h2obuff

Look, we can make accusations and be sarcastic all we want. The bottom line is that this is not a fix or any attempt to solve the situation. Instead of coming up with a solution that will perpetuate over the long haul, the problem was swept under the rug.

It is being reported that 75 positions will need to be cut. The number will be closer to 150 to 200 or more. Last year it was 400-450 positions. Sadly, MORE administrative positions were added (like science coaching teachers-not even sure what that means, especially considering that most hired to that position were under 30 years old-and there were at least 20 people pulled from the classroom for that position).

This isn't about people getting into a profession knowing this would happen. Tell that to people at GM or Chrystler. It also isn't about anything that has already been voted on through bond elections. This is about the fact that the severe problems will continue or get worse. You can only make cuts for so long before you have to shut things down completely. I am not saying the district will cease to exist, but the "sacrifices" that will have to be made year after year will cause the school system to look very different than it does now.

What amazed me is how poorly defended this exemption was last night. The people who spoke against the elimination seemed to either not have a clue about how anything worked or were so frantic in their speech that it came across almost comical. Yet NOBODY on either side talked about the ramifications for the future. I wonder where people think money will come from. Making cuts year after year won't create magical money. The exemption will have to be eliminated eventually and the area is doing FAR better than most areas in the country. (claiming bad economic times is not an excuse)

Klein, Tomball, and Spring ISD must be laughing hysterically at all of this since they don't have an exemption and never will.

Very well said and I agree. Most of the people concerned have no real grasp of how the process works, concerning school funding, concerning bonds, etc. I am also sure they do not know what it truly takes to successfully run a school, let alone a school district. I am by no means an expert (especially given I am not an educator) but I have taken the time to educate myself, and learn the process, etc.

To many people are concerned with the now; short term ramifications, with no regard to next month, let alone next year. Like you said, we can

I like it, retro is nice if done right.

They need to quit expanding the size of Houston out into the farmlands. It just adds to traffic and pollution. I could understand if the land had geographical uniqueness, but it's just open farm land with little to no trees. All of Fry Rd. is flat and boring. Instead of building where there's lots of open land, redevelop land that is inside the Beltway 8 on 290. The land where Bridgeland sits should be open natural space.

Supply and Demand, as simple as that.

Also, wherever you live used to be something else. if you are in the city, then it used to be a forrest that was cleared to make a farm that was cleared to make whatever it is you live in.

Don't be so naive and ignorant about the world. When you move out to a true piece of native land, and live off the earth in a tent, then we can talk because your actions will finally speak louder than words. I know I am coming off as crass, but this mentality never makes sense to me. It is hypocritical.

We have been over this before, but sometimes it needs repeating, but we don't all want to live in the city, some of us live and work in the boonies. I am very certain my drive in is less than yours. I have all of the shopping conveniences within 3 miles of my house, probably the same as you. I just live in a smaller, self contained community than you, and I love it.

Also, the land where most new development is taking place, like Bridgeland, is nat natural itself. it is laser leveled rice field. if the land was to be let fallow, it would be inundated with non-native, invasive species in less than 5 years, killing off the native species and reducing habitat for native animals. What good would that do for society? Nature? All I can say is please know what you are saying before you say it.

Luckily for you and me, there are a group of snow cone stands around the NW area, that are open 7-7 almost year round, and offer not only nearly 100 flavors, but cream and condensed milk as well. I think they are all related, as they are all called Oasis Snowballs.

My favorite is on Hwy 6, between Clay and Keith Harrow, in the same shopping center as Track 21, in the shadows of the large billboard. This location tends to be the most consistent.

The second location I visit after every Costco trip is on 1960 just north of Jones Road, next to the Taco Bell. There are now three (3) different snow cone places in this short stretch, but the Oasis stand (light blue) and against 1960 is by far the best.

And much to my surprise, they recently opened another location at Queensland and W. Little York that i noticed on a trip back from Mission Burrito. It has been opened for a month or two now, and I have only been there once, but it seemed to be pretty typical of the other two locations.

Side note: after typing this, I now realize I am way too obsessed with a good snow cone! But like you, it took me a long time to find these locations and all of the others around. But these are the best!

I think this is good news for Bridgeland.

The Caldwell guys are good people, and yes, this was a good deal (on paper) but I think they bit off more than they could chew in trying to make this acquisition.

Towne Lake is nice, but it is no Bridgeland, and I would be worried to see what changes to the current master plan they would make to the Bridgeland project.

deed restrictions/covenants, setback rules, no strip clubs near schools etc etc

i do not like mass production of starter castles in sprawl development. i do not like the woodlands. i will not like whatever they have planned for the katy prairie. sorry!

Have you actually ever been to the Katy Prairie? I have, heck I live in the so called Katy Prairie. I have also gone to the current Katy Prairie as maintained by the KPC.

First, most of the "prairie" was destroyed in the 20's and 30' by rice farms. Most land in west Harris County was laser leveled. Any resemblance to a prairie is long gone. In addition, letting a worked over piece of land remain fallow will not bring back the prairie, instead, non-native, invasive species (i.e. tallow) will take over the entire land, further irradiating any resemblance to a prairie. The cost to reproduce an acre of prairie is also astronomical, and requires tens of thousands of dollars in yearly up keep.

A natural prairie has wild animals working through it (bison, deer, rabbits, etc.) that help keep the grass growth maintained. There are also naturally occurring events like fires that help rejuvenate the land. No current prairie owner can reproduce what nature does, so instead they must hay the fields twice a year and do many other non-natural items to the land to keep it

Building the Grand Parkway may open up more land (environmentally-sensitive land, at that) to affordable housing, but it's only going to be raising that one shoe further and further up -- and eventually the other one is gonna have to drop.

Define economically sensitive? Have you been out along Segment, E, I have, it is all laser-leveled rice fields. Not much rice is currently growing, just lots of grazing cows. Do you think this is what the area looked like before 1930? Nope, not at all, the farms around that time clear cut, leveled, used the land for whatever purpose they desired.

One good thing developments like Bridgeland are doing (and most will do because of current regulations) is provide better drainage from flooding events, protect riparian corridors around the few real areas of beauty (like Cypress Creek) which in turn provides habitats for wildlife, all while still providing marketable, affordable residential and commercial properties.

The EIS for GP also shows how they will mitigate any areas disturbed by construction to existing or greater conditions. You also have to remember that "wetland" areas found in this part of the county are not naturally occurring, but are where pools of water collect due to poor maintenance and/or farming practices, not because that is the way it has been for hundreds or thousands of years.

As an example of what we SHOULD be doing instead of projects, like the Grand Parkway, take a look at the suburbs of Vancouver (wish I could provide a copy of the map itself instead of just linking to it -- anyone know how?):

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source...mp;t=h&z=14

Vancouver's suburbs look like suburbs. Nice houses, big yards, cul-de-sacs, the whole 9-yards. But the big difference is the amount of local transportation infrastucture that has been provided. Arterials are very regularly spaced every 1/2-mile. Major, expensive projects like the Grand Parkway are not needed, and traffic works better to boot.

The City of Houston and its ETJ does have a major thoroughfare plan, set up on a 1-mile grid:

Map

http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Developm...s/2005_MTFP.pdf

Site

http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Developm...s/frwy_plan.htm

it is by no means perfect, but it does provide the necessary framework to get collector system traffic moving in areas. Most development is required to follow this and even build it. it is in those areas where existing two lane roads currently lie that the county, city, metro, etc. need to step up and improve the roads in a more timely manner (such as on Spring Cypress and Cypress Rosehill recently, just in a much more timely manner).

The Harris County Commissioners Court is set to approve the fast-track development of Segment E of the Grand Parkway in Tuesday's meeting. The plan is for the tollway to ease traffic off of the heavily congested US 290 and feed some of the traffic onto the newly widened Katy Freeway.

Link:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6277272.html

More info about Segment E of Grand Parkway:

http://www.grandpky.com/segments/e/

Here is a map showing the extent of the project:

I know two less cars on 290 as soon as this gets built. My wife's when she goes into work, and mine when I run around town.

I've never understood why, but for some reason cul-de-sacs and curvy roads are supposed to deter crime. I've lived in a few cities where through streets were turned into dead-ends as a crime prevention measure.

Cul-de-sacs have less traffic (no through traffic). In many markets, especially in Houston, home buyers, especially those with children love it! New urbabnist's hate it, they feel (and rightfully so) that it reduces vehicular connectivity and new urbanist would prefer a more grid pattern, mostly to give a driver more than one option to get from point A to point B, therefor not reducing overall traffic counts, but not putting all of the cars on one or two main roads.

But, again, in Houston, cul's rule and that is what buyers want, so that is what buyers get. I live in one, and I always seem to notice when a car that doesn't live there comes into it, usually a lost driver. i notice because traffic is so low, less than 20 cars a day, so nice and quite, especially for those of us with families.

Check at this recent aerial photo of Bridgeland. . .

Looks inviting huh. . .

Okay, I kid, just a random development in California that went bankrupt, but who can tell the difference.

Glad to see you still have no idea what you are talking about. Will you ever learn to have some actual, true, practical, relevant and useful knowledge about anything before commenting.

It's already selling off a couple of malls in Las Vegas. Others can't be far behind.

On a side note -- hopefully the financial trouble will convince GGP to sell its headquarters building. It is on a super-prime piece of real estate on the banks of a river lined with glittering skyscrapers. GGP's building is just awful. It should be torn down and replaced with something blue and flashy to blend in with its neighbors.

If you had to make a bet -- which Houston mall do you think GGP will sell or close first?

Unfortunately, GGP does not own the building, it is owned by a family trust (unrelated to the GGP family).

They're in financial distress, so all bets are off.

They need cash and they'll sell anything that anybody else is willing to buy, and sellers that can close quickly will be rewarded with deep discounts on the price.

The GGP debt is site specific, i.e. all of the debt is tied to individual propoerties, not across all of the properties. The best bet is for GGP to sell a few of these off inorder to save the rest.

Anecdotes make for pretty weak evidence as to the broader trend.

The data that I have seen with respect to homebuilding in the Houston area indicate that higher-priced homes are maintaining their value, have fewer foreclosures, and in fact continue to justify increasing rates of new construction.

I agree with Niche, the higher the price range, the strong the sales are right now (as was mentioned several pages back). Guys like Kickerillo are averaging a 15% incrase over last years sales at the half way point with no real slowing showing on the horizon.

In addition, the slump in entry level homes is not really concerned with rising energy costs, but the tighter mortgage market. it would be fun to see what, if any affect, the energy prices have on new, entry level home sales, but there is not enough information at this point to make the distinction, if even one exists.

More specifically, value and taxes, being part of the cost of the home could be estimated (as such on going maintenance, association dues, renovations. . . ) could be all apart of B, but that complicates things more.

Church, schools, shopping is all covered under X what I consider "live, work, play" or what you consider essential to your daily, weekly, monthly, yearly routine.

As much fun as it would be to have metrics to measure and put a price on enjoyability, fun, attractiveness, accessibility to open space, etc, it is not possible. As a father, husband, etc, there are so many things to take into consideration for you and your family that are not quantifiable but are definately part of teh decision making process.

If I happened to live in your complex, and we worked near each other, based on your equation, we would have the same values/slope. However, you appear to be single, as I am married and have a child, making my experiences and true value of the house much, much different than yours.

It is therefore great that we have the choice to do whatever the heck it is we want to do with where we live, work, play, etc, and are not all forced to live in a 30 year old townhouse complex close to the CBD.

In addition, if you were to try try to truly quantify the total cost of the home, there are a whole slew of economic factors that would need to be taken into consideration:

• Inflation
  
• Appreciation
  
• Gentrification
  
• Stability of local economy
  
• etc.
  

Yeah, you could argue that these are built in to your equation, but to truly account for these market forces you would need to have at least an economic variable.

A similar response I PM'd h2obuff to get back on topic for the ##th time.

All of what you covered was sustainable when we had $1 and $2 per gallon gas.

Traveling those distances as we approach $5 per gallon gas is going to affect more and more people, but mostly those that live far from their "live, work, play" lifestyle and away from mass transit.

That's the point of the topic. I digressed into all sorts of extentions of related topics covered in other threads. Valid points exist on both ends.

But the development you love and support is now on "life support" and will become predominantly income based, just like those that claim urban living is too expensive. The higher the income you make, the less this affects you.

Someone making $50K versus $100K a year and drives 20+ miles each way to work will see things differently. Those are the people covered, and these low cost homes used to be the answer for first time home buyers who are middle class.

Sprawl needs to be re-evaluated and re-invented or else you will have people fleeing those homes when we hit $10 per gallon gas and have hords of vacant outlying neighborhoods, worse than suburban decay. Sounds a lot like the reverse migration of what happened in the inner cities before the 1960/70's suburban fleeing.

What assumptions to you make to support these results (and any evidence to support it?)

In the late 70's/early 80's, it was thought that there would be a "reverse migration" to the city centers, but this was a theory that never happened, and the data supports this. Again, that idea is floating around again, but it is till not true. Yes, there is an increase of sales in the loop, but it matches recent trends, with no significant uptick - expensive new town-homes and large mansions continue to sell. Yes outside the belt sales are down, but this loss is almost entirely due to the current mortgage issues which affects home sales less than $200K - yet sales above $200K are still strong and the average price of these homes is actually increasing. If you look at the sales data without looking at the reasons why, you cant see the real story. Also, in city sales are much, much higher average per foot and/or total sales prices outside the belt.

I can not share all of my data but here are some good informatice articles and data to back me up:

http://www.har.com/mls/dispPressRelease.cfm

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/busine...te/5843392.html

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationw...0,4422376.story

As far as sprawl goes, people are much more likely to change some habits before making huge life changing decisions, much of which can already be seen.

People will first stop making unnecessary trips, and/or consolidate the ones that have to. Before dumping the SUV, people will start to carpool, cutting fuel cost in half. Or better yet, they will take more public transportation:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25010939

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/10/us_mass_transit.html

It is also much cheaper to buy a smaller, more fuel efficient car than to move into the city - especially if you are wanting to make a lateral housing change (new location, but same amenities, prices, etc. which is not possible from suburb to city).

Finally, what do you think MPC base marketing and sales on? It is all income based. Somebody making $50K/yr is not usually going to buy a $300k. You market to your audience, any other marketing is a wasted effort of time and resources.

Put your housing choice in a basic math linear equation Y = MX + B

Y is total cost (during lifetime of home) - ($)

M is cost of transportation type used for distance X - ($/distance)

X is distance to (live,work, play) over a set time frame while in the home - (lifetime distance)

B is the cost of the home. - ($)

1. Lower costing home B with increased transportation cost M and/or larger lifetime commute to live, work, play X.
   
2. Higher costing home B with increased transportation cost with optional access to mass transit, walking, etc. M and/or shorter lifetime commute to live, work, play X.
   

One line will have a steeper slope, and eventually the lifetime cost will reveal itself.

The answer is based on the income level and your distance relationship to live, work, and play lifestyle.

The choice is ultimately a personal decision as the last 300 posts covered. Don't ask a question no one has an answer too.

There are so many more factors that go into selecting a new home than a three variable equaion. What about:

• value
  
• taxes
  
• schools
  
• churches
  
• shopping
  
• open space
  
• etc.
  

As an engineer, I would like to generalize a home purchase so simplicity, but it is not truly possible, there are so many factors that go into the decision.

Congrats on being an exception, you are one of the few. This topic does not affect you then. I am happy for you. Everyone will chime in, but I am just supporting what the topic states. Please email TIME magazine then and tell them to stop lying if you feel so passionate about it.

And sorry Bridgeland is in the middle of nowhere. The development is fine if they can admit that, but they continue to market it as a Houston area neighborhood, that is the issue I see with it. It's a bit far to be relevant to Houston anymore, I think Bridgeland really takes association to conveniances Houston to a ridiculous level as does Fall Creek.

If Cypress is considered a city, that is how they should market it.

You do not get it, I am not the exception, I am the norm. Your definition makes assumptions that are untrue. If the majority of my neighbors are in the same position I am, then it becomes the standard, and your arguments are the exception.

Yes, there are exceptions to everything, but because it differs from your opinion, you define it as an exception. I however, use facts and clear, reproducible logic to make an argument.

Again, if the majority of people in an area are like me, then we are not the exception, but the norm, destroying any argument you make.

Hate to tell you this, but the odds are that most homes are built that way. While the inside and outside of the house looks pretty and is well appointed, but the hidden spaces may be total crap. The only way to assure of a properly built home is to hover over the construction site and picking a construction company yourself.

If you live and work in the 'burbs, I won't hate on that because it works for you. Just don't complain about gas prices.

Again, I did my research, I picked my builder and visited my house under construction nearly everyday. if I found a problem, I spoke up. Even with older homes, you can hire a qualified inspector to use some pretty good technology to see what you are really getting. Again, you have to do the research and but some effort into it.

I sure would love to pay less for gas, but you will not hear me complain (what good does it do but make me sound like a whiner). I do what I have to do, period, regardless of the price of gas. I also have two very workable legs and a bike to get around on. Sure i sweat a lot, but it does work.

You're wrong. And I can prove it.

US 290 is basically 3 lanes each direction outside of 43rd Street. The maximum capacity of a freeway lane is 2,200 passenger cars per hour. Capacity is severaly undercut when traffic is jammed, however, and that number generally reduces to about 800 in stop and go driving. US 290 is generally jammed from 6 am to 9 am and has near capacity flows on the hour on either side of that. That means that about 21,000 cars use US 290 during the morning peak, or about 23,500 people after adjusting for US 290's average vehicle occupancy.

Considering that there are 15 times that many people living within a few miles of US 290, your assertion that the majority of those folks commute into central Houston is baseless, as the infrastructure cannot handle it.

Great post CDeb, you beat me to the punch!

Our spoke and hub freeway design begs to differ, as evidence in the morning traffic channeling into town, and afternoon traffic returning back into the sprawls. It is not necessarily focused on the CBD, but a trend is clearly shown with our daily commutes with the opposite traffic flow moving much more freely.

Thanks for the input, but there are many new home owners finally realizing that the savings and benefits of moving into the "starting from low 100's" starter home sprawls. They are ones that will eventually hurt from this. They are characterized by lower to middle income buyers that want the American dream of owning a home and take advantage of these "supposed" great offers. Long daily commutes and increased gasoline costs cause your subruban frugal lifestyle savings to dwindle quickly.

Again, do your research. Lets use 290 as an example. Over 40% of the traffic on 290 exits the freeway before 610 (I will try and scan in this report to share this info). I doubt this 40% is taking backroads to the CBD. Just because it is a wheel and spoke system does not mean that all traffic flows to the CBD.

Example, during the planning stages of BW8 and the hardy, the original projects were that hardy would make the most money, and help support BW8 to create a break even scenario for HCTRA. However, as we all know, BW8 has many times the usage of hardy. Where do you think all of the BW8 people are going, not to the CBD, but one of the several dozen other work centers around the city.

Your final argument did not address what i said, but instead created a new one. I wasn't discussing the $100k homes, but how many people, as hard as it is to believe, do not care. Look at this article yesterday:

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/593/hardest-to-get-cars/

The Prius and the Lexus LS, tow completely opposite cars are the most wanted. Do you think the person buying the $75k gas guzzler cares if gas is $2 or 5$? Probably not.

Try sticking with what a McMansion is, which my home is clearly not.

The photo I posted is the rear of my home, faces the alley. Alleys are not supposed to be focal point of the home. I have a front door side with great curb appeal. McMansions share the front door with the garage. Not good curb appeal. Even older homes that had garage and fron access in the front side of the property used to have the garage at least recessed further back towards the rear of the home.

I was trying to make a point that not everything in suburbia has to look the same. And easily the majority of the lower priced starter home McMansion resemble these.

Also, my home was built at the time with concrete floors on the second level and a network of steel beams supporting the second floor. Most newer homes have plywood/OSB floors and wooden support structures. I am proud of my awesome home, and don't care what your opinion is about it. It is amazing and I am glad I saved it from going into disrepair.

These sure look much better than your picture.

Does a concrete necessarily mean better than a wood floor? No, it does not, it all depends on design, construction, craftmanship, etc. The only reason your place was built that way is becauuse it was the cheapest construction method for that product at the time, no other reason.

This post is rather off-topic to the cost of energy discussion, but amen, brother. There are lots of ignorant homebuyers out there who would rather snatch up granite countertops and can lights than have quality drywall and plumb walls. This doesn't mean that all houses in subdivisions are bad - there are just as many poorly constructed new townhomes in Cottage Grove as there are poorly constructed new homes in Shadow Creek Ranch - it just means that construction quality and durability is just another one of those many variables, in addition to energy costs, that one has to weigh when deciding where to live. Our house was built in 1964 and aside from simple wear and tear, it is in excellent condition roof and foundation wise and you simply cannot find the same quality of lumber (red fir) in stores today that we have inside our walls, which is one of the reasons we paid up to live where we did.

Are you saying that in the 50's and 60's there were no poorly constructed homes, if you believe that, you are truly mistaken. Some of those poorly built homes are still around in other parts of town, and some have been taken down. don't be naive and think just because it is old it was built better.

I am commenting on the current situation, and existing suburbanites, like yourself, are taking offense to my comments and are ignoring pre-2000 Houston when I am sure most of the people move out there under better circumstances. I grew up in the suburbs too. With that in mind, no, you likely made a smart choice back then. So be happy and just get a smaller car and hope for better times. If you bought a house in Bridgeland, then keep reading.

Now, in 2008, these developers are still building cheap copy cat looking sprawl homes even FURTHER away from Houston; plus we have 4x the cost of gas and at least 2x the cost in electricty.

The average family who is interested in buying those still, now, under these economic times and energy prices, well, if I have nothing nice to say about there personal choices.

I bought my brand new home in the burbs this year. i am fully aware of what actions I take and what i can and can not afford, and where I do and do not want to live. You are neglecting the fact that we are all entitled to free will. I am very happy about my choice, and the several thousand who bought homes out here recently are for the most part happy as well. it is amazing to think this, but most homeowners are capable of making fairly reasonable and good decisions for themselves on where to live and all of the implications associated with it.

Dude, all this is on you for buying a cheaply built house that you are obviously not happy with. The onus is on you to do the research on an area and the homebuilder/ quality of materials before making such a large commitment.

And lets please not go to Puma levels of generalizations. Just because your house is the suburbs in cheap (your words) not all of them are. There are a lot of choices of homebuilders in the Houston area and a wide range of price ranges.

If you feel the developers got one over on you than simply put you didn't do your homework.

Not trying to slam you, just the inferance that an apple is an orange because it is round and falls from a tree is getting old.

Agreed westguy!

I did my research, i got a very energy efficent house, all energy star, state of the art appliance and great fit and finish. its all about doing your homework. And you can get this in all price ranges from $200K and up if you do your research!

Guess the developers believe people are not so attentive, or else they would be more realistic about what the have to offer a new home buyer.

They must be wasting there time then making up lies about the great sprawls.

Wow, again, listen to the argument. Before plunking down for a persons largest investment, unlike you, they typically look in to all factors involving the house, including locations and commute times. You may believe all you hear, but many of us have more intellect and ability to determine their own truth. Again, if you knew anything about marketing, you would know the point is to get people in the door, after that, it is anybodies game, and amazingly, the buyer makes the final decisions. Most people are not strong armed into buying a home.

Sure, if you want to invest time and money developing the far out areas of the city which can take decades (see example below of Bridgeland), while the inner areas already established get neglected.

Right now, they are selling homes and getting ready to have people move in to a neighborhood in the middle of nowhere. The jobs available right now to sustain anyone to even think about purchasing those homes are few and far between, with the majority having to drive 20+ miles each way I am sure. Maybe 30 years from now like all exurb to suburb transitions, closer jobs with office parks will come, but that is 30 years from now.

How far out is enough!

I mean, this website promoting Bridgeland is markting the top header with a view of the downtown Houston skyline! You have more of a chance of seeing a watertower in Hockley.

www.liveinbridgeland.com

They even show the location of the master plan like it is "in" Houston, pointing out locations like (but not mentioning the actual distance to it in miles so I added them):

Memorial City Mall - 15.8 miles

Galleria - 20.7

Texas Medical Center - 35.1 miles

Reliant Stadium - 34.8 miles

Downtown - 30.5 miles

not mentioned

Energy Corridor - 12.4 miles

These are distances from the welcome center on Fry Road, and this development goes way back beyond Grand Parkway! Just getting out of the neigborhood with the cul-de-sac driven design will add a couple of more miles and time each trip.

Of course it's near, how would you argue against it?

You contradict your own argument of all of the job center being over 20 miles away. Like you listed, the Energy Corridor is 12.4 miles, much less than 20 miles, and about the same commute that you have posted you now have. Did you know a large percentage of Bridgeland residents work there? What about the HP campus? it is less then 10 miles away? What about professionals like me work in Cypress? There are more than one of us out here, there are thousands that actually work in Cypress, as hard as it is to imagine. What about the work centers near BW8 and 290? All of the hospitals in the area (3 and counting). Jersey Village. I can go on and on. Again, not everybody, including yourself works downtown or in the medical center. What about those like my wife that get to work from home sometimes, or even those that get to all of the time? They actually have the freedom to live wherever they want, amazing yet again!

Also, over 50% of new Bridgeland residents resided in Cypress before moving to Bridgeland. They sure must know something you don't to pay an average of over $350,000 for a new home in the middle of nowhere.

Again, it is obvious you have not been to Bridgeland to look at the layout, the collector road grid system to help make moving around easier. Please, have some basic knowledge of a subject before making untrue, fact less statements about them.

Then the Bridgeland marketing team should remove the Houston downtown skyline from their website and replace it with office parks, Home Depot and Walmart strip centers, and a Whataburger joint. That's is the sprawling environment that will actually surround Bridgeland.

This is how these developers promote themselves to sell you and make you believe that your new homes is reasonably "in" the city, to be referencing imagery of downtown Houston.

At this rate, a few years from now a Hempstead area developer will be promoting themselves as a Houston suburb and show imagery of downtown Houston.

Again, how far out is enough.

FYI, that is not a bridgeland website, it is a realtor's own bandit site. She made the "mistake" of adding the skyline. Again, please check your facts.

Yeah. People are buying houses in Bridgeland because they're being misled into how far it is from dowtown. Because Bridgeland's marketing material is the first map of the city they've ever seen.

Touch

Your options for "reasonably" close work are fewer the further away you go. If you live near or within density, you have much more variety.

This does not apply to the people who plan the location of their home along with their dental office, salon, coffee house etc; that they manage or own as someone mentioned earlier. That is a rare case and does not apply to the focus of what the article targets.

Some people live above there work, or work at home, obviously they would be not be a good example either.

If you say the Energy Corridor has plenty of good paying jobs is out in the suburbs and living in Katy is not an issue, that is limiting to those with that career. There are plenty of people in Katy that travel to the medical center or downtown.

For everyone else that already has a place to live, does not want to move again, and puts a resume out there for what ever line of work you are in, you depend on a variety of available work "reasonably" close to home.

My last three jobs have been around I-45 S and Telephone, 59 S and BW8, and 290 and Gessner, and me living in nearby the city center his had a minimal impact on my driving time and driving distance.

What do you think people that work in the Energy Corridor do? If tis for a petroleum company, are they only engineers? No over half of them are support personal: maintenance staff, assistants, food workers, maids, etc. There is a job for pretty much every career field. Wow, you really need to think before you speak!

A smart person never bases a career choice on where the job is without taking all other conditions into context. Future growth, prospects and work conditions can far outweigh commuting. Did you know people can also move when changing jobs? It is amazing but it happens, no kidding,

What's done is done, the damage is done, it's built, might as well use live in it rather than let it go to waste.

But the rate of these new sprawls being built by developers is well over the actual demand.

The demand only exists because they offer it so cheaply. If the homes were built with better materials and quality and had ammenties other than a rentention pond and a golf course (waste of land), I can see it being worth something.

If they built homes a bit smaller, better quality, and incorporated more infrustrature, like grided neighborhoods instead of cul-de-sacs, it would be a better developement worth the price that can eventually turn into something better.

An example being Bridgeland. I don't think people were begging for a house in the middle of nowhere until they decided to make up a fancy name, stick a golf course in it and call it a masterplanned community.

But since a developer decided to create a master planned community, the demand is there.

Someone should redo Sharpstown.

Gas money is one thing, my life wasted in traffic because I decided to live 15 miles further away is another.

I can't put a price on that, but my free time after work and before bed is worth more to me having an extra 45-90 minutes a day to do what I want.

Again, you do not have any factual information.

Based on the most recent metro study, demand for homes is still exceeding supply, this includes new homes and resale homes.

Also, basic economics, you can not artificially create demand. If the demand for new homes in Houston is 40,000 a year, you can not create 50,000 new homes and automatically have them sold, there would be 10,000 new homes left over. The demand for 40,000 homes can occur all over, but typically a homebuyer has a set radius in which they are willing to purchase a home, whether for resale or new, all based on what is important to them - location, schools, etc., not what is important to you! if a developer could automatically create demand, there would be more sprawl than you could ever imagine! Also, Bridgeland has no golf course and has set aside over 3,000 acres of open space and large lakes. Do you have anything like that near you? No, I didn't think so!

A major problem with new urbanism is that grid streets are great on paper, but they do not sell. If the buyer wants a cul-de-sac, they will buy in a cul-de sac. Why do you like grid streets, do you have a true reason to like it more, or is this just repeated rhetoric you once read in a book? Did you know that Bridgeland is about to open a TND/new urbanism neighborhood that is adjacent to a village type retail center? No, I am pretty sure you didn't. Did you know that the developer will actually be losing money on this phase of development, and that it is done to see if yahoo's like you and your kind would actually live in a TND in the Houston area. None have been successful so far, we will see if this one is.

What should be redone to Sharpstown? Do you have a true, genuine idea that is not only functional and profitable? I doubt it.

I think the clear difference between the past developements and present developements is that the past was not done for profit nor was it predetermined for us.

It was to establish new settlements on arable land near bodies of water and create a civilization, not master planned communities with no depth in them.

Read the article again if you don't get what point A and point B are in context to was I am referring to.

What in the world do you mean past developments were not done for profit? ____________ all of the Heights was a "master planned community" built for profits. Heck, Houston was founded by two developers that came up Buffalo Bayou to create a city for the purpose of making money. Everywhere you shop, live, eat, play was created by somebody trying to make money. Mot people do not do things just for the sake of doing something, with no positive return expected. Do you work for free? Should you not donate all of the excess money you make to charity or the poor on the street instead of buying you things that are not required to sustain life, like a computer? Wow, totally amazing how completely disconnected you are from the real world!

We have plently of existing 'burbs' as it is, plenty of them decaying and ready for people to reinvest in them, and I am sure we have plenty of them for sale to meet the needs of the Houstonians.

It's crap developments like this are unnecessary. Do we really need more of this, we had had dozens of "Master Planned" already and I doubt they are at full capacity. Bridgeland's mottos is Find Balance, sure more money for gas and less time with family, sounds like a great balance to me.

People just want to say they have a NEW home regardless how far away it is from the city. That is how this vicious cycle continues. More and more sprawl gets built further and further away. Houston is saturated enough with sprawl hoods. When are we going to learn our lesson and stop buying in the middle of nowhere.

Those people deserve to pay $5 gas, heck they should be required to pay $10/gallon for lack of common sense and handing their money away to greedy developers.

Have you even been to Bridgeland? Do you even know what master planned means? It is obvious you do not. also, again, you are to narrow minded to remember that we don't all work downtown. I live, work and play in Cypress. Should I move into the loop so I can commute all the way back out to Cypress? All of my neighbors that work less than 10 miles from their homes, should they do the same? Again, I have a shorter commute than you, a much more pleasurable, enjoyable, attractive and fun place to live than you. I have much more open space and trails and activities than you do. I have a much nicer, many times more energy efficient and overall better value home than you do. I get to spend as much time as I want with my family. I have a much better public educational system available for my child than you do. My child can walk to elementary, middle and high schools, all less than 1 mile form my home. I can go on and on, but I am sure it would be lost on you.

Also, Cypress is not exactly the middle of nowhere. I have just as many amenities and shopping areas available to me as you do, if not more, and more coming all the time. it may not have the "character" you like, but I am not you.

Also, how is a developer different than any other business. They are in it to make money. And to make money, you offer a product that meets a markets demands. if yo don't meet the markets expectations, you will not make any money, if you do, you will. It applies to developers, grocery stores, tire stores, banks, etc. It is basic economics. It is pretty obvious that you do not understand economics or economic factors. You can build the coolest place in the world, that solves all of the worlds woes, but if nobody wants to use it, it is useless and will fail. Every person buying a home knows the risks they are taking in buying a home. Nobody has a gun to their head. Being a free, open market, the consumer has more than enough choices, but it is ultimately the buyers choice, not yours!