Jump to content

004n063

Full Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,006

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by 004n063

  1. 004n063
    Not in the sense in which the term is generally used in economics, which is to value all land in an area equally, so that maximizing the value of the land has no effect on the property tax, and leaving it as a vacant lot or a low-value use like a parking lot would be uneconomical for the owner. There are legitimate downsides, though. Most notably that it wouldn't create the deman needed to make building economical, but it would make it really hard to sell land, which added friction could backfire on the whole idea. I'm just not sure that backfiring would be any worse than having huge lots sit vacant for years, or as parking lots for decades, as they do now. Certainly, implementation of a Land Value Tax would need to follow the much less controversial (here, at least, I assume) elimination of minimum parking and setback requirements.
  2. 004n063
    This might be the first time I've ever felt like the real life version looked better than the renderings.
  3. 004n063
    I would count both the elimination of a parking lot and the creation of shade as useful purposes.
  4. 004n063
    This weekend I saw somebody eating a mayonnaise, peanut butter, and jelly sandwich. So I can say with confidence that it is certainly not the worst idea ever. But I also am not sure the negatives of LVT outweigh the negatives of what we have now.
  5. 004n063
    Sounds like we've got two ideal tenants for some GFR!
  6. 004n063
    Man, it would really be something if that strip center right next to this followed suit. Nice photo, CL!
  7. 004n063
    Say it with me: Land. Value. Tax.
  8. 004n063
    Potato-quality picture, but looks like the landscaping is coming together.
  9. 004n063
    In conjunction with the Buffalo Bayou-Memorial Park connection and the Buffalo Bayou East extensions, this is a pretty big deal.
  10. 004n063
    Why is this legal?
  11. 004n063
    r/accidentalrenaissance
  12. 004n063
    Good pastas as well.
  13. 004n063
    There are counterpoints in the NHHIP's favor that he didn't touch on, but they're not enough to countervail the validity of his argument. We on HAIF have all accepted that it's going to happen, and that TXDoT is essentially a car lobby, so we look for positives through that lens. In the context of such inevitability, the cool little side projects we're supposed to be getting out of it feel like a lot of good things. But for a die-hard urbanist, the premise of that inevitability is damning, so it's impossible not to see the project as a giant giveaway to car-dependency. I don't blame him for that view. I do feel that he undersold the importance of neighborhoods like Gulfton, though, and how much the city has screwed over that whole region in its planning.
  14. 004n063
    Would be a sensible northern terminus of the Concept Neighborhood greenway, no?
  15. 004n063
    Really a great model for all of the overly wide streets in EaDo, now that it has become a mixed-use district.
  16. 004n063
    I agree. Also becoming a pretty active area as is - more residents and destinations on the corner would be a boon. And maybe would spur some much-needed sidewalk redevelopment on Milby?
  17. 004n063
    I saw a reddit post whining about them. I'll check them out tomorrow morning. I may still avoid that section of Polk. Not a vehicular cycling advocate by any means, but in general I'd rather take the lane on a quiet, slow street like Clay than a fast and fairly busy thoroughfare like Polk, unless the lanes are really good.
  18. 004n063
    Umm we call it the Rodeo District now. Gotta manifest.
  19. 004n063
    Too late to edit, but I wanted to add: While there are minor imperfections (too many driveways, street-level crosswalks), of everything I've seen in Houston, I think this should be the new exemplar design for a nonpedestrianized side street. I have moderately high hopes for Eagle St. in the Ion District as a woonerf, but this is really good. If you ask me, this is what Caroline should have been. Plenty of other candidates in Midtown, though: Winbern immediately comes to mind, but Stuart, Francis, Truxillo, Jackson, Anita, Rosalie could all benefit from having at least a few blocks like this.
  20. 004n063
    Woah! I didn't realize the plans were so ambitious! That looks amazing. EaDo is on a mission lately!
  21. 004n063
    Truth be told, I was guessing about the School of Public Health bit. But I've walked that stretch a couple of times trying to figure out how such a bridge could possibly work, and I'm with you - hard to see it working out. Hence my skepticism about this development being really transit accessible. It'll be doable, but walking and transit still seem like the worst ways to access the site. Bike will be okay if they connect to Brays, better if they connect to Brays and Almeda, and better still if OST and/or Holcome get proper facilities. But all in all, I still think it's fair to call the development car-centric, on site location alone. It's pretty good for car-centric, though - at least it's mainly due to factors well outside the developers' control, and not deliberate choices they made. But the Medical Center in general tends to be pretty underwhelming on the urbanist front (despite its density and higher order transit), largely due to its fortressy street grid.
  22. 004n063
    Imagine a future in which every street in EaDo looks like this or the redone Dallas/Lamar/Hutchins. Separated bike facilities on McKinney and Emancipation feel like priorities to me, though I could see St. Charles instead of Emancipation, since it's a better candidate for a road diet. And if the facilities were to cross the tracks (zigzag ped gate across the purple line, bridge over Harrisburg and the RR tracks, then it'd be a great connection to the future facilities on Commerce.
  23. 004n063
    How so? I ride it almost daily (or did, until the WF closure) and it's always felt pretty open to me. Certainly plenty of cars use it. What?!!! That is absurdly wide for a minor side street. How can we bring back <20ft streets? They are the best. Can somebody explain how the whole Walkable Places thing works to me? Because it increasingly sounds like a non-policy. This part makes sense. And again, I'm totally for pedestrian streets and not against this abandonment/privatization. I guess I just wonder why there are so few public pedestrian streets in the city. I feel like they tend to be more reliably successful (think Church St. in Burlington, VT or Pearl St. in Boulder, CO) than the private ones, which tend to feel a bit more mall-ish.
  24. 004n063
    Saw it on one of the promotional materials. Why? Needs a better way to connect to the TMCTC red line stop. How? Above (my pay grade). Here's an example of a promotional image that suggests such a bridge:
  25. 004n063
    Some pictures I posted in a bike thread from the 15-610 portion. This is really happening.
×
×
  • Create New...