The Return of Raven Tower; The Fate of The Woodlands’ Waterway Cruisers; Bellaire’s Proposed New Logo

Photo: o texano via Swamplot Flickr Pool


14 Comment

  • Re: Bellaire Residents Unhappy with $50,000 Logo
    Well, I guess it is comforting to know that Bellaire city employees are not the only ones that can squander money on a world-class level. (Watch out city of Houston – better hustle!)
    Though, I’d only rate Bellaire as being worthy of the bronze medal in the 2018 Squander Olympics. I’m confident that they will get better for the 2022 version.

  • Occupancy increases to 8.95%?

    Man! Glad its up!

  • Current logo has a picture of a church and family. I can’t believe the libs haven’t set fire to the city already due to that.

  • The Heights Mercantile article was interesting. I thought it was curious that they omitted any mention of Donovan park across Heights Boulevard. I know I’m not the only parent who brings their kids down there, let ’em run around in the park, take ’em across the street for crepes and ice cream and the send ’em back across the street to run off some of the sugar.

  • I would assume the much simpler logo would be easier to fit onto smaller signage, as west u does on their street signs, and Upper Kirby district does on their banners. Perhaps there are financial benefits from marketing one’s area or district. The existing, graphically crowded, logo can’t be used for these purposes.

  • Re: Bellaire Residents Unhappy with $50,000 Logo
    Note to outraged citizens: If this is the worst thing your City has done, you’ve lived a pretty charmed life. Bellaire probably spends more than $50,000 a year on coffee. At least this is a one time expense.

  • Bellaire banner: Like the many city flags that are being redesigned in response to this TED talk: This is where I learned what ‘vexillology’ is. Evidently, simpler is much, much better.

  • attention all towns! i will re-design your city’s logo for $40,000. hmu.

  • @Cody: That’s a good one! I didn’t look at it for long I guess. Just thought it was a regular ole bldg.

  • @Gisgo, I loved that TED piece! Thanks!

  • @Cody, we may agree on many libertarian and pro-business ideas, but we wildly differ on religious presence in the community. The church was clearly a Christian symbol which can technically be construed as endorsement of religion since it’s on all official documents and signage, which is clearly unconstitutional, it’s just nobody bothered to challenge it. As I’ve said before, Christianity had such a place of privilege in our country for so long that even equal treatment seems like oppression to them.

  • Wow. I actually agree with commonsense about something.

    It IS a small world after all.

  • I wonder why everyone automatically thinks the logo shows a church. I looked at it, and since I am neither religious nor antagonistic to religion, I just thought it was a boring shot of a community. Even if the picture includes a church, it could have been non-sectarian, which is why it does not contain religious symbols like a cross, the crescent, or the star of David. So how is this image seen as “unconstitutional” when it does not establish any faith or religion? I think people should first actually read the Constitution and relevant jurisprudence about the non-establishment clause before pronouncing images they dislike as unconstitutional.

  • @Cody: The current logo has a picture of three buildings. If you are looking for churches then any of them could be churches, but I don’t see a church when I look at that logo. Just trying to pick a fight with those dastardly libs?