VelvetJ

While not thrilled with the design, the nightlighting softens the blow for me. Maybe that's what the Mercer need?

I really like this bridge, however I personally would have liked to see the columns painted a nice color. Maybe a pretty green or brown.

I didn't really mean look, I meant glance.

I thinking like the Streets of Buckhead development thats going up:

It tickles me that you had to explain that.

Believe it or not citykid09, I actually believe Post Oak will eventually look like that. It's going to take a while but it will. The plans at BLVD is at the very least a 'lean' in the the right direction.

Lovely. Love the abundant use of glass.

Were is this building located in Buckhead?

what I like is that downtown H-town is not Disneyesque or whitebread like the Gas Lamp.

I'm glad Downtown isn't Disneyesque either but what in Houston is? Is Disneyesque ALWAYS BAD?

With regard to the Dueling Piano's, a lot of people view them as cheesy but I LOVE them. I think I may have been most excited to hear the Pavillions would be getting one. Very happy about this.

Did you give any thought at all to perhaps taking a look at the book (or the qualifications of the people making the choices) before making your judgment?

Quite simply Houston19514, "The Hobby Center is one of the Greatest Buildings of the 21st Century".

Wait til you see the rest of the 21st century. Frugality will be essential to any design.

Now that, I can believe and can find justifiable. Houston however, for the most part apparently reached the 21st century a little over a decade before everyone else.

Oops. The Hobby Center has already made into an architectural book. Yes, it is included in The Phaidon Atlas of 21st Century Architecture as one of the "greatest buildings of the 21st Century."

I will then be the first to say that book is bogus. I don't believe there is a person here who believes the Hobby Center is one of the "Greatest Buildings of the 21st Century". That building, like too many others in current day Houston architecture, was designed based upon how cheaply it could be done, leaving design quality as a afterthought.

Plus that rendering looks like it is from around 1984...surely they can come up with something more urban than a building that you'd expect to see in a suburban business park.

You took the words right from my mouth. I can't say I dislike the design, but for downtown? This is the type of design that I would expect in Greenspoint, or the Energy Corridor or even Sugarland......in 1984.

I hope this turns out to not be the design.

See post #407

On a side note, I wish Houston would have a contest for "Best New Designed Bridge". New topic!

Saw this bridge this weekend and had planned to mention it here. Up to this point it really does look like they are not cutting any corners in building it, which of course is a good thing in my eyes. Has anyone seen the final design?

For once I am satisfied! Can you guys believe it?

Seriously, this thing looks freakin' awesome. I can't wait to see the completed building.

I just had my first Krystal burgers. I was impressed with the packaging, the value, and they were good, not great.

I am surprised I just tried them since they are like 5 minutes from me on FM 1960.

So in your opinion, how do they compare to White Castle? Are you familiar with White Castle?

Yeah, but I think he was talking about the quality of local architecture, not local economic growth.

That's exactly what I was referring to. It is no secret on this site I have been disappointed with the architectural designs chosen for projects in Houston over the past say 10-15 years. For every 2727 Kirby, and Main Place, there are too many other current day projects that could have been so much better.

Maybe what I said was a bit harsh....but was indeed rooted in truth, imo. Sometimes quality designs in relatively small projects like the House of Blues on a consistent basis, can change the architectural tones in a city. Many times architectural designs are chosen to fit in with it's surroundings, but when the surrounding architecture is mediocre, the chances of new buildings having a mediocre quality increases.

When the initial renderings of The Houston Pavillion, and Houston's House of Blues were released, I was very excited primarily because of the design. It had the type of design that can really catch people's eye and bring them in. The design had the potential to make the area appear vibrant and exciting, even if it wasn't. So when I saw how it appears to actually be turning out, I was a bit disappointed and quite frankly, let down. Here is yet another project in Houston that appears to have taken on a mediocre quality, resulting in my lashing out.

Though I mentioned our HOB could break the tradition of them looking good, I know there is very much a chance it will not break that tradition. I hope the HOB turns out fantastic.

Wow... you are definitely one of those "the glass is half empty" types of individuals.

Mostly on this particular website. That's my role here. Believe it or not, I think it's needed.

It's House or Blues... it's going to look good... they all do.

But this is Houston 2008. There is very much a possibility ours could break that tradition because doing so would be cheaper. Never underestimate the mediocre underachieving tone that is set in current day Houston.

Not to take it off topic too far, but there's nothing wrong with bringing tourists to Houston, is there? If anything, it supplements the economy a little bit. It doesn't hurt.

But I'd agree that we just need to create places for Houstonians, and in turn, people might become attracted to the uniqueness and want to visit as a tourist. But just b/c times square has them doesn't mean that we're not being unique. Almost everything has been done before. It's just that each place puts it's own spin on things, hopefully.

I agree with this. Whenever the subject of tourism and Houston is discussed, there are always those who interpret increased tourism as wanting to turn Houston into Orlando or San Antonio and that is not the objective. Houston is diverisifying it's economy....why can't tourism be one of the spokes in the diversifying wheel? There are other cities, whose "backbone" is not tourism, but they tend to do a much better job in the tourism department and the result is more tourist visit for leisure and leave lots of cash. For example, I saw a article (this was a few years ago and I can no longer recall the source) that showed Dallas, and Atlanta both had a higher percentage of visitors for leisure than Houston in comparison, and neither of those places depend on tourism like say a New Orleans or San Antonio. Houston had SOME, but there was a obvious difference between the three (we seemed to do much better with visitors on business ).

What we offer is of quality, with maybe the exception of the Johnson Space Center, but it is not enough. IMO Houston has not "arrived" in terms of attractions for a city this size. I think many times some Houstonians are so proud of the quality of the Menil, MFAH, The Holocaust Museum, etc., that we believe we are the type of city that can soley depend on those. New York and Paris are the types of cities that can soley depend on it's museums for tourists, though those cities offer much more. But Houston is not one of those types of cities. Variety is the spice of life and what we offer in variety (the zoo, parks, the mall, and restuarants) can be found just about anywhere. Kemah is nice but anyone who has traveled knows there are other places that do the whole "Seaside Village" thing a lot better than Kemah. Anyone who has been to the Kennedy Space Center, especially within the past 2-3 years, knows there is a world of difference between there and our Johnson Space Center. And the Aquarium Downtown is very nice, but it isn't even a aquarium, it's a restuarant.

Of course something is better than nothing, but as I stated, Houston has a way to go in terms of attractions, and what we do offer isn't marketed probaby like it should. The tourism spoke of our diversifying economy could use some help and it could be done without turning into the next Orlando.

By the way, bring on the monitors at the Pavillions. Houston lacks vibrancy and the answer to that isn't necessarily monitors, but they certainly wouldn't hurt.

This looks fantastic! I don't know how I've missed this.

While it could be a whole lot worse, I see this design and I feel nothing. I like the skin but overall I think this is just blah.

Come on Houston, give me a slanted roof or a large asymmetrical design. There is more to life than basic boxes.

Uggghhh, why do so many Houstonians only notice what Dallas is getting that Houston is not, and not vice versa (which are at least their equal)?

I think that tends to happen because they DO get a lot of things before we do. That is not to say Houston doesn't EVER get anything first but from what I've observed, when many companies enter Texas, they seem to make Dallas the first stop, especially when it comes to 'trendy' things.

And let's face it, in terms of the fashion industry Dallas is a important market for this region, so it seems quite natural that they tend to have the upper hand when it comes to stores. Of course there may be a few stores here or there that Houston has that are not in Dallas, however those few are not enough for Houston to be able to claim any type of shopping advantage over Dallas.

What if it's got a dark brown finish?

You know what, just as long as it doesn't remind me of any type of stucco. I've developed an aversion to stucco and I am a bit paranoid.

Personally if that is the design, I would have loved that 'sheild' to be some type of polished stone but due to availability of materials and costs, I know that may not be possible. But again, the jury is still out for me since what I've seen so far is limited. I may actually end up really loving this design.

Hmmmm, with just the renderings so far, the jury is still out for me on the design. I do like the height, and I love that is has somewhat of a different element to it with the curve and all, but if that 'sheild' covering the building is going to be some form of a dark beige stucco type material, I think I'm going to have to barf. It's time for some solid glass/silver glass tall towers in Uptown.

I can never be satisfied.

I'd agree that there's nothing overtly flashy about the design, but in retrospect, I think I can understand the designer trying to make HC 6 blend in more with its surrounding (specifically HC 5). Sometimes a cutting edge design is bedeviled by its surroundings, and given HC 6's location, maybe daring might not work as well.

For example, I think Heritage Plaza would look a lot less attractive if not for Wells Fargo Plaza being nearby, and so forth.

I'll agree with you, HC 6 is probably not the best building for any type of cutting edge design or something totally left field. I actually think the design will work well.

Though I would have liked a little bit more exciting design, if this is indeed the final choice, at this point I'm almost ok with anything that doesn't include beige stucco.

It's been going on for decades. This was the great funding mechanism that Robt. Moses used to build all his major projects in NYC. Think of tolls as just a tax collected in a different way. Your parents pay tolls for the construction of a freeway they don't use for the same reason people without kids have to pay school taxes.

I actually asked the previous question as a argument I often hear from those who support Houston being covered in toll roads. I personally view Houston's transportation system as a whole as a single entity that works together to the benefit of all Houstonians. Therefor, I do not mind my tax money going to a regional road project that I personally do not use everyday because I like to view things as Houstonians being in this together. So if expanding the Katy Freeway is going to help ease congestion, which will in turn help the entire region, how selfish of me to not want my tax money to go toward it simply because I personally do not use it. I'm not the only person who lives in Houston, and I am not the only person paying taxes.

I can't say I'm against toll roads themselves as much as I am against toll money I pay everyday going toward the building of NEW toll roads, whose toll fees will never be eliminated and will only continue to be increased with HCTRA using "easing congestion" as the sugar to the posion they are feeding the public.

*** (Does anyone know the effect the recent toll increase has had on congestion? I can tell you first hand it hasn't done much for the WestBelt. If it has, it is very little and I can only imagine it being back to pre-price hike levels before this time next year).

Another issue is I think the overwhelming focus on more roads for Houston is not wise. When I look into the future through my crystal ball , it is showing me we should probably move more aggressively in a direction that reduces the amount of cars on our roads and highways. Building more and more roads, free or tolled, is only making the area more convenient for the automobile. Gas is not going to get any cheaper, air quality is not going to get any better with more cars on the roads, and being at the mercy of Middle Eastern countries or South American Presidents is no longer fun. With these factors, aggressive building of more toll roads is wise for us?

To somewhat return to the subject at hand, I'm not opposed to a toll road down 288, but only with the promise to remove or significantly reduce the toll fee once the amount used to build it has been reached.