Jump to content

The Astoria Condos At 1405 Post Oak Boulevard


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 987
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So the biggest fast food chain also happens to produce a lot of items that end up as litter....shocked.   But why are we putting this on them? Once a person purchases their food its theirs a

McDonald’s has owned this land since 1988 it looks like. They sold a bit to RD so he can build The Titan, now Astoria.

http://houstoneb5.com/astoria/          

Posted Images

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

I'm sorry, but I don't understand all of the excitement about a project being developed by Randall Davis, who has proven over and over that he has no taste and will do whatever he can to make the Galleria area look bad.

He's already put up one very unattractive building on Post Oak that really detracts from the cluster of interfin buildings by Borlenghi.

His projects on West Gray and Shepherd at Dallas are disgusting. At least most of his projects have been relatively low rise buildings but now that he is starting to throw up these kitschy towers I say we revoke his developers license, and make him pay a fine for polluting our skyline.

Really, if any of you can defend his work I want to hear it, so I will know who not to consider a reliable source, and someone who has no aesthetic values.

I don't get excited by ugly infill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing bad about the cosmopolitan is the garage and other two you mentioned I actually like. Maybe I have horrible taste but I don't know why everyone hates on those so much.

This new project looks petty good and the Titan would have been a nice project, too.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing bad about the cosmopolitan is the garage and other two you mentioned I actually like. Maybe I have horrible taste but I don't know why everyone hates on those so much.

This new project looks petty good and the Titan would have been a nice project, too.

 

Okay Lockmatt, everyone has a right to their own taste, but for me Randall Davis has only done one project in Houston that I approve or rather am  not totally offended by and that is the Rice Lofts makeover, mainly because he had nothing to do with the exterior of the building. I give him credit for starting the ball in the historic downtown area with this project but everything else he has done is pure garbage.

I'm sorry but his style or lack of aesthetics is disturbing. It comes across as very cheap and will not stand the test of time. Unfortunately we are now in a phase of Houston's  development that is pretty much void of great design and everything that is being done is on the cheap and purely profit driven with no one out there with the balls to do great architecture.

All the new growth is in  the energy,  and quite frankly I haven't seen a nice tower built for an energy related company in town since Pennzoil, and Gerald Hines was still calling the shots. They are about profit and not design. Sure the BG tower is nice but it still doesn't hold a candle to Pennzoil. I don't think his son or others at Hines have the interest in doing for Houston what Gerald did.

Besides they're too busy overseas and on the West Coast to do great work here like they used to be known for. The renderings for the new tower they are talking about sure doesn't send chills up my spine. I hope I'm wrong about Hines, but I know I'm dead right about Davis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First off Lockmatt,  I hope what I'm saying you don't take too personally.

I just think a lot of his problem is in the detailing. I think, and its only my opinion,

that its schlocky, and overdone and just flat out in bad taste.

Now if you want to see nice detailing on a new building go look at what was the new Enron building or 1500 Louisiana

designed by Cesar Pelli. Very simple but aesthetically pleasing. No garish colors, just clean light design.

Whereas the Davis tower on Post Oak is a terrible color, and he's trying to out deco, deco with his hmmm post modern design.

Unfortunately it sticks out like a sore thumb. Just like in art when something in a painting sticks out it shouldn't.

His work always sticks out and it shouldn't.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know its exciting to see all of the infill and watch the cranes go higher and higher, but if its just going to end up being an ugly building I don't want it cluttering what so far has been a pretty evenly designed skyline.

 

One last thing Mattlock, and then I'm going to leave this for you others to resolve.

There is a very well known quote that says it all.

 

"Less is More"

 

Mies

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a big fan of RD's work either. I agree that stylistically it is a hodgepodge that will stand out for all the wrong reasons over time. We really have been on the architectural short end of the stick lately (2929 Weslayan, the 40+ story Hines tower, and the twisting museum district tower notwithstanding). I would like to see RD stick with one theme and run with it, only not so gaudy or "out there". Just my 2 cents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Huge posters off "art"* at the top of Post Oak.

Elegant.

*Don't know what the posters are of. I look away and pretend they're not there.

Huge posters off "art"* at the top of Post Oak.

Elegant.

*Don't know what the posters are of. I look away and pretend they're not there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Huge posters off "art"* at the top of Post Oak.

Elegant.

*Don't know what the posters are of. I look away and pretend they're not there.

Huge posters off "art"* at the top of Post Oak.

Elegant.

*Don't know what the posters are of. I look away and pretend they're not there.

Huh?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the "huge posters of art" referred to what someone once referred to as "urinals of the gods" on the Post Oak side of the Cosmo.  I.e., what we got instead of the water feature RD teased us with in the earlier promotional material.

 

Um, to explain:  those of us who were watching the final phase of construction, expecting that what we were watching was construction of the water feature,  were surprised by what happened.  It started out looking like pedestal-style bathroom fixtures, after which they added the fake mosaic art posters above them.

Edited by ArchFan
Link to post
Share on other sites

1st) those huge posters of art can easily be changed one day for something else...

2nd) the only thing RD could do better would be if he had those changing color lights shining up on his buildings...nothing says class like changing color lights!!!

Edited by gene
Link to post
Share on other sites

ps...sorry this is slightly off topic but it seems all the galleria area streets now have the cool sidewalks/lighting yet Post Oak Blvd does not...is this because they are working on the widening of the street for the metro bus project?

 

the cool lights: http://www.hessamerica.com/Newsletters/201002/

and

the bus/road project: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Uptown-transit-plan-back-on-the-road-4585111.php

 

anyone have any word that we will get these lights along Post Oak Blvd eventually?

Link to post
Share on other sites

A developer could build a hundred "The Mercers" and I'd rejoice at all the density and infill. Im just happy SOMETHING is going up.

Even NYC and Chicago have ugly buildings.

I thought this was an architecture forum. Maybe I was confused when I started following. It sounds more like a construction developer site. I realize work was slow and it helps the economy but

I can't believe the quantity over quality argument espoused all over this site. I would rather see less built but better thoughtful design for urban spaces. I think it's more important to create well conceived projects that address urban issues, and think more about how all these millions of new residents are going to get from home to work inside the loop once all of this infill that so many of you are craving gets built. I too would love to see Houston become a truly urban metropolitan area, but I would like to see a little restraint on the part of the developers to just put up anything they want. And why should we be excited with ugly, especially in quantity. Once it's built there's nothing you can do to hide it.

On the other hand you can go to another project and find people up in arms about marvy's new fiesta site project, and how poorly it fits in with the neighborhood.

Obviously there is a lot of inconsistency in the thinking on individual projects.

There seems to be a consistent thread that no matter what it looks like just so long as it gets it gets built.

I for one think that this is a terrible stance and if that'is what you want what happens to aesthetics, and smart design?

A developer could build a hundred "The Mercers" and I'd rejoice at all the density and infill. Im just happy SOMETHING is going up.

Even NYC and Chicago have ugly buildings.

I thought this was an architecture forum. Maybe I was confused when I started following. It sounds more like a construction developer site. I realize work was slow and it helps the economy but

I can't believe the quantity over quality argument espoused all over this site. I would rather see less built but better thoughtful design for urban spaces. I think it's more important to create well conceived projects that address urban issues, and think more about how all these millions of new residents are going to get from home to work inside the loop once all of this infill that so many of you are craving gets built. I too would love to see Houston become a truly urban metropolitan area, but I would like to see a little restraint on the part of the developers to just put up anything they want. And why should we be excited with ugly, especially in quantity. Once it's built there's nothing you can do to hide it.

On the other hand you can go to another project and find people up in arms about marvy's new fiesta site project, and how poorly it fits in with the neighborhood.

Obviously there is a lot of inconsistency in the thinking on individual projects.

There seems to be a consistent thread that no matter what it looks like just so long as it gets it gets built.

I for one think that this is a terrible stance and if that'is what you want what happens to aesthetics, and smart design?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I belive the conversation about quality vs quantity is an excellent topic point.  Perhaps it warrents a new forum topic, but Any Randall Davis building (yet built) will surely evoke just this type of debate.  And, if the topic were just QvsQ then RD would get dragged into it right quick. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Highrise Tower changed the title to The Astoria Condos At 1405 Post Oak Boulevard

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...