Embassy Suites By Hilton Houston Downtown At 1515 Dallas St.

[scarface]

Pics taken earlier this month. Look closely at the rendering and the building in the 1st pic, you can see where they stopped.

Damn that's sad! Almost brought tears to my eyes. Just wasted!

[barracuda]

That is one ugly building.

[Subdude]

I nominate this for the 2010 Houston Ugly Building Award. (Previous winners include the Mercer and the downtown Civil Courthouse). We should mock up a little trophy and send it to the developer. The facade looks like a cheap subsidized housing project from the 1970s.

[TheNiche]

I nominate this for the 2010 Houston Ugly Building Award. (Previous winners include the Mercer and the downtown Civil Courthouse). We should mock up a little trophy and send it to the developer.

I was gonna nominate Mai's.

Edited September 21, 2010 by TheNiche

[20thStDad]

Come on guys, all it needs is some snazzy lighting scheme at night and you know you'll love it.

[mfastx]

Come on guys, all it needs is some snazzy lighting scheme at night and you know you'll love it.

Yes, that would make it slightly better. Kinda like the Memorial building at I-10 and Beltway 8.

[Subdude]

Come on guys, all it needs is some snazzy lighting scheme at night and you know you'll love it.

Don't bet on it. It would just be putting lipstick on a pig.

[kdog08]

So does this look better than a surface parking lot?

[Subdude]

So does this look better than a surface parking lot?

Yes, of course, but if you are trying to imply that we should therefore be grateful and not mind the pig, I don't buy it. Being better than a surface lot doesn't provide an excuse for overt ugliness.

[TheNiche]

Yes, of course, but if you are trying to imply that we should therefore be grateful and not mind the pig, I don't buy it. Being better than a surface lot doesn't provide an excuse for overt ugliness.

Pigs taste yummy.

[kdog08]

Yes, of course, but if you are trying to imply that we should therefore be grateful and not mind the pig, I don't buy it. Being better than a surface lot doesn't provide an excuse for overt ugliness.

Never suggested we should be grateful but it was one of those things could be worse kind of situations. We got a crap looking building. Oh well. I care more about the building contributing visitors who will hopefully patronize and contribute money to Houston's downtown. Maybe I am the only one who cares about this building being successful instead of looking pretty.

[20thStDad]

Come on guys, all it needs is some snazzy lighting scheme at night and you know you'll love it.

I forgot to use my super sarcasm font. Ok there it is.

[C2H]

Those pics that urbanizer posted show the true scaling back of this project. If the final design of this building was a person, it would look like the equivalent of their head being chopped off and only leaving the shoulders.

[Highway6]

I just don't see the point in b1tchin at the final product. Mediocre buildings get put up all the time in houston, and there are plenty of mediocre buildings downtown.

It seems to me that most Haifers think that if a building gets highlighted with its own thread, its should be and will be spectacular. We're spoiled.

Reality check - It's just a chain hotel guys, one that was hardly slated to be spectacular to begin with. I'm sure there are countless economic reasons why it had to be scaled back.

Pros - Removed a surface lot that so many haifers like to complain about.

Increased hotel rooms downtown

Provided work for an architecture firm, a contractor, engineers, and countless Houstonians when that's hard to come by these days

Cons - It's mediocre.

Move on.

[Geoff8201]

Too bad they couldn't just stick to the rendering and the original height. When you can't do it right, it's sometimes best to do nothing at all...

Overall I don't think it's super horrible, I like the exterior materials, but not the way they are used. It's another box trying obviously and desperately not to be a box.

[Howard Huge]

Whats up with the same ugly beige crap that they also used on the pavilions. Hideous.

[mfastx]

Reality check - It's just a chain hotel guys, one that was hardly slated to be spectacular to begin with. I'm sure there are countless economic reasons why it had to be scaled back.

I think a lot of people are dissapointed because it is so far from the rendering, which was spectacular (OK maybe not spectacular, but pretty solid IMO).

[Highway6]

...because it is so far from the rendering....

You sadden me.

[mfastx]

You sadden me.

And you me as well. I consider this to be far from the rendering because they completely omitted the only aesthetic aspect to the bulding, which was the crown. Obviously you think that since they built basically the same structure minus the most dynamic feature, that it's "close" to the rendering, well, you sadden me.

Edited September 22, 2010 by mfastx

[Highway6]

And you me as well. I consider this to be far from the rendering because they completely omitted the only aesthetic aspect to the bulding, which was the crown. Obviously you think that since they built basically the same structure minus the most dynamic feature, that it's "close" to the rendering, well, you sadden me.

You're 100% wrong on my thoughts. I'm tired of beating a dead horse, so I won't mention them again... my thoughts on renderings and expectations have been documented enough in this thread ( #717).

Edited September 22, 2010 by Highway6

[mfastx]

You're 100% wrong on my thoughts. I'm tired of beating a dead horse, so I won't mention them again... my thoughts on renderings and expectations have been documented enough in this thread ( #717).

Well, just so you know, I'm glad they built it, even though it's mediocre. But I'm sure you understand why some people would be upset about this building.

[Subdude]

I just don't see the point in b1tchin at the final product. Mediocre buildings get put up all the time in houston, and there are plenty of mediocre buildings downtown.

It seems to me that most Haifers think that if a building gets highlighted with its own thread, its should be and will be spectacular. We're spoiled.

Reality check - It's just a chain hotel guys, one that was hardly slated to be spectacular to begin with. I'm sure there are countless economic reasons why it had to be scaled back.

Pros - Removed a surface lot that so many haifers like to complain about.

Increased hotel rooms downtown

Provided work for an architecture firm, a contractor, engineers, and countless Houstonians when that's hard to come by these days

Cons - It's mediocre.

Move on.

See, this is what kills me. Whenever some garbage gets built, and it is criticized as such, someone comes along to not defend the building, but to in effect say we should be happy with junk. This isn't even defending the hotel, just saying that we should be happy to settle for mediocrity, because after all, there are other mediocre buildings around. The pros and cons imply a false trade-off; that somehow it's OK to be ugly if it replaces a surface lot. All the pros mentioned could just have well been accomplished with an attractive building.

Embrace mediocrity!

Simply amazing...

[kdog08]

Embrace mediocrity!

Simply amazing...

No one is embracing mediocrity but what are you going to do about the building? Are you going to boycott ES? Spit on the architects? Commit acts of violence against those responsible for chopping the crown off the building? There is a big difference in "embracing" and accepting "mediocrity".

.

Perhaps you should look into an adage about lemons and lemonade.

Edited September 23, 2010 by kdog08

[kdog08]

I realize b*tching on the internet about things you really have no control over is in vogue right now, but come on people.

[lockmat]

See, this is what kills me. Whenever some garbage gets built, and it is criticized as such, someone comes along to not defend the building, but to in effect say we should be happy with junk. This isn't even defending the hotel, just saying that we should be happy to settle for mediocrity, because after all, there are other mediocre buildings around. The pros and cons imply a false trade-off; that somehow it's OK to be ugly if it replaces a surface lot. All the pros mentioned could just have well been accomplished with an attractive building.

Embrace mediocrity!

Simply amazing...

But does complaining help the situation? What else can we do but accept it? Will developers and architects hear our voices? And if they do, do they listen??? Do they care what we have to say? Maybe some of them do, I don't know, but I doubt it.

[totheskies]

I like the overall design of the building... but I HATE the side the faces the park. If they had thought to build the park side the same as the opposite side, it would have turned out rather nicely.

It's a hotel... it doesn't have to re-invent the architectural wheel. Houston is lucky to have gotten some very nice projects in the past few years (Main Place, OPP, Co-Cathedral). It's ok if we intermingle with some structures that are less of a fine art and more of an applied art.

[Highway6]

See, this is what kills me. Whenever some garbage gets built, and it is criticized as such, someone comes along to not defend the building, but to in effect say we should be happy with junk. This isn't even defending the hotel, just saying that we should be happy to settle for mediocrity, because after all, there are other mediocre buildings around. The pros and cons imply a false trade-off; that somehow it's OK to be ugly if it replaces a surface lot. All the pros mentioned could just have well been accomplished with an attractive building.

Embrace mediocrity!

Simply amazing...

Embrace mediocrity? Me? Apparently you haven't seen my rants against "Recognized" ratings in the Klein ISD thread.

What kills me is the average haifer's lack of sense of reality. There is no city in the world that doesn't have their share of mediocre buildings.. they are just a fact of life. It is stupid to expect every building built to be awe-inspiring. Developers pull all the strings.. architects can only design what they can get away with.. Money always does the talking.

This is not a commercial mid-rise or hi-rise building where a developer might be willing to go out on a limb in order to attract tenants . It's a hotel. Not a Ritz, Not a W, not some famous hotel brand name known for elegance or cutting-edge. It's an Embassy Suites. Here is a snapshot of Embassy Suite's portfolio. Why anyone would expect much beyond mediocrity from Embassy Suites is beyond me!!

Also, what kills me.. ignoring what's going on around you. Economy is in the crapper! Everyone here vilifies the developer, but I just can't imagine it's only his say. I can't imagine that financing issues haven't played an enormous part in his scaling back.

Everyone has a right to b!tch about an ugly building. Hell, I think it's ugly too. I have a right to b!tch about b!tchers if I feel their b!tchings are unjustified. My responses have usually come in after reading two specific complaints.

1) The "oh waaahhh, IT doesn't match the renderings" complaint

2) The " IF you can't build something nice, don't build anything at all " complaint

You can call the building ugly all you want, but if you go to either one of those 2 destinations, I'm gonna rant about what an idiot you are.

And guess what Subdude... It IS okay to be ugly if it increases the taxbase, creates much needed jobs, adds infill to our skyline. Is it preferable? No. But it's certainly Okay.

[KinkaidAlum]

Actually, what's funny to me is that people are surprised that other folks are commenting on BRUTALLY painful architecture on an architectural forum!

Isn't that what this forum is for?????

[Geoff8201]

Everyone has a right to b!tch about an ugly building. Hell, I think it's ugly too. I have a right to b!tch about b!tchers if I feel their b!tchings are unjustified. My responses have usually come in after reading two specific complaints.

1) The "oh waaahhh, IT doesn't match the renderings" complaint

2) The " IF you can't build something nice, don't build anything at all " complaint

You can call the building ugly all you want, but if you go to either one of those 2 destinations, I'm gonna rant about what an idiot you are.

Not to add fuel to a fire... but although I would agree that once you hear these complaints once is enough... hell even I made the same complaint a few posts back... however here's what gets me:

1. It doesn't match the renderings... yea yea, stick with me here... the purpose of a rendering is to give you an idea what the final product will look like. A lot of projects deviate slightly from the renderings, things change in the many construction months, this is normal. This project however, has deviated, needless to say, a LOT from the rendering... basically, couldn't they make a new rendering?Or at least abandon this rendering in all its forms? Take it off display, seems silly to have the original at the site even still, when it's apparent that it's not going to look like that. I can imagine lots of clueless people looking and going "Huh??"

2. I wouldn't say don't build at all... I would say, okay, tough economic times.. lets wait. I'm sure though in the real world, time lost = money lost. Guess you can't argue with that

[Highway6]

1. It doesn't match the renderings... yea yea, stick with me here... the purpose of a rendering is to give you an idea what the final product will look like. ....

Refer to post 717 for my reply.

2. I wouldn't say don't build at all... I would say, okay, tough economic times.. lets wait. I'm sure though in the real world, time lost = money lost. Guess you can't argue with that

Oh.. but you would.

Too bad they couldn't just stick to the rendering and the original height. When you can't do it right, it's sometimes best to do nothing at all...