Jump to content

Texasota

Full Member
  • Posts

    2,782
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Texasota

  1. The Romans built (some) temples clad with marble up to a certain height, Above that it was plaster etched to look like marble. Also, whatever they do use here, it's not going to be "structural." All it has to do is hold itself up; the building is in no way reliant upon it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not really defending what they're doing here. Is it better than tearing it down or leaving it the way it was? Yes. This is *not* responsible historic preservation/reconstruction though.
  2. theyre using eifs detailed to look like brick. only the first 3 floors will actually even have real masonry. Of course, that's all youll really be able to perceive from the sidewalk anyway. Hell, the Romans did it.
  3. There are quite a few houses in the Heights that show a mix of styles though: Craftsman forms with Queen Anne detailing, Queen Anne forms with craftsman detailing etc. This is Houston; nothing is ever pure. But yeah, they're not pokemon. Bungalows don't evolve into queen annes.
  4. eh, i still wouldnt put it like that. Not that I'm not happy to see this happen, but it's an approximation and simplification of the building's original appearance. "Reversal" suggests that the damage of the midcentury remodel is being reversed, but that can never happen. The damage was permanent; the vast majority of historic material is lost.
  5. It's possible to have one firm design the infrastructure, landscaping etc and have other firms come and plug their buildings in. I believe Hines is doing something similar north of Memorial. Honestly, I prefer that approach. Real cities are not like City Centre; they *are* a hodge-podge.
  6. I think that's wrong... That makes sense at the bottom of the market, but these new towers are *not* aimed there.
  7. Pg. 179. I would screenshot it, but I'm not sure where to host the image.
  8. This last planning agenda had a project called Buffalo Studios across from the Buffalo Soldiers Museum. It looked pretty nifty: second story partially elevated over parking, rooftop terrace, generally pretty pedestrian oriented...
  9. I think Gensler did a pretty nice job on the center for Dance. I thinks having a more arts-oriented client is good for them.
  10. oh well. This isn't *bad*, but so much less interesting than what was originally proposed.
  11. I mean, in terms of site plan, it *is* just a g*d-d4*! strip center.
  12. Is it really "infill?" It's taking the place of existing buildings that have *not* outlived there usefulness; it's not going up on vacant land or a brownfield.
  13. Except this is not Houston Center. This is a genuinely pedestrian-oriented development, and the skywalk is actually probably necessary. I think the strongest argument here is security. I guarantee you there are quite a few single women who would love to live in this development but for whom a secure route between the garage and her apartment is an absolute must.
  14. It's better than refinishing hardwood floors. God, I never want to do that again.
  15. I'm just not sure I'm convinced that this skyway is meaningfully different from the interior hallways in either building. Now, if multiple developments started to connect to each other be skyway? Then i'd be complaining. Just to be super obnoxious: Cues, not "ques"
  16. Um, like I said, since the 70's, which is exactly when the gay scene really exploded in Montrose. A better example might be "Neartown," but that never really went anywhere.
  17. People have called Montrose "The Montrose" since the 70's. As for Eado? I always just call it Old Chinatown.
  18. Higher costs than the average building? Possibly, but relying on proven technologies and processes, even while being innovative with their use, is just not likely to result in the same kinds of problems you get in Calatrava's (or, going furth back, Wright's) buildings.
×
×
  • Create New...