GovernorAggie

I wonder where Frank Liu's Duany-designed development is in relation to the Astroworld property, Reliant Park, and Fannin South. Any HCAD wiz's in the house?

I chilled out about the garage when I passed by it yesterday. There's no way this thing can be done. The concrete is still quite raw looking, and the windows for the retail is pretty dusty. They've started lighting it but optimism says that they are not done yet. At least they put awnings over the retail portion.

Wow, Deutsche Bank is big time. So much for our piddly opinions on the project's feasibility.

COOL!!! I guess it'll be a race to see who actually puts a shovel in the ground first--Hines, Crescent, or Brookfield (or maybe even someone else!)

Musicman, you're right generally about what you said. However, that point could transcend into non-deed restricted areas of the city as well. If Walgreens wants to build in a neighborhood that's not deed-protected and their parking lot lights adverse affect the homeowners, it's true that the homeowners' only recourse is to buy something to shield their windows from the lights. Such is life in Houston. But that doesn't mean that's the way is should be. fernz, maybe I wasn't clear. My point was that everything doesn't have to be solely about financial return. Sometimes it can be about being a good neighbor. There's a whole thread about this regarding the CVS in Midtown. City ordinance says basically "make sure your building stands and doesn't kill anyone, and is setback x amount of feet from the street". Based only on financial return, if I'm CVS, I take the cheapest materials that will stand, use the cheapest labor, and the cheapest off-the-shelf design in order to build my building. Why go through the added expense of brick or copper awnings when it does nothing but add to my construction costs and take away from my bottom line? Some of it, I think, has to do with fitting in with the area--translated to basically being a good neighbor.

Is that a fair assessment? Downtown is her neighborhood. Whether or not we see it that way is kinda immaterial in a sense because we don't have the same at stake. Why should the voice of Hines (aka downtown property owner) matter more than violet (aka downtown property owner). Downtown residents have a goal for it to be a living, functioning neighborhood where people can LIVE as well as work and enjoy themselves. Is that a misplaced goal on their part? I don't think so. And as more people move downtown, there's gonna be more complaints about noise, urine, etc. Residents that live in neighborhoods along freight rail tracks that predate their neighborhood complain about noise and traffic tie-ups. The nerve of those people--didn't they know they were living near an active freight rail track? If they can complain and expect action, downtown residents can too, IMO. Heck, we get complaints from Heights residents when people want to build a different kind of residential structure in a residential area. Go figure.

I understand and see the difference and I thnk you make my point for me...this "bad" PR would be minor in the grand scheme of things. That leads me to believe that it shouldn't adversely affect Hines too much, and I think can only help the Commerce residents. As far as Hines' investors goes, I don't think that adding a curtain/skin to the garage would send bad vibes to them. Worse vibes would be if they can't get that retail leased, IMO. Regardless, I would think that with holdings as large and diverse as Hines (2 bldgs. at least 900' in Houston alone!) this parking garage is a "pocket-lint" level project and shouldn't be that big of a deal. If it's an investment without any financial return, is that really that big of a deal? Does EVERYTHING have to have a financial return. If so, we should be seeing some nice quality places filling those retail spots on the garage's opening day. If they take forever to lease the spaces, then maybe the financial return on each an every minor thing that they do with the garage is not as important--thus making the case even more so that something should be done aesthetically to the garage.

I've seen this garbage in person and I can also vouch for the ugliness that it is. I was hoping for something more "architecturally significant" but alas, the real Houston showed up--just enough to work and no more. At the very least be like the McKinney garage on Main. Oh well, I guess the economics of it work, which reminds me... RedScare, not to pile on Niche, but I think you have it right on his perspective here (government vs. business). Look at the suggestions to the private homeowner: "Negotiate" "Use nice words" "Don't cause PR problems" And so on. My response to that is, "who cares". Bad PR is why companies pay PR people. Bad PR hasn't stopped Jack-in-the-Box after the e.coli problems in the 1990s, bad PR hasn't stopped Taco Bell, bad transfat PR hasn't stopped McDonald's, bad PR hasn't stopped Firestone, bad PR doesn't stop the airlines, and on and on and on. But one can just glance at the first page of a posting about Metro or TxDOT or the City and can find the very same Niche using strong, if not demeaning, language in referring to those agencies. But then again, they're government, so they must be ok to lambast. Play nice with the companies who have no real responsibility to us the public. Throw rotten eggs at those who at least would be somewhat responsive (albeit slow or maybe ineffectively) to us the public. One more thing, zoning could've fixed this, and other ordinances could have too. Permits to operate the garage could've been delayed in order to get Hines to keep its "word". Gee, this sounds a lot like, "we're government, trust us...we're here to help". Shouldn't the same leery eye be cast towards Hines and any other developer that makes grand, un-Houston promises like "architecturally-siignificant" or "pedesrian-friendly" or "transit-oriented"? Ironically, these same companies go through the hoops in every other American city they operate or develop in, but for some reason, Houston has to play by the developers' rules so that a little "guidance" (regulation) doesn't make the development jump all the was from $25 a sf to lease to $25.01 a sf to lease. Whew! Sorry for the rant. Nothing personal Niche, just noticing what seems a little like a double standard.

But nothing is stopping the management district from providing tax relief or kicking in some funding. After all, Houston Pavilions is partially subsidized too by the Downtown Management District, the City, and amazingly enough the County(!).

I don't think the Detroit project massively subsidized--at least not from the government. General Motors owns the land and will basically give Hines the building and share in the profits. If it's successful, then Hines gets to build several more towers on the land owned by GM. Please tell me that you didn't think it was subsidized simply by the mere mention of Detroit. Private companies did the research, and private companies are behind the work. Last time I cheked, GM wasn't really in the land development business--Hines also did their renovations to the Rennaisance Center to make it into GM's headquarters. So like I said, if the MARKET is saying to Hines in Detroit that it's feasible to build a rather large condo tower (starting in the $300,000s I think) that is NOT government subsidized, then Houston should be a shoe-in. As a matter of fact, I think there are at least 2-3 condo towers under consideration, approved, or under construction there--not government subsidized. EDIT: Link to Detroit project--http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070621/BIZ/706210416&theme=Metro-Detroit-Riverfront

Well I hope it's a go. If Hines can take on a massive new condo tower project in Detroit, the company can certainly do that here, I'd say.

I'd disagree. I'd say it takes the spectacular "wow" factor out for residents, but I think it becomes something that people get used to having and grow to expect. In a former home city of mine, people came to be excited looking forward to how a new scraper would be lit at night. The RSA Tower in Alabama had that same excitement building up to it's lighting unveiling. An unveiling of lighting? There's a few Houstonians who'd blow a gasket at such a 'stupid' idea.

That's what I think as well. The best we can hope for is that they renovate the thing into something at least nicer looking. Otherwise, forget it. Plus, I completely agree that Midtown has NO idea what they're doing. Not to mention it's the most overpriced neighborhood in the city IMO.

I understood that point. My point was that I thought he was suggesting that Randall's was in trouble overall, not just the Midtown location. As you can see, Subdude had information on the Shepherd location being possibly re-evaluated. So there may be several (if not all) Randall's that are being "re-evaluated". I think that Midtown is just one of them. So I think that the store itself (especially its location) is viable, "Randall's" as an entity may not be, though.

Maybe I have this wrong, but I understood CSOM's rumor about Randall's problems applying to the whole chain, not the Midtown location. If that's the case, then it will be only a matter of time before another grocer moves in. I'd love for Kroger of HEB as well. DOes HEB have any "urban" store locations in its portfolio?

Wells Fargo is lit again!

You know, I've seen this parking garage referred to quite a bit here. Has anyone ever given thought to why the spaces haven't been filled? There could be a ton of issues, such as: maybe the space isn't configured well, maybe the lease options are not very good, or maybe--just maybe there has been interest and attempts to fill the space, but for whatever reason it isn't. I mean, come back if HCC (or whoever owns it) says, "hey, we never got any calls about this space" and then go off on how its a waste and not a good example of urbanity and a bad omen to pedestrian development in Midtown and so on and so on.

I don't disagree with the usefulness of lighting and any impacts on rents or occupancy. But, doesn't that same principle apply to architecture in general? Why pay extra for designs and shapes when you can build a box design off the shellf for the lowest cost possible? Along those same lines, we'll see more LEED-certified buildings in the future not because people have somehow become environmentally sensitive, but instead its because LEED buildings are easier on energy costs, and with tenants being more and more responsible for picking up the utilities tab as part of their leases, a developer has to offer buildings with lower energy costs. Lower costs -> lower overhead -> more profit.

Point taken. But couldn't that be addressed with technology? Can't LEDs be used whenever possible? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they are quite better as far as the use of electricity goes. By the way, the article doesn't say that they would turn them off completely, just from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m., when no one sees them but the night owls and truckers blowing through town. I'd be happy if downtown Houston was well-lit for the same amount of hours that Dallas is talking about shutting down--4. 8 pm to 12 am is a good start IMO. Plus it looks as if the ordinance isn't limited to downtown Dallas, but would include nearly all businesses except those open between 2 and 6.

Was wrong about the crane installation equipment being across from Greyhound. However, the base is definitely in the ground on that block.

Just an FYI, A crane is about be installed on the Main/Dallas/Polk/Fannin block. The base is already in and I think I saw the installation equipment waiting across from Greyhound today.

Good point. Now that I think about, driving in on 45 South, downtown's skyline is definitely like an afterthought after Gallery Furniture and everything else grabs your attention with their flashy signage (actually in a not-so-safe way, directional and guide signs on 45 are like an afterthought, too!).

Agreed. Park Shops is not a fair comparison of HP. Park is clearly aimed at the working crowd (except for their lite Saturday hours), whereas HP may not get its busiest UNTIL 5-6 pm. Apple and orange.

I hope they announce more retailers soon.

Not to get on too much of a tangent, but the author mentioned his intrigue in visiting the Woodlands, a master planned community "by private developers, not by the government." He liked the idea as opposed to the urban corridor stuff around the transit stations. I think it's great, too, for master-planned communities to exist. It shows that people really do like what they offer. The only problem is that it really only allows big-time developers to implement these great developments (GGP/Rouse, Crescent, Trammel Crow, Hines, Friendswood Dev. Corp., etc.). I think that the urban corridors would be good for smaller developers like Liu to do things easier near the stops. I just don't think that it should be harder to do TOD than it is to build master planned communities. OTOH, I know of a Duany project that is along an outerbelt freeway, so I guess it goes a variety of ways.