Reporter

20 minutes ago, houstontexasjack said:

It adds a bit more height and that lattice-work pattern HOK has been going with (think the 7200 Main design that came out), but I prefer the crown on the existing design. 

Agreed. The one they went with is better. It's far more interesting at the top, where it counts the most.

And I admire the simplicity of your critique. You always have the simplest comments. Simpleton.

What a boring idiot. 

I've observed that most folks on this website don't even seem to know the difference between the Grand Texas project and the EarthQuest project. 

Wrong as usual Mr. HAIF moderator.

That's Spanglish for "Pillbilly Idiot Wagon".

PLEASING is in the eye of the beholder. So take your unpleasing OPINION and                it.

Anywhere on Ashby Street would be just fine.

I blame the people.

Its all you deserve.

BARF!

Approved.

Thats right. And they probably don't even realize that most of the floors don't line up properly either. Some stick out, some retract. WTF is wrong with RD anyway?!?!

I'm not putting on my jogging suit anytime soon to run along the roller coaster bridges where the Pierce Elevated one stood but I don't think it's any more far fetched than some of the ideas in the renderings of the (proposed) park area around Minute Maid. What's that little orange band that looks like some kind of high tech bike path swirling around the parks anyway?

Price tags: I agree, everybody's cheap and I get it. They built a park over a freeway in Dallas. It wasn't cheap but they did it. Donors with a vision, wasn't it?  They are proposing to do the same thing in Houston and it won't be cheap. Things like this are possible. Maybe not likely, but possible.

Geometry isn't really an huge obstacle here. It might require a little 'creative geometry'. Maybe angling or curving the bridges so they aren't strait lines. Possibly raising the elevation of the center of the parks so that the grade isn't too steep. Maybe not even putting the low parts of the bridges in the middle. There's more than one way to build a bridge.

Also, no one would be forced to use them. Some pedestrians might still want to or have to cross at street level. My roller coaster bridges aren't going stop anyone from hurling themselves into moving traffic.

Now gauche this!

No. It's brilliant. Make each bridge be a slope. The bridges would be at ground level somewhere in the middle of each block and gradually rise to become overpasses over the street. People could still cross the street at ground level too. But bikers, joggers and walkers would be able to do their thing without having to deal with the traffic at every crossing. It would look like little hills on a roller coaster.

Inconvenient? Not for the bikers, joggers and walkers going over it, or the cars going under it. The extra amount of energy it would take to gradually climb each hill would be great exercise. 

Expensive? Who cares. Just get some rich sucker who needs a tax dodge to pay for it along with the other parks built over the freeways. What's another few million dollars to a plan already this ambitious?

Do both. Make the former Pierce land become several block wide, individual, ground level parks and then connect all the individual parks with skinny, light pedestrian/bike bridges. Don't keep the giant, wide cement structure that was formally the Pierce and put a park on top. 

What's a Ch.13?

3 hours ago, UtterlyUrban said:

I don’t like this.

Who gives a shit?

Let's face it. In Houston, everything sticks out. But's that's how we like it!

Let it stick out. It's about a million times better than what's there now. And maybe it will bring some friends.

I say. If you don't want your view blocked, you should have built a taller building. Maybe that's how we get some supertalls downtown.

Don't hold your breath, because...

So what exactly are we getting? A 36ish-story tower in the middle of Midtown? IMPRESSIVE!