The Great Hizzy!

Just trying to bring a little levity to the festivities.

Denver also had a six year head start on downtown redevelopment. It started with Coors Field in 1994. Same with Baltimore.

Yes, Sienna Plantation is more Missouri City than anywhere else (though, I think the town of Iowa Colony has annexation rights to parts of it. I'll have to double check). HWY 6 to Iowa Colony is fine but once you pass Sienna Plantation, it is rural industrial, and I think you've been in Texas long enough to know what that looks like. As for Mo City. There are older parts that are more middle class than the other parts, especially along FM 2234, but even they are in decent shape--just nothnig as impressive as what you'd find in most of Sugarland. There is a nothern section along US 90-A that's an industrial/rail corridor and it's not at all pretty. But it's relatively small.

LMAO @ Governor Goodhair

Also, the Minnesota North Stars were sold to a Dallas ownership group that was able to move the team to Dallas (the Minnesota franchise was in horrible financial shape and keeping them in M-SP would've killed the franchise entirely). The Edmonton Oilers would've been the Houston Oilers (ha-ha-ha!) about the same time if Les Alexander (the Rockets owner) and Chuck Watson (IHL Aeros owner) weren't at odds and didn't essentially kill each other off. Cosmopolitan had nothing to do with it. You really think the NHL would rather be in places like Nashville, Columbus and Raleigh-Durham, NC before Houston? Nope. If that's the case, Dallas is more cosmopolitan than Los Angeles, because they have the Cowboys and LA has nada.

Check out Uptown along McKinney Avenue, about a mile north of DT. West Village, which is essentially the same as being on McKinney and it's in Uptown as well but a bit further up. The West End is okay but you'll probably be someone disappointed. You'd be more impressed with Uptown, I think. Tool around White Rock Lake. Nice views there. The Turtle Creek (also north of downtown) area is nice, too.

Wait a minute, did I miss something? I thought we had a pretty significant museum/arts district/theater district. I thought we had a Buffalo Bayou plan--hell, I just found out that we have a pretty aggressive and comprehensive beautifucation plan for qutie a few of our bayous--that we had a Hardy Rail Yard plan, a downtown plan and a Midtown plan? Does an area of development have to have a name to be considered a plan? I mean, have you taken note of what's happening east of downtown? There's no grand name given to this but it serves the same purpose as any "plan", which is to bring more residents into the city. I mean, do we just look at what happens in Houston and, in keeping with this perpetual "Woe is me" mindset that I don't think is going to be shaken any time soon, we conveniently ignore it? Seriously. As Dalparadise said, it's all about perception. Nothing more, nothing less.

Holy, crap! I owe you a 12-pack if/when we ever meet, 19514. That was great!!

Hey, I'd settle for renovating our bayous. We have a string of ecological gold mines in them and we've not done much of anything to them over the last three decades. Buffalo Bayou's master plan is a great start, but we could do similar things on a smaller scale at Brays, Sims, Greens, White Oak, etc. Imagine all of those with walkways similar to those you see at the Woodlands Waterways? Imagine them with manicured trees, statuary, etc. The infrastructure is already in place, and they're already "protected". They just need a benefactor.

Oh, well disregard my rant, bro. Grab me a Molson!

2112, My man, seriously, you really have to stop taking this stuff so hard or personel. You really need to understand the mindset of people in order to understand why some people can be so hostile to certain places. EVERYONE tears down another city when it appears to be on the uptick (and you'd be (not you but anyone) an idiot not to see that Houston is a city on the uptick). You don't move to a craphole for any reason, including to work, if you have better options, and if you don't have better options, then where you're moving to isn't a craphole by definition. What are you going to do, run around bragging about your current locale and you can't support your own ass? No. You're going to go where the action is. I don't give a holy damn how beautiful geographically speaking San Francisco is, I'm not going to pay that amount of money for less home and more aggravation. Period. You don't impress me that much. This puffery, this chest pounding that people do, it's meaningless. The average person will enjoy life in Houston the same as they would anywhere else. And the rich play by their own rules here just like they would anywhere else. The rest of this blabbering is to stroke one's own ego. Nothing more. It's just that play words, catch phrase and pop terms abound and when it catches, you role with it. The average person knows diddly poo about Houston except what they've been trained to believe by people with an agenda. Shrug it off. You have no idea how ignorant the average person is about most things, especially geography, and their hostile comments prove it. People are also snooty to the point where they become blinded by their own self-created crap. It's not important what some twit somewhere else thinks about Houston if they're not bringing anything to the table. Go to any US city in this country and their issues are Houston's issues, some of it more so, some if it less so. Just because some fly-by-night urban snobs have suddenly fallen in love with walking everywhere and shunnnig cars/freeways/etc or homes with yards, you're going to let them dictate every one of your tastes? You're going to let them make you feel insecure/uncomfortable about what makes you comfortable? I would hope not. It's not that big of a deal. Popularity contests are what rule high schools, not mature adult life. So take it easy and don't worry about it. You can't be all things to all people all the time. And, to quote Robin Williams in Death To Smoochy, in a world of neanderthals and rapists, I wear the f*****' badge of honor. I'm going to grab a diet Dr. Pepper, jump on the rail, take the 65 Bissonnet on over to Rice Village and have me a nice little evening with the ladyfriend. As far as I'm concerned, I'm in paradise. Those that disagree can suck their thumbs.

LOL! I didn't even notice the Dart.

We really need to talk more about the urban projects going up on the eastern end of DT/warehouse district. A trip down Dowling will reveal a handful of new buildings with more on the way. I like the way the building's laid out. Is it a "from-the-ground-up" deal or a rehab?

Man, I'm so eye-to-eye with you on the issue of middle schools that it's not funny. I think elementary school kids can be taught the basics with a solid degree of competency but the middle school years are so important because that's when you start seeing how the kids react to more mature issues and expectations. Plus, middle school teachers are more likely to not care or to become overwhelmed because that's when kids are their most obnoxious and precocious. I've seen so many middle school teachers spend an entire day either not caring and staring into a magazine or arguing with one or two students about minor things like chewing gum or not showing up thirty seconds late. It's a pretty fruitless environment. OTOH, you have some excellent middle school teachers who don't get the backing by administration that they need to really have an impact on all of their students. Ah well... back on subject. Pearland is indeed really growing but Sugarland is what's hot on so many levels. You might consider splitting the difference and looking into Missouri City, which has some of the ammenities that Sugarland has but more of the costs of what you'd find in Pearland.

Oh, I don't want to give the impression that the city isn't beautiful in many ways, just that like a lot of tourist type cities, the upkeep can wane in some of the common areas. Miami has that issue in many of its non-tourist neighborhoods. So does New Orleans. I think the northern strip of San Antonio between I-10 and approximately US 281 (or maybe a mile or so east of 281) is very well kept and scenic. I imagine Houston would be quite a postcard type town if our west central, northwest and southwest areas had such topography. I also like the Olmos Basin Park area.

Unfortunately... both. East and Southeast San Antonio have a rural--NE Houston type of look to it. In fact, it takes a few miles inside the 410 coming from the east on 1-10 to really get the feeling that you're inside the city. Lots of weeded fields with commercial entities that scatter their farm & truck equipment across their lots with no order. That sort of thing. Further inside the loop, you start to see the usual culprits: pieces of cardboard boxes on sidewalks, paper cups along the curbs, plastic and paper bags blowing up and down the streets, napkins taking up residents in lawns, nothing out of the ordinary but still disappointing.

I think the comparison is kind of nebulous because people have different ideas of what constitutes "dirt", but if we're talking about litter, I will say that I was fairly disappointed in how the older areas inside much of the 410 loop were maintained. South and east San Antonio, in particular standout, and some of the areas along Commerce heading west are pretty grimy. Where Houston has an issue with litter in its medians (and in the drainage ditches in some neighborhoods), many areas in San Antonio business centers and run-of-the-mill neighborhoods inside the 410 have a good amount of litter. I can only assume that part of it is the fault of the citizens (your typical ambivalence that you find in many cities) but it may be as much an issue with how trash pickup is handled, because I've noticed that there is a tendency in some cities, especially by some private contractors, of leaving as much trash as they pick up.

I tend to agree with this. It would also be nice if there was a way to intice commercial entities to take a chance on poorer neighborhoods. One of the biggest problems for lower income communities is that a.) there aren't much in the way of convenient shopping options in their neighborhoods and b.) this lack of retail/commerce affects the overall property values in the neighborhood, thereby lowering the amount of taxes collected in that neighborhood, which affects a municipalities ability to provide rudimentary services, such as street lighting and so forth. On the flipside, isolated areas of lower income residents would more restrict that areas ability to receive upgraded city services as opposed to if they were integrated into a more prosperous taxing zone.

The next step is government wire taps. Someone will have recorded a conversation at the US Census Bureau's main office.

ESPN Zone is located in Atlanta. Enough said.

This building was postponed indefinitely due to a downturn in the national economy. Then of course the land that it was to be built on was sold, meaning that any reincarnation of the project will take place somewhere else and would probably include a different design. It's too bad, though, as I thought it was a very intriguing design.

Right. And an honest look is better than spending years in delusionment like some other new growth cities. Only recently has cities like Phoenix admitted some of its quality of life issues such as rising crime, lack of transit options, dearth of public parks and an antiquated water works department. Dallas recently came to grips with reality not being in tune with the locals perception, particularly with regards to schools and crime. Atlanta is finally starting to acknowledge that it is a city that also extends south of I-20 and that blight and decay is growing at a faster rate in this area of the city than prosperity is growing in other parts. The moral (as if I'm one to give morals): the first step to being the best of what you can be is to acknowledge the worst of what you are.

1. Either Memorial or Allen Parkway into downtown. Second is either Main Street or Louisiana Street from the South. I imagine using Travis Street is going to kick arse as well once repairs are done. 2. No clue. 3. I've wondered the same. That land's been empty for a minute and you'd think that someone would've tapped into the fact that Westchase is fairly large and reasonably prosperous area that needs more retail. I don't think it will be upscale but it'll probably be a step up from some of your bargain basement centers. 4. No zoning and a preference by the average person to drive. It's a match made in "heaven." I really, really don't have a problem with parking lots as a concept (I drive myself and often enjoy it) but I agree that there's a tendency towards overkill these days. 5. Yes. Westheimer will be treated properly between Post Oak and the northbound feeder of the West Loop (just as the rest of the road has). Post Oak and San Felipe are scheduled for improvements once construction on the West Loop is completed. I remember the head of the city's Public Works department talking about this on TV last summer.

Trash: Answer is no. Philadelphia, Detroit, Cleveland, New Orleans, Lousiville, New York City (despite the excellent clean up initiatives of the last ten plus years) and even San Francisco all strike me as being trashier. That said, we need to clean up our medians, because the medians help the trash to standout. Not many cities have medians as wide as Houston (in fact, I can't think of any that have as many) so every piece of paper that sits in a median stands out more. Fortunately, Houston doesn't have areas where lot after lot (and many in residential areas) is infested with bulk trash that no one seems to care about, like what you find in Philadelphia or Detroit. That said, the worst offender for trash in Houston is Fifth Ward and most of the NE Side. As far as cleanest, I'd say Seattle is the epitome of clean, with San Diego and Denver close behind. Roads: Answer is no. Easily. You haven't seen bad roads until you've visited some of our midwestern cities. Boston and Dallas both have a bit of a problem with potholes, too. In fact, moreso than when I first visited some ten plus years ago. I would say Boston is slightly worse than Houston where Dallas is slightly better--at least IMO. Conversely, I think Los Angeles, Atlanta and San Diego have the best roads as far as major cities are concerned.

The CSAs are done by whole county (not portions). For Houston-Galveston-Sugarland, this includes: Brazoria Chambers Fort Bend Galveston Harris Liberty Montgomery Walker Waller Walker is the newest county to be added, according to the US Census Bureau. I don't have accurate estimates but I imagine that Houston's CSA population is at about 5.4 million by now if not more. DFW's CSA has consistently been between 580,000 - 650,000 larger than Houston's since about 1998 (it has fluctuated between 2000 and 2003 so it's hard to tell if you now estimate on the higher end or the lower end). Other recently changed CSAs: * Miami-Fort Lauderdale is now Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach * Atlanta has added two new counties (whose names I can't remember). Atlanta's CSA has somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 counties but these counties' combined land area isn't that much bigger than those included in Houston's or Dallas's CSA