I am surprised that the Mayor openly stated the the taxpayers are ultimately on the hook for this investment. Now we have a luxury tower and a hotel to backstop, when we are not trying to prevent flooding and keep libraries open.Originally Posted by Mr. Mojito
I still think this is a small issue that got blown up on a slow news day. Why wasent this problem pointed out in September? It seems like Nasher dragged their feet, and are now feeling the pressure from the artist and are trying to make them self's look like victims to something they just noticed. "Highrises are hurting the Art district!" I dont hear the DMA or the theaters throwing a fit about stuff going up around them.
Help the Tower get a special lens coating put over the windows on that side of the building that will not reflect light but still allow for crystal clear views out of them and move on! And if this technology does no exist, put money into inventing it and make money off selling it to other people! Stop the bitching and moaning and lets get this fixed!!!!
if it stops the Nasher guys from whining then do it. They need to stop playing to the media and fix the problem.
It's a really simple solution. Just don't wash the windows on that side of the building. Eventually it takes care of itself. :P
maybe our sun will die out soon and this won't be a problem.
there seriously has to be a non light reflective coating you can put on the windows to stop this.
Just change the Nasher's open hours to only occur between sundown and sunrise.
Stop kowtow-ing to the Nashers and other haters. What next? The rumbling from the new Woodall Rogers Deck Park 'tunnel' disrupting the galleries? Fill it in? Those pesky Southwest jets too unattractive and noisy above? Shut down Love Field?
If they wanted to build an art oasis, there's plenty of open land zoned accordingly. They chose to develop (thankfully) in an urban area and get to enjoy the merits of being in a 'big town'.
This reminds me of a similar issue with the Walt Disney Concert Hall here in LA a few years ago. The glare from the steel was heating up condominiums across the street and disturbing drivers during certain times of day. The issue went on for about a year before Frank Gehry sand-papered the high-gloss stainless steel finish from the part of the building causing the issues to a dull, matte finish. Don't know if something similar would be possible with Museum Tower.
I know this would not be a popular option but would a canopy, like the one over at Winspear work over part or all of Nasher? That could effectively block the reflection and keep the "desired" sunlight. But then nobody that lives at Museum could see the Nasher from their condos. I don't know, this whole thing sounds so dumb.
I'd say its highly probable that the architects have now run a sunlight study on the tower to determine what time of day and what time of year creates conditions that may adversely affect their neighbors. These are pretty accurate models.
I doubt adding some kind of coating to the tower is a viable solution. That's a lot of (expensive) glass area. More likely the solution with be a settlement and some kind of alterations at the nasher.
Reminds me of the little lady across the street that doesn't like something on my property even though I have the zoning and permits to do it.
Frankly, I can think of a couple of other reflective buildings that give me a migraine just thinking about it. Like Campbell Centre for one.
What is the difference between Mechanical Engineers and Civil Engineers?
Mechanical Engineers build weapons, Civil Engineers build targets.
Not only does the reflections that compromise the art viewing change during the day, the reflections will change during the year. There's probably going to be more reflection distraction if the museum's eastern neighbor ever gets anything built, so it kinda seems like the only solution is different louvers.
As far as the comments go about being able to forecast what's going to built around you in the future, all you have to rely on are the existing zoning laws. You expect those to be enforced in the future otherwise we might as well toss out the Plan Commission and Board of Adjustments and become another Houston. For Museum Tower, they need to provide the Nasher Garden with whatever resources it needs to protect itself from the glare. Same goes for Woodall Rodgers Park. If it means planting more trees and moving some of the sculpture to other areas of the Garden, then write out the check. If it means bringing back the Nasher Garden's original architect to reconfigure the building, then get on with it. Do it before this because a bigger PR issue.
The Nasher is an awesome place and a great contribution to downtown. They aren't just a bunch of losers thinking nothing would ever get built near them (as several here have suggested).Originally Posted by 1999McKinneyAve
The Museum Tower has sold 20 units (as of a couple weeks ago). With several of those being sold to foreign buyers. It is in a comically unwalkable location, ringed by a highway, basing its hopes entirely upon a future park that is also largely isolated by unwalkable/unbikeable streets and sidewalks to its north.
The Nasher has done nothing wrong. This joke of a tower is the issue.
So under your view, the person who built the house and got all the proper approvals would have to pay... not the guy who set the butter out?
Are you really suggesting that we set this precedent?
SO if the city were to enforce the city code Museum Tower would have to make changes the city is just trying to stay out of it for now.
I say the museum tower should sit on a turning foundation. This way the entire building can spin giving each resident a 360 degree panoramic view. Something that would attract buyers from around the globe! The engineering required to do such a project would attract TV shows and all sorts of advertisement/publicity. After that techies, super rich, celebrities would all be begging to get a condo inside. Then to top it all off they could reshape the facade to a concave shape giving the tower the ability to focus its rays upon whatever target it choses!!!
Walking to lunch today, I couldn't help but notice that Fountain Place is pretty much a mirror. Are we sure that Museum Tower violates code? What's our source on that?
It doesn't violate code. There is something in the city code regarding artificial illumination, but that would not apply to reflected light. There was an agreement as to the allowed reflectivity of development on that property, but that has expired and is no longer relevant.
Actually the folks at the Nasher should be glad Museum Tower is convex, and not concave like this building: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09...gas_death_ray/
Good part of that article to reference here:
The Vdara's management is well aware of the threat to guests, which it attributes to a "solar convergence phenomenon". The architects had taken this into consideration, and "hired a consultant who decided to place a thin film over the window which reduces the sun's effects by 70 per cent".
MGM Mirage spokesman Gordon Absher admitted: "But even with that, when folks are out on the pool deck, on some days people will feel this reflection and the heat associated with it."
Absher explained that there's no easy fix for the problem, since the hot spot will shift according to the season, and so throwing up a few extra-thick umbrellas would mean their continual repositioning.
He said: "This is quite literally an astronomical challenge. We are dealing with a moving target."
Although the Vdara is mulling hi-tech solutions, it's immediate response to the death ray menace is to fall back on "larger, thicker umbrellas" and "maybe some large plants".
This photo doesn't adequately describe the glare/beam I see. Definitely "put your glasses on because I'm blinded" type of glare. Our art is placed on opposite wall..so can't really speak to damage. I'll try and grab a shot next time.
Funny how the trees near Fountain Place seem to survive...
Trees seems to survive alright in the sun..............................................
They had this problem with Vdara in Las Vegas City Center. The developer said they applied a film to the hotel that would cause the light to scatter. I'm sure that film could be used in this application with a better success since Museum Tower's shape isn't in the concentrator form that Vdara suffers from. Funny thing is, I haven't heard about this in almost 2 years. It came up and it went away, and Las Vegas is still taking reservations.
Museum Tower Model Homes: Ann Schooler Schools Us In Tradition
Ann Schooler, founder of Schooler, Kellogg & Company, began her career leading groups to England and Virginia to study the great houses of Britain and their influence on American decorative arts. Her career of over 22 years includes projects in the United States and abroad. Schooler’s works have been featured in leading shelter publications and she was named one of the Four Under Forty, the four best designers in America under the age of 40, by Southern Accents magazine. Her MT mission: traditional.
Museum Tower Model Homes: Emily Summers Neutral Palette for a Building, a Work of Art Itself
A nationally recognized designer with numerous awards under her belt, Emily Summers of Emily Summers Design Associates is known for her refined interiors and creative eye. Throughout her 30 years in business, her work has been defined by her integration of architecture, art and interior design. In 2007, Summers was named to the AD100, Architectural Digest’s directory of the world’s top 100 designers and architects. Emily Summers Design Associates has consulted and contributed to the interiors at the Wyly Theater and The Winspear Opera House, while Summers herself is currently a member of the Building Committee at the Dallas Museum of Art. Her MT Mission: modern.
Museum Tower Model Homes: 2800 Square Feet of Clean Living With Marco French
Marco French, founder of Marco French Studio, has been on the forefront of interior architectural design for 25 years, with 20 years of international experience working exclusively with five star properties. His ability to create beautiful and dramatic spaces that don’t sacrifice comfort has been the key to his success. Marco’s attention to detail allows him to develop an individual unique style for each client. His MT Mission: timeless.
Last edited by Mr. Mojito; 17 April 2012 at 10:54 AM. Reason: fix hotlink
For my $2.2 million I would want a bigger bedroom...BUT my $2.2 million also does not exist, so I suppose my opinion does not matter....
Traditional: looks homey, too stuffy. Modern: looks clean, too cold. Timeless: perfect!
There are currently 7 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 7 guests)