San Antonio's Downtown Skyline: Nice or Ugly? (Austin, Mission: condos, new house)

[HisLilSecret]

Originally Posted by L3XVS

Why is it not bothering you?

Hmmm...why are you answering a question with a question? No real answer perhaps?

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by L3XVS

Why is it not bothering you?

I rather have 1 World Class kid's museum that will motivate kids to enjoy physics, chemistry, math, engineering, architecture, etc.
than 10 World Class skyscrappers that are as useless as a man's n.pples

[wattsbw2004]

Originally Posted by Dopo

I rather have 1 World Class kid's museum that will motivate kids to enjoy physics, chemistry, math, engineering, architecture, etc.
than 10 World Class skyscrappers that are as useless as a man's n.pples

I'm an architecture major in college right now and I would rather look at interesting buildings which actually help out the community, enviroment, etc... rather then some old buildings are as

useless as a man's n.pples

You can't expect to get out of a recession with old, you have to be optimistic and think outside the box with something new. Going new doesn't mean bad especially if the architect tries to get his building LEED certified at it's highest level.

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by wattsbw2004

You can't expect to get out of a recession with old, you have to be optimistic and think outside the box with something new. Going new doesn't mean bad especially if the architect tries to get his building LEED certified at it's highest level.

Let's say that you are right,
who's gonna pay for those buildings? and what would be the movitation for them to do it?

[Montirob]

Originally Posted by wattsbw2004

I'm an architecture major in college right now and I would rather look at interesting buildings which actually help out the community, enviroment, etc... rather then some old buildings are as

You can't expect to get out of a recession with old, you have to be optimistic and think outside the box with something new. Going new doesn't mean bad especially if the architect tries to get his building LEED certified at it's highest level.

Ok... as a licensed architect, I feel I need to take this one.

First, old buildings contain valuable precedents worth learning about. I would rather look at a classic Mies building than the new "neo-faux-tuscan" nonsense. I would rather look at the terra cotta coping of an old building built by craftsmen rather than the styrofoam equivalent built by the lowest bidder.

Regarding LEED, the most environmentally friendly thing you can do is to reuse old buildings in the urban core. In fact, the first LEED platinum project in San Antonio is a renovation/expansion of an old house in King William. There are many other LEED projects which are adaptive reuse (I am working on a 35,000 sf one now). In fact, in the June 2009 issue of Green Source magazine there is an article about the reuse of a 1950's building - the results are amazing. Likewise, the June 2009 Architectural Record's cover story is "Adaption+Preservation".

Should we stop building new buildings? Of course not, but to revisit your statement, going OLD doesn't mean bad.

[wattsbw2004]

Originally Posted by Montirob

Ok... as a licensed architect, I feel I need to take this one.

First, old buildings contain valuable precedents worth learning about. I would rather look at a classic Mies building than the new "neo-faux-tuscan" nonsense. I would rather look at the terra cotta coping of an old building built by craftsmen rather than the styrofoam equivalent built by the lowest bidder.

Oh, I completely agree, I would much rather look at that rather then the fake tuscan [insert some other name from another country here] but I think such things like the Walt Disney Concert Hall could bring more people to San Antonio because it opens a market for people who like the type of shows that could be played there such as Opera, Broadway, etc...

Old isn't bad and there are definitely uses for it when it comes to Adaptive Reuse in which I read a article from Arch News Now in which a company takes advatage of the positive things that can come from A.R. I can see San Antonio doing this but I can see a whole 'nother market from new things as well, as long as it isn't more hotels and such.

[wattsbw2004]

Originally Posted by Dopo

Let's say that you are right,
who's gonna pay for those buildings? and what would be the movitation for them to do it?

The motivation is from bringing in more money from tourists and locals as well. It would be hard to accomplish I agree with not much money unless the city steps in and doe's something about it which unfortunately would raises taxes to pay for it. In the long run though I can see it working when these new markets are bringing something else to SA.

[dvlpr]

Originally Posted by Montirob

Ok... as a licensed architect, I feel I need to take this one.

First, old buildings contain valuable precedents worth learning about. I would rather look at a classic Mies building than the new "neo-faux-tuscan" nonsense. I would rather look at the terra cotta coping of an old building built by craftsmen rather than the styrofoam equivalent built by the lowest bidder.

Regarding LEED, the most environmentally friendly thing you can do is to reuse old buildings in the urban core. In fact, the first LEED platinum project in San Antonio is a renovation/expansion of an old house in King William. There are many other LEED projects which are adaptive reuse (I am working on a 35,000 sf one now). In fact, in the June 2009 issue of Green Source magazine there is an article about the reuse of a 1950's building - the results are amazing. Likewise, the June 2009 Architectural Record's cover story is "Adaption+Preservation".

Should we stop building new buildings? Of course not, but to revisit your statement, going OLD doesn't mean bad.

Excellent, excellent response.

It's a little sad that many folks get excited about LEED buildings built in the suburbs that are only accessible by car.

[Montirob]

Originally Posted by wattsbw2004

such things like the Walt Disney Concert Hall could bring more people to San Antonio because it opens a market for people who like the type of shows that could be played there such as Opera, Broadway, etc...

Which is why I think the Municipal Auditorium project could be incredible both from an architectural and usage viewpoint. Trust me, the image they printed in the Express-News was by far the most conservative of the ideas by the design team.

Originally Posted by wattsbw2004

I can see a whole 'nother market from new things as well, as long as it isn't more hotels and such.

I Agree 100% - the Grand Hyatt really missed an opportunity, in my opinion. I'm not against "new" forms of architecture or sculpture, (the Downtown Library and the Torch of Friendship are perfect examples of great interventions) - they just need to be done well and not cheapened up. Oh, and I do realize the Library is styrofoam... perfectly acceptable for the design intent in my opinion.

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by wattsbw2004

The motivation is from bringing in more money from tourists and locals as well. It would be hard to accomplish I agree with not much money unless the city steps in and doe's something about it which unfortunately would raises taxes to pay for it. In the long run though I can see it working when these new markets are bringing something else to SA.

I've never heard of anybody travelling to a city just to see 10 skyscrappers.
I saw Sears tower and I wasn't impressed at all.

I was more impressed when I saw Mission San Jose