New Skyscapers In Houston

[Guest Plastic]

Houston's skylines have remained much the same since 1986. That's year we got our last highrise skyscraper. It was the Texaco Heritage Building. It' s the tall but stout highrise at the front of downtown. It has a jagged top and an Aztec Temple ontop. It was the building with the giant projection screen on it during Jean-Michael Jarre's Rendevous Houston concert.

As you move from downtown the only other real highrise we've got is William's/Transco Tower.

[ecal_in_Taipei]

As far as "true" sky-scrapers, I wouldn't expect to see one until around 2025. Thats my guess.

You should also define "true" skyscraper. Do you mean 800+ feet? 1000+feet?

[scarface]

Houston's skylines have remained much the same since 1986. That's year we got our last highrise skyscraper. It was the Texaco Heritage Building. It' s the tall but stout highrise at the front of downtown. It has a jagged top and an Aztec Temple ontop. It was the building with the giant projection screen on it during Jean-Michael Jarre's Rendevous Houston concert.

As you move from downtown the only other real highrise we've got is William's/Transco Tower.

Actually, that's not true, the Wedge International building was built in 1993. The Reliant Energy Plaza is also fairly high which was completed in 2003

[SamHouston]

Also, what about the new Enron building (also known as 1500 Louisiana) in 2002 by Cesar Pelli? It's also very distinctive (for many reasons) and sits on the same side of town as Heritage.

[Dominax]

I know what he means this guy is willing to know

as when they are planning to add more high rises or when the next taller skyscraper will be planned in this city that reaches over 1500 feet.

Many people has lots of to ask but they morely give the same answers

of seeing more in 2025.

But most cities have skylines that look the same since the 70's and 60's and have not changed a bit and not had any plans on building or adding skyscrapers to their town.

As today its not easy to come up with plans and ideas and approving having newwer and taller structures beiing built. Buildings being proposed today as you would see in our world are twice more expensive to have to construct in our cities as moving along coming up to have our cities look more upgrade as the years go by. As there are more things to look after and pay more on what u have and whats goes on than coming up with new skyscrapers.

[Guest Plastic]

It would be cool to see s supertall skyscraper here. One's like The Twin Towers,Sears Tower,Tapei 101, or The Petronas Towers.

[MadMax]

is it economically viable? what's the real estate market like downtown? isn't there already a surplus of office space with the exodus of Enron?

[hokieone]

The market is soft as is. Also, I think to see new tower growth, you have to have one company that is growing/ booming and decides they need a new home. In Philly, they are getting new towers because Comcast decided they needed a massive new complex. While we have a ton of businesses, I don't know if any are exactly to the point where they feel they need to either combine into one massive building downtown or are booming. Although Enron's boom was manufactured, that is how that building got done, because they were allegedly "booming"

[supkof]

How many stories is the tallest building in Houston?

[Gary]

How many stories is the tallest building in Houston?

75 stories.

I also don't get the statement that none of our "skylines" have changed. Since I've lived here (about 7 years now), the Uptown skyline has changed alot with all of the new residential towers. Also the Med Center is constantly changing.

[sevfiv]

jp morgan chase - 75...right?

1,002 feet

[Dominax]

jp morgan chase - 75...right?

1,002 feet

Yeah! it could of still been tallest today of the south

only if they did actually build up to the 80th floor :closedeyes:

it could of reached over 1,102 feet.........

[Montrose1100]

Yeah! it could of still been tallest today of the south

only if they did actually build up to the 80th floor :closedeyes:

it could of reached over 1,102 feet.........

Please don't believe that rumor, its been delt with before

[PureAuteur]

There are some more skyscrapers in Houston besides downtown and Transco Tower.

Greenway area has a few, and there are a few others in the Uptown Galleria district.

I think Westchase and I-10 west have a few too. I'm not sure if the Technip building is considered

a high rise.

As for my guess when Houston builds more downtown skyscrapers, probably not until Houston

finds another economic base besides energy/oil. The foundation that Houston was built on does

not really support Houston's growth anymore. Our downtown is the product of Houston's success

in the oil industry. In order for the city to get more skyscrapers, it needs to be thriving with

business and commerce in the core of the city, and there would need to be a re-migration of

people into the center, rather than outward. It's too bad all the productive forces at work are

building cheap sprawl (strip centers, gas stations, cookie-cutter subdivisions) rather than

quality architecture which will have design merit, lasting appeal, local cultural significance,

and eventually historic significance.

[marc]

There are some more skyscrapers in Houston besides downtown and Transco Tower.

Greenway area has a few, and there are a few others in the Uptown Galleria district.

I think Westchase and I-10 west have a few too. I'm not sure if the Technip building is considered

a high rise.

As for my guess when Houston builds more downtown skyscrapers, probably not until Houston

finds another economic base besides energy/oil. The foundation that Houston was built on does

not really support Houston's growth anymore. Our downtown is the product of Houston's success

in the oil industry. In order for the city to get more skyscrapers, it needs to be thriving with

business and commerce in the core of the city, and there would need to be a re-migration of

people into the center, rather than outward. It's too bad all the productive forces at work are

building cheap sprawl (strip centers, gas stations, cookie-cutter subdivisions) rather than

quality architecture which will have design merit, lasting appeal, local cultural significance,

and eventually historic significance.

I agree.

I would guess the next significant high rise will be residential/hotel in nature.

If mid-town (Med. Center) continues to boom, i foresee a possible 30/40 residential tower there...perhaps something by Caltrava.

m.

[SamHouston]

I would guess the next significant high rise will be residential/hotel in nature.

If mid-town (Med. Center) continues to boom, i foresee a possible 30/40 residential tower there...perhaps something by Caltrava.

From a post in the Museum District forum

Chronicle article

[Dominax]

Here my creation photo of future Houston in November 3, 2062

Dallas in November 8, 2063

[TxDave]

Skyscrapers are much harder to get off the ground these days than they were 25 years ago - although it still can be done as Houston has proven in the past 8 years.

My question is: is it better to wait to fill up downtown with super tall towers, or better to focus on filling in the gaps with mid-rise buildings?

I think I would rather see downtown filled in with a contiguous flow of low-to-mid rise buildings than 1 or 2 more isolated towers.

The towers do make the skyline look nice (although it already does), but I think filling in all of the vacant lots and parking lots would make a much better downtown experience.

I guess my point is, we shouldn't worry about more super tall towers right now - we already have those. It would be nicer (and likely easier) to fill in the blanks.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

I would love to see more super tall buildings in downtown Houston as well as uptown. I fly in and out of IAH regularly and on appraoch looking towards the south, it appears that Houston actually has 2 distinct downtown areas as measured by the tall buildings. Looks very good for the city and also for the skyline

[banking214]

Skyscrapers are much harder to get off the ground these days than they were 25 years ago - although it still can be done as Houston has proven in the past 8 years.

My question is: is it better to wait to fill up downtown with super tall towers, or better to focus on filling in the gaps with mid-rise buildings?

I think I would rather see downtown filled in with a contiguous flow of low-to-mid rise buildings than 1 or 2 more isolated towers.

The towers do make the skyline look nice (although it already does), but I think filling in all of the vacant lots and parking lots would make a much better downtown experience.

I guess my point is, we shouldn't worry about more super tall towers right now - we already have those. It would be nicer (and likely easier) to fill in the blanks.

Wait until more space is needed. I rather see something taller, but occupancy rates are not so hot at the moment.

[Watch4Snakes]

I think the focus should be on "filling in the gaps." Smaller buildings/mid-rises that bring the residents to Downtown. Fill in all those parking lots! There is a good balance among the heights of the skyscrapers, as well. One large, tall building might throw off the distinctive classic look we have now.

Anyone remember the name of the 90+ story building that was planned for downtown before the oil/real estate bust?

[nmainguy]

I think the focus should be on "filling in the gaps." Smaller buildings/mid-rises that bring the residents to Downtown. Fill in all those parking lots! There is a good balance among the heights of the skyscrapers, as well. One large, tall building might throw off the distinctive classic look we have now.

Anyone remember the name of the 90+ story building that was planned for downtown before the oil/real estate bust?

Bank of the Southwest

Ultimatly built in a shorter version by Helmut Jhan in Philladelphia