Texasota Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 ew 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UtterlyUrban Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I have walked by this several times. It's ugly. It looks like a U-store-it location. The nuns should be embarrassed and the architect should be mortified. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I think it's a crying shame. They could have saved and renovated it if they wanted to. They just didn't want to and didn't have the nerve to be honest about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 They could have at least saved and braced the facade, and then just built whatever they wanted behind it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 It is just so bad on so many levels. I sometimes wonder how a horrible design like this even makes it through the approval process without someone putting up their hand and saying "But it's really ugly!" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nole23 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gene Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 i'm sorry but WTH!!!???!!! seriously... yikes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 1 hour ago, Subdude said: It is just so bad on so many levels. I sometimes wonder how a horrible design like this even makes it through the approval process without someone putting up their hand and saying "But it's really ugly!" Usually followed by, "but it's the cheapest option" which is unfortunate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 5 hours ago, BigFootsSocks said: Usually followed by, "but it's the cheapest option" which is unfortunate. Yeah, I'm sure that in this case no one will ever question that this was the cheapest option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinkaidAlum Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 It's value engineered... for the children. Don't forget about the children, y'all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollusk Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 20 hours ago, UtterlyUrban said: I have walked by this several times. It's ugly. It looks like a U-store-it location. The nuns should be embarrassed and the architect should be mortified. Flagellation gets my vote. For the architect, not me. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbannizer Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 Talk about a hot mess. https://houston-texas-us.blogspot.com/2016/12/incarnate-word-current-coloring-scheme.html 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Pragmatist Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 We need to drop a bag over that thing so people don't go blind. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobruss Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 I hope the nuns have to say a thousand hell mary's for destroying the Nicholas Clayton for this piece of crap. Get the ruler. They need to pay penance for this. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rechlin Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 In fairness, the blue will turn gray before it's done, slightly improving it, but yes, it is still hideous. The only way it could be even remotely saved at this point is to repaint it in the colors of the Westin to be a little less jarring and fit in better with the 500 Crawford apartments and the stadium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 It's so bad in so many ways: the cheap-looking orange panels, the oddly shaped towers, the mix of round and rectangular windows, the cheap concrete panel construction, etc. When I see things like this I always wonder how it made it through the design process without someone crying "Stop! This is really hideous!" 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollusk Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 Oh, HMOG... (crosses himself) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 I mentioned the Nicholas Clayton being razed for this travesty a month or two ago. Regardless of the state of the Clayton, this is a terrible replacement for a nice piece of existing architecture. I find it sad. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinkaidAlum Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 Cocaine is a helluva drug. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmac Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 Bright and cheery! I like it. Adds some color to downtown. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naviguessor Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 ^^LMAO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
native_Houstonian Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 Everyone take a deep breath! The first choice was to renovate the Clayton building. The architects came back with a plan to include 4 classrooms and some office space. That was the best they could do with the interior of the existing building. It simply did not meet the current and future needs of the school. Check out the plan for the new building: https://uploads.strikinglycdn.com/files/e3bb2996-8287-4384-9142-b16390aec3a8/Campus Map.pdf 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobruss Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 My disappointment with this plan is that they could have left the Clayton building and eventually restored it for posterity and its historical value, and added a building as large as what they are constructing now on the northeast corner of their property where they have placed the old house that sits neglected. I just think that they rushed into this without truly seeking the best solution. Think how nice it would have been to have a repurposed Nicholas Clayton building as a visitors building in the new convention district. I'm sure it would have been a popular spot for visitors. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triton Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 You can just tell this building is going to age terribly. It doesn't even look like the right decade now! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 They also could have kept the Clayton facade and built something completely new behind it. Or, hey, just build something new that isn't hideously ugly. The idea that this monstrosity was their best option is absurd. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 7 hours ago, bobruss said: My disappointment with this plan is that they could have left the Clayton building and eventually restored it for posterity and its historical value, and added a building as large as what they are constructing now on the northeast corner of their property where they have placed the old house that sits neglected. I just think that they rushed into this without truly seeking the best solution. Think how nice it would have been to have a repurposed Nicholas Clayton building as a visitors building in the new convention district. I'm sure it would have been a popular spot for visitors. The nuns (and to a much larger extent, the Church) don't really care what you, or me, or anyone else thinks. There were, and may still be, plans to tear down the old co-cathedral building. Once the Church decides a building doesn't meet the needs any longer, it's likely to go away. They are in the business of saving souls, not architecture. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 Maybe they should pay taxes if they don't want public input on what they do. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UtterlyUrban Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 (edited) 10 hours ago, Ross said: The nuns (and to a much larger extent, the Church) don't really care what you, or me, or anyone else thinks. Such a pity that an institution that draws is legitimacy, funding and, frankly it's very existence from the community in which it resides won't, in your view, listen to the preservationists and urbanists from that same community. In your view, has the Christian Church become that distant and uncaring of the community to which it is a part? Edited December 16, 2016 by UtterlyUrban 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naviguessor Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 ...and the city gave the church the old historic home, to use. Well, after it is used, for however long they are required to maintain it, there is no doubt in my mind what will happen to that part of our cities architectural history. B'bye! These structures just become old, disposable buildings. But who can blame them. They are not concerned about the soul of the herd...just the souls of the sheep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate99 Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 May the most morally righteous prevail, the others are just nasty folk, don't you know. 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.