The Driscoll High-Rise & River Oaks Shopping Center Developments

[nmainguy]

I just received a copy of the site plan for north of W.Gray. I can't share it with you as I promised I wouldn't but I can tell you this: The symmetry of the center will be blown out of the water.

ROC becomes the same old SOS you'll find anywhere.

BTW, Nancy Sarnoff is now at Gensler.

Edited July 30, 2006 by nmainguy

[TJones]

I just received a copy of the site plan for north of W.Gray. I can't share it with you as I promised I wouldn't but I can tell you this: The symmetry of the center will be blown out of the water.

ROC becomes the same old SOS you'll find anywhere.

BTW, Nancy Sarnoff is now at Gensler.

Nmain, I meant to ask you, is that avatar of yours Michael Landon's friend from Highway to Heaven ?

Or is it Mel Gibson's recent DUI mugshot ?

Edited July 30, 2006 by TJones

[nmainguy]

Namin, I meant to ask you, is that avatar of yours Michael Landon's friend from Highway to Heaven ?

Or is it Mel Gibson's recent DUI mugshot ?

It was taken the moment he realized he is gay.

[H-Town Man]

^^I swear the moment I saw that on the drudgereport I thought I was seeing an article about Saddam Hussein.

Doesn't the inner loop have about half a dozen proposed condo towers? Clearly not all of them will be built. My guess is that either (a) this one will be built and we will lose one of the others (along with a historic theater and the city's classiest shopping center) or ( they'll demolish the theater and much of the center in order to make it look like the tower's about to be built, and the tower will never get built, leaving a big empty square of dirt on West Gray.

Given recent history, I'd say ( is more likely.

[TheNiche]

Er, what? Would someone please explain to me how ' ... the public would also benefit from a condominium tower .... ' built to replace a public access venue like the RO Theatre ???

The public would be able to live there. That's how.

I am live in the city (not the suburbs), own a home that I pay full city taxes on, and make what I recently read is right at the average US salary; therefore I consider myself a decent representation of the Houston 'public' referenced here.

If you say so...but you aren't the 'public'. Only a tiny tiny fraction of it.

But, exactly how will a new condo building in which units will likely be priced in the 400-700K range (about 4 to 7 times more what I, the average salaried public, can afford to buy and which I will likely never set foot in) BENEFIT ME ? How will it benefit anyone besides the upper income residents who will inhabit it ???

How did you arrive at those price points? That would be one of the most expensive towers in town (if not the MOST expensive. I can't stand it when people apply made-up data to their arguments.

You need to get over this selfish notion that if something doesn't directly benefit you, then it is no benefit to the 'public'. Rememeber that wealthy people are part of the 'public' too. Moreover, if it is out of your price range, then that is an indicator of the extremely high value that consumers place upon the condo units. Just because the tower benefits people that are wealthier than you are is no reason to discount the benefit of the proposal. Classist arguments will get you nowhere.

I would really like to know, so that I can be sure I'm not on the wrong side of this argument (the side trying to wake up Weingarten to the travesty they are planning to commit, and simultaneously wake Houston up to the fact that we'll never be a world-class city if we don't start somewhere to preserve the most iconic examples of our illustrious past ...).

How does RO Theater make Houston any more "world class"? For that matter, most of our historic buildings aren't all that inspired compared to "world class" cities. If you want to lay claim to the "world class" descriptor, I'd suggest that you promote building inspired new forms of architecture rather. Follow Dubai's example.

[Highway6]

I just received a copy of the site plan for north of W.Gray. I can't share it with you as I promised I wouldn't but I can tell you this: The symmetry of the center will be blown out of the water.

ROC becomes the same old SOS you'll find anywhere.

BTW, Nancy Sarnoff is now at Gensler.

Can you tell us the date and architect ?

Does it looks like the same one lgg had for the Chronicle ?

[TheNiche]

As the debate rolls on, you become more illogical. Your backdoor accusation of firstngoal wanting to take away an individual's property rights is just illogical as he said no such thing.

I preempted my statements by unambiguously saying the following in the very first sentence:

...but to the extent that this is at all a policy debate...

You will note that I did not say: "This is a policy debate." I did not say: "The only solution to your desires is to change municipal laws." I only made an allowance for the possibility that his input may imply policy change. My arguments were then made within that context.

In fact, I stated respect for firstngoal's cause. If he or any of the unhappy citizens are able to find an alternative means of resolving the issue without legal intervention, that's a good thing. Being able to do so would prove that in fact, the RO Theater is really and truely the highest and best use of the site.

[nmainguy]

I've received permission to describe the site plan but not to post the actual drawing.

1. An approx. 100' wide by 400' long 3 story parking garage is situated 7' from the north property line. It aligns with the eastern end of the existing wing next to La Griglia and travels west for 400'

2. There is a 6400 sq/ft freestanding building-80' x 80'-that stands 25' off the S. Shepherd property line and approx. 80' off the north property line. Someone has marked it "Future Restaurant" with a sharpie.

3. There is a 30,000 sq/ft addition where Jos. Banks is that is marked "Lease Space". It is 120' x 125' and is situated approx 55' west of Talbots and approx. 55' from the W. Gray property line. It also has a smaller 1500 sq/ft lease space attached to it's west side 20' x 75'.

4. The Starbucks stays as is.

Everything else is surface parking. The entire curved wing is destroyed.

So grab your pencils and sketch it out.This is how it stands of today.

This directly from my source's email:

There may be a newer plan, but as far as I can tell, Weingarten hasn

[Highway6]

I've received permission to describe the site plan but not to post the actual drawing.

1. An approx. 100' wide by 400' long 3 story parking garage is situated 7' from the north property line. It aligns with the eastern end of the existing wing next to La Griglia and travels west for 400'

2. There is a 6400 sq/ft freestanding building-80' x 80'-that stands 25' off the S. Shepherd property line and approx. 80' off the north property line. Someone has marked it "Future Restaurant" with a sharpie.

3. There is a 30,000 sq/ft addition where Jos. Banks is that is marked "Lease Space". It is 120' x 125' and is situated approx 55' west of Talbots and approx. 55' from the W. Gray property line. It also has a smaller 1500 sq/ft lease space attached to it's west side 20' x 75'.

4. The Starbucks stays as is.

Everything else is surface parking. The entire curved wing is destroyed.

So grab your pencils and sketch it out.This is how it stands of today.

This directly from my source's email:

I'm guessing you might know how the "source" is.

I'm curious to date and architect on yours, but i understand if you can't reveal that part.

Edited July 30, 2006 by Highway6

[Pumapayam]

Hooray for Parking Garages!

Did I miss something or are they going to still support 2 Starbuck over there?

[nmainguy]

I'm curious to date and architect on yours, but i understand if you can't reveal that part.

Same architect-Hermes-with Weingarten Realty stamp. It's really all I can say except for the above^^^.

Hermes does a pretty decent job on their strip centers. If I were an architect working there, I'd have a hard time being a part of the destruction of the entire center-save Kroger.

Just my 2...

Pumapayam:

Can't speak for the other Starbucks. I'm assuming it will go if they tear that section down along with the theatre.

Edited July 30, 2006 by nmainguy

[gonzo1976]

Yeesh, can that area even support the traffic a shopping center like that would bring?

[nmainguy]

Yeesh, can that area even support the traffic a shopping center like that would bring?

Well, they'll lose 8 tenants and gain 3-maybe more: a restaurant, a B&N(?) and a 1500 sq' addition so who knows. Maybe they could put in a dry cleaners, a bank branch and a Shipley's. In any event, the destruction will just make it another piece of crap strip mall. Enjoy.

[RedScare]

Well, they'll lose 8 tenants and gain 3-maybe more: a restaurant, a B&N(?) and a 1500 sq' addition so who knows. Maybe they could put in a dry cleaners, a bank branch and a Shipley's. In any event, the destruction will just make it another piece of crap strip mall. Enjoy.

That's probably not quite true. The existing center is long since paid for, with very high rents. The only reason to outrage the public or even waste construction money on a profitable site would be if net revenue would be greater after the reconstruction. The only way that would happen would be to drastically increase square footage. To do that, and also accomodate increased patronage, would require multi-story buildings, very likely fronting the street, with parking garages behind them. While the new construction would never approach the classic Art Moderne lines of the original center, it will probably be attractive and efficient. It is next door to River Oaks, afterall, and will be trying to attract high end retailers and customers. That suggests a pretty expensive development, even if most prefer the previous center.

[mls1202]

That's probably not quite true. The existing center is long since paid for, with very high rents. The only reason to outrage the public or even waste construction money on a profitable site would be if net revenue would be greater after the reconstruction. The only way that would happen would be to drastically increase square footage. To do that, and also accomodate increased patronage, would require multi-story buildings, very likely fronting the street, with parking garages behind them. While the new construction would never approach the classic Art Moderne lines of the original center, it will probably be attractive and efficient. It is next door to River Oaks, afterall, and will be trying to attract high end retailers and customers. That suggests a pretty expensive development, even if most prefer the previous center.

I have a feeling that people's feelings "MAY" change a bit if they were to show a rendering, at least as far as the Black-Eyed Pea part goes. I'm definitely against anything that takes away the theater itself.

[sevfiv]

I'm curious to date and architect on yours, but i understand if you can't reveal that part.

i think the same hermes march 2005 slip is being circulated

Edited July 31, 2006 by sevfiv

[KinkaidAlum]

I don't mind the parking garage and the Chronicle did reveal that the new B&N would be multi story, so they are going vertical.

The problem I have is that the "pod" Starbucks will remain and a 6,400 sq foot restaurant pod site will also be added. Strip malls with pod sites do not excite me. NMain also alluded to ample surface parking and the set backs seem quite a distance from the streets so that may indeed be the case.

[Native Montrosian]

A comment on the KHOU board lists Wallace Garcia Wilson Architects as drawing the condo plans.

[Highway6]

A comment on the KHOU board lists Wallace Garcia Wilson Architects as drawing the condo plans.

Can you provide us a link to the board there.. i can't find the specific one.

[gnu]

A story in today's chronicle on a similar issue in Austin that would affect Las Manitas/Avenue Cafe:

Is the River Oaks Center a Houston ICON??

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metrop...an/4082738.html

If that doesn't work, Dave Sullivan has an idea. The chairman of the city planning commission calls it "iconic preservation," a program that would both support and protect businesses deemed Austin icons.

Wisconsin has a similar program to protect barns and Vermont has one for covered bridges, Sullivan said.

Such a program could offer incentives to icons and require that developers asking for increased entitlements preserve any iconic property on site.

Sullivan is shopping the idea this week, though he isn't certain it would pass in time to help Las Manitas.

"If there is strong support for it — and I haven't met anybody yet who doesn't like this idea — it is something that could come about in a couple of months," he said.

EDIT: oops just saw this was posted in its own thread by Sevfiv.

http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...st&p=103366

( but i think the ICON preservation part of it is more relevant in the river oaks thread)

Edited July 31, 2006 by gnu

[Native Montrosian]

Can you provide us a link to the board there.. i can't find the specific one.

Entire message:

July 28, 2006 05:48 p.m.

Since 2 architectural firms are already drawing the new plans for the retail (Hermes Architects) and the hi-rise (Wallace Garcia Wilson Architects), I'd say that the demo of the River Oaks Shopping Center & the River Oaks Theatre are more than just a "rumor." I sincerely hope that the public outcry against the tragic loss of the art deco architecture and the loss of Houston's last grand movie theatre will halt Weingarten from this action.

This was on their survey board - in order to access the messages, one has to be a registered member. Latest KHOU story

The link to the survey is the 3rd box in the story text.

[RyanJX5]

Now this rumor about the River Oaks theater is getting serious,Texas social queen and international art patron Lynn Wyatt, is going to talk and debate to the city council on Thurs about the supposed demolition of the River Oaks Theatre and its neighbors. Lynn Wyatt will bring some clout to the public outcry of this horrific and hopefully false rumor.

Edited August 1, 2006 by RyanJX5

[KimberlySayWhat]

Go Lynn! Go Lynn!

[nmainguy]

Now this rumor about the River Oaks theater is getting serious,Texas social queen and international art patron Lynn Wyatt, is going to talk and debate to the city council on Thurs about the supposed demolition of the River Oaks Theatre and its neighbors. Lynn Wyatt will bring some clout to the public outcry of this horrific and hopefully false rumor.

It doesn't look like a rumor-sorry to say.

If you talk to Lynn before Thursday, PLEASE tell her to leave Oscar at home-having one of Saddam's buddys show up might be a deal killer.

Edited August 1, 2006 by nmainguy

[KimberlySayWhat]

She looks like Carol Channing in that picture. I think I said that before.

You all probably think I'm old because I know who Carol Channing is, but I'm not.

Edited August 1, 2006 by KimberlySayWhat

[TJones]

It doesn't look like a rumor-sorry to say.

If you talk to Lynn before Thursday, PLEASE tell her to leave Oscar at home-having one of Saddam's buddys show up might be a deal killer.

Seperated at birth ?

Edited August 1, 2006 by TJones

[sevfiv]

^ eek!

a little birdie told me there will be RO t-shirts for sale beginning sometime tomorrow from GHPA's website and at the copy.com store

[dbigtex56]

Now this rumor about the River Oaks theater is getting serious,Texas social queen and international art patron Lynn Wyatt, is going to talk and debate to the city council on Thurs about the supposed demolition of the River Oaks Theatre and its neighbors. Lynn Wyatt will bring some clout to the public outcry of this horrific and hopefully false rumor.

Public speakers' sessions are held on Tuesdays (not Thursdays) at 2:00PM.

They are shown live on the Municipal Channel (channel 16 on Warner Cable.)

[KimberlySayWhat]

TJones:

Seperated at birth ?

Wow! I'd say.

Sorry, I won't stray off topic no mo'.

[KimberlySayWhat]

Looks like Caroyln Farb and Sheila Jackson Lee (SJL as I like to call her) are getting involved as well.