j_cuevas713

Just when you think we're making progress smh 

21 minutes ago, urbanize713 said:

What a beautiful wall facing the centennial gardens!

Looks like a great spot for a mural dedicated to the Museum District

2 hours ago, 004n063 said:

I wouldn't say that parking minimums and setback requirements are the only problems with Houston development. We were overdue for an urban growth boundary about 40 years ago. Of course, without endless exurban expansion, we probably would have wound up with more deed-restricted R1-esque neighborhoods in the city, and higher housing/property prices to boot.

On the other hand, anybody who doesn't factor the costs of car use and ownership (and/or transit/biking time) into their COL is kidding themselves, and a studier and closer-in boundary would have made it easier (politically, economically, and functionally) to improve transit. At the very least, it would have cut our VMT per capita.

But these are big and relatively pointless hypotheticals. The infuriating thing about getting rid of minimum parking and setback requirements is that it would cost the city nothing to enact, likely lead to more tax dollars per acre, and have no immediately radical impact on anyone's experience of the city, so the political lift can't be that high.

I probably should have been smarter with my words. What I mean is that those 2 issues are some of the most important with the current layout of our city. I do agree though, I have no idea why a boundary wasn't better established. Houston at one time was a small dense city. What I've seen happen is people who don't live in Houston or live out of state think Houston is 600 square miles of sprawl but that's actually not the case. Much of the area is undeveloped land, another chunk is sprawl, and the other section is The Loop which is Houston proper. It would have been nice for the city to cut itself off at The Loop but it annexed a ton of land for tax revenue purposes. While I'm not a fan, it gives the city leverage with how it wants to utilize all of that land, like one massive real estate agency. 

12 minutes ago, __nevii said:

I also forgot to mention: I think quite a few of the Houston mayoral candidates (Gilbert Garcia and Robert Gallegos to name two) will help alot when it comes to transit, as they did have experience regarding local affairs. Of course, with SJL as the most well-known face in the race, she would overshadow others ... but I'm not sure her stances regarding transit, YIMBY urban development in general to know if she would be a detriment.

I was too young to know much of leadership under Annise Parker, whether she was a detriment regarding urban planning affairs.

I actually don't remember Parker's stance on much. And tbh I think SJL is going to win even though I completely agree with your point on the other two candidates. Whitmire is the only candidate that in my opinion is very moderate on everything. While he has a stance on public transit, it's a very basic outlook of simply getting people to work, school, etc. but I don't know what he believes in terms of expansion. He come's across like a guy that believes in roads first. 

1 hour ago, editor said:

It was zoning that made mixed use districts possible in big American cities, not a lack of zoning.  The whole reason that zoning was invented was because the magic imaginary hand of the free market doesn't work for the common good.  That's why we invented governments. 

Houston has had 150 years to prove that a lack of zoning makes things better.  Clearly the experiment has failed.

It hasn't failed. The ONLY thing that is holding this city back in parking minimums and setbacks, but letting the market determine what things are built has been proven to work in this city. The problem is those restrictions I listed are limiting developers in meeting the design potential of what they want to develop because they have to account for one or both. You can already see what free market development is doing in EaDo with less restrictions. And to add to your point, cities with some of the most stringent zoning are actually loosening those restrictions. One of those cities is SF. My last visit some friends of mine, who are native to the area, were all excited because now you can build multifamily in single family neighborhoods. I was like "Houston has been doing that."

On 6/24/2023 at 9:33 PM, Highrise Tower said:

Terrible.

I remove bandit signs in my neighborhood

Same

On 6/25/2023 at 7:34 AM, Texasota said:

I'm usually disappointed by Cisneros, but this is one of their best designs.

...except for the landscaping. 

Literally ate up the sidewalk with landscaping

It's amazing what simple neutral colors can do. Unlike some of these apartments painting themselves black and white 😒

Yeah and tbh while Houston does have a large Cajun population, it's not like New Orleans where that is the culture. Houston is so diverse that it's not an easy sell here. 

Blasphemy 

Anyone else notice how great driving down W Dallas looks in this area? Just density all around. It's really piecing together nicely. 

17 minutes ago, __nevii said:

@Brooklyn173 @j_cuevas713

Some of these cases though seems more like the intervention of larger entities, rather than any individual city's choices. In the above mentioned case, it was USDOT that initiated the partnership with Austin, so will aid in facilitating some of the projects in that city.

In much the same way, pretty much all the issues in Houston regarding sprawl (as well as with the other TX cities) is the end product of TXDOT and mandates regarding highway expenditures (controlled by the state government). A lot of ire should really be directed at the state government: I've always found it interesting how much people try to separate politics from discourse when it has such a major impact regarding outcomes (especially societal concerns like transportation/overall infrastructure, etc.

The city's themselves would be in control of things like minimum parking, and other zoning/building codes that can affect mobility outcomes.

While that is true, shouldn't Houston make an attempt to reach out to the Feds and say 'Hey we want this in our city but we need your help because idiots like TxDOT aren't listening to us?' 

So Wolf Capital Partners only owns 1111 East 11th correct? Any idea what they plan to do with the building? 

All the ice cream melted in this heat

11 hours ago, steve1363 said:

That’s part of the problem being addressed.  Unless you go to the church and know there is a small rectory parking lot in the back you are left to find street parking.

I went to a funeral mass on a Wednesday morning recently.  Many people arrived late due to parking issues and the procession to the cemetery was problematic due to the lack of cohesive parking.  

I’m not a member but I don’t begrudge the church for wanting a better parking solution for people that go there.

They easily could have found a way to coordinate a lease with an existing lot or garage

On 6/2/2023 at 10:44 AM, hindesky said:

Is that a new wide sidewalk? 

On 6/23/2023 at 10:45 AM, Amlaham said:

Jeez, why is the Houston Planning Commission being this aggressive with the parking when the parking mandates are eventually going to be lessened according to them???

I wish we could delete comments . I saw the plans for reduced parking

On 5/2/2023 at 6:33 AM, HoustonMidtown said:

He lives just down the road (just out of the picture to the right) - he operates those horse-drawn carriages that you see around downtown.

No wonder those babies are so thin smh 

18 hours ago, cityliving said:

Fairmont Museum District with X-Houston in background.

The density!!! 😯 

Very little parking dedicated for this site so we get full design potential. I love it. So many projects are happening all at once that it’s hard to keep track. 

On 3/3/2023 at 11:46 AM, Paco Jones said:

Project:

RO Parcel 3

 

Architect:

House & Robertson (Exectutive)

Michael Hsu (Design)

 

Information:

Two 3-story mixed-use buildings with a pedestrian bridge connecting them at level 2 outdoor terraces.  Combined, the buildings total 129,622 SF.  Levels 1 and 2 will consist of restaurant and retail space while level 3 will be office space.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This will tie in so nicely with Upper Kirby and feel like one continuous neighborhood

This gives me vibes of what Regent Square could have been. I love this development and I can’t wait for Phase 2

Sphere has really blown up. Mike Chabala seems to being pretty well for himself after his Dynamo days. 

I think what's really cool to finally start to see is the market based parking for this project. The parking just doesn't seem so overwhelming and better planned for the site.