1914 and 1916 originals, but rather to rehabilitate the 1966 curtain wall. The logic for this decision was twofold: First, the slipcover is fifty years old, a critical threshold for historic consideration, and second, the building’s original facade was so damaged during Slater’s remodeling that the missing ornament would have to be almost entirely reconstructed. According to the developer, this will be the first time that such a slipcover has been intentionally preserved in Texas. This approach has raised the ire of no less an authority than architectural historian Stephen Fox who complained that the Texas Historical Commission was using “twisted logic to preserve a mediocre exterior.” 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Did they copy and paste from previous articles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted September 22, 2016 Share Posted September 22, 2016 I can see both sides of the argument for using the bland 1960s facade or not. As with 806 Main the original facade is probably in very bad shape. So what would be interesting would be to remove some sections of the current facade to show the original. Make it look like strips of the new facade have been peeled off, like peeling the top layer of wallpaper. It would make an interesting effect. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted September 22, 2016 Share Posted September 22, 2016 4 hours ago, Subdude said: I can see both sides of the argument for using the bland 1960s facade or not. As with 806 Main the original facade is probably in very bad shape. So what would be interesting would be to remove some sections of the current facade to show the original. Make it look like strips of the new facade have been peeled off, like peeling the top layer of wallpaper. It would make an interesting effect. This is a very clever idea. I've seen this done with other older buildings and it can be a very interesting look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H-Town Man Posted September 26, 2016 Share Posted September 26, 2016 It is a somewhat handsome building. And I have no faith in today's average developer to do a good job replacing historic ornament (stars, anyone?). I like the idea of removing some of it just for curiosity's sake, but then you compromise an overall handsome composition, as seen in Urb's pic. It is hard for a tacked-on skin to look legitimate; this one actually pulls it off. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 The bottom floor has curtains in the Windows? Are those new? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rechlin Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Yes, I first noticed the curtains earlier this week. May be unrelated to the development, though, as I'm sure they'll gut the place before beginning work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 5 hours ago, rechlin said: Yes, I first noticed the curtains earlier this week. May be unrelated to the development, though, as I'm sure they'll gut the place before beginning work. You're right, they didnt look related to construction. They look really old and thin, too. Really odd because of the kind they are and the timing. Strange, but probably irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rechlin Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 Actually I took a peek in there on Friday night and it looked like a fully-built-out bar, complete with liquor bottles and everything. I tried to take a picture but it just didn't turn out. Last year a TABC license application sign was up there but I assumed that never panned out, so this is all very strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbannizer Posted November 13, 2016 Author Share Posted November 13, 2016 A tenant was moving out as I passed by yesterday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbannizer Posted April 21, 2017 Author Share Posted April 21, 2017 Downtown TIRZ March meeting indicates construction has begun. http://www.downtowntirz.com/downtownhouston/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/03142017-Zone-Minutes-SIGNED.pdf 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UtterlyUrban Posted April 22, 2017 Share Posted April 22, 2017 (edited) Boy, I hope this comes to pass. Great location both for visitors to Houston (who want an "urban experience": dodging panhandlers, grifters, addicts, and the ( sadly) insane). Visitors who are normally sane may enjoy and unwind with the great nightlife on Main -- letting their brain cells submit to an over-infusion of ethanol. Generally this makes a memorable business trip for those from Stepfordville. They can go home, talk about the nice hotel, the walk to the bars, the hangover, and the grifters, panhandlers, addicts, and insane..... many from Stepfordville will be jealous and will want to come. Some may even book trips here to "keep up with the Jones." all good. Edited April 22, 2017 by UtterlyUrban 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbates2 Posted April 22, 2017 Share Posted April 22, 2017 I saw plywood up in front of the entrance the other day. I was thinking that it looked like construction had started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rechlin Posted April 23, 2017 Share Posted April 23, 2017 The plywood was because people kept throwing (and breaking) glass liquor bottles into the gated entryway, and this stops that. The sign for the "VENUE" that used to be there has been painted over, too. So hopefully this means things have started! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate99 Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 Yeah, the boarded up portion wasn't really used once that bar was out of business, but it does show that someone cares about the place now. The upper floors look emptier than usual, I think. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbannizer Posted July 31, 2017 Author Share Posted July 31, 2017 Seeking landmark designation http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Commissions/docs_pdfs/hahc/reports_ACTION_2017/JulyAction/B1_LM_Houston_Bar_Center_ACTION.pdf 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.