City Plans Incentives For Downtown Homes

[j_cuevas713]

Wow! I'm extremely excited!

[lockmat]

Maybe this has already been stated, but if this program is used to its fullest, it will double the number of units currently downtown. Downtown occupancy is about 90% currently, so I think downtown is ready for this. If people see all these going up, just the cranes alone in a clustered area will make it more appealing.

Also, something interesting I learned is that just about all but a few downtown residential properties are less than 100 units, with many of them around 50. New developments tend to be at least 300, so these projects likely to go up will be very noticeable.

[woolie]

Good luck.

[infinite_jim]

Seeing how this incentive as spurred some developments it seems to me that these residential projects will do little to "reinvigorate" downtown. By deliberately placing the residential incentives away from the large office properties on the west side of downtown they have abandoned the principle of mixed-use where it could have be most effective. Building highrises surrounded by parking lots sounds like progress but not as much as filling in parking lots adjacent to existing and functional bldgs. If I were given the same power as the downtown management district I would have mirrored the boundary to incentivize only the west side to spur large infill projects while the development pipeline is hot. The ballpark lofts and the new tower on Main are so far from anything worth walking to and will probably struggle b/c they will exist as residential islands like Houston House or 2016 Main do.

 

My 2 cents.

[samagon]

Looking at Google maps, north of Clay street and west of Caroline there's one full city block that is just parking. There's about 3 other city blocks in this area that have buildings and parking.

 

Otherwise, all the empty lots in downtown are south of Clay and east of Caroline. These streets are like invisible barriers or something. The way I see it, they could go south from Clay, or east from Caroline.

 

If it were up to me, and I had a choice to attempt to invigorate living in downtown based on this, I'd work around the stadiums, arena and convention center. This area is going to get far more traffic than the area south of Clay. I hope that eventually all of the area bounded by the freeways fill in, but I think around the stadiums, arena and convention center is a easier sell.

[shasta]

Seeing how this incentive as spurred some developments it seems to me that these residential projects will do little to "reinvigorate" downtown. By deliberately placing the residential incentives away from the large office properties on the west side of downtown they have abandoned the principle of mixed-use where it could have be most effective. Building highrises surrounded by parking lots sounds like progress but not as much as filling in parking lots adjacent to existing and functional bldgs. If I were given the same power as the downtown management district I would have mirrored the boundary to incentivize only the west side to spur large infill projects while the development pipeline is hot. The ballpark lofts and the new tower on Main are so far from anything worth walking to and will probably struggle b/c they will exist as residential islands like Houston House or 2016 Main do.

 

My 2 cents.

 

I disagree entirely. I almost view the western part of downtown as the sterile, imposing skyline district. The pedestal buildings offer little in urban connectivity. I would almost forget about that part of downtown and focus on the center and east sides which include projects that are created for urban connectivity- anchored by parks, sporting events, retail, residential, tourism centers, conventions, and hotels.

[infinite_jim]

I disagree entirely. I almost view the western part of downtown as the sterile, imposing skyline district. The pedestal buildings offer little in urban connectivity. I would almost forget about that part of downtown and focus on the center and east sides which include projects that are created for urban connectivity- anchored by parks, sporting events, retail, residential, tourism centers, conventions, and hotels.

 

Large scale convention centers and stadia are a hindrance to cohesive mixed-use. How is that not obvious? 

 

The western part of downtown has plenty of commercial; it just needs a couple supertall residential towers to help balance out the existing. How is this a hard concept to follow?

 

The pedestal buildings may not seem very "mixed-use" but when connected by the tunnel system (an underground mall) and by virtue of adjacency to residential towers; this creates exactly the type of mix-used that is desired. 

 

Building another residential tower next to Houston House does little to build a cohesive mixed-use nab. In fact this incentive is little more than a further suburbanization of downtown by setting out to make the east side the "residential district" and the west side the "office district" 

 

At current land values the only thing that will get build on the west side of downtown is offices. We should ignore the "parking lot district." Why reward landowners that have done nothing for the nab except put up a parking lot?

[ToryGattis]

Realistically, south and east downtown is where you can build residential towers with good views, and that's unlikely in west downtown surrounded by office skyscrapers, so the residential developers will target the east and south edges of downtown.

[infinite_jim]

http://news.rice.edu/2013/02/25/rices-shell-center-for-sustainability-outlines-sustainable-strategies-for-houston-2/

 

 

Employment and housing balance

 

Encouraging developers to build housing close to job centers would be a boon for Houston, the report suggests. King said data show that Houston has 17 “business centers,” areas with a high-density of 10,000 or more jobs. About 57 percent of all jobs in the city are in these business centers, yet only 22 percent of the population lives within a quarter mile of business centers. That score is paltry compared with other major U.S. cities, like Los Angeles, where about 90 percent of the population lives within a quarter mile of a business center, he said.

 

King said the study suggests Houston officials do more comprehensive and sustainable development, not with zoning but with “a suite of development codes that regulate the construction and design of new development based on proximity to business centers.” For example, the city’s recent offers of $15,000 incentives to develop housing units downtown could be used to spur development near other business centers.

 

“Why is this incentive policy only focused on downtown when there are 16 other large business centers in Houston, all generating traffic each day?” he asked. “This is an example of Houston not performing like the fourth-largest city in the nation.”

 

[ToryGattis]

http://news.rice.edu/2013/02/25/rices-shell-center-for-sustainability-outlines-sustainable-strategies-for-houston-2/

 

Sigh.  There are plenty of apartments near every business center in Houston.  If people want to live next to their job, they certainly have that option.  How would it help to use tax dollars to incent more apartment construction in these areas?

[infinite_jim]

Sigh.  There are plenty of apartments near every business center in Houston.  If people want to live next to their job, they certainly have that option.  How would it help to use tax dollars to incent more apartment construction in these areas?

This is good enough for you? 

 

 

MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF COMPARABLE Tax dollars are already being used to splay housing farther away from job centers in form of highways. Let's not get into what tax dollars SHOULD be used for or you will be exposed as the corrupt propagandist you are. The report undercuts your cheerleading by showing that on average Houstonians spend more on transportation and housing thus eating up any potential cost of living savings that you blew chunks about in your rag. "Error has no rights."

 

[editor]

This is good enough for you? 

 

 

MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF COMPARABLE Tax dollars are already being used to splay housing farther away from job centers in form of highways. Let's not get into what tax dollars SHOULD be used for or you will be exposed as the corrupt propagandist you are. The report undercuts your cheerleading by showing that on average Houstonians spend more on transportation and housing thus eating up any potential cost of living savings that you blew chunks about in your rag. "Error has no rights."

 

 

Calm down, Sparky.  Take a deep breath and then re-read the HAIF Terms of Service you agreed to when you signed up.  Take special note of the section about personal attacks.

 

Talk about issues, not each other.

[ToryGattis]

The report undercuts your cheerleading by showing that on average Houstonians spend more on transportation and housing thus eating up any potential cost of living savings 

 

 

Not a fan of that stat. When people save on housing, they splurge on their cars. That's a personal choice and it doesn't mean Houston is expensive to get around. Anybody is more than welcome to keep their transportation costs low by driving a used Toyota Prius or Honda Civic, just as they can in any other city.

[kylejack]

Not a fan of that stat. When people save on housing, they splurge on their cars. That's a personal choice and it doesn't mean Houston is expensive to get around. Anybody is more than welcome to keep their transportation costs low by driving a used Toyota Prius or Honda Civic, just as they can in any other city.

 

I keep my transportation costs low by not owning a car.

[infinite_jim]

Not a fan of that stat. When people save on housing, they splurge on their cars. That's a personal choice and it doesn't mean Houston is expensive to get around. Anybody is more than welcome to keep their transportation costs low by driving a used Toyota Prius or Honda Civic, just as they can in any other city.

 

Not a fan b/c you have no factual way to dispute it. Thank you for proving my point.

 

http://blog.chron.com/opportunityurbanist/2013/02/houston-dominates-americas-growth-corridors-and-makes-the-case-for-the-worlds-highest-standard-of-living/

[ToryGattis]

Not a fan b/c you have no factual way to dispute it. Thank you for proving my point.

 

http://blog.chron.com/opportunityurbanist/2013/02/houston-dominates-americas-growth-corridors-and-makes-the-case-for-the-worlds-highest-standard-of-living/

 

I'm logically disputing the implied implication that the stat indicates that Houston is not an affordable city.  I'll also point out that it ignores taxes that go to transit, which should certainly factor into the transportation costs and would make a big difference in more transit-focused cities.  The farebox is nowhere close to your actual cost of that transit ride.

 

Thanks for linking to my post, which does, ironically, contain a graph of facts disputing it, based on real government data.

[KinkaidAlum]

Not a fan of that stat. When people save on housing, they splurge on their cars. That's a personal choice and it doesn't mean Houston is expensive to get around. Anybody is more than welcome to keep their transportation costs low by driving a used Toyota Prius or Honda Civic, just as they can in any other city.

 

best way to keep transportation costs lower? better transit OPTIONS.

 

Personally, I'd wish we'd spend some money fixing roads rather than building new ones. Greenbrier, Cullen, Woodway, Richmond, etc... are in such poor shape that it isn't uncommon for them to damage vehicles, especially tires. Memorizing potholes is my new hobby.

[ToryGattis]

Personally, I'd wish we'd spend some money fixing roads rather than building new ones. Greenbrier, Cullen, Woodway, Richmond, etc... are in such poor shape that it isn't uncommon for them to damage vehicles, especially tires. Memorizing potholes is my new hobby.

 

Yeah, the 2011 drought did a number on the city's roads.  The shrinking clay ground heaved up asphalt everywhere.  It'll take a decade+ for the city to recover, if not longer...

[Ross]

This is good enough for you? 

 

 

MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF COMPARABLE Tax dollars are already being used to splay housing farther away from job centers in form of highways.

 

 

The housing moves out because people want affordable single family housing with yards. A family with two kids would have a hard time living in my 2BR 1 bath house inside the Loop, even if they thought the $260k price tag was affordable. And once the housing is built, the roads have to follow, just to avoid the horrific conditions that existed on FM1960 before it was widened and made usable. The only people I know at work who want to live in apartments near the office are single with no kids. And a large percentage of the young singles are actually buying in the suburbs.

[samagon]

Not a fan of that stat. When people save on housing, they splurge on their cars. That's a personal choice and it doesn't mean Houston is expensive to get around. Anybody is more than welcome to keep their transportation costs low by driving a used Toyota Prius or Honda Civic, just as they can in any other city.

 

I agree.

 

It is silly to me when I see the stat though of cost of living, and Houston being so high because people choose to buy a big SUV that they hardly ever use to the full potential. I don't do anything about it, but shrug, their money, do what they will with it. I just don't think it's a good stat to use in a study.

 

There are tons of options available for downsizing a vehicle that is only really used to full potential maybe 3 or 4 times a year. Rental, buy a 3rd car (and keep it on weekend insurance), get a smaller SUV that is still rated to tow your boat and buy a trailer (or rent one) when you go camping. Tons of options out there. And of course, it's not just people buying oversized trucks/SUVs, and I'm guilty as well, I have a rocketship of a car that I hardly ever get to take to a track. I should get a cheap commuter and a cheaper used car for track days. 

 

I think you missed the point though on the amount of housing near business centers, Houston is at 20 some odd percent, other cities are way higher, from the article:

 

 

About 57 percent of all jobs in the city are in these business centers, yet only 22 percent of the population lives within a quarter mile of business centers. That score is paltry compared with other major U.S. cities, like Los Angeles, where about 90 percent of the population lives within a quarter mile of a business center, he said.

 

There certainly are lots of apartments near business centers, but there should be more.

 

Of course, this is also dictated by demand, people want to live in the burbs, so that's where residential development goes, I think with the prices that can be charged for apartments in midtown and other areas inside the loop, compared with apartment prices elsewhere in town, there's a desire by more people to live in town.

[swtsig]

is someone actually arguing that the cost of living in Houston is actually high??? compared to what, exactly?

[Subdude]

is someone actually arguing that the cost of living in Houston is actually high??? compared to what, exactly?

 

Studies have indicated that transportation costs in Houston are very high compared to other metros, thereby offsetting lower costs in areas such as housing.  The transportation costs included estimates of fuel, insurance, depreciation, etc.

[Houston19514]

I think you missed the point though on the amount of housing near business centers, Houston is at 20 some odd percent, other cities are way higher, from the article:

 

Quote

About 57 percent of all jobs in the city are in these business centers, yet only 22 percent of the population lives within a quarter mile of business centers. That score is paltry compared with other major U.S. cities, like Los Angeles, where about 90 percent of the population lives within a quarter mile of a business center, he said.

 

 

There certainly are lots of apartments near business centers, but there should be more.

 

Of course, this is also dictated by demand, people want to live in the burbs, so that's where residential development goes, I think with the prices that can be charged for apartments in midtown and other areas inside the loop, compared with apartment prices elsewhere in town, there's a desire by more people to live in town.

 

Color me extremely skeptical of that "90 percent of the population lives within a quarter mile of business center" stat for Los Angeles.  That just cannot be correct.

 

Also from the report:

• From 1990 to 2010 the percentage of persons that reside within a quarter mile of high density business centers [in Houston] more than doubled from 10% to 22%.

 

[kylejack]

Studies have indicated that transportation costs in Houston are very high compared to other metros, thereby offsetting lower costs in areas such as housing.  The transportation costs included estimates of fuel, insurance, depreciation, etc.

 

Which study concluded that transportation costs in Houston offset any savings in housing?

[livincinco]

Color me extremely skeptical of that "90 percent of the population lives within a quarter mile of business center" stat for Los Angeles. That just cannot be correct.

I'm sure that they are talking about the city of Los Angeles, not the LA metro area. Houston has a lot of bedroom communities that are inside the city limits, but they're incorporated as separate cities for the most part in LA.

[Houston19514]

I'm sure that they are talking about the city of Los Angeles, not the LA metro area. Houston has a lot of bedroom communities that are inside the city limits, but they're incorporated as separate cities for the most part in LA.

Still not buying it.

[samagon]

the entirety of LA probably is listed in such a way as to qualify anything inside the city limits as a business district.

 

I am skeptical of that number as well, and it's not like it matters, LA even if they all live near one business district, if you note their traffic on like, the 5 or whatever freeway you want, no one works in the business district they live near.

[ToryGattis]

Thanks for saving me from having to make those points, guys.  Appreciated.  Count me in on the LA skepticism too.  And obviously having everybody near business districts is not exactly helping their traffic.

 

On that housing + transportation stat: next they're going to notice Houstonians take their extra discretionary income to eat out more than any other major city (according to Zagat), so we spend a higher proportion of income on food, so that means Houston is an expensive city keep yourself fed.  Jeesh.  Everybody see the flaw in that logic?

[samagon]

I think on the housing and transportation stat, it's best to compare cost/sqft and gasoline prices and distances traveled.

 

The size of house a person would choose to buy and where it is located are choices made for reasons that improve that individual's quality of life. 

 

The cost of a BMW X5 is going to be the same in Houston as in LA (maybe not for used quite so much), it's the distance traveled and the price of gasoline that because our cost of housing is so low can be more variable.

 

Being single with no kids (yes ladies, I'm available), I couldn't imagine sitting in hour long traffic going into work. If I had a kid though, I might use that hour to reflect (as I sit crawling in traffic) that my commute might suck, but at least my kid is going to school in a good district.

[ToryGattis]

I think on the housing and transportation stat, it's best to compare cost/sqft and gasoline prices and distances traveled.

 

The size of house a person would choose to buy and where it is located are choices made for reasons that improve that individual's quality of life. 

 

The cost of a BMW X5 is going to be the same in Houston as in LA (maybe not for used quite so much), it's the distance traveled and the price of gasoline that because our cost of housing is so low can be more variable.

 

Being single with no kids (yes ladies, I'm available), I couldn't imagine sitting in hour long traffic going into work. If I had a kid though, I might use that hour to reflect (as I sit crawling in traffic) that my commute might suck, but at least my kid is going to school in a good district.

 

This is why cost of living indexes are better than income percentages: they create a standardized middle class lifestyle and then see what it costs in each city.  It equalizes the comparison and makes it apples to apples.