N Judah

If you don't like my posts, then don't respond to my posts.

The urban areas did not need freeways to be successful. There were thriving urban areas before freeways. But without freeways, the mass-produced homes popping up in the middle of the prairie 50 miles away from downtown would not be worth very much. In fact they probably would not exist at all. Ugh. I never said they would "cease to be a dominant trend." In fact, if you've been reading, I've even admitted that I don't disagree that anything can snowball into a negative feedback loop once you've dropped a few trillion dollars to incentivize things in a specific direction. Actually, that's exactly what I want you to do. in fact, I specifically asked you to come up with a multi-trillion dollar lifestyle subsidies specifically targeting urban areas and not suburban areas. For a few trillion dollars, the suburbanites had better be nothing short of euphoric. Apparently you can pay them off and they still wish they were somewhere else. Kudos to the city dwellers for sticking it out.

No, I don't like that area anymore. I haven't been there in months. I'll go back when it looks like Naperville Illinois. I understand the problem perfectly and have lived in places where that is the case. I just think one-way streets are a bad idea and should be avoided whenever possible.

A page from your playbook! I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Yes, Houston would have been the same but with a smaller footprint. Nonetheless jobs are moving to the suburbs and residential in-town is getting denser. Cutting down commute times are a chaser's dream. Subsidized growth reveals peoples' preferences the way a Coke v. Pepsi taste test would always reveal that people will overwhelmingly prefer Coke as long as you pay them $100 to say so. Nice! Like I said, we can't all make it out to Christmas mountain, but it's nice to dream, and in the meantime that's what suburbs are for Er...What is it you think I don't understand about the study? The fact that it shows that many suburban dwellers still manage to be dissatisfied with their heavily subsidized lifestyles? There is no connection between the data you just described. 31% of overall respondents lived in the city...and 23% of the overall respondents would prefer to either move to the city or to continue living in the city. That's not the same as saying "23% of the 31% of people who lived in the city preferred living there" or whatever it is you're trying to show. In fact it might not even be the same group of people at all. Do you understand this? Did you even read the study? Anyway, when given the choice, more city dwellers prefer small towns than they do suburbs. A few trillion in subsidies should make the city dwellers happy.

so people can't just take another street? did I-10 inside the loop not get expanded since the development started coming in? what about memorial or allen pkwy? I am sure Washington Ave is a very important street (with very important and extremely prestigious people living nearby, no slur against them), but to be honest if it's good enough for the downtown of the 4th-largest city in illinois it should be good enough for some little middle-of-the-pack neighborhood in Houston. Sometimes when a neighborhood gets really dense it doesn't make sense to expect it to be a busy arterial forever. Well, when I look at the direction Houston's neighborhoods are going my priorities are streetlife and walkability, and one-way streets are a great way to kill streetlife. there's nothing more "built to fail" than the idea that people are going to walk down streets that have all the ambience of a drag race (*especially* in a place like Houston). if you want to ship cars through as fast as possible, however, then one way streets are a fantastic idea. having said that I would be open to the idea of closing off portions of the street completely (making it a series of pull-in parking spots) and having the next street south work as a one-way eastbound lane and the next street north of Wash Ave work as a one-way westbound street. Well there might be some other agenda at work there...not sure what to say. I never thought the roads were too narrow, and if they seem that way they can just pave over those drainage ditches, can't they? I am not sure the neighborhood should encourage speedy access through their residential neighborhoods for the convenience of new residents (or for the convenience of people just speedin' through) any more than I think new residents should be able to falsely call the police on a neighborhood bar 212 times solely for the sake of trying to get it closed. Are you trying to say you don't think they're the same width? I think they roughly are - 2 lanes in each direction, take one lane away for parking, and you've got that picture (with greenlife, different setbacks, and the canyon effect of tall buildings). This is true over by the roundabout. Anyway I think it's strange that anyone would trade what's in that picture for a bunch of one way streets. Then when it has all the ambience of Fannin I guess we can all have something extra to complain about, except for that somebody somewhere who temporarily saved 4 or 5 minutes off of his or her morning commute. Anyway I don't live there, but I think a lot of places would kill for an opportunity like this to really build an urban neighborhood from the ground up. But if they screw it up there will still be other chances in/around Houston for the next several years.

Yikes. If you can't figure out how to do that, then I really can't help you. Sorry! http://www.google.com/search?q=50%25+of+am...+somewhere+else I don't disagree that anything can snowball into a negative feedback loop once you've dropped a few trillion dollars to incentivize things in a specific direction. Freeways are their own cottage industry (and then some!), and as I have said I am glad they at least have something to show for it. But there were thriving urban areas before freeway subsidies and there will be thriving urban areas long after the freeways are gone.

I didn't think you would. Unfortunately, too many people think like you, and that's how we got into the mess we're in now.

I think that overall development pattern is a good idea for the area. A lot of the other proposals, such as shipping a bunch of one-way streets through the area, reek of "built to fail." One of the main constraints of Wash Ave. is its narrow width, and I think the street in that picture is about the same size, so it sort of shows how it can be done.

You don't have to believe anything that contradicts what you have already decided to be true. But you can also look up "record foreclosures" if you want. Anyway -don't worry- the brain drain is coming and then you can have your middle management nation all to yourself.

Aha! Here's what Washington Ave. should look like: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mturnbull/3194619122/

yahoo/googld/whatever search engine you use "savings rate us" etc etc

That could be part of my park idea. I have never been to an indoor Farmer's market, which makes me think the people who sell stuff at those prefer the outdoors. Part of it could also be used as a venue for outdoor concerts.

If we kill the Astrodome, the grass can live again.

No, to my knowledge almost none of my "social peers" run everything up on credit card debt. Sorry! I'm pretty sure it's the middle managers who need to save more. A 60K/yr millionaire at the end of the day is still...a 60K/yr millionaire.

I agree...we have become a nation of middle managers. When there was money flying everywhere it's not like people were using it to go back to school to become scientists. Instead they just got bigger cars and were flipping houses. Overall i agree with your post but instead of manufacturing (which can be outsourced to anywhere) we should be doing more R+D type stuff.

They should shell it except for the basic structure and make it into a park (with lots of overgrown greenery) built upon the ruins of where the astrodome once was. It will be like our Roman Coliseum except bigger and with landscaping.

I wonder how their office space is doing.

That's true. When moneymaking is your paramount objective, these decisions are essentially made for you. Yep! 50% of Americans wish they lived somewhere else. The difference is that some of those Americans' lifestyle preferences are heavily subsidized while others are not. I understand you when you say that suburbanites would hold the exact same point of view as me about projects that serve urban areas and not their own. But for my part i guess I am just unable to come up with any such multi-trillion dollar lifestyle subsidies specifically targeting such urban areas.

I didn't mean literally subsidizing someone's midlife crisis, I said it's LIKE subsidizing someone's midlife crisis. People who live in the suburbs are people who had a dream of living somewhere else but couldn't execute. Now we all had to pay so that they could have their grassy plot of land. Living in the mountains sounds great, but not everyone does it. I would hope suburbanites pay more taxes. We gave them trillions of dollars in lifestyle subsidies -- I'd hate to think that they had nothing to show for it.

Small towns have been experiencing a resurgence and cities with strong neighborhoods that can replicate a small-town feel (which excludes Houston and its suburbs) will do well too. This is the result of telecommuting. People with real options never choose the suburbs, except as a compromise. When we build freeways to the suburbs it's like subsidizing someone else's midlife crisis.

Any news on Polk St Grill?

Man I moved back here and promptly gained ~30 pounds. That's all i have to say.

Edit: n/m

It's called "Sport Stadia Grill" -- so its really a restaurant that has a bar section. It just happens that the bar section is prominently featured instead of shoved in the back. Overall it really is one of the nicer places that I have seen in Katy.