George R. Brown Convention Center Redevelopment, Office Building & W Hotel

[Howard Huge]

The more I think about it, the more I realize that the idea of a Top Golf on the roof of the george r brown would be PHENOMENAL.

But sadly, as Houston fights everything that makes a city "cool", it is probably jist another pipe dream of mine, like jumbotrons at greenstreet.

[BigFootsSocks]

Damn that would be so sick...^

[cloud713]

The more I think about it, the more I realize that the idea of a Top Golf on the roof of the george r brown would be PHENOMENAL. .

I've been saying this for a year.. (Maybe that's what you were referring to?)

Give something for the new residents of downtown to do. It would also provide entertainment/meeting places to talk business over in a casual environment for the employees of downtown, or take extended breaks/lunches at during the weekday (for the more privledged employees). Also I think it would be a hit for all the conventioneers staying nearby, and anyone who lived IN the city, (or on the south and east sides, as it would be much closer than the other 2) as all the existing topgolfs are in a suburban setting.

As for the rest of the rooftop (TopGolf would easily fit on just part of the roof), put a public sports complex or something for the kids (and adults) of the inner city to have even more entertainment options, while promoting a healthier lifestyle (active). It would also make downtown more family friendly.

[Howard Huge]

I've been saying this for a year.. (Maybe that's what you were referring to?)

Give something for the new residents of downtown to do. It would also provide entertainment/meeting places to talk business over in a casual environment for the employees of downtown, or take extended breaks/lunches at during the weekday (for the more privledged employees). Also I think it would be a hit for all the conventioneers staying nearby, and anyone who lived IN the city, (or on the south and east sides, as it would be much closer than the other 2) as all the existing topgolfs are in a suburban setting.

As for the rest of the rooftop (TopGolf would easily fit on just part of the roof), put a public sports complex or something for the kids (and adults) of the inner city to have even more entertainment options, while promoting a healthier lifestyle (active). It would also make downtown more family friendly.

Yes, I was referring to your idea, Cloud.

How bout some batting cages and a soccer pitch too?

It would be our version of Manhattans Chelsea Piers...

...with a killer view of the park and the skyline...

It would add something to the horrible view that drivers on 59 have of the endless wall of GRB that blocks out the sky. It would give the city a "pulse" from that view, something akin to driving down the westside highway.

I am going to contact Top Golf about this idea, and then ill wrangle up a few goons and kidnap Ric Campo to seal the deal.

[kbates2]

The more I think about it, the more I realize that the idea of a Top Golf on the roof of the george r brown would be PHENOMENAL.

But sadly, as Houston fights everything that makes a city "cool", it is probably jist another pipe dream of mine, like jumbotrons at greenstreet.

That's a phenomenal idea Howard, way too go.

[Luminare]

While those are cool ideas and all, lets be aware that just to achieve something like that would mean a complete revamp of the building structurally. That roof is only able to take the loads of the roof and maintenance crews that maybe go up there a couple days out of the month. I'm not even a structural engineer and I know this. You are adding, not only new loads from all the faculties needed to make such a venture successful, but people loads as well. Not to mention I don't think a bunch of nets on the roof would be very appealing imo. Just to make a roof "green" is alone is an enormous challenge much less through an entire golf facility.

[cloud713]

While those are cool ideas and all, lets be aware that just to achieve something like that would mean a complete revamp of the building structurally. That roof is only able to take the loads of the roof and maintenance crews that maybe go up there a couple days out of the month. I'm not even a structural engineer and I know this. You are adding, not only new loads from all the faculties needed to make such a venture successful, but people loads as well. Not to mention I don't think a bunch of nets on the roof would be very appealing imo. Just to make a roof "green" is alone is an enormous challenge much less through an entire golf facility.

You do realize they considered adding 1,600 parking spaces on the roof, right? That would be like 7 million pounds.

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 8, 2019 by Timoric

[Houston19514]

You do realize they considered adding 1,600 parking spaces on the roof, right? That would be liwke 7 million pounds.

No. They are not. They considered the idea and quickly dropped it. . . One surmises they dropped it because it was utterly infeasible. You know, 7 million pounds on top of a structure not designed for it and all...

Edited September 10, 2014 by Houston19514

[cloud713]

No. They are not. They considered the idea and quickly dropped it. . . One surmises they dropped it because it was utterly infeasible. You know, 7 million pounds on top of a structure not designed for it and all...

Or they dropped it because it's a pain in the ass to get cars that high up. Probably both though. Point being, it's more than possible.

[Houston19514]

Or they dropped it because it's a pain in the ass to get cars that high up. Probably both though. Point being, it's more than possible.

Point being, you have absolutely no idea if it is possible and we have very strong indication that it is completely infeasible.

And the other point being... your claim that they are considering putting parking on the roof of the GRB was false.

Edited September 10, 2014 by Houston19514

[cloud713]

And I have absolutely no connection with TopGolf or any high up officials to get something like this done. Point being? I dreamed up the idea. Sue me.

[cloud713]

And the other point being... your claim that they are considering putting parking on the roof of the GRB was false.

It was back before they ended up building the garage next to Hilton Americas I believe/when they were considering how to implement that parking.

[Howard Huge]

That's a phenomenal idea Howard, way too go.

Not my idea, all credit goes to Cloud713, hes been saying this for years.

[ricco67]

And I have absolutely no connection with TopGolf or any high up officials to get something like this done. Point being? I dreamed up the idea. Sue me.

I think it would be an idiotic idea.

The glare from the lights would be a driving hazard for those on the freeway, and an annoyance to those living nearby.

[Howard Huge]

Point being, you have absolutely no idea if it is possible and we have very strong indication that it is completely infeasible.

And the other point being... your claim that they are considering putting parking on the roof of the GRB was false.

First off, spike your tone down a little, no need to get all hostile towards cloud over nothing.

Second, this is just a couple of posters on HAIF tossing ideas around, no one claimed this was a done deal and happening tomorrow.

Third, you're insulting our intelligence, you're telling a poster on an architecture board that "they would have to alter the structure to build on the roof" Well no s##t, Sherlock.

And claiming that building something like this would be virtually impossible is an overstatement. It isnt even remotely impossible. Would it require some engineering and structural additions? Sure. Impossible? Hardly.

[H-Town Man]

The people's champ, doin' what he does.

 

[Howard Huge]

I think it would be an idiotic idea.

The glare from the lights would be a driving hazard for those on the freeway

You mean like the Top Golf right next to the freeway on I-10 west?

Yea, how could anyone manage to drive next to such insanely brilliant, annoying, distracting lights like they do on the Katy freeway?

I dont see how driving next to all those lights is possible...

IF YOU CANT DRIVE BY A TOP GOLF WITHOUT "GETTING DISTRACTED" AND CAUSING ACCIDENTS, YOU DONT NEED TO BE DRIVING.

Besides, all the drivers would be too busy looking at their phones to get distracted anyway.....

Anyhow, this thread has strayed off topic, lets talk about the Convention Center office building/hotel.

[Sparrow]

Doesn't matter to me what they build on the roof of the GRB, but that's ~8 acres of prime real estate that should have something be it solar panels, Top Golf, soccer fields, park, helicopter landing pads, parking spaces, apartments, train station, botanical gardens, or whatever other ideas they can come up with.

[Purdueenginerd]

So, I dont understand the anger going on here. I personally think top golf would be a great idea. But, as a structural engineer let me chime in on roof loading. In houston, roof loads have to account for downward, and uplift windloads. Snow loads, ice loads,  rain loads, self weight/dead load. 

For live load uniform distribution, the roof with no utilization aside from, being a roof will have a live load of 20 PSF (ASCE7 Table 4-1), or Pounds per square foot: So a 100x100 foot roof, is designed for 200,000 lbs (ballpark), of live load IN ADDITION TO its self weight, windloads, snow loads, ice loads, rain loads, etc...

 

 

Now, lets imagine they put "top golf" on top. That changes the classification to "Roof used for roof gardens" (table 4-1). And the LIVE load to 100 PSF. That means to the roof (100x100ft) would be designed to hold 1,000,000 lbs of live load IN ADDITION to the aforementioned.

 

 

And for the record, parking garage live loading is specified at 40 PSF(ASCE 7 table 4-1. People throwing around 7 million lbs: Thats not a lot of load. Cars, are relatively speaking: Pretty light. 

 

Finally, the equipment "air conditions, etc" is accounted for (likely) within the dead load calculation. I would guess, that that roof design already has a capacity between 100-250 psf.

:Edit: I see the area is 8 acres, or 348480 SQ Ft.

Therefore, a roof garden would be 34,848,000 extra lbs of live load. Sounds like a lot... but not impossible. To give you an idea of how strong these structures are in compression. One 12''x12'' concrete column (@4000 psi) can hold 576,000 lbs (Ballpark) in compression before it explodes (literally) (assuming buckling doesnt control). Would it require strengthing? Maybe/probably. Is it difficult? Not really. Is it expensive? Yes.

/Note, all loads unfactored. No factors of safety. No accounting for moments, etc... 

Edited September 10, 2014 by Purdueenginerd

[Purdueenginerd]

Doesn't matter to me what they build on the roof of the GRB, but that's ~8 acres of prime real estate that should have something be it solar panels, Top Golf, soccer fields, park, helicopter landing pads, parking spaces, apartments, train station, botanical gardens, or whatever other ideas they can come up with.

 

 

To add to the conversation at hand:

 

Minimum Uniformly distributed live loads Table 4-1 ASCE 7: Minmum Design loads for buildings and other structures

 

 

Top Golf, Soccer Fields, Park, Botanical Gardens

Roof used for roof gardens: 100 psf

 

Helicopter Landing Pads

Helipads: 60psf (for helicopter with max take-off weight of 3000 lbs or less)

Parking Spaces

Garages with Passenger vehicles only: 40 psf

Train Station

For the trains: a lot-- I'd have to look at another code, but train supports would be very heavy

for the passengers waiting for trains the classifcation would be Assembly platform: 100 psf

Apartments

New structural editions, but floor loading is normally 40-100psf for apartment buildings. Depending purpose of room and portion of floor. 

[Houston19514]

^  Interesting info, Purdueenginerd.   Thanks.  If I read your post and the referenced materials correctly, installing something like TopGolf on the GRB roof would require the roof to be raised to a load level roughly 5 times as strong as the current roof, and building parking on the roof (which has been considered and found to be infeasible) would only require twice the load strength of the current roof (presuming the building was not over-engineered).

 

FWIW, I believe the GRB roof is actually approximately 11 acres, with the north and south additions.

[Grizzly46]

Always the educator, Purdue. Thanks.

[Howard Huge]

I love having a structural engineer on the forum, I learn something interesting everytime you post

[Purdueenginerd]

^  Interesting info, Purdueenginerd.   Thanks.  If I read your post and the referenced materials correctly, installing something like TopGolf on the GRB roof would require the roof to be raised to a load level roughly 5 times as strong as the current roof, and building parking on the roof (which has been considered and found to be infeasible) would only require twice the load strength of the current roof (presuming the building was not over-engineered).

 

FWIW, I believe the GRB roof is actually approximately 11 acres, with the north and south additions.

 

Maybe. The truth is., We dont know what live load the roof was originally designed for. What we do know, is that 100 psf is a minimum design live load for a 'roof garden'. But using the assumption that baseline live load calculation was 20 psf back when it was originally built. Then the live load would increase by a factor of five. Using the term live load is important, because the total load would not increase by a factor of 5. The designer still has to account for rain, snow, self weight, wind, etc... Total load, might only increase by 1.2 or 1.5:

Now, in-feasibility is a tricky term in regards to design and engineering. I would opine that from an engineering standpoint, it would be doable to put parking on top and even top golf. The controlling factor is probably like many things: Cost & Benefit. 

Note: no factors of safety, reduction factors etc accounted for. 

[Houston19514]

Maybe. The truth is., We dont know what live load the roof was originally designed for. What we do know, is that 100 psf is a minimum design live load for a 'roof garden'. But using the assumption that baseline live load calculation was 20 psf back when it was originally built. Then the live load would increase by a factor of five. Using the term live load is important, because the total load would not increase by a factor of 5. The designer still has to account for rain, snow, self weight, wind, etc... Total load, might only increase by 1.2 or 1.5:

Now, in-feasibility is a tricky term in regards to design and engineering. I would opine that from an engineering standpoint, it would be doable to put parking on top and even top golf. The controlling factor is probably like many things: Cost & Benefit. 

Note: no factors of safety, reduction factors etc accounted for. 

 

Well, yes, I was referring to infeasibility here in the real world.  It's understood that almost anything is possible, if money is no object.  ;-)

 

Thanks again for the very interesting information.

Edited September 10, 2014 by Houston19514

[cloud713]

Wow. Thank you, thank you! Some serious info was just dropped in here and I learned a few things.

And yeah, I believe the roof is actually a bit over 10 acres (about the size of a TopGolf facility, surface parking lot included). And when they build the 4 block expansion to the south that's in the GRB 2025 master plan the building footprint will be increased by another 5 or so acres.

That's around 16 acres of flat rooftop in the middle (well, to the side) of downtown Houston. Eventually that will be some super prime real estate, if they don't already see the potential now.

[BigFootsSocks]

I think it would be an idiotic idea.

The glare from the lights would be a driving hazard for those on the freeway, and an annoyance to those living nearby.

Yeah because it's suuuuuch a HUUUUUUUUUGGGGEEEEE hazard for the people driving down I-10...

[ricco67]

Yeah because it's suuuuuch a HUUUUUUUUUGGGGEEEEE hazard for the people driving down I-10...

The top golf on I 10 is NOT built above and NEXT to the freeway. it's a fairly good distance and the lights are far enough to not affect anyone driving.

[Luminare]

this escalated quickly sheesh....