HoustonIsHome

Yeah, Wheeler would make an excellent location for another square, but we still need one downtown. I don't know how one would work at Hardy. The plans are still far off so it's hard for me to picture. But the way lower midtown is improving, a square at the juncture of those two rail lines would be interesting

Exactly. They did the home work for us. They saw the value in creating urban out door breathing space, why not emulate them? ExActly, exactly!!!!! Cars took our downtown pedestrians away. We need urban features that draw then back. I know you are not proposing just sitting back and waiting for them to come are you? Or just just filling in the population density while creating retail deserts? Its easier to develop with growth in mind than to build and then correct mistakes. huh???? That is not how things work. If you read back I said you build with interaction in mind. The same way the city provided incentives that attracted skyhouse, and the others planned for downtown they can do the same around a square with tightly detailed specifications for the ground floor facing the square. You don't guess at the ingredients, you lure them. Guessing it's what the city is doing now with its plans for the shopping district the city has developed parks, it has never delved into urban squares. As I mentioned above, market square is a park but not a square. A square can be a park but not all parks are squares. A square must be intimately tied to its surroundings which are very pedestrian friendly. Preston, Milam, Travis and Congress are not little intimate streets you casually cross. They are all major thoroughfares with 4 lanes of traffic. Yes main street functions as a square, but it is so narrow. discovery green is more Central Park than Madison Square. Furthermore, just adding retail won't make an area a square. Houston planners are very poor at getting projects to interact with each other. They would line westheimer with projects from Pasadena to El Paso but not one of them would interact. The projects between Highland Village and Uptown are perfect examples. expect a truly urban development for Houston??? We are talking about Houston Texas right??? I don't get it? Why does ask of that have to happen? Why is that land a must? Have you seen all the emptiness on the east side? That kills four birds with one stone:1. Creates a point of interest that would help define Houston and create a point of interest for tourists. 2. Give downtown the best chance of attracting major retail. 3. Attract more residential downtown. 4. Most importantly, it would get rid of a ton of lots Totally disagree. First off, we don't have any squares yet, and secondly we have to grow with the city not wait for dysfunction then try to remedy it. Our car centric way of life is already way too expensive to remedy. You build the darn thing in an empty spot downtown. You woo macys back, you lure more residential to the area, businesses attract more businesses, maybe another anchor will take interest, and you go from there.

Main street is still the number one convergence street for public transportation and downtown has by far the highest daytime population of any area in Houston. A huge percentage of the busses dump passengers on main street. Westheimer and Montrose is rather the sleepy in comparison. Westheimer and post oak world probably be the worst intersection for a square in all of Texas. Squares are anti car and you suggest taking the most heavily car dependent corner in all of the southern United States and building a square there? Most highly functional squares are blocked off to cars altogether or have narrow slow moving car lanes. Downtown already has the high concentration of public transportation, it us surrounded by fairly well developed neighborhoods and the through car traffic on the east side of downtown isn't as hazardous as post oak. A block or two of traffic can easily be removed without much notice because many already don't go all the way through. Try blocking off any spot along Westheimer and see how that goes. Blocking westheimer at post oak would be kind closing off uptown's Aorta. Leaving it open would result in a drive by square. Why would anyone want to improve downtown and build the square 6 miles away next to a huge enclosed mall? Enclosed malls are highly suburban, white squares are highly urban features. i don't get it. You are taking one feature (highly travelled areas) and ignoring a dozen others. Westheimer and post oak had the density but it fails in every other category. Uptown had the makings of a modern central business district, but urban it is not. The only business district which feels as urban as Downtown is TMC.

Does the traffic argument ever fly? I mean, we are a growing city. We are getting more dense by the second. Traffic is going to get worse if we are not proactive about it. Lol, im picturing an old folks stampede down the little Streets. The area is already dense for Houston Standards. It is going to get more dense. We just need to have a traffic in mind plan for the inner loop. Frankly for the bullseye of the 5th largest metropolitan area (actually 4th, cause #4 has two snake bullseyes) in the country, it is too easy to drive here. Traffic in Houstons core is really not that bad considering how big we are. Using the traffic argument for that area is weak

Just because you prefer greenspace doesn't mean we don't need a square. I prefer green space too. I think it works be a darn near unanimous choice over hardspace. But that has nothing to do with what a square creates. The open atmosphere the square creates gives the area a sense of connection. You have a view of the other pedestrians. You see the activity. You want to be a part of it. Its part of the city, it ties it together. Sorry Arche, the plazas around reliant are far from what I am talking about and they do not serve anywhere near the same purpose. There are about six empty (for now) blocks infront of Minute Maid that would be an awesome spot for a square. I agree that location would make an awesome crossroads, but the goal here is making downtown mite interesting and drawing retail. Building it in midtown will just make midtown that much more awesome than downtown. On your first point I partially agree, these things don't come over night, but if we have a laissez faire attitude we will never get them. Look what our "lets see what happens next" has gotten us. Our last department store was blown to bits. Your second point I could not disagree with more. New York, Philly, SF, Chicago, Baltimore all have interesting areas because the city worked hard to attract interest. Market Square you can cross off your list right now because there is little room for upgrades. Discovery Green is too large with too many sight hinderances and has had too many missed opportunity to create a good square. The buildings that were already there did not interact with the surroundings and the buildings that were later built continued that trend. There might be more residential and more restaurants around those two parks, but they are definitely not going to develop into much more than what they are now. They were developed as spaces where people drive to, enjoy the greenspace and drive back home. They were not developed with large scale attractions in mind. I for one don't want market square to be overrun. The bars are great, and I love what Hines is planning for the area. Major retail would be out of place at market square. It would fit in at Disco green, but disco green is already near built out. So I disagree with you. We need space to develop new and exciting and we need incentives to drive what we want to see. Really the only spits that are left that would accommodate a nice square are: 1. The seven empty/ near empty blocks infront of MM park 2. The five or 6 near empty blocks between Bell Station and Exxon. 3. The 16 or so near empty blocks south of Toyota center, north of 45, west of 59 and east of Austin Street

The walking you talk about is not in the league if the walking I am talking about. There is very little interest on main right now. Houston has the second largest population in a 2 to 5 mile radius around downtown and yet you see 5 or 6 people walking along main. Don't be making excuses for downtown, it is improving but still very week. I think you are 200% correct and that's why I think the shopping district won't have any legs. We need anchors and the same reason why we don't have much of a reason to draw shoppers downtown is the reason why we don't have a reason for retail anchors to be drawn downtown. There is no draw. A square means cohesiveness. A square improves the feel and look of the shopping experience. A macys down on main, then another store down the street around the corner doesn't sound like anything special. Take union square for example. Its a hardscaped plot with a giant penis in the middle. Not a ton of attractions, very simple, but it is one of the most successful in the US. It is anchored by Saks, Neimans, Barneys, Bloomingdales, Macys and Nordstrom. What would we offer any of those anchors that is new and exciting that would make them want to open downtown? We need something big. A park may draw residential, but retail (especially anchors) need more. We need to package whatever we build to make it attractive. Union square is successful because it is not just a public space, it is public space with shopping, restaurants, offices, etc

I don't know about Downtown Dallas getting any really tall building anytime soon. The office vacancy rate its ridiculously high at 30%, and the residential market didn't have that much of a demand to warrant a really tall building. If anything I would expect a tall tower to go up in nearby uptown Dallas, if its mixed use, before one goes up in downtown

I have a question, I have heard many mention that market square served as a more traditional square back in the day, but all the pics I have seen show City Hall occupying the space where market square is now. I think City Hall was located there until the 1930s. Then the city hall building was turned into a bus depot. Then in the 60s it became a parking lot. Do my question is was this ever a square? To me it just looked like a building with a farmers market round the side Thanks so much for moving this. Ok, I'm going to disagree with you now. There are many examples in the past where squares worked well in US cities. Union Square in San Fran created an awesome shopping experience. Then there is Union Square in New York along with Madison Square and others. Philly, Baltimore, St Louis and even New Orleans have sucessful squares. Now there is a recent push to recreate town gathering places in cities as Downtowns are in style again. Cities in diverse places such as the Midwest (Cleveland for example), the West (san Diego) and south ( San Antonio, cities in DFW, ETC) are trying to improve or create a central square feel. Houston is in an interesting point in its history. Lots of interest in residential and retail downtown, but what is the draw? I have been very critical of the downtown shopping district proposal because there is no real draw. I think a square would work here. People would not no what to do with it? We don't need to know what to do with it. A square is just an attractive breathing space. Many cities use it as a central dumping ground for PT users. I guarantee you anything that if a shopping district developed around a square downtown, people would have a reason to shop there. People don't walk downtown because there is nothing to see. Combine the draw of Discovery Green with shopping and I am telling you the opinions of Houston would instantly change. 1. Discovery Green by itself lacks interaction with the city. Its just a park, it could be anywhere. 2. The shopping district by itself lacks a draw. They will be just stores. Why go there? When we build we build little independent islands. We need to connect those islands. They draw more people that way

London has a few good squares that are really close to each other. The outdoor urban spots in most European cities are so inviting. It makes you want to explore the city. I love Houston, but I have to admit it is a pass through city. You don't have to get out of your car...see it at 60 mph...its huge so you have to hurry...sad, but thats us. I didn't really get to spend time in Poland. Will have to visit Krakow next time.

Well I guess how I said that was stupid. There is a lot in and around Market Square but I don't think there is any major wow factor that would be a must see. The clock is interesting but its not really in the square. When I said it lacked anything major I meant a nice statue or an interesting fountain....

I think I opened Pandora's box on this one Maybe we could get a mod to move this to a new thread so we could discuss this further. Getting back on topic I think rebuilding will be best for this site. Sorry for the detour

Personal definition:1. Open space of which a large proportion is hard scape (Jones Plaza for example), but greenscapes are not ruled out. 2. Variety of points of interest such as statues, fountains, busts, water features, even concert stages and stands. 3. Strong/easy pedestrian access. Great squares have closed off lanes of traffic, or traffic in just one direction ( I think those in Savannah you can only made right turns around them. 4. Strong interaction with the surrounding buildings. A nice old library or museum with massive steps falling out into the square where people sit to read or have a snack; store fronts, cafes with sidewalks tables... stuff like that instead on blank walls like around discovery green or Jones Plaza. Discovery green has the elements of a great park but doesn't have the square feeling. Market Square has way too much traffic and no real big draw like Disco Green. Main Street square has big draws, some building attraction, but is still too traffic heavy and too narrow to feel like you are in a square. It still feels like side walk. This to me is a square not a park: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Trafalgar_Square%2C_London_2_-_Jun_2009.jpg http://www.fosterandpartners.com/m/projects/trafalgar-square-redevelopment/images.php?id=1046

This is beyond fascinating. Excellent work

Htown man I agree, the macys site would make a rather unscenic square. That's why I think a square would be nicer in the southeast part of downtown where there is more room for growth and ability to build with interaction with the square in mind. They should just go ahead and close of the area around the former Macys to cars and continue to develop Main Street square into a proper square. Didn't say it was fake, I called it a fake square, and that is by my definition only. I don't know how it looked back in Houston early days, but to me it is just a park now. As for the Sam Houston statue, I don't want it moved either, it is iconic where it is. All I said was that it would be an ideal centerpiece for a square.

Its the town square effect. Downtown already has about ten park but no squares (even though three of them are called squares). What would be nice would be a two to four block hard scape square surrounded by a shopping plaza with points of interests in various areas. Discovery Green is close but not enough hard scape to fit my ridiculously narrow definition Downtown also has: 2. Sam Houston park, 3. Buffalo Bayou Park, 4. Allen's Landing, 5. Tranquility Park, 6. Sesquicentennial Park, 7. Eleanor Tinsley Park, 8. Quebedeaux Park Plus the fake squares: 9. Market Square 10. Hermann Square 11. Root Square The few plazas we do have would fit in my definition (Jones Plaza is awesome) but tiny and has little connectivity to the area around it so I don't consider it a square. I say build us a square. The statute of Sam Houston on the horse at Hermann Park would be a nice feature for a square centerpiece downtown.

Exactly my point. A new residential boosting the downtown population , and knocking off an empty lot is +++ in my book. A supertall on each lot would be nice, but since that isn't happening I will take an alternative

This thing stinks. I totally hate it. Why couldn't they build some thing nicer and closer to downtown instead of this pile of boxes halfway to El Paso. Lol, just joking. I am surprised at the lack of negativity in this thread. Anyway, it is a very interesting building and its so uptown. It will fit in nicely. Uptown is definitely becoming a city within a city. The changes that have occurred since 2000 is astounding. Throw in a couple more of these mixed use structures like this building and a trolley looping around uptown and thus place will be marvelous. Cant wait to see this thing finished and look up and marvel at the uptown skyline yet again

I agree. A dense midrise sea around downtown would be more feasible for the area for now than a string of towers surrounded by lots.

I think he is confusing buildings with the mass-produced-outsourced-to-China-made-for America goods

That too it's the same in most big cities

I have been to over 50 countries, I've been to hundreds of cities, Houston is the only place where residents act like homeless are some novel, alien creatures. I got drunk and lost in Seattle but some homeless people have me awesome directions to my hotel. I would have been wandering around in the rain if it wasn't for the neighborhood hobos. In Cork, Ireland one of the people buying rounds of beers to welcome us to the city was a homeless girl. Didn't know she was homeless till after. She was just a person who didn't have an indoor home. I think many people like to feel themselves victims and ashamed to say no. Many of these homeless people are really friendly. Yeah some do commit crimes, but most are harmless. People keep saying midtown won't improve because of the homeless, but hey I was asked for money right down the street from Buckingham Palace (well closer to Kensington). Homeless are everywhere people. Its not a Houston thing. They stay where they get fed.

I'm with wxman too. This is sexy. Wish it was near George R Brown, but still sexy.

A gas station? Why not go all out. Let the weeds grow in then let some goats graze on the property. Illegal dumping would be nice, so the rats would have something to build a fort out of.

Nothing wrong with it. It's better than an empty lot. Why all the whining?

I don't spend much thought on buildings past uptown. Energy Corridor, Westchase, Greenspoint, etc could develop perfect rectangles for miles for all I care. But I get excited by interesting architecture in the loop and uptown. It may be boring banal beltway boxes but who cares, it's suburbs. We are lucky to get so much development. Be lucky for that. It's an awesome time to be a Houstonian. "Oh Jesus, we on fire"