arche_757

I think you meant to say "Houston is diverse, yet there are still a few places you can go and only see Race XYZ" There are suburbs where the proportion of white/caucasian to other races is much higher, but Houston proper is very diverse, and it is readily visable to the casual viewer.

Was it finished? I think its a nice sculptural element on the skyline from a distance. Many skyscrapers don't look wonderful up close... hence why I've always thought the best architecture is the smaller buildings designed for more specific uses than spec residential or office spaces. The original World Trade towers were not beautiful buildings.

Those new residential towers in NYC are garbage design by big name firms. To think a "ultra-lux" residential condo tower that is nothing more than a really tall 4 sided building will tower over the likes of the Empire State and the Chrysler Buildings.... sad. The best of these new small footprint 1000'+ towers is One57. NYC has a lot of nice architecture (mostly unseen from the street) and a lot of tacky highrises (particularly residential) popping up lately. (not to offend anyone as this is my personal opinion)

^Its not that this is a terrible building, just rather uninspired in the quality of its design. The worst part about this particular building is that what was first proposed was a really nice building, and this current proposal is not in the same realm as that first one. Which happens. Seems it happens all too often in this city.

I'll play to your posts democide... Lets assume the government did demolish the World Trade Towers. Here's a big question that needs answering. Why? To start a war? If so they would only have needed to blow up/demolish (with airplanes) 1 building - not 2 (or three or 4), and it could of been any building of 20 floors or more in any city in the country. Why would they purposefully target a building that at full capacity had 5,000+ people in it? Much less BOTH twin towers? IF the government had wanted to do that they could have done so at night, with minimal loss of life and the average American person would have been pretty outraged over the whole thing to the point that war because of those actions would have been inevitable. Now, assume the Government did everything - and it played out the way it did - why? To appease defense contractors? Remember the defense industry really took off post-911. It's grown ever since because of the new nature of global conflict, and the hysteria at home about "take'n our guns" (perpetrated by the defense/armaments industry). Per-911 it was much smaller, and I doubt those folks at Ratheon and Lockheed got together and said "lets make a war by blowing up the twin towers"... seems very unlikely. Lets peel off from the "government" for a moment, and instead focus on the New World Order (that has some living in fear): If that group did it. Why? To gain what? What did they gain by accomplishing that? The US today is armed to the teeth with weapons of war that can obliterate any country on earth, not much different than it was in 1989, in fact one could say things haven't really changed. On top of that we have a fairly large group of combat experienced veterans who'll be a big asset in any conflict over the next 10-20 years (guys discharge from Afghanistan or Iraq 4 years ago who are 22-24 will be 42-44 in two decades and easily recalled for training should a large conflict come about). The rise in gun ownership in America has blossomed into a mushroom-cloud during this same interval, and with near military grade hardware. Any one who wanted to invade us, or try and take over this country will face the most daunting fighting force in the world, then the most heavily armed and militarized civilian population on the planet. And that population is very well motivated to resist aggression against itself. I should add that the US has the nuclear arsenal large enough to destroy the whole planet several times over and then some. One ballistic missile submarine has 24 Trident Missiles, each has 3-4 warheads capable of destroying a very large area. What would a rouge government plan to do with those assets? Or the carrier strike groups larger than all the worlds navies save a handful of Russian, Chinese and European fleets? Again I ask.... what/why/who though it was a good idea to do what they did? Why did the government assault the WTC when it could of attacked XYZ Center in Anytown, USA and gotten the same response? The simple answer is 99% of the time the correct answer. Besides that, how many thousands of people would have had to keep this secret for over a decade? Someone would have blown a whistle by now, and have real, credible, fool-proof evidence that foul play was instituted by the government (or some other organization). It would simply be impossible for the thousands of people needed to be involved in this to have kept quiet for this many years with so many people watching, and listening.

I guess I didn't notice that in my first "once over" of the new proposal. Agreed that is a bad architectural feature. This building - for those who've missed it elsewhere in town - is the typical representation of Houston speculative (and even specific use) architecture. In that we have a featured design which turns out too expensive, or badly timed, or sold to a different developer who has a lesser eye for design, so the original design gets revamped into something similar yet far less architecturally fulfilling. The name is abhorrent! Like Subdude (I think) said above: the name sounds like a residential enclave on a suburban cul-de-sac.

Whenever I see a Randall Davis project: I'm reminded of that "famous" quote from The Dark Knight about the "hero Gotham deserves...but not the one we need right now" I don't know why, but I just feel like it is appropriate for him? Except he's sort of the inverse. If that makes sense?

I think what IronTiger was trying to say is that NYC is perceived to be diverse, while many people from out of town may not realize that Houston is also diverse. Remember, most people are fairly ignorant when it comes to geography - they all think Texas is just desert and cowboys riding bucking broncos. You must admit that we're improving - and we all know improvements are needed - yet those changes don't happen overnight. Houston most likely will not ever be a tourist destination like NYC or San Francisco, but we can aspire to at least be better than anywhere else in Texas! At least on the short term (10-20 years). Personally, I think the improvements we've made just in the past 5 years are huge. Buffalo Bayou may not be the roaring, rapid filled river we wish it was, but we have access to it now and ever improving parkscape around it. Discovery Green - while a little over 5 years old - is a VAST improvement on the parking lots previously at that location. We've built (or are still building) additional light rail. Yes, its a drop in the bucket, but you have to start with something. Look at the level of mixed-use projects going in, these too are a vast improvement. You know - NYC in 1960 was pretty much a crime-ridden hellish place to visit for tourists. In fact NYC hasn't been the paragon of urban development until the past decade or decade-and-a-half. They've done much to not only improve the safety issues that have plagued the city for years and years, but also added pedestrian level interactions (High Line etc) that were non-existent in decades past. They started from somewhere. Baltimore (another example) was (and largely still is) a dumpy town, but the Inner Harbor area is truly a nice urban zone that was previously also a hellish place for tourists anyone. DC was the same - the Anacostia Waterfront area was for most of its life slums, and overrun with crime. Point being: Every city has ugly, boring, bad areas. Investment in the proper zones, proper developments etc. will reap rewards. Houston is doing that. Come back in 2020 and see the improvements. Will they be enough? Never. Cities area constantly changing, constantly growing; it is why architects and urban planners exist.

You have about the same chance of getting Ebola as you do Hepatitus from someone - that is if someone has Hep and wants to NOT take precautions. If Ebola were airborne (like the common Flu, which kills upwards of 30,000 people yearly - more if you include the worldwide population) we would be panicking like scared little kids. As it stands, this "scare" is going to remind people to WASH THEIR HANDS after doing anything that involves their orifices, and don't sweat or bleed on people! These are of course common knowledge.

It looks like Hell! Ugly, dirty, cold, depressing! I'm still fascinated by it! Find it intriguing to see how people live and work in places like that, and this isn't a small town, it has over 150,000 people living there. I imagine its below 32degrees 75% of the year (at least), and even in summer its only above that temperature for short times. I love these old Stalinist-era towns built on the backs of the poor souls who found themselves in the Gulag system that plagued Russia for about 45 years (give or take).

Norilsk, Russia: This is the coldest, northernmost city with a population greater than 100,000 in the world. Personally I think this is fascinating! The second link provides some interesting pictures. I can't imagine living in a place like this, but I guess there would still be something interesting to see there - besides the soot and grime? https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Norilsk,+Russia&hl=en&ll=68.736383,87.890625&spn=7.704429,19.841309&sll=66.731223,64.138184&sspn=8.390098,19.841309&t=h&hnear=Norilsk,+gorod+Norilsk,+Krasnoyarsk+Krai,+Russia&z=6 http://io9.com/scenes-from-the-worlds-northernmost-big-city-a-polluted-1595204982 http://nordroden.livejournal.com/101071.html Isn't this a beautiful place?

Fred Hartman would probably cost A LOT more today in our current environment. 1998 was 16 years ago. That's quite a length of time. Dallas wanted a neat bridge, it didn't need one, but they wanted one - so they built it. Still interesting sculptural element out on the prairie. I'm sure some from Dallas would have preferred spending that money elsewhere.

Yes, the Ebola confirmation in Dallas is news - just sit back and watch the crazies come out with pitchforks and freakout. Now, if there end up being confirmed cases all over the country.... then that might warrant some freaking. Although Ebola is similar to AIDS - its transmitted via secretions and body fluids - not airborne. However, it kills much more quickly than AIDS. Also, it has a 21 day period where a carrier may not show symptoms. That is the scary part of it! Other than that I think the affect of a large scale outbreak across the US would be about the same as in Africa - which when you consider we've got 300,000,000+ people that's a drop in the bucket. Perhaps people will finally start washing their hands?! I've long felt the scale of the bridge to be simply too large for this. The odd part of the bridge is Dallas' proximity to...well...nothing really big enough for the scale of this thing. Still a cool sculptural addition to their skyline.

Houston - like any other city - is missing plenty of things. It is not some singular phenomenon that is only relevant to Houston.

Right Field (it's the right field side of MMP) North Park (north of MMP) Shadow Park (since it is "in" MMP's shadow and its kind of sketchy) The 69 (in honor of the once and future interestate) The Big Empty (since it is mostly empty) Parkers Alley (mostly parking lots) Enron Station The Yards Jackson's Hole? Since Jackson Street is basically wiped out here due to MMP

While I'll agree that the bridge is ...somewhat of an overstatement for the area, Dallas has plans to redevelop that mostly empty industrial warehouse area to the southwest of Downtown. Parkspace that is created out of nothing, or worse still - a former industrial blight/overly engineered flood zone such as this particular area of Dallas - is even better. Props to Dallas for reimagining its more underused neighborhoods. If anything Houston should take note. Dallas' Victory Park is a success, and home to some nice modern architecture. While this particular redevelopment zone may never reach that scale, at least they are thinking big.

Clearly this current boom - or at least this phase of the boom - is attributable to the oil patch. However, the growth is all connected. Growth in the oil business will mean more growth in the port, more people, more hospitals, more doctors. And believe it or not doctors make big money, and hence pay a lot for housing. What do you want? Do you want us to run from here screaming saying the "sky is falling, the sky is falling"?! Do you want us to say "Houston's screwed if oil drops in price to $40?" Revel in the current economic climate here in Houston/Texas and be glad for it. You're right it could come crashing down - though I would tend to think if that happens its because of a worldwide calamity or economic crash far worse than the recession of 2008.

We're certainly a better tourist town than we used to be. Houston will continue to improve as more and more people move in, and different districts/options open up. And comparing San Antonio to Houston is hard. One is a big city that feels like a small-ish city, the other is a really big city that feels like a really big city (with or without the trains). I'm not saying we're a better tourist destination, just one that has more to offer than most people realize. I've traveled quite a bit over my years both domestically and internationally, and I have to tell you that I've never visited a place I'd say was boring. Ever. And that includes plenty of mid-sized cities, but then things I enjoy are: architecture, planning, books, museums etc. and many cities have enough of those that are interesting that it makes it worthwhile to visit. Now if I was a huge Techno fan and also loved Broadway - then I may find Houston to be dull?

I think - from my own personal discussion with people related to the oil business - this boom won't continue forever (obviously); however, the odds that we have another "bust" like what was experienced in the 1980s seems highly unlikely. If that happens then we're facing a global slowdown the likes of which will harm the economic output to the extent that we won't be singularly worried about Houston... we'll be worried about the national economy as a whole. Taking a smaller recession or slow down in the energy business (similar to what happened post-Enron) we'll see other sectors continue on with business as usual. The 1990s and early 2000s saw rapid growth in the TMC complex, expansion in Houston's international ties due to the shipping industry and growth at the Port of Houston. The boom - at least in terms of commercial construction is slowing (you can tell by the dwindling number of proposals trickling down right now), but the uptick in residential, and residential-service construction is yet to really start. Where are the new schools, hospitals, services, retail? Aside from growth inside the Loop in big mixed-use projects and a few other locations (The Woodlands, City Center etc) this area has yet to really take off elsewhere in the Houston region. And to those who keep talking about the oil business, you fail to recall the massive port complex we have just east of Downtown. Its there. It isn't going away, it will only grow in size, scope, scale. Global shipping is an immense industry. Houston is positioned very well to continue to reap the rewards of forward thinking and a huge port industrial complex that makes us a much different city from places like Dallas and Atlanta.

Obviously this goes without saying for a lot of buildings similar to Central Bank, in countless cities nationwide. Personally I have long felt it was an interesting building that was primed for a good re-use. Unfortunately it has just been the subject of property neglect and very prominently located property neglect to boot. Its still unused. And still a dump (in its current condition) even if it is being worked on.

Central Bank is a dump and unused - anything is better than what it is. Anything! 800 Bell is a fine tower built with a 60s vibe and style. No need to muddle with that, but its going to happen. I guess its better than a tear down

Sure did. This is their HQ for this area. Do something nice, or just rent a space in a retail strip center and forgo the money needed to build their own building, buy property etc. That would be cheaper than building new. I'm not advocating they spend $300,000 on design + implementation of something, but do a little something. I know the have a tight budget - non-profits always do. There is still the chance to build something meaningful while also staying within a budget.

I'd rather see something that's not identical - at least if we're going to get twin towers lets get some quality. SkyHouse is ...well....residential towers are seldom worth a darn when it comes to design. I'd rather see the Hines Museum District tower across from SkyHouse and see SkyHouse #3 (or #2?) over in the Museum District for some contrast on the skyline. That's all I'm saying.

Good to infill that area. The design of this building is...........very non-profit like. Too bad they couldn't have spent a little more money on something architectural.