Mixed-Use Parking Garage At 820 Main St.

[GovernorAggie]

Actually, I'm quite please with the garage built for the new Camden City Center (name may be butchered). I really blends in with the development.

CSOM, though it's not local, the first several levels of John Hancock in Chicago is also parking garage. Then there's Phoenix Tower in Greenway and I'm sure several others.

[Subdude]

Look on the first page of this topic for some better looking parking garages. The mere fact that people are questioning if this thing is even finished indicates how poorly it is exectuted. I'm afraid I must stick with "rubbish." We should be able to do better.

[Jax]

Are you saying you know for a fact that it is finished?

[dbigtex56]

nothing out of the ordinary to me. particularly when describing a parking garage. i don't think i've ever heard anyone say "wow, that is a GREAT parking garage"

There's a parking garage in Rochester, NY which draws comparisons to Frank Lloyd Wright's Guggenheim museum.

(rather, it did draw comparisons, until its signature ramp abruptly collapsed. )

[sevfiv]

i hope it isn't finished - up close it looks rough.

i can't really see how this one can be salvaged at this point, though

[KinkaidAlum]

Wow.

That is so FUGLY it might need this treatment

[Jeebus]

The lights don't look nearly as intrusive as made out to be. Perhaps an actual picture from a Commerce Tower resident, from their window - so that we can truly feel their pain?

[sevfiv]

yeah - not sure about that, although the lighting was brighter than the picture shows - this was taken about 6:30 pm or so, and it was a bad glare in the sky

[Guest Marty]

I have been following this thread and thought it cant look that bad until i saw what it looks like. i am speechless......

[TheNiche]

i hope it isn't finished - up close it looks rough.

i can't really see how this one can be salvaged at this point, though

I drove within eyeshot of it late last night. It was all lit up and the lighting was indeed very distracting. The design isn't at all sensitive to its surroundings.

The person that was in the car with me is certainly no architectural afficianado, but she commented how nice it looks being so well lit, contrasting against the darkness of the other buildings. And from a distance at night, with the parking garage as a focus, it does kind of have a cool skeletal look. She wanted to see more parking garages built this way. I had to explain about the lighting being a problem for the Commerce Towers residents for the issue to sink in for her. We also weren't close enough to make out how rough the concrete treatment was.

[Guest Marty]

Quik, post a pic of the girl you was with my eyes are burning.

[Jax]

What's up with the little holes in the concrete on the side of that monstrosity? It sure doesn't look finished to me.

[ricco67]

Wouldn't the garage have a limited lifespan if property values increase, anyway?

While this wouldn't immediately solve the problems of the commerce towers, but wouldn't the land/taxes on that site eventually cost more than the revenue taken in which would make it financially viable to sell the bloody thing?

Yeah? No? maybe? When?

[TheNiche]

Wouldn't the garage have a limited lifespan if property values increase, anyway?

While this wouldn't immediately solve the problems of the commerce towers, but wouldn't the land/taxes on that site eventually cost more than the revenue taken in which would make it financially viable to sell the bloody thing?

Yeah? No? maybe? When?

Not a chance. At least not for a long, long time. Parking in downtown is tight enough as it is and has been a limiting factor for filling up existing office buildings. This one garage will not end all the parking problems, much less accomodate all the new demand for parking that will surely be created over the course of its functional life. More likely, you'll see more parking garages built to accomodate the growth.

[fernz]

I don't mean any offense to anyone here, but I am amazed how little architectural knowledge there is among the members of this forum, especially for a forum about architecture.

Anyone who has seen this building or pictures of it and still thinks that they might add a skin to it has no understanding of the significance of what is called exposed concrete, or even better, architectural concrete.

Even though they did a terrible job with this building, the concrete on the facade, with the little holes and the defined reveals and pattern, is considered a premium finish. Yes, Hines paid a premium for this concrete. It is not raw or unfinished as suggested by some. It is a premium, architectural grade concrete wall. It will not be covered up by any skin (unless Hines holds the contractor responsible for doing such a bad job on the concrete finish and makes them cover it up)

And yes it is plain concrete, it could be much better, but is not half as bad as described previously. I for one think it is much better than that fake stone looking parking garage attached to the Commerce Towers, and better than many parking garages in the city. It is clean, modern, honest and makes no apologies. It is a parking garage than is not disguised as something else, and it reflects the true identity of the city, one that is 100% car centric.

[sevfiv]

some would argue there is a big difference between "architectural knowledge" and the subjectivity of what one thinks is aesthetically pleasing. just because it is a "premium finish" doesn't mean that it doesn't still look raw, or that this attribute is just plain ugly to some.

there is also the issue of the hype associated with this garage pre-construction

and the demolition of the bender/san jacinto hotel that made this parking garage a reality :closedeyes:

to me, it is plain and boring. i would expect nothing less from a parking garage. it is just sad to know what was there before, and to also have the hope that the garage might be different in some way

Edited July 16, 2007 by sevfiv

[GovernorAggie]

I don't mean any offense to anyone here, but I am amazed how little architectural knowledge there is among the members of this forum, especially for a forum about architecture.

Anyone who has seen this building or pictures of it and still thinks that they might add a skin to it has no understanding of the significance of what is called exposed concrete, or even better, architectural concrete.

Even though they did a terrible job with this building, the concrete on the facade, with the little holes and the defined reveals and pattern, is considered a premium finish. Yes, Hines paid a premium for this concrete. It is not raw or unfinished as suggested by some. It is a premium, architectural grade concrete wall. It will not be covered up by any skin (unless Hines holds the contractor responsible for doing such a bad job on the concrete finish and makes them cover it up)

And yes it is plain concrete, it could be much better, but is not half as bad as described previously. I for one think it is much better than that fake stone looking parking garage attached to the Commerce Towers, and better than many parking garages in the city. It is clean, modern, honest and makes no apologies. It is a parking garage than is not disguised as something else, and it reflects the true identity of the city, one that is 100% car centric.

I don't care what it's "supposed" to be, the thing is absolutely terrible. No way around it. I've seen textured concrete and this ain-t it. Architectural concrete would be, imo, more akin to TxDOT's freeway treatments with different design elements (which by the way has a true identity of being 100% car-centric). I hope you're right and it's the contractor that fumbled the ball on this one, because it's just bad. There are areas on the thing that look like smudges or grease spots on paper. They can easily fix this by painting it and adding screens to the open areas with different designs. After all, they blocked in the area under the lowest ramp with cinderblock and painted it white. Why can't they block in the rest?

[Jeebus]

Can anyone post a picture of what was there before?

[Jax]

I don't mean any offense to anyone here, but I am amazed how little architectural knowledge there is among the members of this forum, especially for a forum about architecture.

Anyone who has seen this building or pictures of it and still thinks that they might add a skin to it has no understanding of the significance of what is called exposed concrete, or even better, architectural concrete.

I think he's talking about me...

I admit it, I'm not an architect, I'm a physicist. I admit that I have no understanding of the significance of what is called exposed concrete or architectural concrete. Sorry for having so little architectural knowledge, and sorry for participating in a forum which is not in my field. When I looked at the concrete with the little holes it looked unfinished. I was merely hoping that somebody would explain to me whether the building was finished or not and what the purpose of those holes was and how likely it was that they might improve on this design. I didn't expect such a hostile reply.

Do people here in general have a problem with non-architects being a part of this forum? Or is it just this guy?

[Trae]

^^Check the first page.

The building is so ugly. They could at least paint it.

[musicman]

The building is so ugly. They could at least paint it.

paint would peel off and just look worse long term. enclosing parking garages also means active ventilation systems which then leads to noise complaints and saying it isn't "energy efficient"

Jax don't take anything personally here. People vent sometimes.

Edited July 16, 2007 by musicman

[sevfiv]

Can anyone post a picture of what was there before?

i'm sure i have something buried somewhere at home

there is a postcard earlier in this thread

there is a small image of the demolition on this page, but the building isn't from the fifties, just the remodel:

http://www.mindspring.com/~tbgray/writings.htm

and an article about the demolition (reg. required):

http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive....id=2003_3680866

It seemed at one point that Hines was considering using the building, but obviously that didn't happen:

It has been widely speculated that Hines will tear down the San Jacinto building and construct a parking garage, Cook said. But a spokeswoman for Hines said Wednesday the firm is considering several possibilities for the San Jacinto property, but no final decisions have been made.

http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive....id=1999_3169526

Edited July 16, 2007 by sevfiv

[TheNiche]

I don't mean any offense to anyone here, but I am amazed how little architectural knowledge there is among the members of this forum, especially for a forum about architecture.

Anyone who has seen this building or pictures of it and still thinks that they might add a skin to it has no understanding of the significance of what is called exposed concrete, or even better, architectural concrete.

Even though they did a terrible job with this building, the concrete on the facade, with the little holes and the defined reveals and pattern, is considered a premium finish. Yes, Hines paid a premium for this concrete. It is not raw or unfinished as suggested by some. It is a premium, architectural grade concrete wall. It will not be covered up by any skin (unless Hines holds the contractor responsible for doing such a bad job on the concrete finish and makes them cover it up)

And yes it is plain concrete, it could be much better, but is not half as bad as described previously. I for one think it is much better than that fake stone looking parking garage attached to the Commerce Towers, and better than many parking garages in the city. It is clean, modern, honest and makes no apologies. It is a parking garage than is not disguised as something else, and it reflects the true identity of the city, one that is 100% car centric.

I have to admit, I prefer the minimalist skeletal look of this one to the substantial look of the faux-brick garage serving Camden City Center that a couple of people have cited elsewhere in this forum as the right way to do parking garages, but I can also appreciate violet's issues with the light pollution and the matter about cars' headlights pointing directly into neighboring buildings. If only they'd mitigated those externalities, I'd be giving two thumbs up on this project.

[Trae]

paint would peel off and just look worse long term. enclosing parking garages also means active ventilation systems which then leads to noise complaints and saying it isn't "energy efficient"

Jax don't take anything personally here. People vent sometimes.

Don't they paint those freeways? They still look the same. That paint they are putting on 59 through Sugar Land and I-10 West should stay a long time.

[TheNiche]

Don't they paint those freeways? They still look the same. That paint they are putting on 59 through Sugar Land and I-10 West should stay a long time.

No, it'll peel or fade over time. It's inevitable.

Seems like some of the color treatments might be mixed into the concrete itself, though, and I'd imagine that with occaisional power washing, that might continue looking good for decades to come.

[musicman]

Don't they paint those freeways? They still look the same. That paint they are putting on 59 through Sugar Land and I-10 West should stay a long time.

drive down the gulf freeway...peeling paint galore. a stain would probably be best for concrete. i was on 59 north (cavalcade) this weekend and i couldn't believe how many rust spots were forming on the freeway walls (noticeable from the feeder intersection). Definitely ruins the more designer look.

[Highway6]

As far as the exposed concrete.. I agree with Fernz.. what you see is the intended result. I haven't seen it in person, but I actually like the posted picture of it....

I don't know who the architect is, but they obviously are Tadao Ando fans.

Some pics of Ando's signature concrete style.

The bottom picture is inside the Modern Art Museum of Ft.Worth.

Edited July 16, 2007 by Highway6

[Jax]

If it were clean looking it might work a bit better but that still doesn't explain the smudges all over it, particularly the lower part. That really adds to the unfinished look. By the way the 3rd photo didn't work.

So to the connoisseur of architectural concrete, it looks fine, but to the layman, I still think the building looks strange and unfinished.

The overall design doesn't bother me too much. It actually reminds me a bit of the El Paso building (if you squint and pretend there are windows).

It's just the "architectural concrete" with smudges look that bothers me as seen in the Highway's photo above.

Edited July 16, 2007 by Jax

[dbigtex56]

It's just the "architectural concrete" with smudges look that bothers me as seen in the Highway's photo above.

Ah, a little graffiti will fix that right up.

Any guesses as to how long before that happens?

[Trae]

drive down the gulf freeway...peeling paint galore. a stain would probably be best for concrete. i was on 59 north (cavalcade) this weekend and i couldn't believe how many rust spots were forming on the freeway walls (noticeable from the feeder intersection). Definitely ruins the more designer look.

Your right. I have seen I-45 going towards Galveston, and the paint is fading.