Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well when developers have projects like this, I don't think they should announce them until its time. Don't announce 6 years ahead and have people waiting on it. Do like the memorial city malls surrounding development, they announced a month before construction.

And how are they supposed to market themselves to retailers without publicizing their proposal?

...besides, all it takes is one such retailer to go to the Chronicle, and suddenly Wulfe would've had to have dealt with the publicity at a time not of his choosing and on somebody else's terms, a la Weingarten. In contrast, they *could* just make a reporter's life easy, spill the beans, get some publicity for their project in a way that is constructive and posed entirely as a 'Yay Houston' article as opposed to a 'Pro/Con' article. If you were him, which path would you take?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Crane going up this weekend according to the FAA filing.  

Well since these models have been revealed, I guess I can probably post the renderings...

Posted Images

And how are they supposed to market themselves to retailers without publicizing their proposal?

...besides, all it takes is one such retailer to go to the Chronicle, and suddenly Wulfe would've had to have dealt with the publicity at a time not of his choosing and on somebody else's terms, a la Weingarten. In contrast, they *could* just make a reporter's life easy, spill the beans, get some publicity for their project in a way that is constructive and posed entirely as a 'Yay Houston' article as opposed to a 'Pro/Con' article. If you were him, which path would you take?

the niche speaks the truth.

as a side note, hanover still plans to move forward with 1 tower where the palm reader currently resides. its considered, in their minds, a done deal.

doesnt mean it wont happen; however, i would be absolutely shocked and floored if it didnt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
as a side note, hanover still plans to move forward with 1 tower where the palm reader currently resides. its considered, in their minds, a done deal.

The palm reader is leaving, how about the rest of the homes in that row?

Link to post
Share on other sites
A month! I get a fresh cut every two-three weeks. At least an edge up every week and a half or so.

...and that's a month after I'd usually have gotten another cut. And I'm frugal, so it is usually one cut per two months.

...still, I'd like to think my hair better than Trump's.

Edited by TheNiche
Link to post
Share on other sites
Basically nothing, as scraggly as its gotten. I just haven't had any time over the past month to kill the beast.

...still, I'd like to think it better than Trump's.

LOL I was actually referring to the price of the hair itself. Not the price of the haircuts/stying. ;-)

(And we may have just set a record for veering wildly off topic) :-)

Edited by Houston19514
Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears that someone just mentioned that (or just questioned about) a row of residences along the west/back side of the project already being demolished. (South of the home of the fortune teller.) If this is the case, would this be an indication of a positive direction being taken in the development? Or, is the razing of these structures not true?

I thought it was simply Fashion Square and The Pavillions that was being torn down. I did not realize single-family homes were being demolished. And, is there an old assited-living facility that is being rid of as well?

Perhaps photographs of the alledged demolition would appease some individuals....add some fuel-to-the fire for their talking points...whatever they may be.

And, at least, it would GET THIS THREAD BACK ON TOPIC....AGAIN!

Link to post
Share on other sites
It appears that someone just mentioned that (or just questioned about) a row of residences along the west/back side of the project already being demolished. (South of the home of the fortune teller.) If this is the case, would this be an indication of a positive direction being taken in the development? Or, is the razing of these structures not true?

all of the homes south of the palm reader are gone; nothing but grass and trees.

unfortunately i was unable to take pictures because someone decided to steal my camera :angry2:

if you dont want to take my word for it, no hard feelings. feel free to drive over there and see for yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
all of the homes south of the palm reader are gone; nothing but grass and trees.

unfortunately i was unable to take pictures because someone decided to steal my camera :angry2:

if you dont want to take my word for it, no hard feelings. feel free to drive over there and see for yourself.

I can vouch for this as I have a partial view of the area from my office. All I see in that area now are trees and land. They are making progress on this project, it's just happening slowly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I know it's just a rendering and shouldn't be taken too seriously, but is that a 50 story tower in the middle? I like these renderings better than the old ones. It looks more "space age". I like it, it's fun, clean, colorful and modern.

Just wish they'd lose the narrow parking lot that faces post oak. That parking lot almost seems like a superficial add-on. It's too small to provide any real benefit or convenience. It's almost like they had to go out of there way to make the front of this development look less pedestrian friendly. I don't mind the buildings being set back from the street, but a nice extra wide sidewalk with some beautiful fountains and shade trees would be fantastic where that narrow parking lot will be. The part that faces San Felipe (I think) looks great though.

So when's groundbreaking?

Edited by Mister X
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree the towers look nice. I don't have a problem with the parking lot in front. I can't see Post Oak becoming some major pedestrian boulevard, and perhaps the sight of parking in front will make BLVD more attractive to drivers going by.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree the towers look nice. I don't have a problem with the parking lot in front. I can't see Post Oak becoming some major pedestrian boulevard, and perhaps the sight of parking in front will make BLVD more attractive to drivers going by.

They do look nice, but they look too commercial. Isn't the tall one supposed to be apartments? I bet these are just massing representations and the towers themselves (at least the residential one) will not look anything like it.

Is Wulfe developing all of it or is he only doing the retail and partnering with other developers who do have office / residential experience to do those portions? There has been talk on this forum that Hanover will be doing the residential component. That would make it even more likely that the towers will look very different from what's shown on the renderings. I don't think it's a coincidence that the renderings show a lot more detail on the retail components than on the towers.

As for the parking lot on Post Oak, Wulfe knows from his experience that retailers in Houston will not sign a lease if they don't have parking in front of their storefronts. It's a business decision that has nothing to do with the urban character of Post Oak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole foods in seattle has large underground parking so maybe they'll plan for something like that here. I know theres a flooding issue in Houston, but I've also seen some stores that have rooftop parking as well......I can't imagine wfmi building a flagship grocery store there without planning for sufficient parking, even if the drawings dont seem to depict any.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The whole foods in seattle has large underground parking so maybe they'll plan for something like that here. I know theres a flooding issue in Houston, but I've also seen some stores that have rooftop parking as well......I can't imagine wfmi building a flagship grocery store there without planning for sufficient parking, even if the drawings dont seem to depict any.

There is a big deal of underground parking associated with this project.. but i I agree with Fernz.. while garages can handle high volumes, they're less convenient for quick run-ins and pulling in passing drivers off the street.. retailers want some amount of street parking too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe build a parking garage across the street, but have it look like the development. Maybe a few retail shops at the bottom of it.

Any development of this size would need massive parking garages, but in the pictures you can't really tell where the parking is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can see ramps in the 1st and the 6th picture.. course, im cheating since i know where to look.

There will also be underground parking..

So yeah... they don't need an additional garage across the street.

Edited by Highway6
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just wish they'd lose the narrow parking lot that faces post oak. That parking lot almost seems like a superficial add-on. It's too small to provide any real benefit or convenience. It's almost like they had to go out of there way to make the front of this development look less pedestrian friendly. I don't mind the buildings being set back from the street, but a nice extra wide sidewalk with some beautiful fountains and shade trees would be fantastic where that narrow parking lot will be. The part that faces San Felipe (I think) looks great though.

I agree. If the goal is a new urbanistic pedestrian-friendly development, go all the way. Don't almost do it. This design is 95% there. Why uglify (new word) it with a typical Houston strip of parking?

Glad to see they've been working over at Wulfe, if only on new pretty pictures.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree. If the goal is a new urbanistic pedestrian-friendly development, go all the way. Don't almost do it. This design is 95% there. Why uglify (new word) it with a typical Houston strip of parking?

Glad to see they've been working over at Wulfe, if only on new pretty pictures.

Why do you think that is their goal.. or only goal ?

How many people do you see walking along Post Oak... even once LRT gets there, it's not a sea of parking ppl are being asked to cross, its one drivelane.... no different the majority of Rice Village.

Also, design work and pretty pictures aren't done over at Wulfe.. they lease spaces and control the finances of the project, thats about it... credit belongs to the design firm for the pretty pictures..

Edited by Highway6
Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree. If the goal is a new urbanistic pedestrian-friendly development, go all the way. Don't almost do it. This design is 95% there. Why uglify (new word) it with a typical Houston strip of parking?

Glad to see they've been working over at Wulfe, if only on new pretty pictures.

Is the goal here really an "urbanistic pedestrian-friendly development," or just high-end stores fronting office space? Regent Square maybe I can see getting closer, but I think BLVD is going to have to be more auto-oriented. That's why I thought the parking made sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A subway line down Post Oak from 59 all the way to the Northwest Transit Center is looking so good right now. How else are they going to connect the two? Some plans show them going on 610. Who wants to do that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the goal here really an "urbanistic pedestrian-friendly development," or just high-end stores fronting office space? Regent Square maybe I can see getting closer, but I think BLVD is going to have to be more auto-oriented. That's why I thought the parking made sense.

It seems more like an urban-pedestrian friendly place, exclusive to those who live or stay there, yet is still inviting to the outsiders with autos.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A subway line down Post Oak from 59 all the way to the Northwest Transit Center is looking so good right now. How else are they going to connect the two? Some plans show them going on 610. Who wants to do that?

It wont run on 610 till north of Post Oak and south of 10. It's basically only bypassing Memorial Park, and i believe they are still have a Park station.. or they were.

And it's not going to be subway.. thats not going to change.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't see Post Oak becoming some major pedestrian boulevard, and perhaps the sight of parking in front will make BLVD more attractive to drivers going by.

I agree that it is hard to imagine Uptown or Post Oak ever becoming truly pedestrian friendly. There is just too much that would have to be rebuilt in every direction. But, if nothing else, an entry plaza or something special facing Post Oak would have more curb appeal than just another parking lot like the ones in front of all the other minor strip centers in town. BLVD Place seems special, after all, not every mixed use development in Houston will be blessed with a rail line right in front of it (eventually), and the front should look special. A project of this magnitude will certainly make a significant impact on uptown and might even start a trend on Post Oak.

Like Juniper said - it's 95% there. But I can live with what they are doing. I mean, I don't think the front is ugly or anything, and I know that attracting drivers off the street HAS to be a top priority for the developers. The overall coolness of these buildings (design and style) and the layout of the complex far out weighs any problem I have with the narrow parking lot facing PO. But it would be so nice to see this place set a new standard for street aesthetics in Houston even if the rest of Uptown never becomes pedestrian friendly.

My 3 cents :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just wish they'd lose the narrow parking lot that faces post oak. That parking lot almost seems like a superficial add-on. It's too small to provide any real benefit or convenience. It's almost like they had to go out of there way to make the front of this development look less pedestrian friendly. I don't mind the buildings being set back from the street, but a nice extra wide sidewalk with some beautiful fountains and shade trees would be fantastic where that narrow parking lot will be. The part that faces San Felipe (I think) looks great though.

The properties on Westheimer and Post Oak are simply too valuable to devote to surface parking. IMO, the Post Oak elevation would be better if they matched the San Felipe elevation. They could take a cue from the Galleria. Imagine a strip center parking lot in front of Neimans on Post Oak. While the Galleria did build some surface parking on Westheimer, they did so keeping in mind that eventually there would be future developement supplanted with parking structures.

I agree. If the goal is a new urbanistic pedestrian-friendly development, go all the way. Don't almost do it. This design is 95% there. Why uglify (new word) it with a typical Houston strip of parking?

But that's the prevailing attitude of many developers and posters here on HAIF. Build just what you can get away with and leave the aggie designed crap for someone else to clean up. I love your description "Don't almost do it"...it seems the mantra of the provincial Houston real estate/developer mind-set...and I propose we make "uglify" a legitamate descriptor for those that truely don't give a damn.

But it would be so nice to see this place set a new standard for street aesthetics in Houston even if the rest of Uptown never becomes pedestrian friendly.

My 3 cents :)

Absolutly. But it doesn't have to be pedestrian friendly on the outside to be aestheticly appealling on the inside. Houston for the most part has nailed down the environmetally controlled pedestrian interior shopping spaces. It's the expediant Aggie designed strip centers that will never beat the visitorship and long-term profitability of places like the Galleria.

BTW, have you seen the Aggie-style designed Jiffe Lube firehouse downtown? I know I'm off topic but I've yet to see a more embarrasing civic structure since the Hobby Center.

Edited by nmainguy
Link to post
Share on other sites
blah blah blah.. Aggies suck

1st off, the design firm working on Blvd place works out of San Francisco... eventhough you'd be lucky to having Aggies designing for you.

2nd, it doesnt matter where the design firm is becasue a project of this magnitude, decisions about parking will always come down to the developer.

3rd, even developers have to answer to tenants to get something built. Aggie (Engineer & businessman, not architect) developer Wulfe knows this. This project wouldnt get built if tenants can't be found and if all the tenants want some degree of street parking to be comfortable enough to sign, then thats thats what they get.

Furthermore... Hobby Center was designed by Robert Stern out of NYC.

And i read through the entire "fire station" thread, certainly noticed all your jiffylube moaning.... mind telling me what Aggie firm designed the firehouse, I certainly havent been able to find out which firm did it?

I was under the impression that new civic bldgs, including our firehouse, or least a good portion of them, had to go to disadvanted firms - minority or women owned.

Lastly, on the firestation, it a city's civic architecture across the board is mundane.. who's fault is that ? All the individual firms that design for them over time, or the city that controls the money. I guarandamntee you that even with the firehouse, firms start of a project presenting numerous visions to the client.. nobody wants to design mundane... but ultimately, the client gets what the client wants or can afford... and if so-in-so architecture firm can't deliver that, they can be replaced.

Regardless, your stance that if its a local project that sucks, it must be a local firm, and if its a local firm, it must be run by aggies is pretty juvenile and pathetic.

Edited by Subdude
Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the "Aggie" is the mascot of Texas A&M but can somebody please explain to me what an Aggie is? Is it an animal, like most of the other US college mascots? Or a scary looking native person like some of the Canadian college mascots??

Link to post
Share on other sites
I know the "Aggie" is the mascot of Texas A&M but can somebody please explain to me what an Aggie is? Is it an animal, like most of the other US college mascots? Or a scary looking native person like some of the Canadian college mascots??

This should answer your question.

Texas A&M Aggies

The official mascot is Reveille. It was a originally a mutt found by some college students back in the the 30's. Since the original mutt, it has been a Collie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The properties on Westheimer and Post Oak are simply too valuable to devote to surface parking. IMO, the Post Oak elevation would be better if they matched the San Felipe elevation. They could take a cue from the Galleria. Imagine a strip center parking lot in front of Neimans on Post Oak. While the Galleria did build some surface parking on Westheimer, they did so keeping in mind that eventually there would be future developement supplanted with parking structures.

But that's the prevailing attitude of many developers and posters here on HAIF. Build just what you can get away with and leave the aggie designed crap for someone else to clean up. I love your description "Don't almost do it"...it seems the mantra of the provincial Houston real estate/developer mind-set...and I propose we make "uglify" a legitamate descriptor for those that truely don't give a damn.

Absolutly. But it doesn't have to be pedestrian friendly on the outside to be aestheticly appealling on the inside. Houston for the most part has nailed down the environmetally controlled pedestrian interior shopping spaces. It's the expediant Aggie designed strip centers that will never beat the visitorship and long-term profitability of places like the Galleria.

BTW, have you seen the Aggie-style designed Jiffe Lube firehouse downtown? I know I'm off topic but I've yet to see a more embarrasing civic structure since the Hobby Center.

Aggie envy...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. So Aggies are just students? Maybe it has something to do with agriculture? That's kinda boring. I expected it to be some kind of really fierce yet obscure mythical creature or something like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting. So Aggies are just students? Maybe it has something to do with agriculture? That's kinda boring. I expected it to be some kind of really fierce yet obscure mythical creature or something like that.

It's pretty pedestrian, actually. Aggie is just a term for a TAMU graduate. If you want to give it a more colorful flavor in your mind, try to imagine it as the Texas Illuminati. Basically, Aggies give preferential treatment to other Aggies in hiring, promotions, awarding contracts, etc. Think "good ole' boys network." It's also somewhat of a military society, very rigid and focused on power structures. In some ways you can imagine an "Aggie Ideology," somewhat like neoconservatism. I find the whole thing pretty boring, and the whole Aggie creed just makes me tired and :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Applied to architecture, the myth is something like this. TAMU is an engineering school, that produces architects who are competent engineers but completely void of any vision or artistic ability. The UH architecture school is much more theoretical and interested in the study of architecture itself, with less an emphasis on building and engineering. UH architects have a reputation for being good dreamers but bad at execution.

or so I've heard...

Also, don't have to go far to find a typical Aggieism, even in this thread. Look at the TAMU demographics and it'll be obvious why.

I was under the impression that new civic bldgs, including our firehouse, or least a good portion of them, had to go to disadvanted firms - minority or women owned.
Edited by woolie
Link to post
Share on other sites

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...