A Texas Way of Being Urban

[totheskies]

http://texasleftist.blogspot.com/2013/09/a-texas-way-of-being-urban.html

 

If you've been to Houston recently (and took some time to exit the freeways), you probably could tell one thing pretty quickly... the city is in the throws of a rapid transformation. Much of this building boom is taking place in the form of new condominiums and mid-rise structures, which will likely increase after revisions to the city's development code. But it's not just the law that is mandating these types of developments... much of it is driven market demand, as more and more Houstonians prefer to live in a traditional "built urban" environment.

The shift in thinking is starting to get noticed outside the city as well, for it affects the way Houston does business. Take this interesting interview on the changing face of Houston architecture, from an architect's perspective. The editor of the Chicago Architecture Blog interviewed John Lahey, CEO of Simon Cordwell Buenz. SCB is a Chicago-based firm that is currently working on projects across the United States, including two in Houston.

 Editor: Houston is a whole different market.

Lahey: For an urban person, it’s not as accommodating. But there is a sprit of Texas that you can’t help but like. Even if, politically or whatever, you’re not in sync with it, their do-it-yourself identity is really kind of neat.

Editor: How is working in Texas different than the other markets you’re working in?

Lahey: The people that we’re working for in Texas are from Texas, so the Texas imprint is very apparent. I would say in Texas it’s just not as dense and hard an urban environment, and it’s a little more gracious. A little more landscaping when you come into the building. It’s hot, but it’s sunny a lot. The units are a little bigger.

There’s a vitality in Texas that is different. Chicago and San Francisco have very established urban areas and you’re sort of being part of an established urban framework. Whereas in Texas, you can be more freewheeling, and people want to just celebrate it a little more. The buildings in Chicago have a lot of civility, where in Texas… it’s hard to say exactly what’s different.

In Texas the construction costs aren’t as much as they are here, and so you get more for your money.

Editor: And no zoning in Houston.

Lahey: Austin has zoning. It has a lot of zoning. But the buildings there are large, and we’re working on a few smaller ones, too.

Editor: In the last few years, people in Houston seem to be coming around to the notion that it’s OK to live in a tower instead of a rambler.

Lahey: I think there’s quite a bit of it. And then there’s more stuff starting to happen in downtown. The one that we’re doing in Montrose isn’t a super-tall tower. It’s probably half as tall as this [Rincon Two], but that’s tall for there. But what’s neat about an area like that where there’s already a density and there’s restaurants and stuff, when you bring in that many people and do it in a way that still lets the neighborhood be what it is, it’s just more people going to these things. Walking to them. And you can see how the urban experience that we all love, will morph into a Texas way of being urban.

Austin is a little more urban feeling because of all the music downtown, and it’s pretty centralized. And because of the size of Austin, they’ve probably got a denser core than Houston. But I think Houston is going to be really good. The things that are happening there are really positive.

Editor: Are there things that you have to do differently designing a building in Houston?

Lahey: It’s not so cold, so when you do your amenities, the outdoor — the pools and all that stuff — are really important because you’re going to be using that a lot.

Balconies… You know, it gets so hot that some people want them and some people don’t. Somebody told me that you just don’t sit out a lot in Houston. So when we’re doing it, there is the thought that people are going to be in their apartments and have the windows closed and have the air conditioning on a lot.

Now in Chicago, we have the same thing in the winter — people are going to be inside and have the heat on. So, they’re similar. Whereas in Chicago, you’re making sure things don’t get too dark, in Houston you’re making sure things don’t get too light. You don’t have the short days, what you have is the big hot sun. Here you’ve got the winter, when it’s dark and it’s cloudy, and you want to make sure you get enough light into each unit.

 

[cloud713]

great read, thanks for posting! im looking forward to the Montrose project adding some height in the area. is there a thread on that tower here? i cant remember seeing it.

[Urbannizer]

Thread below, it needs to be moved back to the going up section.

 

http://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/26859-3400-montrose-old-10-story-building-at-montrose-hawthorne/

[cloud713]

Thread below, it needs to be moved back to the going up section.

 

http://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/26859-3400-montrose-old-10-story-building-at-montrose-hawthorne/

agreed, it sounds like its a for sure project the way they were talking about it in the article.

[totheskies]

Oh sorry... Didn't know where to put this, since it was kind of a general discussion too. Fascinating to see how architects/ urban planners view Houston when they're from a more traditional built environment.

[cloud713]

Oh sorry... Didn't know where to put this, since it was kind of a general discussion too. Fascinating to see how architects/ urban planners view Houston when they're from a more traditional built environment.

no the placement of this thread is appropriate, but in whatever subforum that Hanover at Montrose project thread is in, that one needs to be moved back to going up, since its been confirmed.

[lockmat]

My question is, who are these people moving to the more urban areas of Houston?

Are they new to Houston, kids who grew up in the Houston suburbs, kids who grew up in urban Houston that are staying in urban Houston or adults who have lived in suburban Houston moving to urban Houston?

Did I leave a category out?

My guess is the last group on the list is non-existent and the two leading groups are kids becoming adults and non-Houstonians moving here.

[LarryDierker]

My question is, who are these people moving to the more urban areas of Houston?

Are they new to Houston, kids who grew up in the Houston suburbs, kids who grew up in urban Houston that are staying in urban Houston or adults who have lived in suburban Houston moving to urban Houston?

Did I leave a category out?

My guess is the last group on the list is non-existent and the two leading groups are kids becoming adults and non-Houstonians moving here.

 

I'm guessing all of the above. And Empty Nesters.

 

Maybe we should put a group together and do some surveys.

[lockmat]

I'm guessing all of the above. And Empty Nesters.

Maybe we should put a group together and do some surveys.

But where were the empty nesters before? Already in an urban area or the burbs?

[LarryDierker]

I'm not sure. But I saw this youtube video a few years back, and since have always associated empty nesters with urban living.

 

[cloud713]

My question is, who are these people moving to the more urban areas of Houston?

Are they new to Houston, kids who grew up in the Houston suburbs, kids who grew up in urban Houston that are staying in urban Houston or adults who have lived in suburban Houston moving to urban Houston?

Did I leave a category out?

My guess is the last group on the list is non-existent and the two leading groups are kids becoming adults and non-Houstonians moving here.

also i think a factor is where a lot of these people are coming from. many people outside of the sunbelt arent used to our sprawl and mcmansions on half acre lots, and all they know is the urban life from back home in Chicago or the northeast so they choose to live in the city when they move here instead of out in the burbs.

[totheskies]

Agreed cloud713... I've met a few people both in downtown and here in Montrose. They're new residents to Houston. One lady is from New Jersey, and she originally moved to downtown Houston, but came over to Montrose after a year. She said Montrose really "felt like" her old neighborhood, even though it doesn't quite look the same. I assume she meant that it has a more urban feel than downtown?

Which is why the new development is so interesting. It's creating an urban look to match the urban feel that many inner loop neighborhoods have already achieved.

[livincinco]

My question is, who are these people moving to the more urban areas of Houston?

Are they new to Houston, kids who grew up in the Houston suburbs, kids who grew up in urban Houston that are staying in urban Houston or adults who have lived in suburban Houston moving to urban Houston?

Did I leave a category out?

My guess is the last group on the list is non-existent and the two leading groups are kids becoming adults and non-Houstonians moving here.

I think that this is pre-dominantly driven by people moving to Houston. There have been predictions of empty nesters moving from the suburbs back to urban areas for years, but it's never materialized in any significant way. I'm personally skeptical that will ever happen in any major way in Houston because of the difference in property costs. I do think that this is a big factor in the urbanization of the suburbs though.

It's going to be interesting to see how much longer this rate of growth lasts. I think that we could plateau relatively quickly, but that depends on macroeconomic factors too.

[luciaphile]

Just noticed your quote:

 

“ I like Houston, the nation’s fourth-largest city, for all the reasons you may think you don’t. In this American moment, when walkable neighborhoods are vogue and historically grounded restaurants are au courant, Houston flouts conventions."

- John Edge in Departures Magazine

 

John Edge in Departures magazine! That is priceless. No idea what that bit about restaurants means, but because a vanishingly small percentage of Americans, drawn from the tiny sample aware of urban issues, are talking about walkable neighborhoods, the fact that Houston is continuing to do what it always has and no longer has any control over, somehow "flouts conventions."
Having grown up in Houston sprawl, and having become convinced during that time -- on my own, tabula rasa as it were, never once having heard or read anything at all about the design of cities -- that sprawl is a quality of life issue, being told many years on that Houston's development pattern is now touted as bravely nonconformist, is to be transported to cloud cuckoo land.

Except that I've heard it so many times now. A steady drumbeat. So much for "contrarianism."
In fact, sprawl is enjoying its cultural moment, with pro-sprawl articles right and left. As with so many other things (everything, perhaps) I've noticed that when something initially frowned-upon becomes the norm, there is a suspension of judgment after awhile, or a tendency to celebrate it, co-opt or adopt it as our own, in a "we must have done this on purpose" sort of way. I haven't parsed all the reasons for this. Maybe just the desire of pundits to back a winner, maybe an American bias against "negativity," 'cuz we've got a show to put on,etc.!  Or perhaps the simple fact that to say something really novel or uncomfortable is (rightly, as there should be some test) difficult and often lonely, and most people like to be affirmed by others.

I will put this thesis on the line with a prediction. The last ten or fifteen years the subject of obesity has been much in the news. We are all sick even unto death with the topic, yes? I have read about efforts to engineer food to allow people to continue in their eating habits while not gaining as much weight. I expect this effort to fail, and then, I soothsay: the experts will redefine obesity, decide it is normal, not something to be concerned about as previously thought. Look for an "Atlantic" cover story to this effect circa 2020.

[samagon]

 

 the experts will redefine obesity, decide it is normal, not something to be concerned about as previously thought. Look for an "Atlantic" cover story to this effect circa 2020.

 

 

I will jump far afield of the general topic, but there is nothing natural about eating an entire entree at chilis. the number of calories in their food is disgustingly high. hell, any chain restaurant. then to just lead a sedentary lifestyle on top of that.

 

nothing natural about that at all.

 

our bodies need activity, our bodies need to not overload on calories.

 

they can redefine obesity to make people feel better about their choices, but it's not going to help them at all, from a health standpoint.

 

to the question raised above about people living in the loop, I know for me and a few of my neighbors, we all grew up in the suburbs of Houston and ended up living in the city. For me, I grew up along westheimer outside the beltway, and as long as I can remember, traffic was abysmal, only ever getting worse. they'd widen hwy 6, the traffic would get worse. they'd widen westheimer, traffic would get worse. I don't miss it at all.

[august948]

I'm not sure. But I saw this youtube video a few years back, and since have always associated empty nesters with urban living.

 

 

Most of the empty nesters I've known have lived in the same houses they raised their children in until they've gotten too old to maintain them.  At that point they tend to live with their children or move into an assisted living apartment.  Quite a few 55+ apartment complexes have gone up on the west side of town in the last decade or so.

[livincinco]

Just noticed your quote:

“ I like Houston, the nation’s fourth-largest city, for all the reasons you may think you don’t. In this American moment, when walkable neighborhoods are vogue and historically grounded restaurants are au courant, Houston flouts conventions."

- John Edge in Departures Magazine

John Edge in Departures magazine! That is priceless. No idea what that bit about restaurants means, but because a vanishingly small percentage of Americans, drawn from the tiny sample aware of urban issues, are talking about walkable neighborhoods, the fact that Houston is continuing to do what it always has and no longer has any control over, somehow "flouts conventions."

Having grown up in Houston sprawl, and having become convinced during that time -- on my own, tabula rasa as it were, never once having heard or read anything at all about the design of cities -- that sprawl is a quality of life issue, being told many years on that Houston's development pattern is now touted as bravely nonconformist, is to be transported to cloud cuckoo land.

Except that I've heard it so many times now. A steady drumbeat. So much for "contrarianism."

In fact, sprawl is enjoying its cultural moment, with pro-sprawl articles right and left. As with so many other things (everything, perhaps) I've noticed that when something initially frowned-upon becomes the norm, there is a suspension of judgment after awhile, or a tendency to celebrate it, co-opt or adopt it as our own, in a "we must have done this on purpose" sort of way. I haven't parsed all the reasons for this. Maybe just the desire of pundits to back a winner, maybe an American bias against "negativity," 'cuz we've got a show to put on,etc.! Or perhaps the simple fact that to say something really novel or uncomfortable is (rightly, as there should be some test) difficult and often lonely, and most people like to be affirmed by others.

I will put this thesis on the line with a prediction. The last ten or fifteen years the subject of obesity has been much in the news. We are all sick even unto death with the topic, yes? I have read about efforts to engineer food to allow people to continue in their eating habits while not gaining as much weight. I expect this effort to fail, and then, I soothsay: the experts will redefine obesity, decide it is normal, not something to be concerned about as previously thought. Look for an "Atlantic" cover story to this effect circa 2020.

Sorry, I missed this when you originally posted it, but I think it brings up an interesting points. The first is that there is frequent misuse of the term "sprawl" on this site. Sprawl is defined as "unplanned, uncontrolled, and uncoordinated single use development that does not provide for a functional mix of uses and/or is not functionally related to surrounding land uses and which variously appears as low-density ...development" (Arbury 2005). Yet the many master planned communities that ring Houston are frequently considered "sprawl" while if anything, they are th opposite of sprawl by being meticulously planned in every detail and use of the land. Considering planned communities as one and the same with sprawl is just lazy.

I don't doubt that sprawl as literally defined is and has been on its way out for years. The growth and popularity of planned communities has shown that for decades. I also don't agree that there is going to be a mass exodus for big cities. Instead, I expect to see more suburbs develop along the lines of The Woodlands where they become legitimate small cities that are within the Houston metro area. I've never seen statistics, but I'd be really curious to see specific data around commute patterns from established suburban communities. What percentage of people from The Woodlands commute into downtown vs. the percentage that work north of the beltway? What percentage of people from Katy commute to downtown vs. the percentage that work in Westchase or the Energy Corridor? My personal observations are that virtually everyone I know works outside the Beltway and that those who work in downtown already utilize park and ride.

BTW, the food quotes were because the article was specifically about Houston's food scene and why it's one of the best in the country. I've added the link below. It's a good read.

http://www.departures.com/articles/a-restaurant-renaissance-in-houston

[Slick Vik]

Sorry, I missed this when you originally posted it, but I think it brings up an interesting points. The first is that there is frequent misuse of the term "sprawl" on this site. Sprawl is defined as "unplanned, uncontrolled, and uncoordinated single use development that does not provide for a functional mix of uses and/or is not functionally related to surrounding land uses and which variously appears as low-density ...development" (Arbury 2005). Yet the many master planned communities that ring Houston are frequently considered "sprawl" while if anything, they are th opposite of sprawl by being meticulously planned in every detail and use of the land. Considering planned communities as one and the same with sprawl is just lazy.

I don't doubt that sprawl as literally defined is and has been on its way out for years. The growth and popularity of planned communities has shown that for decades. I also don't agree that there is going to be a mass exodus for big cities. Instead, I expect to see more suburbs develop along the lines of The Woodlands where they become legitimate small cities that are within the Houston metro area. I've never seen statistics, but I'd be really curious to see specific data around commute patterns from established suburban communities. What percentage of people from The Woodlands commute into downtown vs. the percentage that work north of the beltway? What percentage of people from Katy commute to downtown vs. the percentage that work in Westchase or the Energy Corridor? My personal observations are that virtually everyone I know works outside the Beltway and that those who work in downtown already utilize park and ride.

BTW, the food quotes were because the article was specifically about Houston's food scene and why it's one of the best in the country. I've added the link below. It's a good read.

http://www.departures.com/articles/a-restaurant-renaissance-in-houston

 

The term sprawl comes from one community after another, after another, in the end forming an endless chain of houses.

[livincinco]

The term sprawl comes from one community after another, after another, in the end forming an endless chain of houses.

Yeah, that's kind of my point. Many of the planned communities are specifically designed to not be an endless chain of houses. At some point, there's a differentiation between a town and sprawl.

[luciaphile]

Sorry, I missed this when you originally posted it, but I think it brings up an interesting points. The first is that there is frequent misuse of the term "sprawl" on this site. Sprawl is defined as "unplanned, uncontrolled, and uncoordinated single use development that does not provide for a functional mix of uses and/or is not functionally related to surrounding land uses and which variously appears as low-density ...development" (Arbury 2005). Yet the many master planned communities that ring Houston are frequently considered "sprawl" while if anything, they are th opposite of sprawl by being meticulously planned in every detail and use of the land. Considering planned communities as one and the same with sprawl is just lazy.

I don't doubt that sprawl as literally defined is and has been on its way out for years. The growth and popularity of planned communities has shown that for decades. I also don't agree that there is going to be a mass exodus for big cities. Instead, I expect to see more suburbs develop along the lines of The Woodlands where they become legitimate small cities that are within the Houston metro area. I've never seen statistics, but I'd be really curious to see specific data around commute patterns from established suburban communities. What percentage of people from The Woodlands commute into downtown vs. the percentage that work north of the beltway? What percentage of people from Katy commute to downtown vs. the percentage that work in Westchase or the Energy Corridor? My personal observations are that virtually everyone I know works outside the Beltway and that those who work in downtown already utilize park and ride.

BTW, the food quotes were because the article was specifically about Houston's food scene and why it's one of the best in the country. I've added the link below. It's a good read.

http://www.departures.com/articles/a-restaurant-renaissance-in-houston

 

livincinco, let me preface this by saying I have no patience for the topic that seems to so engage those especially on swamplot, namely, categorizing people based on where they live, obsessing over hipsters and suburbanites and that mysterious third thing they always presume themselves to be (regular Joe? - it's unclear).  It's about as fascinating, and revealing, as the difference between Presbyterians and Methodists.

 

You've proposed the Argument From Design, and suggested that master-planned communities cannot contribute to sprawl because their developers have (more or less meticulously) planned for a variety of uses, down to the last square foot, and that these places throw the very meaning of the word sprawl into confusion. I think you're putting a bit of a fine point on it. Everything was planned badly or well by somebody, at some scale. But I tried to play the game: 

{OED:sprawl: the expansion of an urban or industrial area into the adjoining countryside in a way perceived to be disorganized and unattractive; OED American English, sprawl: the uncontrolled expansion of urban areas; Merriam-Webster, sprawl: a situation in which large stores, groups of houses, etc., are built in an area around a city that formerly had few people living in it; wikipedia, urban sprawl: a multifaceted concept centered on the expansion of auto-oriented, low-density development, ...}

I know y'all can do this stuff all day, but my attention flagged. People have bloviated quite a bit on the word sprawl and its first appearances in print some 60 years before your "Arbury."

I like the succinct "Urbanizing the Countryside," which is the name of a Chinese Communist party manual for doing just that.

  

I hope you won't mind if in a similar spirit I express my confusion about "master-planned community." It sounds like a marketing term that was granted legitimacy at some point. (Would we detect the hand of the "master" if the developer's billboards didn't alert us to it?...). But does not all new construction purport to be master-planned?

 

My impression of such places (which mainly reduces to the peculiar spacing of things), or whether they seem likely to hold up as well as the "un-master-planned" postwar single-family neighborhood I grew up in, is irrelevant. I am genuinely mystified, though, by your contention that the incorporation of new features and selling points disqualifies "master-planned" neighborhoods from being considered part of the city's outward spread.

 

I have already said that I believe sprawl has been blessed and will be seen - by fiat - as a 20th century problem. The word itself can hardly be said to have been a dealbreaker so far, but if sprawl's new fans in the media feel it is overly pejorative toward the places where - let's face it - most Americans will be living, they will surely come up with a better neologism.

 

 

I agree with this ...

 

 

I also don't agree that there is going to be a mass exodus for big cities.

 

,,, to the extent that, contra those who fetishize densifying urban single-family neighborhoods, condo towers built in the Museum district have no connection whatsoever with, uh, the Phenomenon Formerly Known as Sprawl. It is definitely its own dynamic.