Luminare

2 hours ago, tangledwoods said:

I fully expect that this building is going to end up gorgeous but every rendering they put out is horrible.  After staring at these for a while I finally realized its the lighting.  They all seem to use a very diffuse natural lighting which gives the renderings a very bland feel.  For the kind of money the are paying Moussavi, I would have expected a much better product.

Its also a big pet peeve of mine when architects put out renderings that ignore the structural and MEPF disciplines. I get that ductwork and diffusors arent always sexy but its never good to just ignore it. 

1) these are likely overly compressed jpeg versions. As an example I normally export from render programs at 4k because its always better working with more pixels in photoshop, but to get everything out to our clients I at least export down to 1080 or "Desktop" size. For some reason after that is where things get fussy. I think a lot of marketing crews just mindlessly compress images down further because they always get fussy after they leave any office. For me the renders just look overly compressed or were exported at really low res.

2) lighting seems fine to me, but lighting is always tricky in renders. Its all about mood at the end of the day. I remember the last place I worked at my renders tended to be on the darker side, and my boss would be like "is there any way to make this look...happier?" Moussavi strikes me as a very serious architect, so I'd imagine she likes her images more moody and quiet.

3) As far as bland, I do think they probably could up the saturation of the image to show of the subtle blues and other colors. Maybe its an overlay problem? I don't think the building looks bland, but the colors aren't really shining through like we are seeing already with the exterior mockup of the pigmented concrete (I'm guess thats what it is, might be cast stone).

4) I don't know what your expectation of a religious building is, but even the most modernist interpretations of religious buildings, spaces are really clean and even where you do have structure its well integrated to be the aesthetic or hidden nicely, and MEP is designed in a way so it can be unseen. This just isn't a building to show case that, and I'll be real with you, most architects do not have the time to put that into their models. My office I currently work for never puts in families of MEP items and rarely structural (though I put them in to coordinate). Most offices are like this as well, unless you are an architect that really likes to highlight these things. Otherwise they will be absent. Its just not important and lets be real when you are in a space with these items you mind normally "hides" them yourself, so you only see the aesthetics of the space minus the light switches and registers, just like our brain selectively reads, or remembers faces.

12 hours ago, 004n063 said:

Dang.

Not every development needs GFR. This is actually a pretty quite area, an edge between two districts with little car traffic. Imagining myself Architect on this job, which I'm not, but if I was, and the client wanted GFR I'd probably would advise doing a catchment study. Likely the study would've resulted in stating that anything other than a small coffee shop would've been tough to put in GFR. Maybe in another 10-15 years with more density and foot traffic then others could consider it. You can't force GFR. There has to be a need. Otherwise its just going to be wasted empty space. Don't plan from above. Plan from the ground.

On 7/19/2022 at 9:32 AM, editor said:

Yes.  With permission.

I don't know what the process is in Houston, but I've seen it done dozens of times in other cities.

Usually the developer compensates the city for the value of the land, and it requires approval from various committees and a public hearing or six and eventually the approval of the city council and the city's DOT.  Mostly, it's just paperwork and a check.

And its a chore. Usually with a lot of strings attached. City's always feel they can ask for way more from a street abandonment when it comes around. Lets just say I've gotten some experience in this department lately. Not to mention the major utility work required post abandonment.

On 7/19/2022 at 2:17 PM, iah77 said:

I think taking out that street would really change the feeling and view of the Renzo Piano building in a negative way. It's designed perfectly to fit in its context as is. The Menil's vision was to integrate their projects into the existing neighborhood, not create a monumental campus. I do think the street could be made to look a lot nicer though...

Lived and worked in the area for around 2 years. Frequently walked across the Menil, Rothko, and St. Thomas. I gotta say those two houses that will be removed won't really impact the feeling and view of the Menil in my opinion. Those two houses (which were turned into small office buildings) always felt awkward, and are not as good bungalow examples as those in the area. I don't think they will be missed. Most don't even approach the Menil from the East anyway. Most approach the Menil from the North and South. You also have to consider looking at the drawing above that their has been a replant of River Birch which flanks the Broken Obelisk, which is a great upgrade when I visited in April. As more people move into Montrose its to be expected that Rothko is getting pushed to be more pronounced, but I think the additions of late are welcomed. It still feels like that lost treasure nestled in a neighborhood, but with some light touches.

Holy Cantilever....

Yeah that ain't happenin. I'm no structural engineer, but I did take physics. Last I checked, gravity is still a thing.

The sketchup model and elevation don't really show much either. Looks very preliminary.

If you want a deep cantilever like that you would need to do some funky stuff with large steel trusses basically from the under ceiling to the roof, and then really anchor that sucker in the back. Really expensive.

I would love to be surprised though! Please prove me wrong.

MetaLabs is a good firm. Always glad to see them get work.

On 7/30/2022 at 8:48 PM, arche_757 said:

@Luminare what I’ve heard from clients is: they’re wanting to get started on projects so that when they are completed we will be emerging/have emerged from recession… seems many are thinking that it won’t be as deep or painful as others.   Only time will tell?

Seems to make sense. I bet many developers because of covid lockdowns had a bunch of projects in inventory that they need to offload. Even with FED rates rising, real rates are still ridiculously low, so even with lead times through the roof, and material prices through the roof, it still pays to take construction loans. Real estate while starting to drop is still way up as well. I do see this window closing sooner rather than later. I'm just glad projects are still activating. These days, take what you can when you can seems to be the truism.

45 minutes ago, JBTX said:

Demolition fencing up and crews on site now.

Also in the nick of time. I was worried this one was taking a little longer.

Interesting. Curious how this plays out. I actually know Kevin Barden of RiversBarden as an acquaintance, cool guy. Looking forward to what is presented.

Man that is a messy Deck Coating application, or someone got murdered haha

*AT THE DRIVE-THRU*

Yes I'd like one Extra Tall Building with a side of Parking Garage.

*AT THE WINDOW*

No no no. I said I wanted an Extra Tall Building with a side of Parking Garage...Not an Extra Tall Garage with a side of Building. Ugh...

19 hours ago, astrohip said:

I walked over today, to get a closer look (and came back drenched--it's hot!). It looks like they're trying to save the trees. I don't know if they're going to move them, or build barriers around them, but it's definitely not your typical "doze 'em to the ground" process. Lots of them have those dirt walls around them.

That dirt wall is to mark off the "Drip Line" of the tree. Any grading that is done can not breach that drip line or the tree will die. This is usually a process coordinated between the Architect, Landscape Architect, Civil Engineer, and GC. As far as moving them, not sure myself. I don't remember seeing any markings on a previous site plan noting which trees were marked as "Existing Tree to Remain" or "Existing Tree to be Relocated". I guess we will know soon enough.

21 minutes ago, BEES?! said:

Well at least your procrastination at work is sort-of tangentially related to what you do, right? If someone looks over your shoulder you can just show them the URL. “It’s an architecture forum! It’s work-adjacent at worst!”

I call it "Design Research", or "Constructability Research".

1 hour ago, BeerNut said:

@hindeskyWow,  I've seen places in the West go all out but didn't realize we had one in Houston.  With the increase in energy cost and questionable reliability probably more businesses and homes will consider solar.

Solar takes up a lot of space. I'm only in favor of employing solar if its in areas that are already taking up space, and would be enhanced with extra utility such as parking lots and roofs. Other than that I don't think solar justifies the cost in terms of power output to acreage of land. The applications seen above are great examples.

As far as out west...yes. Particularly when I was driving through Arizona on my way up to Utah, they definitely throw solar around there a lot which makes sense.

1 hour ago, Montrose1100 said:

Unlikely, since it faces north. 

Very true. I was just bored at work, and feeling slightly sadistic in a comedic way haha. Construction documentation can be a real grind.

Funny thought. I wonder if that concave curtain wall will melt cars below like the famous car melting building in London.

They missed a great opportunity to make one of these white and the other black. That way whenever I fly into Houston again I can point to the literal play on the famous yen-yang symbol. Oh well.

Interesting how we now have two buildings in Houston that are essentially Boolean forms of one another. This building and the new MFAH building. One with an entirely convex facade, and this one an entirely concave facade.

3 hours ago, Montrose1100 said:

Because the bar is low. We're the architecture limbo champions. 

and the best post of 2022 goes too...

3 hours ago, Texasota said:

It looks like a student rendering to impart a general design and color scheme.

1. If this is what students can do these days then thats significant progress from when I was in school haha

2. We all have our sense of aesthetics, you have yours and I have mine. To me its just fine. I'm not a fan of realistic architectural renders, nor do they wow me since most people have the capability to produce these. The quality looks good to me. I think someone up'ed the bloom a bit to much. Just a tad washed out, but it seems to me they want to impart an idea that this is nice bright open space.

3. General design is fine. Its industrial chic and that is very in line with Method Architectures thing. It seems to be good approach for them. Is it my thing? .. Seen way to much now. Not that I don't like it. Just seen to much at this point.

4. Color scheme is definitely...eclectic. Its the kind of eclectic that seems to have a purpose though. I personally think this variety of color is a tad distracting for an office environment. This scheme for a candy store? Yes. This scheme for an arch firm? Not my cup of tea. It is fun looking though. Guess thats the vibe they want.

If this were me right now grading this at a criq. for final review, I would say there is nothing "wrong" with any of this, but its definitely not something I would immediately appreciate. This is simply a very specific and particular approach they want to go which I both admire, but it means it narrows the scope/amount of people whom could appreciate it.

On 7/22/2022 at 1:41 PM, hindesky said:

I don't see how they can attach anything between the hotel next door with such a tiny space. Assuming the material is secured from inside the new building.

Now that is a fun color!

@hindesky to your point about the space between the hotel and this new building, they likely won't need to get back there at all. I don't have access to the Construction Documents, but in these situations that wall is simply a rated fire wall, and will most likely be made of CMU. I would assume it would be a Single or Double Wythe wall of CMU. Maybe they then put the Rigid Insulation on the interior side and then fur-out with 3 5/8" Aluminum Studs? Just a hunch.
 

14 hours ago, Texasota said:

hmmmm. These are pretty crappy renderings for an architecture firm.

compared to what exactly?

Clearly we are moving into a recession next quarter. If anyone wants to disagree you are free to do so, but this will not be my question to you guys. We have been lucky thus far to see a string of project activations when in past cycles even the slightest sniff of a recession brought a wave of cancellations. What are still some projects out there that are close to activation, but need to activate now, or they will be likely canceled in the next 3-6 months? Curious as my focus has been off the Houston market for awhile now.

Man, some of these projects are activating just in the nick of time.

9 minutes ago, Avossos said:

Ha! I had the same thought. Totally pointless and screams FAKE. if the cheap rock veneer wasn't bad enough, lets highlight how fake it is by putting it somewhere that a real rock would absolutely never (and could never) exist..

On the flip side, while frustrating, Detailing is hard. It really is. Transitions like these are tough to catch, and its usually missed in construction documents because the last thing typically firms touch. A young draftsman is just not considering how this looks or even how this edge condition works. With that being said this is pretty common edge condition that one would think the firm has done a dozen times and knows how to execute, but you'd be amazed "corporate knowledge" wise what firms have in their detail libraries and what they don't. I'm still learning as well. My approach would have been to take the Fiber Cement Board (Hardi Plank for layman) down either flush with the bottom side of the slab which you could then flash, or just beyond it and then wrap it as a soffit and retouch the slab. People often don't realize that what is the "floor" on the interior is often not, and should not be represented literally on the exterior.

That small banding of stone veneer really annoys me.