Houstonist: Two county buildings could face wrecking ball

Urban_Houstonian

Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:00:11 -0600

Jim, I agree. At the same time, I despise Weingarten for what they have done and will do to the River Oaks Shopping Center, yet am willing to watch another building be torn down to usher in a new one. You'll recall I felt differently still about the Franklin building. Ultimately, I'm not for saving everything nor am I for tearing down everything. I just feel like this subject, being so sensitive in nature, can illicit irrational emotions towards situations that wouldn't garner much attention if Houston had a better record preserving its history. I am even starting to believe the idea that maybe Houston is one city that doesn't relish the past, and forges forward with its head down; always looking forward, never looking back. It's a mentality that has served us well in the past; Enron, anyone? It's not always admirable, may the Shamrock Hotel rest in peace, but it's got a certain charm to it that I am starting to begrudgingly admire.

Jim Parsons

Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:37:10 -0600

I just know that given Houston's poor behavior in the realm of historical preservation, we get a little too trigger happy about some buildings that may just need to come down for the greater good. Not saying that is definitely the case here, but not every building that is slated for destruction in Houston is worth protecting either. I think there are a lot of people who favor tearing down the River Oaks Shopping Center, River Oaks Theater and Alabama Theater who would make exactly the same argument, Urban Houstonian. For the greater good!

Urban_Houstonian

Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:19:35 -0600

Cipher, spare me the global warming guilt speech. And the 100 degree days are hardly a sign of global warming. Otherwise, where have they been the past four years? I take the bus nearly every day, even IN the 100 degree heat, so I hardly need a lecture about being environmentally responsible. Besides, we built the Port of Houston 50 miles inland in anticipation for when it would be the actual Texas Coast. :P I am looking forward to Houston being a beach town! :S Jim, personally, I've always liked the Faux Dome, and enjoyed watching it go up. In any case, I've been a fan of Quebedeaux Park, even if it is an anemic example of a pocket park. In the end, I feel the whole idea of something being "architecturally significant" is more subjective than objective. I mean, there are some strip malls that would be considered architecturally appealing, but it doesn't make them worthy of preservation, or does it? I don't know. I just know that given Houston's poor behavior in the realm of historical preservation, we get a little too trigger happy about some buildings that may just need to come down for the greater good. Not saying that is definitely the case here, but not every building that is slated for destruction in Houston is worth protecting either. What bothers me is that I seem to agree with the Chronicle whack jobs. That makes me want to lay down, and talk to someone about my childhood. ;)

Jax

Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:59:31 -0600

I find the family law center building pretty ugly, but there isn't much point in turning it into another plaza when there are already plans for an even nicer plaza and most of these downtown plazas aren't used anyways. If something spectacular was going up in its place I might consider knocking that ugly sucker down, but not to just create more empty unused space downtown.

Cipher

Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:48:55 -0600

Oh geez, haven't you heard of the phrase "Beauty Lies in the Eye of the Beholder"? Just because something doesn't fit your taste, that doesn't make it useless. I just can't understand how Houstonians can be so cavalier about destroying buildings worth tens of millions of dollars. Buidings we've already paid for. These buldings can be cleaned up and renovated, and put to good use. Do Houstonians think money grows on trees? Do they think we live in Never Ending Boom Times? Aesthetics aside, every time you destroy a usable old building to put up some new shiny piece of crap you're adding tons of carbon emissions into the atmosphere. You're immoral for doing that. You're stupid for doing that. Does the ocean have to lap against your patio for you to get it? How many months of 100 degree August days do you need for you to get it?

guest

Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:00:26 -0600

It wouldn't let me login.

Jim Parsons

Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:58:58 -0600

Right, the plaza in front of the civil courts building is still a parking lot — as I said in the post, it's still a proposed plaza. The existing plazas (the one behind the administration building, the one in front of the Family Law Center and Quebedeaux Park) all far from great. As for the Family Law Center, ugly or not, it deserves to be saved for what it is: a particularly good example of late 1960s modernist architecture. The strength of the building is in the details, I think, and it has very nice details. And I'm sure few people agree with me here, but I think it's a heck of a lot better architecturally than the new, faux-old civil courthouse, with its ridiculous dome.

Urban_Houstonian

Tue, 14 Aug 2007 11:13:24 -0600

Forgive me, but what great county plaza(s) are you referring to? I mean, the planned plaza in the court complex is something that I have been eagerly anticipating, but I wasn't aware that they had even broken ground on it; it's still a parking lot, right? In any case, I think it's unfair to knock the County when they have done a great job consolidating the court complex into a nice sector of Downtown. Adding more open space, at the expense of an ugly, albeit architecturally interesting, building is okay by me. Still, the County has proven to be adept at fixing and refining older buidlings, and they should try to save the Franklin building.