nonenadazilch

Notice how HInes chooses locations along the Main St. rail line for both its 811 & 609 Main buildings; surely they're an affirmation for rail as a transit option for the workforce. The recent momentum for both residential development and expansion of Metro's rail lines must help the chances for additional highrise construction downtown. Unlike NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc., for a city with few topographic obstacles to inhibit high-density office areas it's already remarkable for downtown Houston to have the skyline that it does. In lieu of earthly features, it's vehicle traffic and severely inadequate mass transit that's increasingly burdening the potential for companies to build/locate/expand downtown. The faster the metropolitan area implements a robust rail network (including commuter rail connecting the burbs), the more barriers might be eliminated for corporate and residential desire to be in the city center.

@mollusk Interesting ..thanks for sharing. Too bad it's not possible that the block between 600 Travis and 609 Main could exist in this day as a city-preserved green space or pedestrian plaza. I wonder how Market Square came to be a city park, or how many commercial interests made attempts to buy it did the city resist? As it slowly crawls out of its reputation as merely a location to work then commute away from, I think downtown as a region still misses out on its largest advantage. It's the highest density of people for the metro area yet so few choose to appear out on ground level thanks (and no thanks) to the ubiquitous options in the tunnels but also to the lack of natural appeal above surface. I very much like 600 Travis's plaza and wish developers past, present, & future would mimic and not devote for construction every last square foot of ground-level space. Instead, why not enhance building aesthetics and reserve open spaces for office workers to escape to, chat leisurely, grab a bite at food carts, etc. I realize the climate advantages offered by the tunnels, but perhaps if there were more plazas and pocket parks with even small patches of green space interspersed around the highrises they might be inviting enough to draw more people outdoors and above surface, particularly from the October through April time frame. Comparatively, Houston's downtown still seems overly buttoned-down, anesthetic, spiritless, devoid of signs of non-contrived human interaction - characteristics that obviously detract from big city vibrancy. Let the workforce find its solitude and productivity inside those soaring glass & steel monuments. For respite, how nice it'd be to come down the elevators, shove against a heavy revolving door, emerge into a natural setting of sunlight and fresh air, and take a moment's pleasure to contemplate not on a frustrating spreadsheet but a nascent, slightly bustling street scene. I'm sure the same street vibe - eclectic mixes of business people, students, tourists, artists & performers, food carts - in the business districts of Chicago, NYC, or Seattle can relish the same in Houston's city center if only there were attractive public spaces to do so.

I suspect it's not just the 80s economic climate that did this one in but also anti-rail politicians like Tom DeLay and John Culberson. Transit infrastructure for a sprawling region like Houston's must be commensurately available, in particular, for a city center to thrive. Once build-out of an efficient light rail + commuter rail system happens, thoughts of locating downtown - for corporate bases as well as residents - becomes less & less ominous. Ever-increasing vehicle traffic stifles the region in so many aspects. Conservative, anti-rail politicians & their adherents insidiously uphold the initial costs while refusing to see the absolute necessity for rail years & decades out. Ironically, these same folks cannot understand that the longer Houston goes without a rail network the higher the probability the region falls out of favor in economic & population trend growth. Local leaders must lead stronger. Keep momentum for light rail strong, build commuter rail to/from the suburbs and IAH/HOU, and build a downtown "central station" transit mall to make seamless transfers between bus, light rail, and commuter rail.

Nice ..if only there was an actual plaza/open space across Main St. where pedestrians could take in such a perspective. 609 looks similar to the 800 ft Ocean Financial Ctr. in Singapore.

Another seemingly inexpensive way to improve aesthetics: Providence Hospital's garage from Interstate 84 in Portland.

So, looks like DFW gets Emirates A380 service starting in October with Qantas A380 service to Sydney a bit later on. For IAH, the news is out that Emirates swaps 777 service with the A380 starting 12/3/14. Coupled with Lufthansa's existing IAH-FRA route and what looks to be Houston Airport System's anticipation of both Air France and Qatar Airways replacing their Boeing 777s with A380s, IAH flyers might soon be seeing 4 of those massive tail fins in north Houston before too long. Lots of interesting details are in the city's Terminal D renovation draft plan in case anyone has interest. IAH is really growing up: the city plans to have 15 gates for Term D including 12 "flex" gates to accommodate various long-haul planes. When they're not around, those flex gates can service 737s and CRJs. The .pdf also mentions gate plans include utilization by United Airlines so Term D won't be exclusively for foreign carriers.

I agree but further add that there's a significant variable that must make an increasingly large impact on oil consumption: federal legislation and global treaties aiming to reduce consumption and/or increase conservation. I enjoy the celebration on here in what's more or less a gathering space for the spectator sport of local developments. But just as surely, I hope we don't do so without other heavy considerations. This naturally progresses to the topic of human-induced changes to atmospheric composition and - embarrassingly, in this country only - just as easily digresses into compulsory exchanges between political encampments. Recognizing that the hyper-politicization of the subject likely reaches some within this community, I post not to incite or solicit contempt but, rather, only to appeal to common sense: modern society and all its accoutrements ride forward on the backs of science, technology, and the painstaking efforts of scientists through the ages. If one agrees with such a notion even slightly, by corollary they also acknowledge, unwittingly or not, that the same science and engineering methods that prove the ways Exxon delivers oil to hungry economies have equal foundation in the science methods climatologists use to prove that natural cycles of climate change are being altered by human carbon consumption. Climate change is controversial here in the US only because idealogues with vile ulterior motives manage to manipulate the naivety and/or ignorance of the general (American) public into indifference at best and steadfast disbelief at worst. While scientists debate the degrees of finite-ness of fossil fuel reserves, there's no debate in the rational world that the increasing rates of industrial carbon extraction and burning are accelerating towards the infusion of dire levels of heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere. Again, and for brevity's sake, I don't want to extend into denouncement nor soliloquy but if Exxon and its equally profit-hungry counterparts see this planet's fossil fuel reserves only as deep pots of cash to drill for unabated, our generation surely reaps the windfalls but only at unforgiveable consequences to our grandkids and theirs beyond.

I agree, KinkaidAlum. Ominously, it's not a matter of 'if' fossil fuels deplete. World oil reserves are past peak volumes and countries like China are, graphically-speaking, on a geometrically increasing rate of consumption. This easily gravitates towards off-topics like foreign policy and climate change, but to say the least, oil production vs consumption comes to a head sooner rather than later. Your observation on Big Oil's potential & willingness to adapt is quite poignant. If they choose not to, can you imagine how empty all the gleaming skyscrapers and fancy recent developments might get? Nonetheless, Exxonmobil's campus is astounding. Along with many others here, I'm also intrigued by new architecture and development as signs of both community progress and prosperity. But i hope this fan base - with which i congenially associate - remains faithful to acknowledge (even if not publicly) that these brick-and-mortar creations are, ultimately, monuments to private and corporate wealth & power no matter how massive in scale they are in the suburbs or soaring in height downtown. A comfortable life in mainstream America no doubt cannot function without the employment opportunities and wage spectrum companies like Exxonmobil offer. These benefits to a community deserve their rightful kudos. But, high-paying, career-enriching jobs are the obvious, easiest to discern societal attributes of corporate America. I only say we must guard against becoming overtly naive in dealing our fealty like many in these forums express. If horrendously poor journalism sites like Hearst Corp.'s chron.com exemplify the declining media citizens rely upon for at least a novice awareness of large company happenings, we certainly serve ourselves well if we find other ways to stay keen to what's going on as a result of actions large companies make, particularly because their decisions and their increasing influence over our gov't can impact us so greatly & unwittingly. From all perspectives - commercial real estate, oil & gas industry, community booster - the images of the new Exxon campus stitching together weld by weld are compelling. Somewhere in the midst of that invitingly collegial construct are offices for the company's treasury function from which many a well-earned paycheck disseminates. The worthy employee, hard-pressed to anticipate inevitably cyclical layoffs or cutbacks, then circulates some of his wages into the local economy as he provides for himself & family a deservedly fine living. The cascading benefits from Exxon's growth in north Houston are palpable. Easy to see, right? Easy for novice observers like us to acknowledge. But we have to stay mindful that - just as with any blue chip multinational - it's their bottom line that keeps singular focus on quarter-to-quarter profits, relegating virtually all other corporate matters. Beyond the realm of right- or leftwing ideological views, we mustn't lose sight of the paradoxical fact that the same treasury offices in the woods of north Houston allocate massive corporate budgets for public relations (e.g., ubiquitous campaigns, charity events, fun runs that project images of "Everything's great!"), political action committees, and lobbyists that are commensurate with those profit goals first & foremost. By corporate definition, we both gain & lose because companies exist solely to enrich its shareholders. All other motives we as citizens might perceive are figments of their carefully honed image coupled with our naive brand loyalties. So, naturally, there'll always exist the potential for conflicts between their goals and the priorities and welfare of the community, state, and/or country as a whole. I'm an eager enthusiast who cheers for local teams (I can't wait for October - go Rockets!). So, I stand in awe of Big Oil's prominence here - be it Exxon's impressive fort coming together in our suburban woods or Chevron's towering ambitions downtown. But as a patriotic citizen, I hope I'm one among many who stays vigilant of board room decisions that have far-reaching impact on my kids' futures, my neighbors, and hard-working families in all the countries in which Exxonmobil operates.

I do hope that's the case. Just as in lively city centers all over the world, street-level vibrancy seems crucial in helping neighborhoods thrive and not just exist as places people choose to reside for merely pragmatic reasons. Ironically, most all the historic images of downtown Houston I've seen show that: people of all different types, in different sartorial tastes, going in different directions with different urgencies and purposes all making their impressions upon others, themselves, and weaving a collective fabric to the setting. Perhaps we ought to attribute many kudos to the city incentive program that seems to have really initiated a groundswell of projects and, hopefully, re-acquaint Houstonians with a socially healthier era long since forgotten. The chances of impromptu interactions and obervations-of-the-mind are part of what attracts people to live in close environments. People in cars and tunnels, as useful as they'll always be, just can't offer this. I hope the tunnel costs indeed stay prohibitive, grocery, street vendor, and retail options grow, and Houstonians of all different ages & backgrounds share a desire or need to cross paths downtown - on foot (or bike) & above surface.

I wonder if the stained reputation and ongoing controversy over the former Deyaar ceo might impact the company's willingness to develop its land at Richmond & Post Oak. Apparently, he was responsible for the directing Deyaar to pay a grossly inflated price in a Nov 2007 Houston transaction (I assume it's the Richmond & Post Oak piece) which is one of several transactions that subsequently triggered fraud, embezzlement, and conspiracy charges against him. If it interests you guys, look him up: Zack Shahin. There's quite a drama going on about this guy here in Houston and in Dubai.

Greatest soon-to-be retail need? A grocery store has to find its way near a cluster of all these new developments. Unless momentum grows for a residential district that purposely rejects subterranean activity, the popularity & usage of the tunnel system might always limit how vibrant the street scene becomes.

so it's basically identical in height to Heritage Plaza.