Thoughts On The Suburbs

[Gary]

Well one could ask "why did you decide to have so many children?" but then it seems that is a decision you made. Your present situation - good or bad - is the consequence of your previous decisions.

I could say "Well then don't have so many children" but I dont want to be too much of a jerk. Good luck though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's your answer?

You miss the point completely my friend. I won't try to explain it again as I don't think it would matter.

[InnerLoopOnly]

I advocate living near where you work, and living in denser communities. As I have stated before I feel that you put less stress on your family, the economy, the environment, and the government through dense settlement.

I prefer living close to the museums, theaters, and clubs that the city offer. I realize these aren't places someone who has a family will go to very often. I don't think we should make arguments on where people should live based on what attractions are nearby. My priorities are different from everyone else's. I won't begrudge someone who wants to live in a good school district, I just think we need to rework our development patterns.

[MidtownCoog]

Again, how often do you go to the museum? The exhibits only change so often.

And "clubs". I don't know many adults with famalies who go to "clubs" anymore.

You end up out growing that stuff.

And as far as

dense settlement

goes, that too, can be stressful. I've worked in the heart of London, and after a few weeks, the dense settlement can be a drag.

No need for Houston to force its citizens to live like a rat in a cage. Even if we build out the major dumps within the loop, we should still leave ourselves a little elbow room.

[kjb434]

Good point midtowncoog. I live by TC Jester and I-10. I visit the same bars and restraunts all the time. I have tons of more places to go in the loop but I never really do go there.

[Gary]

I advocate living near where you work, and living in denser communities.  As I have stated before I feel that you put less stress on your family, the economy, the environment, and the government through dense settlement.

I prefer living close to the museums, theaters, and clubs that the city offer.  I realize these aren't places someone who has a family will go to very often.  I don't think we should make arguments on where people should live based on what attractions are nearby.  My priorities are different from everyone else's.  I won't begrudge someone who wants to live in a good school district, I just think we need to rework our development patterns.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think any sane person would dissagree with living close to the office, but the reality is that many simply can't.

I love the idea of more affordable housing in town which hopefully is on the brink of happening, but again until that happens, people like me will still be in the burbs.

[LTAWACS]

That's your answer?

You miss the point completely my friend. I won't try to explain it again as I don't think it would matter.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You asked more than 1 question. I gave you several responses.

[InnerLoopOnly]

Again, how often do you go to the museum?  The exhibits only change so often.

And "clubs".  I don't know many adults with famalies who go to "clubs" anymore.

You end up out growing that stuff.

And as far as  goes, that too, can be stressful.  I've worked in the heart of London, and after a few weeks, the dense settlement can be a drag.

No need for Houston to force its citizens to live like a rat in a cage.  Even if we build out the major dumps within the loop, we should still leave ourselves a little elbow room.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I said that I realize these aren't places family people go often, or for that matter at all. I don't think someone should base their location solely on attractions that are nearby.

As far as getting tired of being in a dense area, there is the country. You don't have to stay in the city every minute of your free time. We have beaches, camp sites, and lakes that are all within a close proximity. And if we don't think there are enough of these areas, then we need to create more.

My point remains that the burbs are generaly bad in their current design.

[sevfiv]

Man, is that the best sales job you can offer?

Mine's better than that, but I sure thought y'all would be better than that.

neither a sales job nor a better/worse than issue.

most everything i do is in town/neartown. therefore, i like to be intown/neartown. easy as pie!

[Gary]

You asked more than 1 question. I gave you several responses.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your response was unsatisfactory at best and offered no solution other than to not have kids.

My whole point to this dialogue with you is to get a productive response with a viable solution that's objective and mature.

Being so pro "inside the loop only" I'm curious as to where you live?

[VicMan]

Here's a mathematical statement to prove that if Manhattan's population density was the maximum allowed population density, that 90% of Houston can't be in 5 square miles..

"Gary, as you know, there are some people (the hardest of the hardcore urbanist) who think 90% of the city should be situated on about four or five square miles. Anything outside that radius is "in the middle of nowhere.""

Heck, in 2000 New York County (Manhattan) had 1,537,195 in 23 square miles - All of New York had 8,085,700 in 468.9 square miles.

In other words, Manhattan had 19% of the city in 23 square miles (4.9% of the land).

What if Manhattan had the same density, but was only 5 square miles large? And what if Manhattan was 90% of New York?

1,537,195/23 = about 48,037 per square mile (New York's density as a whole is about 17,240 per square mile)

48,037*5=about 240,186 in the five square miles.

240,186 is to 90 as n is to 100.

240,186(100) = 90n

24,018,600 = 90n

about 266,870 = n

The whole city would have 266,870 people.

Therefore one cannot cram 90% of the people of the city of Houston into 5 square miles if Manhattan's current population density is the maximum limit of a population density.

EDIT: Corrected a small math error

[bachanon]

now THAT was fun.

great point.

[Guest danax]

So how often do you frequent the cool stuff ;-)

When I lived in The Loop, it was nice to be near the cool stuff, but it's not like we went there everyday. 

Work 8-5 or longer most days, and the cool stuff is there, but I am not.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mainly the weekends. Or, if I feel like stopping somewhere after work, it's not far to get home afterwards. But a fair point, and it's not enough by itself to base a home buying decision on. There are a few places that I frequent that I can run over to on short notice that are not available in the burbs. I've lived in suburban Spring and liked it there too. I also like my old, established neighborhood.

The current thinking is causing the suburbs to become more self sufficient and complete so there's a lot to be said for them too.

[Guest danax]

Therefore one cannot cram 90% of the people of the city of Houston into 5 square miles if Manhattan's current population density is the maximum limit of a population density.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Anyone know what the inner-loop square mileage is? It's about 5-6 miles to the south loop from DT and from Galleria to Ship Channel is what, maybe, 12-15 miles? Not trying to nitpick Vic, but the inner loop must be at least 130 square miles.???

This place is in the process of filling up and the result is slowly increasing density.

We just stopped a re-plat in my inner-loop neighborhood that would've been the first set of townhouses within the neighborhood boundaries and would've potentially opened the floodgates for more of the same. While density can bring beautiful developments and amenities that we all like to oooo and ahhhh about, it also brings more people and eliminates our dwindling supply of close-in homes with yards so there's definitely a downside to density.

[YakuzaIce]

Anyone know what the inner-loop square mileage is? It's about 5-6 miles to the south loop from DT and from Galleria to Ship Channel is what, maybe, 12-15 miles? Not trying to nitpick Vic, but the inner loop must be at least 130 square miles.???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I did this awhile ago. I believe including the ship channel but not bellaire it is 110 or so sq. miles. With around 465,000 plus bellaire living there. That is census 2000 numbers though. In a sec I can double check that.

Edit: it is 101.08 plus bellaire.

[VicMan]

But New York's different than Houston - New York is locked by state boundaries and boundaries of other cities.

Houston is not confined by other cities and has the option of expanding further.

Furthermore, I never said Manhattan was the equivalent of the inner loop. The CBD of Manhattan takes up much of its space, while the CBD of the inner loop does not.

Now, to do an equivalent of Manhattan's space compared to the rest of NY compared to Houston...

23 is to 468.9

n is to 601.7

23(601.7) = 468.9n

13839.1 = 468.9n

about 29.51

(note: This size is from the 2000 Census)

So the equivalent to Manhattan in Houston land-wise would be about 29.51 if we were keeping the ratios of Manhattan to New York with the "Central Area" to Houston.

Now, if 110 square miles is the inner loop minus Bellaire, West U, and Southside place, this is to show the equivalent in New York if ratios are kept true.

110 is to 601.7

n is to 468.9

100(468.9) = 601.7n

46890 = 601.7n

about 77.9

So the New York equivalent of the Inner Loop would be 77.9 square miles if the ratios are kept true.

Aside from the equations,

I like to see more high density but at the same time I like having houses with yards, especially that "middle class family area" type house inside the inner loop.

Plus I don't know if Bellaire, West U, and Southside Place would stand for going to high density.

But I wonder if there is any resistance in areas north of Downtown to go high density..

[The Great Hizzy!]

But I wonder if there is any resistance in areas north of Downtown to go high density..

I think the North Main Corridor is a perfect candidate to see that type of development, as is the warehouse district east of DT. These two areas could account for a couple hundred thousand residents themselves over the next couple of decades if development is done right.

[LTAWACS]

Your response was unsatisfactory at best and offered no solution other than to not have kids.

My whole point to this dialogue with you is to get a productive response with a viable solution that's objective and mature.

Being so pro "inside the loop only" I'm curious as to where you live?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The solution is to not have children. It seems that was a factor in determining where you should live.

I live inside the loop. I've already posted this.

[RedScare]

AWACS, I wouldn't tell them either. I think the suburban posters are plotting to take you out with your anti-suburb rhetoric.

Don't fall for it, man! Don't fall for it!

[MidtownCoog]

There are plenty of dumps in the loop. That monkier alone should impress no one.

And when you think about it, the Memorial Villages are outside the loop.

Dirty scuzballs, all of them. They should move in the loop to be cool.

[kjb434]

LOL

[MidtownCoog]

I am just being a smart-arse, but some of y'all need to think "outside the loop".

[VicMan]

I think some people who mean "inside the loop" really mean "inside Beltway 8" as the area between beltway 8 and the inner loop has become urban.

Also many bad areas are outside the loop, and most of those are inside Beltway 8.

[Casual Observer]

I would think inner-loop has morphed from just inside 610, to inside the West Belt, North Loop, South Loop, I-45/US288 - or whatever you'd call that screwed up circle.

[MidtownCoog]

And as long as you are happy where you live, who is anyone to judge?

If your life was truly miserable, you'd find a way out.

That's human nature.

[Casual Observer]

If your life was truly miserable, you'd find a way out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're right. If 50 cent can do it - then anyone can.

[sevfiv]

i suddenly feel...inspired

[InnerLoopOnly]

i suddenly feel...inspired

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you feel inspired to buy a single family home 30 miles from the city?

[Casual Observer]

Do you feel inspired to buy a single family home 30 miles from the city?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I bet someone who works 30 miles from the city would.

[jmancuso]

The solution is to not have children. It seems that was a factor in determining where you should live.

I live inside the loop. I've already posted this.

well, you can't expect people not to have kids so they won't move out to the 'burbs. different strokes for different folks.

i'm glad we do have the variety here from a loft downtown, a flat in the montrose area, a bungalow in the heights, a condo in uptown, small ranch in walnut bend or a newer subdivision 6000 miles sway in katy.

[Gary]

The solution is to not have children. It seems that was a factor in determining where you should live.

I live inside the loop. I've already posted this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So what your saying is no one should have kids? How exactly do propose that we raise up the next generations? Procreation is a basic human function.

I understand you've posted that you live inside the loop, but you haven't given any indication of where. I've heard someone else ask you this same question but no response was given. I'm not asking for your address, I'm just curious as to where you live generally, and why it makes you so pro "inside the loop only".