Houston19514 Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 different?Yes, different. (but only slightly so). I don't recall the "bands" of light being quite so sharply differentiated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarface Posted October 25, 2008 Share Posted October 25, 2008 I just saw the lighting last night. I'm with the OP, I like and miss the blue but I like the white just as much, if not better. I mean the blue lighting was so dim you could barely see it anyway, not to mention, you couldn't even see the projected Continential Logo. For years i've been asking what the point was of even having the logo if it couldn't be seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C2H Posted November 1, 2008 Share Posted November 1, 2008 I liked the blue better too but this lighting isn't so bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HtownWxBoy Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 I like the blue lighting more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolBuddy06 Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 If anything all the blue light needs is to be a little brighter and the logo sharper, instead of glowing like embers. The white is only just better than nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddavenport Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 Pics, please... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metro Matt Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 (edited) My guess is the blue lighting was damaged by Ike. Possibly lenses that got blown off exposing the white sodium floods underneath. Edited November 14, 2008 by Metro Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HtownWxBoy Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 My guess is the blue lighting was damaged by Ike. Possibly lenses that got blown off exposing the white sodium floods underneath.Hopefully... I don't know why they could change it. The light was blue b/c it's Continental's building... it matched their logo. Why would they change that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deut28Thirteen Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Watching Rockets on ESPN it shows the blue lighting is back on. I love the blue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UrbaNerd Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Watching Rockets on ESPN it shows the blue lighting is back on. I love the blue.That might be stock footage. It was white on the way home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uhlaw09 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Watching Rockets on ESPN it shows the blue lighting is back on. I love the blue.It was white last night. Almost certain it was stock footage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgr Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 according to someone at continental, the blue lighting was given up as a cost cutting measure. continental had to pay for it. the white lighting is paid for by the building owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houstonmacbro Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 I just wanted to know what everyone thinks of the new lighting on the crown of the Continential Building. Personally, i miss the blue lighting with the Continential logo but i still like the new lighting because its a little more pronounced. Does anyone know why they stopped the blue lighting?I'll look the next time I am down that way. I loved the blue with the faint Continental logo imprinted inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 according to someone at continental, the blue lighting was given up as a cost cutting measure. continental had to pay for it. the white lighting is paid for by the building owner.Anybody know if they gave up the naming rights to the building? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgr Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Anybody know if they gave up the naming rights to the building?no, they haven't. from what i hear, it's still continental center. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbannizer Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 https://therealdeal.com/texas/2022/11/01/brookfield-exploring-options-on-houstons-1600-smith/ Brookfield Properties is reportedly in the process of “mothballing” one of downtown Houston’s more iconic office towers, The Real Deal has learned. New York-based Brookfield, the largest landlord in downtown Houston, is asking current tenants at 1600 Smith to move to one of the company’s other 11 properties in the city’s central business district. The plan is to figure out what to do with the 23,500 square-foot, 51-story office tower, a source familiar with the property told TRD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEES?! Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 Interesting. 1801 Smith is, I believe, another brookfield property- it’s the one currently being converted to multifamily. I wonder if they’re going to do a study with the DRA on converting this one- maybe multifamily and reno some of it to higher-end office space, like what they’re doing to Esperson. I feel like this side of DT needs more units. 1801 Smith is gonna help with that for sure. 1600 Smith is a cool postmodern building. Even though I don’t always care for pomo architecture, I like the look of this one. It reminds me of something we’d make out of lego when we were kids .. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 (edited) 14 hours ago, Urbannizer said: https://therealdeal.com/texas/2022/11/01/brookfield-exploring-options-on-houstons-1600-smith/ It's hard to take the report of "mothballing" too seriously when they also tell us that the building is 23,500 square feet .. I'm sorry, but anyone who could write that should not be reporting on commercial real estate matters. They also tell us that "It (mothballing) is a fate that has already befallen some of the Bayou City’s other notable office towers" with a link to a story about ONE building that was foreclosed and says nothing about any buildings being mothballed. <SMH> To make matters even worse, they keep throwing out the word "mothball", but there doesn't seem to be any indication from Brookfield that they are "mothballing" is even one of the alternatives they are considering. It seems some kind of repurposing would be considerably more likely. What a sad mish-mash of an article that was. Edited November 8, 2022 by Houston19514 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattyt36 Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 HBJ Fall 2022 Office Leasing Guide reported 481K of 1,227K sf vacant at 1600 Smith, for a vacancy rate of 40%. Is most of the leased space Chevron? 1 Allen Center: 268K of 931K, or 29% 2 Allen Center: 462K of 1,075K, or 43% 3 Allen Center: 325K of 1,283K, or 25% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_cuevas713 Posted November 10, 2022 Share Posted November 10, 2022 This is awesome! I agree this side of downtown should be majority residential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.