texas911

How about some more pictures?

Nice! You definitely have a show place!

Hey vine, could you do a 1 or 2 line synopsis? Thanks.

Its not the truckers that cause the traffic, most truckers are professional drivers and know the stay out of the left lane.

So basically you said PUF is a small pool from which UT and ATM get their money. And they are underfunded, but the giant endowments they both have also figure into how they are funded? And you can't see why they can't share PUF? UT and ATM aren't hurting in terms of funding. Heck UT is turing away freshmen because they have no room for them. How is that doing the State of Texas a service?

As for the per student funding compared to other schools, well Texas also has the lowest cost of living index. So comparing a California funded student to one that lives in College Station, well that's not good comparison is it?

UNT and TWU are in Denton

Texas has 3 "tier 1" universities if you include Rice

the part in bold is a very common and extremely false misconception......The PUF paid out 400 million in 2007 and not all of that goes to UT Austin or TAMU College Station......some of it goes to pay off bonds that cover specific types of infrastructure and equipment at most, but not all of the UT System and TAMU System institutions.....what is left from that goes to UT Austin, TAMU College Station, and PVAMU for "excellence"

and in addition when judged against peer schools like those in the UC System or other "tier 1" public universities UT Austin and TAMU College Station are underfunded based on state funding and on a tuition basis so overall they are well underfunded when compared to peer schools

If the PUF was shared more than it is the results would be one of three things or possibly two of three.....Texas would have one very low ranked "tier 1" public university being UT, Texas would have no "tier 1" public universities, or UT Austin and TAMU College Station would have to raise their tuition dramatically to both maintain "tier1" status

the PUF pays out just under 5% of a three year average of the funds which if that 400 million went to JUST UT Austin would only equal 1/3 of their yearly budget

the PUF is not some endless source of wealth that two schools hog all for themselves.....it is just a way to keep political idiots hands off of a fraction of higher education funding and it is the only reason Texas even has two public "tier 1" universities

BS. You conveniently forgot to include UT's and ATM's huge endowments into the equation. Rice isn't considered a Tier 1 because it gets no funding from the state. Tier 1 only means it gets Tier 1 State funding. The only thing holding back UH's funding is all political. Go read about how Gov Perry castrated UH and Tech's funding. Its all BS, and UT and ATM are the ones keeping UH down.

Anyway, the battle for undergrad prestige is simply unwinnable for U of H because it is so far behind in that respect.

As such it should not bother making admissions more stringent. In fact I think it should return to its open admissions policy.

This would not affect its ability to obtain "Tier 1" status which really has more to do with obtaining research funding than anything else. (Undergrad prestige does not bring in the venture capital, but well-funded research at the grad level probably could.)

UH never had an open admission policy. That's UH downtown and TSU.

I drove to Orlando for Xmas vacation and noticed that there were "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs all the way to Florida and even in Orlando. How come Houston doesn't have those signs? They should have lots of these signs on all our freeways, and have them in Spanish too.

Even if you hate UH, for whatever reason, if you live in Houston, supporting UH's Teir 1 status will benefit you. The more students UH graduates the better the workforce Houston gets. And the bigger the economic impact they make too.

What's a shame is that Texas only has 2 tier 1 institutions for such a large population. California has 7! And those contribute to its economy greatly. What's sucks is that UT and ATM are just greedy and don't want to share their funding.

They are opening up a new super HEB across the street from the super Kroger. I seriously doubt people will go to a gourmet place instead of those two grocery stores. Really, its not more than 5 minutes from anywhere in West U. They really need to make the whole place more like a town square type place. JMH was a great place for ice cream but not really to go grocery shopping. And now that the new Costco is so nearby, a lot of my West U neighbors go there to grocery shop as well.

They should just build a TRex restaurant. Same concept and company but with Dinosaurs. They have one at Disney World. Real fun when the meteor strikes!

I tried to use them but they are going high brow. Nothing wrong with that. I found them when they first started out and where a small hungry firm, but wasn't ready to build. When I was ready, they were too expensive for my budget. They seem to be busy so they aren't going to lower their fees for now. But I do love their work and am glad there are firms out there that are pushing the envelope.

ARS.

That's the thing though. Contemporary design is not a style. Maybe that's why people don't like it, they think its a style.

Anyway, America is full of people who left their countries for a better life. Why then, hold on to those old styles from their old countries?

Yea since we're not in spanish colonial times, why build a building that looks like a it came from that time. That's as ridiculous as buying a new Ford car that looks like the Model T. I don't understand why people can accept, computers, cell phones, TVs, cars, planes, electronics that are contemporary but when it comes to buildings they want to build crappy "stylistic" charactatures from the past.

Palm trees are so california wannabe. Houston should stick with oak trees.

Architecture lags behind the rest of the economy. The crisis just hit, so big projects are still going, but once those are finished, architects will get hit. Just delayed. And when it hits, it'll be hard. The last time it happened was in the 90's. Terrible time to be an architecture graduate.

I blame HGTV. They only show crappy designs and everyone is brainwashed by them.

I haven't read the whole thread but wanted to share with you guys that you can see the building even from US59 south! Quite clearly too. Its amazing that I-10 is so close when you have some reference point! We need more tall buildings around Houston!

Just for the record, I live in a 1937 2100SF bungalow in West U, not a 4000SF house. I don't have a tiny mortgage or a big one, its paid off and as well, my electricity bill is huge because, its an old house. My house's worth is equivalent to a 4000SF house in the burbs though, so I guess I have that.

Just as some people find living in a 1200SF house with kids vulgar.

Not that I'm complaining because I love the forum. But this forum has got way to many sub-forums, which makes it hard to navigate, unless you're committed. The casual reader probably will post on a certain sub-forum and not go anywhere else. Just an observation.

a value set that Travelguy identifies with, that maybe disarmed his prejudices (correct me here Travelguy). AIA is all about wearing pants and this town is an architectural backwaters waiting for high water. I don't expect the AIA to be doing anything more "revealing" than holding their own version of the Bellaire showcase. See the Outgrow Home v. Grow Ego thread for more of my thoughts w/r/t the OP and here's to hoping decon breaks through into condo cool.

Well with the general population of Houston, such as the original poster, can you blame Houston, for being a "backwater" in terms of architecture? No educated clients = no cool architecture.

Redscare's vision of efficient living!

Gosh, everyone here is on such a high horse! Of course everyone wants bigger. What's wrong with that? I attribute it to better building techniques and technology to support it. A 4000 SF house can be made pretty energy efficient compared to say 20 years ago. Of course not as efficient as a 2000 SF house built today, but so what?

Ummm, your use of the word modern means contemporary. Its just more logical to use because modern was an actual period in architectural history. In which case they would have been "modern" in style but actually, they're just contemporary architecture. Sorry I offended you, but since you readily admit that you know nothing of architecture, why so be defensive?