The Great Hizzy!

I don't know... Nottingham and Kelliwood are pretty thick with trees south of I-10. North of I-10... I can't think of much that really stands out.

Heck, I also thought they'd already stopped making those, especially with the arrival of the 500 and the Fusion...

LOL

Wow. That's actually kind of funny in spots. Retarded in others.

I think we're on the same page. I was talking about the areas south of Ben White (Stassney, William Cannon, etc). I realize that the areas north of Ben White are very much like the inner-Loop Houston areas like "The Heights" and Montrose--older but still hip 'hoods for young professionals. And the Westbury/Meyerland comparison certainly wasn't a knock; just pointing out that those areas in "Far" South Austin are similar in that they've matured now and are no longer those new grouth 'burbs of the 70s. I have family who live just of west of Mopac and south of Stassney. They bought their home in 1984 and it was about seven years old then. The neighborhood looks almost identical to some of the neighborhoods along Blackhawk Road in SE Houston (except with fewer palms and more hills ).

Thanks for sharing, Pumapayam.

LOL!

Not far off from H-Town Man's suggestion of Midway Green a month or so ago. Not bad. Certainly not a cookie cutter name. I think it'll stick in a positive way. Of course, I could be wrong.

Actually, most U.S. cities have pretty dead downtowns, and many of them even more so than Houston. Philadelphia, Washington, Boston, New York, Chicago, Seattle and San Francisco are among the few exceptions. Most other cities, however, aren't really happening either. I'm still baffled by this prevailing notion that every social ill in this country is "the worse" in Houston. I mean, really, what happened over the last twenty years before I moved here? There's a real psychosis among some people in this city.

Was it rescheduled for today? I never heard for sure.

Oh, stop that.

Detroit's issues are complex, bedevilling and multi-faceted. Upon my travels there as well as through vast conversations with friends and relatives who are from there or who still live in the city and area, the city is faced with these issues: 1) A city hall that's had a history of being run by people whose belief in city revitalization is always tempered by political bickering and posturing that also leads to some self-serving tomfoolery, the likes of which distracts the city from doing its job of serving its citizenry. 2) White flight has come and gone. It's done. It's now 2006 and the problem Detroit is facing today is that black Detroiters, like white Detroiters, desire a safe city with at least decent schools and adequate city services. Since Detroit provides very little of any of this, blacks are moving to Oakland and Macomb Counties, too. 3) A diminishing tax base (read, citizen flight) leads to a greater strain on city services and the city's ability to pay for them. That leads to layoffs which leads to a spike in the city's unemployment rate, which leads to yet another group of people who will eventually decide that they need to move in order to survive. 4) Developers and City Hall have been at odds for decades. African American leaders at city hall and throughout the community rightfully want to see new development in a city that's nearly 90% African-American consider thosee very people who live and work there. They want greater opportunities for minority contractors, designers, laborers etc, but there is also a sort of disconnect among city leaders as to how to go about this, and the developers who might consider coming in to revitalize A or B are less inclined to take on this potential controversy. Further, because the tax base is strained, big time developers don't get the same tax incentives or breaks that they might get here in Houston or in an Atlanta, Dallas or Denver. 5) A shift in industries from blue collar automotive to technical and financial, which has gutted the city's longtime tax and job generator. Not only is the former dying a quick death in terms of its presence in the city but the newer more white collar industry isn't setting up shop in downtown offices but in the Southfields and Dearborns of the world. Imagine the effect that Plano and Addison have had on the city of Dallas over the last 20 years or so and then magnify that by about five or six. 6) National image. Detroit's viewed as a hard city with hard people--obstinate, bitter people who are resistent to change. A hard city with hard edges. An unwelcoming city that threatens you from a distance and then assaults you up close. A city that is at constant odds with the world. A city with hope, care or concern. Now, this is probably an unfair image--grossly so, in fact--but it makes it that much more difficult to promote the city and its resources. 7) Ill-conceived revitaliation efforts. The city has invested in some rather ambitious projects (Ren Center in 1975 under Coleman Young, for example) but the most troubling of these, based on the numbers, is the city's effort to intice the gambling industry. The casinos in downtown (MGM, Greek) are merely okay and are certainly not stimulating the uptick in the ecomony that the city said it would. If nothing else, the city is enjoying some small benefit that those casinos are paying in public taxes, but the citizens certainly aren't benefitting job and income wise. Plus, is Detroit really a tourist destination? Wouldn't the majority of people serving those casinos (and thus losing their money in staggering numbers) be Detroiters and the very people who least need to be losing their money? The Census Bureau estimates that Detroit will fall to just 750,000 residents by 2025. That's just 38% of its 1949 high of 2,000,000. That's a loss of 1,250,000 residents. So essentially, we will have lost the equivalent of the city of Dallas in the span of 75 years or so due to economic and social relocation. Kind of creepy when you look at it that way.

Oh, I agree, and with that I was framing my comments as the pertain to Houston, in particular. Because Houston doesn't have governmental controls for 'X' type of development, developers will continue to develop in a way that's cost effective and serves the supposed interest of their clients. If the client begins to demand different from what's being offered, the developer begins to change his tune. The fact that 4th Ward, Midtown, the Warehouse District, Rice Military and other intown neighborhoods have seen the change in development over the last ten years that they have speaks to this. Still not 100% what the urbanist wants but certainly a change from the past. Would this be expediated with aggressive zoning? Yes. No argument there.

Yeah, it seems to me that South Central Austin is starting to resemble certain fringe areas in Southwest Houston--not necessarily the high-crime areas of Fondren Southwest or Gulfton but more like Meyerland and Westbury.

There's an opinion held by some that building a neighborhood of smaller buildings--mid-rises and near-highrises--does a better job of providing infill. Maybe that's the effect that the smaller residential towers/buildings in Uptown Dallas will do over time, especially given its headstart relative to Houston's Midtown/Fourth Ward or Atlanta's Atlantic Station area.

LOL So true.

^^^ And here's another problem I have. If the pedestrian needs to be served in Houston in a better way (an idea with which I personally agree) then those who have an interest in such need to be more vocal and more proactive. I don't expect developers to develop in a way that is outside the box of what's been successful for them. The fact is that well over 75% of development in this country caters to the person who's willing to drive--even prefers to drive. Pedestrian neighborhoods are born out of a verifiable committment by those who'll choose--demand, in fact--to live there. In Houston (in Dallas, in Atlanta, in Phoenix, in most cities, in fact), that's a small percentage but not nearly as small as the developer thinks. The developer needs to be influenced by a vocal and insistent market of buyers/renters. If the potential buyers are half-committed, then the developer isn't influenced to develop Midtown in a way that the urbanist desires. There will still be a lot of the quasi-urban or even suburban style design and development that infuriates today's urbanist. In this, I tend to more "blame" the neighborhood groups that are supposed to be in charge of forming a vision for these near-DT communities. There seems to be only a faint level of influence on development in these communities.

What the hardcore urbanist needs to understand (and I'm not posting bout anyone in particular, just about a general class of individual who is becoming more obnoxious as the years come and go) is that he's not nearly as impressive as he thinks he is. He's just not. He also needs to understand that this is 2006 and not 1926. People just aren't as awed by New York anymore. They just aren't. The fact that New Yorkers--or at least a handful of them--have decided not to join the rest of the country, to isolate themselves instead, and to fawn over their compressed landscape of dated, cookie-cutter (that's right, I said it) brick buildings built two or three stories above the ground and with little landscaping or parking isn't the big deal that the coffee house crew think it is. To them, yes. To the rest of the country, no. And the more I hear/read about this self-righteousness, the more I'm inclined to say that there's no difference between the suburban snob and the urban snob other than the latter chooses not to drive or have a yard. No real difference. Both are waaay too impressed with themselves. But so it goes.

If I'm reading the map right, this would put it practically in Webster, though still inside the Friendswood city limits. I assume this project will be on the south side of FM 528? I think the land north of FM 528 at that intersection is in unincorporated Harris County, unless Friendswood recently annexed that land. Anyway, there'll be even more traffic in the area to add on to the brutal traffic on NASA Rd. 1 and the Gulf Freeway, which is only blocks away.

I'd forgotten how funny this thread was.

Official groundbreaking dates are, like, so cool, man.

I seem to remember a garage being there as well.

This sounds like something geared towards the 35-50 set. I could be wrong, though.

Wow, didn't realize it was that soon. I was thinking December or something like that.

In all honesty, I wouldn't be surprised to see Wal*Mart start trying out some new concepts similar to what Midtowner is talking about. Probably far-fetched for Midtown in the near future but not necessarily in other areas.... something smaller with more limited items of an allegedly greater/expensive quality.