Discovery Green Park At 1500 McKinney St.

[MidtownCoog]

The Dog Run/Picnic combo is perhaps the worse idea I have EVER heard of. This is new to the plan since the last time I read it.

I love my toy poodle, but do we REALLY need to cram a dog run in the park, too.

And the POND? Good grief. That's almost as bad as having to use the consultants from NYC to build a simple park.

[Houston19514]

So as to get off my soapbox and show you what we are potentially missing out on, here is an example of what another city decided to do when they had the chance to build a new downtown park. Seattle in the process of building a brand-new 8.5 acre downtown park along the waterfront. Notice the lack of restaurants and vendor booths in the plan, I know, shocking.....:

Seattle's Olympic Sculpture Park

So what. Different parks serve different purposes.

In any event, you might want to look a little more closely; From the website you linked us to:

The top of the park, at the city

[mike1]

The Dog Run/Picnic combo is perhaps the worse idea I have EVER heard of. This is new to the plan since the last time I read it.

I love my toy poodle, but do we REALLY need to cram a dog run in the park, too.

And the POND? Good grief. That's almost as bad as having to use the consultants from NYC to build a simple park.

Good point about the dog run/picnic area. Nothing like getting a good Fido leg-humping while trying to eat your burger! Not to mention all of those little doggie mines that will be all over the place! Kinda reminds me of Cousin Eddie's dog under the table in Christmas Vacation!

[Houston19514]

The Dog Run/Picnic combo is perhaps the worse idea I have EVER heard of. This is new to the plan since the last time I read it.

I love my toy poodle, but do we REALLY need to cram a dog run in the park, too.

And the POND? Good grief. That's almost as bad as having to use the consultants from NYC to build a simple park.

The dog run has been in the plan since the first Site Activity Plan was first released many months ago. I personally think it's one of the very best features of the park. If we want people living downtown, we have to expect some of them might have dogs.

The total relentless negativity on this board is getting quite tiresome. If projects are done with local architects/designers we attack because we're not drawing in fresh world-class talent. If projects are done in a low-key way, we attack because Houston is not doing anything flashy/attention-getting/cutting-edge. If projects are done by world-class designers from outside Houston (such as this park) and they try to make something world-class, we attack because we're trying to be too flashy. If projects are designed without public input, we attack because the powers that be are imposing their designs on us. If projects (such as this one) are designed with huge amounts of public input, we attack because they are trying to please everyone. If downtown parks are vacant green space used by nobody but homeless (which is exactly the current situation of the green portions of what will become this park), we attack. If the city proposes to develop a park that has great potential to actually be used by thousands of people in many different way, we attack. If restaurants/developments are built without adequate parking, we attack. If plans are made to include parking, we attack. For crying out loud, we even attack for the audacity of giving names to projects. I don't think they've named this park yet; I hope it won't be considered to pretentious for it to have a name.

[MidtownCoog]

And FYI - I avoid the tunnels like the plague. I may grab a sandwich down there, but that's about it.

There are some nice sections (like under Reliant Energy Plaza), but for the most part, they creep me out.

And I get to work at 8:00, and you can still walk to work without getting too hot. And after work, who cares if you break a sweat while walking to the parking garage?

[Houston19514]

Good point about the dog run/picnic area. Nothing like getting a good Fido leg-humping while trying to eat your burger! Not to mention all of those little doggie mines that will be all over the place! Kinda reminds me of Cousin Eddie's dog under the table in Christmas Vacation!

The Site Activity Plan is a rather generalized conceptual plan. I think they are indicating a general area that include both a dog park and a picnic area, not necessarily combined into one. From the plan: "There will be fenced in 'dog runs' for downtown residents and their pets and nearby picnic tables and benches."

Edited January 13, 2006 by Houston19514

[MidtownCoog]

The total relentless negativity on this board is getting quite tiresome.

Then please, find another thread to read. If we had a bunch of "Yes Men" then I'd really be worried about this project.

I think we are all for this project. But it sure appears we are trying to cram far too much into this little space. Less is more as far as this project is concerned.

And FWIW, if you use paragraphs it makes your tirades much easier to read.

[mike1]

The Site Activity Plan is a rather generalized conceptual plan. I think they are indicating a general area that include both a dog park and a picnic area, not necessarily combined into one. From the plan: "There will be fenced in 'dog runs' for downtown residents and their pets and nearby picnic tables and benches."

Hope so! My comment was more in jest, as the previous post conjured up a funny image in my mind... Sorry, no more bad humor!

[The Great Hizzy!]

The dog run has been in the plan since the first Site Activity Plan was first released many months ago. I personally think it's one of the very best features of the park. If we want people living downtown, we have to expect some of them might have dogs.

The total relentless negativity on this board is getting quite tiresome. If projects are done with local architects/designers we attack because we're not drawing in fresh world-class talent. If projects are done in a low-key way, we attack because Houston is not doing anything flashy/attention-getting/cutting-edge. If projects are done by world-class designers from outside Houston (such as this park) and they try to make something world-class, we attack because we're trying to be too flashy. If projects are designed without public input, we attack because the powers that be are imposing their designs on us. If projects (such as this one) are designed with huge amounts of public input, we attack because they are trying to please everyone. If downtown parks are vacant green space used by nobody but homeless (which is exactly the current situation of the green portions of what will become this park), we attack. If the city proposes to develop a park that has great potential to actually be used by thousands of people in many different way, we attack. If restaurants/developments are built without adequate parking, we attack. If plans are made to include parking, we attack. For crying out loud, we even attack for the audacity of giving names to projects. I don't think they've named this park yet; I hope it won't be considered to pretentious for it to have a name.

I'm laughing like hell because this is the post I would've made if I had the desire to go through the process of typing it. It's almost to the point where I don't even read info on projects anymore to gain information but to watching the frenzy of people picking every nit possible to the point of contradicting a point they made about another project.

The project will be imperfect. I can't think of one that ever comes out perfect. Anywhere. Then again, going back to some other famous nitpicks to be found at HAIF, it may all be a smokescreen, a fraud. It may never even be built.

Which will take some of us back to another old reliable complaint. You know, the one about nothing ever getting built in Houston.

I'd love for this board to be part of a focus group concerning a proposed project. The developer might kill him/herself after a few readings.

Edited January 13, 2006 by The Great Hizzy!

[MidtownCoog]

But even still, why put the picnic area near the dog run?

Put the dogs out of the way. Call me crazy, but I'd prefer a nice little quiet picnic in my urban oasis without having to hear a bunch dogs bark.

And I don't have a lot of sympathy for folks with dogs living downtown to begin with. Acutally, I do feel sorry for the dogs. I see those poor pooches taking care of business at Market Square, and they look miserable on their walk back to Rice.

The project will be imperfect.

Actually, I think the project is pretty good. Just scrap the undergroud parking, and lose a few of the activity areas.

Less IS more as far as this tiny park is concerned.

[mike1]

And FYI - I avoid the tunnels like the plague. I may grab a sandwich down there, but that's about it.

There are some nice sections (like under Reliant Energy Plaza), but for the most part, they creep me out.

And I get to work at 8:00, and you can still walk to work without getting too hot. And after work, who cares if you break a sweat while walking to the parking garage?

I think we agreed to leave the "tunnel good...tunnel bad" debate for another time and place. We're never going to convince each other and its not really on point with the topic at hand. I admit to going outside when the weather is nice, and I assume you'll admit that the tunnels are convenient at least for some people some of the time...

[The Great Hizzy!]

I see the tunnels as a very considerate feature. The simple truth is that there is a large number of us who are very sensitive to the elements (today, in fact, I had a lady say that it was a bit too nippy for her to walk over to Jason's Deli--this at a very enjoyable, IMO, 64 degrees). So given that, the tunnels serve a distinct and faithful clientelle.

OTOH, in providing for the sensitivities of one group, developers/planners may have gone overboard and to the detriment to traditional street retail. I think the best balance is to find a way to provide better linkage between street level and tunnel access. A pretty good example is the McKinney Garage Entrance on Main Street. You can grab a donut a Krispy Kreme or stop by CVS for whatever and then head down to Rajin' Cajun. Imagine if you then added a higher profile retailer like Old Navy or TJ Max to one of the Main Street Square parcels?

In this, I hope the new park and parking garage will provide a prototype--linking underground Houston with street level Houston in a not-before-seen harmony.

[HeightsGuy]

I'm laughing like hell because this is the post I would've made if I had the desire to go through the process of typing it. It's almost to the point where I don't even read info on projects anymore to gain information but to watching the frenzy of people picking every nit possible to the point of contradicting a point they made about another project.

The project will be imperfect. I can't think of one that ever comes out perfect. Anywhere. Then again, going back to some other famous nitpicks to be found at HAIF, it may all be a smokescreen, a fraud. It may never even be built.

Which will take some of us back to another old reliable complaint. You know, the one about nothing ever getting built in Houston.

I'd love for this board to be part of a focus group concerning a proposed project. The developer might kill him/herself after a few readings.

Sorry guys, you can't shame me into being on board with this park design. Many of you are architects, you know that it's possible to stuff an oversized L-shaped couch, wet bar, and a 50 in plasma TV into a 10x10 room, but why would you do that? An 8.5 acre downtown park is the public space equivalent to the 10x10 room.

The only, and I mean only, point I am making is that there is too much going on. Less is more, that's all I'm saying.

[mike1]

I see the tunnels as a very considerate feature. The simple truth is that there is a large number of us who are very sensitive to the elements (today, in fact, I had a lady say that it was a bit too nippy for her to walk over to Jason's Deli--this at a very enjoyable, IMO, 64 degrees). So given that, the tunnels serve a distinct and faithful clientelle.

OTOH, in providing for the sensitivities of one group, developers/planners may have gone overboard and to the detriment to traditional street retail. I think the best balance is to find a way to provide better linkage between street level and tunnel access. A pretty good example is the McKinney Garage Entrance on Main Street. You can grab a donut a Krispy Kreme or stop by CVS for whatever and then head down to Rajin' Cajun. Imagine if you then added a higher profile retailer like Old Navy or TJ Max to one of the Main Street Square parcels?

In this, I hope the new park and parking garage will provide a prototype--linking underground Houston with street level Houston in a not-before-seen harmony.

I can agree with this point. Not every challenge is the same, and different developments require different plans depending on the desired outcome. A tunnel is a great solution for certain types of development but may be inappropriate in other instances. Its hard to speak about this in general terms.

In the meanwhile, I agree to let everyone else on this site have their own daily routines as long as they agree to let me have mine.

[Guest danax]

The only, and I mean only, point I am making is that there is too much going on. Less is more, that's all I'm saying.

I personally agree with a wanting a more serene oasis type place but, reading the document, this was a park-by-committee with a lot of input from different groups and individuals. Of course, it's going to become overloaded with ideas doing it that way, as opposed to letting one architect plan it. We all talk about how dead DT is. With all of the out-of-towners over there, they probably figured a serene and green plot of land would end up being empty and unused save for the usual bums and wandering mystics.

The idea seems to be to attract as many people as possible to it, therefore naturally, they figured they'd need a lot of parking.

I agree too with Hizzy's thought of somehow continuing to link the tunnels to the New Downtown piece by piece creating a very unique streetscape/tunnelscape.

[Houston19514]

Sorry guys, you can't shame me into being on board with this park design. Many of you are architects, you know that it's possible to stuff an oversized L-shaped couch, wet bar, and a 50 in plasma TV into a 10x10 room, but why would you do that? An 8.5 acre downtown park is the public space equivalent to the 10x10 room.

The only, and I mean only, point I am making is that there is too much going on. Less is more, that's all I'm saying.

What if we expanded the site by almost 50%, to 12 acres? Would you be happy then?

In any event, keep in mind that what we have seen is not the final design of the park. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere recently that the final design may not include all of the elements that are in the Site Activity Plan.

Earlier you said your biggest beef was that there will be less greenspace than there is now. Unless you've seen some plans that are not on the Park's website, I don't know where you came up with that. According to the Site Activity Plan on the website, pretty much all of what is currently greenspace will remain greenspace, plus a good chunk of what is now parking in front of the Hilton Americas will become greenspace, plus a good chunk (actually a majority) of what is now parking to the north of the current greenspace. (I recognize that the pond may not be technically "green," but I'm counting it and the area around it as greenspace anyway. )

And here's some more food for thought. The widely-acclaimed Bryant Park in NYC is 4 acres and its amenities/activies include:

Bryant Park Grille

Bryant Park Cafe

a Coffee kiosk

a "Creamery" kiosk

a Soups & Salads kiosk

a Sandwiches kiosk

chess & Backgammon areas

Boule ball area

a pond with skat rental facilities and warming pavilion

Ice Cafe

Pond Snack Bar

Music at the Pond

Carousel

Flower kiosk

The Bryant Park Reading Room

Wireless network

Apparently, New Yorkers didn't get the "less is more" memo and yet the park is wildly successful.

Edited January 13, 2006 by Houston19514

[Houston19514]

Here's another: Detroit's Campus Martius Park. Only 2 acres! Its amenities include:

major fountains and waterwalls

ice rink

cafe

major monuments

Lawn light and vine towers

two lawn areas

sitting gardens

two stages

all on only 2 acres. and it's surrounded by apparently pretty high-traffic streets. (It actually is making me think more of the possibilities for Holcombe Square.)

And they gave it a name! The horror of it all. Those Detroiters are sooo pretentious. ;-)

[CincoRanch-HoustonResident]

I agree, I think there are many things Downtown could learn from the burbs considering theres a big portion of Houston's population that live in the burbs. I also think the park is a good idea because any green space that can bring quality to life in an urban setting is a good thing. The garage I also think is a good idea because it took one ugly surface lot and turned it into a park, and took away no parking spots. I just think its neat a park over a parking garage. It dose sound almost like putting a freeway under a park. Could That Happen?

Yeah, a freeway under a park can happen. If you have ever been to Washington D.C., the fountain in front of the Capitol Building has a freeway running through it.

This parking garage/park is a good idea. No parking spaces lost, and it would be needed in the future. Should create an urban-style enviroment.

Edited January 14, 2006 by CincoRanch-HoustonResident

[RedScare]

Hey, it's a (somewhat) free country. For those of you that want the "less is more" approach to parks, there is Market Square Park, with virtually nothing more than grass. For those of us that want business, maybe the GRB park will satisfy us.

[nmainguy]

Since there is going to be an underground garage, perhaps the focus should be on constructing those elements that don't require trees over the garage. A pond, restaurants, a band shell and/or a children's playground. It seems that would leave quite a bit of space for plenty of grass and live oaks. The published plans seem a bit too contrived and fixed. Large green open spaces with large trees combined with the above sounds appealing to me.

[largeTEXAS]

What if we expanded the site by almost 50%, to 12 acres? Would you be happy then?

The park WILL actually be roughly 12 acres

Did any of you complaining about the park actually go to the focus sessions? There were a lot of concerns raised and I thought the committee did a fantastic job explaining the different features and how they will relate. If you guys were so passionate about this park looking a certain way, why did you not voice your opinions at the meetings when the designers were actually listening?.

[bachanon]

the point is..........WE'RE GETTING ANOTHER PARK DOWNTOWN!!!! who'd have thought 5 years ago that a park this size, with so much interest would be on the drawing boards with financing, etc.? the property fits perfectly in front of the GRB and the hilton, and has space on it's perimeter for new development. the brainstorming/creative input from the community is phenomenal. even if the park were one huge green space with a reflecting pool in the middle of it and a parking lot under it, it would still be better than surface parking.

although the current plan may be ambitious, many of the ideas will be refined (some might say watered down) due to financing, interest, space, construction issues, etc.

i'm just excited were getting another park.

[Subdude]

There were two open threads on the new park so they have been merged.

[mike1]

Hey, it's a (somewhat) free country. For those of you that want the "less is more" approach to parks, there is Market Square Park, with virtually nothing more than grass. For those of us that want business, maybe the GRB park will satisfy us.

Agreed...and it would also nice for those of us who would like to have a place downtown to take our children. While a Zen meditation space might be a good idea, try keeping a 2-yr old entertained and out of trouble on an empty plot of grass and trees. Besides, most of us in the 'burbs already have empty green serene spaces in our own back yards--no reason to go downtown for that!

I agree with MidtownCoog that this park seems a little busy on paper, but if it draws families, children, and others who will actually spend money downtown, it will lead to development. In that case, I'm all for it, flaws and all!

Edited January 14, 2006 by mike1

[Subdude]

The latest issue of "Cite" has the preliminary rendering for the park and an article about it.

At first I was somewhat dubious about the park, but after seeing the plans I think it's pretty exciting. I can see it being very popular, especially with the pond and water features, like the redesigned Hermann Park reflecting pool. The dog park is a nice feature, but I'm not sure it will draw too many pups away from Allen Parkway dog park with bayou access. I think you need more than just an expanse of grass to draw crowds, but this should do it.

It's great to see the effort being made for this to be a really first-class park. I think sometimes in Houston we are too ready to settle for, or even embrace, second-rate architecture and design. This will be a great addition to downtown.

[MidtownCoog]

Market Square Park

Market Square Park is not really a park. It's a square.

And squares are traditionally surrounded by business. Kinda like Treebeards, Warrens, La Carfe, Le Grivales, Kim Son surround Market Square Park.

Do they really call it Market Square Park? I always just call it Market Square.

[RedScare]

Market Square Park is not really a park. It's a square.

And squares are traditionally surrounded by business. Kinda like Treebeards, Warrens, La Carfe, Le Grivales, Kim Son surround Market Square Park.

Do they really call it Market Square Park? I always just call it Market Square.

http://www.houstontx.gov/parks/index.html

On the left side, scroll to parks and click. Click on Park inventory. Scroll down to "M".

As to whether it is a square or a park, I would suggest that it is in fact a square park. Does that make it any less usable?

[MidtownCoog]

They should call it Pooch-Poop Square Park.

[TheNiche]

I won't/can't name sources, but I'm hearing bad things about the park development plans...has to do with money. Anyone able to expand on this?

[MidtownCoog]

It would not surprise me if they did have money trouble.

Considering all that whacky crap they want to dump into the park from day one.

I'll still stand by my "baby steps" for this park. Start green and start simple.

And forget about the underground parking. What a waste of money.