Confirms now why the recent interior of the rebuilt Joske's Building was so starkly banal--it really was all just temporary commercial placeholder until they could redevelop it again. It's just as well, for the city shouldn't have caved on the previously proposed Joske's Tower to begin with. I wonder if Joske's owner still holds rights on the design and engineering of that tabled tower.
Hard Rock Hotel... https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.town...size=327%2C500 (Photo by Matt Miller on the Omaha World-Herald) Wait till the critics of Tomb Raider 3D on Alamo Plaza see a new giant, light up marquee guitar spinning atop Joske's! No doubt the review boards will be weighing heavily on the developers to tone it all down--hopefully not back into something yet again banal. Atlanta has been working on a Gensler-designed Hard Rock Hotel for their Castleberry Park redevelopment, and its general outlines are not too dissimilar in size, scale, and massing to what is being tentatively suggested here. https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...2/?format=750w (Rendering by Gensler for Hard Rock International) Just superimpose Joske's over the base. Actually, one legitimate strategy to emphasize and complement the historic architecture of Joske's is to cleanly, boldly, and distinctly contrast against it rather than slavishly trying to clone, extrude, or merge into and absorb it. So long as proportions, rhythms, scales, and functionalities are kept, materials and styles can be very different, and that can make for a more interesting architecture that better preserves the image and sensibility of the older building. |
Personally, I'd rather see another hotel operator. Hard Rock has lost its panache/coolness. Something like an Edition or 1Hotel would be more interesting/exciting.
In other words, I'd rather see a hotel which does not have a location on the Redneck Riviera (Biloxi/Gulfport, MS). Something that puts SA on a different map. |
Quote:
The two hotels you mentioned would fit in the Pearl or maybe as part of the Hemisfair development or near Southtown, possibly part of Grey Street’s large SAISD land development. Heck, near the new Frost HQ in the tech district would work better than on top of the Shops at Rivercenter. |
Quote:
( like button ) 👍 |
Quote:
For me, this is the wrong direction to go. SA needs to step up with the times. Riding on our laurels is going to kill us. As a whole, we need to realize (and accept) that what we had in the past no longer exists. Tourism has changed. Example: the HRH in San Diego is in a perfect spot...but, it's dead. The Onmi across the street has more hop to it! Plus, there are numerous more, hip options, from which to choose in the immediate area - The Gaslamp District. The most "touristy" spot in downtown San Diego. The Hard Rock brand's time has run its course. |
Personally, I'm hoping for a Howard Johnson's.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Something similar to what is pictured above would work perfectly atop the Joske's building; mixing old with flashy new. I love it! And across the street, we have a mix of cheap eats (McDonald's) and high-end (Ruth Chris) to super high-end restaurants (Fig Tree; this place is truly great, as not great as Bella on the River, though). Downtown San Antonio needs more centralized diversification in architecture and pro-social activities; the building of this hotel may help with this need, least from an exterior presence.
|
Quote:
|
I guess i'm the only one here who is opposed to this idea of putting an 18 floor hotel on top of the Joske building.
https://s26.postimg.cc/3pu5szh89/joske.jpg I can't see how this old relic like the joske building would compliment a modern high rise hotel on top of it, it would just look so out of place to me. I will say this though, I wouldn't be opposed to something in a smaller scale like this Hampton inn on cesar chavez blvd. https://s26.postimg.cc/7jnm25dzt/Cap...13-42-01-1.png https://s26.postimg.cc/ij8tdq9jt/Cap...13-42-47-1.png They incorporated an old building and built three extra floors on top of it. I personally would of matched the exterior of the addition to the existing building but other than that, it takes up pretty much the entire original building so that to me makes it a fine addition. The Joske building is pretty huge so to me, they can only pull off adding an addition to the building by adding more floors (3 or 4 at most) on top of the majority or all of the existing perimeter of the building and matching the exterior of the addition to existing building. That way it'll look like this addition actually belongs. That's just my opinion, but I know we all want as many new sophisticated buildings to rise from the GROUND up here in SA. Trust me, I do too. Add a new high rise on top of Joske's, and it would just stick out like a sore thumb to me. |
I feel they should incorporate the brick that used to be the old Joskes tower. If they can.
|
Hearst Tower in Manhattan remains the familiar textbook case study.
Base by Joseph Urban originally built in 1928: http://collections.mcny.org/Doc/MNY/.../MNY237028.jpg (Photo from Wurts Bros. collection of the Museum of the City of New York) Tower by Foster + Partners finally added in 2006: http://images.skyscrapercenter.com/b...rporation1.jpg (Photo from Hearst Corporation on CTBUH) https://cdn.archpaper.com/wp-content...t_tower_02.jpg (Photo from Simon King on Flickr via The Architect's Newspaper) The howls on our city's review committees for even just a less daring, 14-floor version would never cease, but we see that it can be done successfully. The relevant wing of Joske's is not really that much different in scale, style, or type than Hearst's base, such that you can very easily photoshop Joske's into the image above. I fear, however, that only the most conservative, unassuming, and conventional add-on atop Joske's would make it through the process, and even Hard Rock, for all its brand imagery, will play it safe. |
Somebody on here who's more educated than I can correct me if I'm wrong, but it was my understanding that the HDRC required additions to historic buildings to look distinct. The reason for this was so that the casual observer could readily distinguish what is historic from what isn't.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Too bad parking lots east (Denny"s) and north on Bowie of RC cannot be purchased and developed as stand alone projects. Joske's building doesn't need a top hat.
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 3:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.