Jump to content

fernz

Full Member
  • Posts

    619
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by fernz

  1. I completely agree. Not many people do exposed concrete because of the risk involved. Not much you can do if you have a bad pour. If you patch, it will always be evident. Google "Tadao Ando houses" for some of the best examples of exposed concrete in residential construction:
  2. you're probably right, but the Astrodome may beat the record.
  3. I never said the buildings don't look good. The failing is in regards to the creativity of the architects. To come up with one design style and spread it around town is failed creativity. Btw, your examples are mid rises, can't really compare. Sky house, Hanover towers, Chelsea st and OPP are all good looking high rises, yet they have very different styles.
  4. I'm all for using local architects, but it would be nice if they were more creative. Three towers in close proximity from each other (Hines, Marquette and Trammell) and they all look very similar. Fail!
  5. Also, this was during the Depression, as already mentioned. There was a large pool of cheap labor available, willing to do anything, even if unsafe.
  6. It's the other way around. The stores go where the people are; "retail follows rooftops". People choose home location for many reasons, top of list are proximity to jobs, affordability and schools. Availability of retail does come into play, but is not a driving factor.
  7. I don't think he's asking him to overturn a verdict. If I remember correctly, the verdict was that the developer should pay damages, and the judge in the case said he would decide whether the project should continue or not.
  8. The best example is one park place. They have a huge pool deck, beatifully landscaped, and facing west to get maximum sun exposure. However, in my opinion, they should've have it facing discovery green to get much better views. The would still get some southern exposure.
  9. Between this and developers "threatening" taller building if variances aren't granted; I think it's about time to put zoning up for a vote, again. I agree that if this project is stopped it would be bad for developments in the city. This would definitely set a precedent that it doesn't matter if your project is approved and follows all the rules, it could be stopped at any time, even if you're willing to compensate neighbors for their problems. Why spend the time and money? Developers and lenders are by nature risk-averse - they will take only calculated risks, and price those risks into their proformas. This is not the type of risk that can be priced in. If you don't want tall buildings in your cozy residential neighborhood, then vote for zoning. Put up or shut up. For the record, I also think it makes no sense to build this tower in this neighborhood, but based on our city's laws, that is completely irrelevant. In fact, that is exactly what we asked for when we voted zoning down. We collectively said we want to be able to build whatever we want, wherever we want. That also means our nehighboors can build whatever they want. And this is not just about residential buildings in residential neighborhoods by the way. What's to keep business owners in midtown stoping an apartment building because construction will affect business? In fact, if neighbors can band together to stop a building because of unwritten rules, what will keep a bunch of apartment owners from blocking a new apartment building they see as competition? Or a new apartment building for middle-income families that could drive down the rents for neighboring luxury rentals? This list could go on and on....
  10. They don't need to own the lot to control it, there are other ways to make sure they keep the parking and/or the views. They can have a long-term lease, or even own the air rights.
  11. I hope you're right....however, the magazine where the article comes from has a full-page ad from Thor Equities, so obviously they have a working relationship. No reason why Thor wouldn't give the magazine the latest renderings; it's free publicity.
  12. Although the model probably is to scale, you are seeing it from a perspective you won't experience in real life. The rendering is probably to scale as well, and you will see it like that if you look up from right across the street. But most of the time, it will look like something in between.
  13. It's cool, although it looks like something right out of the 80's. I'm afraid it will look dated and out place in just a few years.
  14. I agree with most of your points, however...the apartment does not cost 50% more just because the area for parking is 50% more. The parking space is much cheaper to build than the apartment space - no finishes, no walls, no plumbing, no air conditioning... Also, at least in downtown, the developers are building only the amount of parking they think is necessary to make the project viable. Downtown (and a few blocks in Midtown) have ZERO parking requiremetns. Even outside downtown Houston, most cities require less parking (at least for residential, retail is another issue) than what demand warrants. I've worked on dozens of apartment buildings, and not once did we have to build more parking that was required by the market.
×
×
  • Create New...