Jump to content

East Downtown, Warehouse, Dynamo District Development


Recommended Posts

You made a mathematical error due to a social bias involving socioeconomic class and--whether directly or indirectly--race. The wood-frame houses that you characterize as "forgotten" aren't. It is the people within them that you have forgotten from your post.

Again, you're really reading too much into what I wrote. Using "forgotten" was simply a colorful, poetic description. I visualized the old houses as if they were sentient beings, the crispness of their youthful origins now long forgotten, as they settle into old age, transformed from being like a Norman Rockwell painting to one by Edward Hopper.

But since you mention socioeconomics, if the economy and dollar are pummeled, then those with no reserves will find it hard to buy food etc. and there are likely to be a lot of these homes for sale cheap. Enter those who are still able to buy houses, which would then create a neighborhood demographic shift, based on economics and not race, although as you pointed out, there is still a lot of relation between those two, instead of the trendy, "urban" types of neighborhood remakes that we've seen in the recent past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Unless Saudi Arabia decides to go Egypt as well, we won't see $7 gasoline any time soon, well, in the next 5 years.

However, expenses will go up, as will Gasoline, people that work in downtown are going to want to live nearby. And yeah, it's not just a vast forgotten cotton field ready to be plundered by people eager to build a house and live close to town.

There are already people living here though. Of the people that live here already, there's always a smattering of people who are willing to sell for a price that they and a buyer agree upon, which is likely to give the seller a profit over their investment price, and ultimately the higher prices will drive up the property values. In addition to a lot of homeowners, there are tons of renters. As the value of the property goes up, the owners of the rentals will see that they can clean the rentals up a bit and start charging more money to rent, or they can start charging more money to rent first.

Either way, as the value goes up, so will the price to rent. The ultimate response to that is that the people renting will have to pay more, or go somewhere else, and someone who is willing to pay that price will move in.

It sucks a bit, I like my neighborhood the way it is, the people, the Citgo around the corner that has lots of soft drinks that have real sugar, being able to ride my bike on telephone road at 6pm with no traffic at all.

But there are things I don't like, that will only change when the neighborhood becomes more affluent. Things like, gang graffiti that gets repainted a few days after it is cleaned up, or idiots driving too fast down residential streets, or completely different idiots using loudspeakers connected to their radio so we all get to listen to whatever it is they call music (on a side note, I want to find out where these people live so I can go set their radio stations to classical permanently, how funny would that be to see some kid driving down your street with classical blaring? or maybe NPR, hmmmm).

Anyway, even over the last 2 years I've seen a lot change for the better in the neighborhood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, you're really reading too much into what I wrote. Using "forgotten" was simply a colorful, poetic description. I visualized the old houses as if they were sentient beings, the crispness of their youthful origins now long forgotten, as they settle into old age, transformed from being like a Norman Rockwell painting to one by Edward Hopper.

I think that your Rockwell/Hopper analogy is absolutely 100% reversed. The only difference between a Rockwell painting and the East End is that the characters in the East End tend to be shorter, stockier, and of a darker complexion. But the warmth and family values are very much present in a way that isn't as much the case for the modern WASPy household.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea, when I bought this place, I also inherited a stack of newspaper clippings (featuring this very house) going back to the late 90s talking about how Eastwood was the new inner loop neighborhood. Don't get me wrong: there is a lot of blight to be cleaned up yet. But I love it here, and would hate to see Canal, or any street in the vicinity, turned into the next Washington Ave. The "EaDO" plans are mostly silly to me. An ampitheatre? For what, exactly???

Some BudLight/Lucky's Pub themed sponsorship of some lame-ass faux event? This is more than just a playground for the those who want to live urban for a couple of years. It already IS a neighborhood. Bring in some non-trend, solid retail/grocery/restaurants, and start from there. These mixed-use pedestrian-friendly bread and circuses renderings, jesus.

To what renderings are you referring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that your Rockwell/Hopper analogy is absolutely 100% reversed. The only difference between a Rockwell painting and the East End is that the characters in the East End tend to be shorter, stockier, and of a darker complexion. But the warmth and family values are very much present in a way that isn't as much the case for the modern WASPy household.

Well, you're very fixated on the people again, and their race. I was talking about the houses, and the fresh 1940s look (Rockwell) to a more melancholy, edgier, sad and dishelved look, the families and lives within notwithstanding (Hopper). And I don't know where you're coming from with the comment on the WASP household. Are you saying they're cold and lacking family values?

So back to the EaDo topic. I see it as neither Rockwellian or Hopperian, but rather Daliesque. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can we PLEASE us any of the other historical terms except THAT??

2nd ward, East end, I wouldn't mind being called "Magnolia" (even though it's a bit further north and east).

has anyone else noticed how eado is just as awkward to type as it is to say?

anyway..

not only that but the Warehouse District (the area marketed as eado) is already littered with townhomes that have either taken over former warehouses, or empty land, which way predate the stadium and metro(rail).

the question at this point is, are any new construction in the area caused by the stadium/metro(rail) or by other new constructions that have already been done? or is it simply something that is accelerated?

regardless, that specific area (east of 59 out to about velasco) is going to be like midtown east, there isn't any stopping it, it's impossible to not see that. of course, that's just my opinion..

as others have stated, the areas in and around Eastwood have been reported for years to become "the next *insert area of Houston*" and that is the question... Now that the old warehouse district is growing, becoming the next midtown, will it spread farther east? What good/bad is going to come/go with it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand what the problem with EADO, its like people having a problem with the name Midtown. EADO is a great name for the area, especially with the area changing and expanding.

But does that mean you have to totally abandon the area name?

Midtown was nothing but a wasteland and was a "Ward" (5th?) since the founding the of the city.

"uptown" was about as generic as it was, because "Galleria area" was referred to that as simply because the galleria was about the only thing out in that way for the longest time.

I mean, "Hell's Kitchen" in Manhattan still held onto its name even after gentrification, but also refer to it as "Clinton" as the proper name. To wipe out the name of a neighborhood is, in my opinion, worse then demolishing historic homes. It's the erasing of a neighborhood.

If a blessed event would ever destroy "freedman's town", as much as I HATE that area, I'd still refer to it by that name, even if townhomes or even skyscrapers went up in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand what the problem with EADO, its like people having a problem with the name Midtown. EADO is a great name for the area, especially with the area changing and expanding.

That's NOT a good name for the area. Do you live in the 'area'? I've lived here for more years than I care to remember and no one I've talked to likes that term. It doesn't sound cool, it doesn't sound trendy, it just sounds like something contrived by a person or group who knew/knows absolutely nothing about the 'area'.

The East End sounds just fine. I too would hate to see Harrisburg or Canal or Navigation get all douched up like Washington Ave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've lived here for more years than I care to remember

Forgive me - but THAT's funny.

The term 'East End' seems to encompass everything east of Main Street. I've grown to grudgingly accept the Neartown designation (well...not really) for the whole Montrose/Hyde Park/Audubon/Westmoreland et.al. neighborhoods. What name seems right for your neighborhood?

I always thought Maxwell would be an appropriate name for the neighborhood immediately surrounding the coffee plant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Land is too cheap here and more people want to live in the loop than in the burbs. They have to go somewhere, and there is plenty of space in EADO.

I hear a lot of talk about this, but haven't seen any statistics that actually support this conclusion. Do you have any data?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear a lot of talk about this, but haven't seen any statistics that actually support this conclusion. Do you have any data?

I don't, but would be interested to see such an analysis.

My impression is that Houston has had a greater movement towards repopulating its traditional center than most cities; I have no basis for this opinion.

Of course, there are many criteria by which such a trend could be measured, or interpreted.

As Twain (or was it Disraeli?) said, "(there are) Lies, damned Lies, and Statistics."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you're very fixated on the people again, and their race. I was talking about the houses, and the fresh 1940s look (Rockwell) to a more melancholy, edgier, sad and dishelved look, the families and lives within notwithstanding (Hopper). And I don't know where you're coming from with the comment on the WASP household. Are you saying they're cold and lacking family values?

So back to the EaDo topic. I see it as neither Rockwellian or Hopperian, but rather Daliesque. B)

Oh, I'm sorry. I was going by what each respective artist intended to express through their work, and was attempting to comment on how your architect's fixation on the shallow periphery of their work allowed you to see only a couple of trees from atop a mountain summit overlooking a vast forest...so to speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I visualized the old houses as if they were sentient beings, the crispness of their youthful origins now long forgotten, as they settle into old age, transformed from being like a Norman Rockwell painting to one by Edward Hopper.

I like the analogy. I also believe that a lack of anthropomorphic love of architecture is a fatal flaw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the analogy. I also believe that a lack of anthropomorphic love of architecture is a fatal flaw.

Yes, romance with architecture. And this is the town to have your heart broken. I wonder if people who love architecture are somewhat non-people people. Buildings are silent and it takes a quiet mind to appreciate their finer qualities sometimes. They're a lot like trees, really. So can we call those who fight to preserve architecture building huggers? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if people who love architecture are somewhat non-people people. Buildings are silent and it takes a quiet mind to appreciate their finer qualities sometimes. They're a lot like trees, really.

I am not sure I completely understand what you are saying here. To fully "appreciate [a building's] finer qualities", you cannot take a "non-people" perspective. Humanity is a large component of architecture, in that most buildings are designed by, built by, built for, and inhabited by, and altered by people. Successful building designs fully embrace the concept of human occupation and endeavor to make this human occupation a more enjoyable experience.

The people who occupy buildings usually carry out activities that directly affect the buildings. This human occupation gives the building sort of a life in itself. Perhaps 'life' isn't the best term, but what I'm getting at is that occupied buildings are not static, unchanging elements, or "silent". However, they are like trees, in that they are constantly changing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, romance with architecture. And this is the town to have your heart broken. I wonder if people who love architecture are somewhat non-people people. Buildings are silent and it takes a quiet mind to appreciate their finer qualities sometimes. They're a lot like trees, really. So can we call those who fight to preserve architecture building huggers? :)

Oh! I like this conversation.

I hope that my love for architecture (or buildings - there's a fine distinction) doesn't make me a misanthrope. I've noticed that there are those who can appreciate a building as one might a piece of music, or a work of art. Others see buildings as a formula, where the only criteria for value are square footage, an arbitrary measure of desirability, and land value.

For those who take the latter point of view - I get it. There are certain practical and economic considerations which cannot be ignored. Please consider that those who take the former point of view are responsible for some of the great (and profitable) neighborhoods. Greenwich Village, the French Quarter, Nob Hill, et. al. would not exist if the typical Houston style of development had been allowed.

So far as someone calling me a tree or building 'hugger', fine. Yes, I like them. And I'll ask, do you like your mom? Because that would make you a motherhugger - right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't, but would be interested to see such an analysis.

My impression is that Houston has had a greater movement towards repopulating its traditional center than most cities; I have no basis for this opinion.

Of course, there are many criteria by which such a trend could be measured, or interpreted.

As Twain (or was it Disraeli?) said, "(there are) Lies, damned Lies, and Statistics."

I agree - I have a sense that the repopulation of the center is just a result of overall population growth though and not as a result of a "trend", but I don't have the data. It would be an interesting thread if someone has the information.

I like the East Downtown area. I'm just not convinced that it's going to grow at the rate that many people appear to expect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh! I like this conversation.

I hope that my love for architecture (or buildings - there's a fine distinction) doesn't make me a misanthrope. I've noticed that there are those who can appreciate a building as one might a piece of music, or a work of art. Others see buildings as a formula, where the only criteria for value are square footage, an arbitrary measure of desirability, and land value.

For those who take the latter point of view - I get it. There are certain practical and economic considerations which cannot be ignored. Please consider that those who take the former point of view are responsible for some of the great (and profitable) neighborhoods. Greenwich Village, the French Quarter, Nob Hill, et. al. would not exist if the typical Houston style of development had been allowed.

So far as someone calling me a tree or building 'hugger', fine. Yes, I like them. And I'll ask, do you like your mom? Because that would make you a motherhugger - right?

Okay, I'll bite.

If we're going to anthropomorphize buildings, then let us do so properly. We should acknowledge that just as the mathematically efficient physicality of human design (and the design of other life forms) has been derived from trial and error through the ages, so to has architecture. Forms of architecture that were unsuccessful have not been replicated. That is to say, form follows function. The more functional buildings (like the drive-thru) will thrive; the most whimsical and least efficient (like the creations of Ghery) are retarded children that should've been aborted.

Frequently, through the course of evolutionary history, there have been environmental shocks to the ecosystem, causing all but a few of a species to whither or die. The human advent of the automobile, corresponding demographic shifts, and simultaneous changes to building materials (the food supply) were one such shock, by and large relegating the form of older neighborhoods to starvation and impotentency even as ticky tacky flourished and replicated across a vast landscape.

More recently, it seems that the old forms have experienced a resurgence. In a limited number of places, I attribute a profitable justification to the practical limitations of travel by car and the relative mobility of relevant demographic niches; even then, these places must be accommodative of the automobile in a way that their forebears were not. However...the ubiquitousness of this movement (i.e. Sugar Land Town Square) has transcended profitability and indicates that the disease characterized in the film Idiocracy is transmitable between humans and architecture. The future is bleak. Just as is the case with humans, profitability is no longer the guiding force dictating reproductive success. We shall share in one another's lengthy and internally imperceptible destruction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I'll bite.

If we're going to anthropomorphize buildings, then let us do so properly. We should acknowledge that just as the mathematically efficient physicality of human design (and the design of other life forms) has been derived from trial and error through the ages, so to has architecture. Forms of architecture that were unsuccessful have not been replicated. That is to say, form follows function. The more functional buildings (like the drive-thru) will thrive; the most whimsical and least efficient (like the creations of Ghery) are retarded children that should've been aborted.

Frequently, through the course of evolutionary history, there have been environmental shocks to the ecosystem, causing all but a few of a species to whither or die. The human advent of the automobile, corresponding demographic shifts, and simultaneous changes to building materials (the food supply) were one such shock, by and large relegating the form of older neighborhoods to starvation and impotentency even as ticky tacky flourished and replicated across a vast landscape.

More recently, it seems that the old forms have experienced a resurgence. In a limited number of places, I attribute a profitable justification to the practical limitations of travel by car and the relative mobility of relevant demographic niches; even then, these places must be accommodative of the automobile in a way that their forebears were not. However...the ubiquitousness of this movement (i.e. Sugar Land Town Square) has transcended profitability and indicates that the disease characterized in the film Idiocracy is transmitable between humans and architecture. The future is bleak. Just as is the case with humans, profitability is no longer the guiding force dictating reproductive success. We shall share in one another's lengthy and internally imperceptible destruction.

I'm curious as to how one can "properly" anthropomorphize anything. While I didn't use that word, I'll cheerfully admit that, yes, I feel an emotional pang when a noble structure is neglected or demolished. Many people put money and sweat equity into interesting buildings (or 'retarded' children) because their affection for these things is greater than a desire to create attractive spread sheets. I believe that their faith is often rewarded.

Apparently, I anthropomorphize people, too; they seem so much like human beings.

The future is bleak. Just as is the case with humans, profitability is no longer the guiding force dictating reproductive success. We shall share in one another's lengthy and internally imperceptible destruction.
I've searched in vain for a Hallmark Card that conveys that sentiment.

"[they] regarded each other with mutual distrust, tempered by a scientific interest"

- Saki, Reginald At The Theatre

(It should be noted that TheNiche and I have met, and were civil, and we both enjoyed a lively conversation.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious as to how one can "properly" anthropomorphize anything. While I didn't use that word, I'll cheerfully admit that, yes, I feel an emotional pang when a noble structure is neglected or demolished. Many people put money and sweat equity into interesting buildings (or 'retarded' children) because their affection for these things is greater than a desire to create attractive spread sheets. I believe that their faith is often rewarded.

Apparently, I anthropomorphize people, too; they seem so much like human beings.

You know, I bought an old building that was literally girating with the movement of so many carpenter ants, spiders, termites, birds and their chicks, and the occasional alley cat interloper; it was as close to alive as any building might be.

I sterilized it.

I rendered it fit for profitable human occupancy.

How does that make you feel?

I've searched in vain for a Hallmark Card that conveys that sentiment.

"[they] regarded each other with mutual distrust, tempered by a scientific interest"

- Saki, Reginald At The Theatre

(It should be noted that TheNiche and I have met, and were civil, and we both enjoyed a lively conversation.)

"That is the worst of a tragedy. One can't always hear oneself talk." ;)

We are each willing to dabble in the absurd and we do provide a good foil for the other. The conversation is worthwhile and enjoyable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I bought an old building that was literally girating with the movement of so many carpenter ants, spiders, termites, birds and their chicks, and the occasional alley cat interloper; it was as close to alive as any building might be.

I sterilized it.

I rendered it fit for profitable human occupancy.

How does that make you feel?

Pretty damn proud of you! I applaud your initiative and commitment.

(And, while you may not hear it, while you sleep the building is murmuring, "thank you ... thank you.")

"That is the worst of a tragedy. One can't always hear oneself talk." ;)

Glad you got the Saki reference. I'll return the volley with "Oh, you're simply exasperating. You've been reading Nietzsche till you haven't got any sense of moral proportion left." :D

We are each willing to dabble in the absurd and we do provide a good foil for the other. The conversation is worthwhile and enjoyable.

I agree. Now, if we can only convince the other HAIFers that it is ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty damn proud of you! I applaud your initiative and commitment.

(And, while you may not hear it, while you sleep the building is murmuring, "thank you ... thank you.")

As it is rodeo season, a little Jimmy Webb seems in order.

If these old walls could speak of things that they remembered well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree - I have a sense that the repopulation of the center is just a result of overall population growth though and not as a result of a "trend", but I don't have the data. It would be an interesting thread if someone has the information.

I like the East Downtown area. I'm just not convinced that it's going to grow at the rate that many people appear to expect.

Well, both in the warehouse district, as well as the rest of east end, as Niche pointed out, it isn't repopulation.

for the warehouse district prior to the condos and townhomes most of the land was commercial and industrial, so that isn't so much a repopulation as it is populating an area that historically wasn't used for residential. Granted there were residential structures that people used (and still do), it wasn't the norm.

as for the rest of the east end, the area is still/already populated. I'd say if anything is happening, it is a changing of the residents. be it renters, owners or whoever.

Anyway, as to the point, I think there are probably less people from out of town that are willing to come to the East End, than there are people who know Houston who choose the East End. I have no basis of fact on that, just a gut feeling from myself visiting other cities and judging the area based on the condition of the buildings that are in the area (and I'm sure, as Niche pointed out, some are so ignorant as to base their judgment on the skin tone of people they see).

How many people park in their yard in the Heights, or in Montrose? You can either see ruts in the yard, gravel instead of a yard, or cars in the yard in half of the houses in most neighborhoods in the East End, that alone is probably going to scare someone who doesn't know Houston into looking somewhere else.

How much gang graffiti is there in the Heights, or Montrose? Sadly, I see this one place under i45 (going south on the feeder, take the u-turn by the railroad tracks by Schlumberger) that has gang graffiti on it all the time, (even though some group comes by and paints over it, it's right back the next day) you just don't see that over there. That doesn't mean that there aren't issues with violence in those areas, it just means that at first appearance people will be frightened of the area.

I'm not saying that everyone that transplants to Houston just ignores the East End, but I am saying that it is less likely.

Most of the people I have met that have moved here, they do so because they are from Houston and heard good things about the neighborhood, usually through friends that live here. Some of them went to school at UH and decided to rent in the area, and decided to them live in the area.

Anyway, lunch is over, back to the work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...