jghall00

Take your ignorant ass back to poverty-ridden Fresno.

Tell me how you really feel!

Oh so eloquently spoken, I might add.

Well, you asked and the first hell-hole that popped into my mind was Fresno. So glad you're not here.

You're not the only one. I'd hate to have Houston's inferiority complex impress itself upon me.

Not until we've reached the status of Fresno.

Nice try. I was in Houston for 10 years before I moved to Fresno. Houston is just as, if not more insecure then Fresno. That's not saying much, considering the Houston Metropolitan area is like 4X the size of Fresno's. Houston shares a feeling of inadequacy with a CMSA less then 1/4 its size. Tsk Tsk.

No wonder Houston didn't get the Olympics...it can't even handle the Essence festival.

Will Houston ever stop being so insecure?

Title insurance is regulated and cost about 1%. So that charge is right on. Not sure about the escrow fee- That is probably legal fees which are split (is this about $75 per party?). If you are paying a 6% commission your total closing cost should range between 7.5% and 8%. if you are paying less in fees then this will obviously drop. Good luck.

Thanks for the snappy response. Mine comes in around 8%, I'm guessing due to the extra condo fees. I feel better, I was worried I might be paying something unnecessarily.

So, I'm selling my condo, and I received the closing documentation today. I had a question about a couple of the fees on the documentation.

Title Insurance fee: This fee is quite hefty, nearing $800 for an 80,000 property, and I'm wondering if it has been marked up beyond reason.

Escrow Fee: This was described as the title company's payment, and it's split between the buyer and myself. Should it be?

Anyone with any experience in these matters, please weigh in.

I found the rate schedule at http://www.centralandtitle.com/titleinsurence_rates.html. Is title insurance generally provided to the buyer?

So, I'm selling my condo, and I received the closing documentation today. I had a question about a couple of the fees on the documentation.

Title Insurance fee: This fee is quite hefty, nearing $800 for an 80,000 property, and I'm wondering if it has been marked up beyond reason.

Escrow Fee: This was described as the title company's payment, and it's split between the buyer and myself. Should it be?

Anyone with any experience in these matters, please weigh in.

Silly fan fiction. Helicopters/flying cars will never be used for mass personal use because it is too dangerous and too invasive of privacy. The chances for a wreck on a ground plane are manageable, in the air they are multiplied, as is the destructive power to hit innocent bystanders/houses/schools/playgrounds/etc. How do you put up a fence, curb, and guardrail in the air? Control of an aircraft is one thing, shielding from out of control/errant crafts quite another (in fact effectively impossible.)

Not to mention the noise and visual clutter issues, these crafts would be a NIMBY screamer's dream target.

Roads are here to stay, as they have been throughout recorded history. Deal with it.

C'mon, do you really want hopped up male teens or your average female on a cell phone behind the controls of these things?

I'm with you on this one. Talk about visual blight. We complain about billboards now, I can only imagine what people would say about a proliferation of personal aircraft. I think our future looks more like the fifth element then the jetsons. Unless high fuel prices expedites the use of ultra-light and strong materials like carbon fiber and nanotubes in transportation, we'll be making the switch to smaller vehicles very soon. Just think, India and China are just beginning to ramp up demand for fuel. Our consumption pattern is unsustainable when it is exported. Honestly, I'd prefer the atmosphere of Key West or Miami Beach anyway! Not everything has to be so large; 3000 sq ft, I'm not cleaning that!

I'm from NYC and I spent 10 years in Houston before moving to California. Since you seem familiar with the minuses, I'll fill you in on the pluses:

1) Eateries - Houston has a large and varied ethnic community, and you'll find food representative of dozens of cultures.

2) Restaurants - Houston has lots of great places to eat out.

3) Food - There are a lots of great places to eat, to suit any budget.

And that's about it.

Just kidding!

There's lots of culture as far as music, theatre, museums, sporting events, etc.

Housing is cheap.

Now I'm really done.

Oh, as far as schools, just get into the richest or newest area you can afford. Pretty much any school that has a large concentration of poor, immigrant, or minority students will perform poorly. Sad, but true.

*Flame suit on*

You know if you live in the right places and can ignore the fact that theres 105 heat index outside, riding a bike in houston is pretty feasible. Its probably just as dangerous in New York or in San Francisco too.

Also I dont live in the city to go to the museums. I live in the city because I feel the extra money for rent is worth not spending 10 years of my life spent in a car.

People in Houston use the heat as an excuse for everything. In reality, there are places that are just as hot, if not hotter, and people get along just fine without autos and A/C. And yes, that includes the humidity. People here in Fresno complain about the weeks of 100 plus temperatures. Everywhere you go, people will find something to complain about.

I moved to California, and I still can't figure out how people do it. Yes, the pay is higher, no it does not compensate for all increased expenses. Produce is waaaay cheaper here because it's ag country. The main higher expense is housing. I guess the home ownership rate is probably lower. Same in New York. I'm from there, and no one I know owns a home except my grandfather. Everyone else rents. Rent control pretty much guarantees you don't move.

You know what though...I don't think people in Cali or New York are any less happy. We get caught up in thinking that happiness consists of owning stuff (including a bigger home). I think it has more to do with quality and quantity of our relationships with other people. Since I and all my friends have left Houston, I've been feeling less happy. I've got two young kids, and they couldn't care less where we live (maybe when they get older!). I'm seriously considering moving back to the East Coast, because the urban environment makes it much easier to create and nurture relationships with people.

exactamundo !

Who needs local wages when you have excess liquidity and low doc option loans!

I'm amazed that the Westpark Tollway has succumbed to such heavy traffic in just 18 months.

But there are a few things that should be pointed out.

1. Congestion occurs only during rush hour. The rest of the time, these facilities are free-flowing.

2. Before the Southwest Freeway expansion, it backed up most of the day and on Saturday, like the Katy Freeway does now. It usually took multiple traffic light cycles to get through any intersection. Now congestion is limited to peak periods and the frontage roads are far better than they were. At Beechnut, you usually get through in one cycle.

3. The expanding population and growing economy needs more freeway/tollway infrastructure than is currently being provided.

4. People want/need to drive their own cars, even if there is a big cost.

Did anyone honestly think the Westpark tollway would stay clear for any length of time? The only way to ensure it flows during rush hour is to utilize congestion pricing, which it appears is not currently the case. I do believe it is configured for it though. I've posted my responses to maxconcrete's statements below:

1. That's true for most freeways. Building for rush hour is a stupid idea, you'll never satiate demand, and end up with an underutilized facility during off peak hours.

2. It's only a matter of time before the SW Freeway resembles its former self...congested for an expanded number of hours.

3. There are lot of cities with more people and less infrastructure then Houston that get by just fine. We cannot build our way out of this mess, nor should we even try.

4. That's fine, as long as the price of driving your own car reflects the full cost. As things currently stand, the true cost is externalized. Add the sociological, economic, and environmental expenses and see how many people start shopping for alternatives. We should at least fund redevelopment in Iraq and cleaning our air with gas taxes.

I agree that we have to look at passenger rail as a long term addition to our transportation scheme and that in the short term it might all look like a huge boondoggle.

It's going to take ridiculously worse traffic to get people to finally give up their cars in mass numbers and, by that time, the HOV lanes will probably be unreliable as high-speed routes anyway, and express buses will be sitting there in traffic like the rest of us.

How bad will traffic have to get before we use these things? In the Los Angeles area, where they are decades ahead of us in terms of traffic congestion, they have a fairly extensive network of light rail in place and ridership is miniscule as a percentage of total commuters. So, that would suggest that traffic basically needs to come to a daily standstill before large groups of commuters leave their cars at home.

There's a proposal in Orange Co., south of L.A., to create a tunnel under some mountains to relieve traffic which, is so bad, that it can take 1.5 hours to travel 6 miles USA Today article. I'm guessing if they had commuter rail in place in that area it would be filled by now.

I moved to Fresno, California after 10 years in Houston. L.A. is all traffic, all the time and Houston should learn from its mistakes. One of the problems here is the NIMBYism driven development that limits the rate at which the city can increase density. Houston has the opposite problem, with little development restriction preventing developers from consuming land further out for housing. And before someone says anything, I'm aware that L.A. is the most densely populated city in the country. I'm also aware that density in L.A. isn't geared towards mixed use, which impedes widespread use of public transportation.

The tunnel idea is stupid, it will be packed full of cars as soon as it is open, and it is in earthquake country. It may facilitate travel of vehicles, but from an individual time the end result will be a congestion increase until transit times are the same as they were before it was constructed. It just hows the extent to which people have to be dragged kicking and screaming into a new transportation paradigm. Congestion is not the problem, it is the cure to the disease that ails us.

Hi, I have some pictures of the condo for sale. These are shots of the living room, and the pool directly outside the unit.

Hi all, I have a spacious, 2/2 Galleria area condo for sale. The condo has a FANTASTIC location, around the corner from the Galleria. It provides < 5 minute access to a variety of locations, including retail, resturants, parks, and museums. If you are tired of spending time in traffic, this is the place for you. The MLS listing number is 904190 and you can find pictures and contact info for the realtor at www.har.com.

Suburban Mass Transit is a misnomer. The Sub-urbs do not have the Urban density necessary to transport "Mass"es of people. They have to increase density artificially, e.g., the park and ride system. This doesn't do much for old, young, and handicapped, which is what I've been saying for awhile. Increased fuel costs will bring to light the tru(th) ramifications of sprawling development. The bus systems will only work for those who are employed in dense business districts. Unless China stops loaning us money and the economy slows, increasing demand for oil in China and India will result in ever-increased fuel costs. The next 10 or so years are going to be very interesting.

Maybe I am just thinking of a different area but I would say that the areas somewhat outside 610 have been on the upswing, while the areas slightly further are transitional and the areas around the beltway may soon be on the downswing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The only areas in Houston that I can think of between 610 and Beltway 8 that are well maintained and will probably stay so are those near westheimer and Braeswood. Of course, that's a pretty large area to cover, so perhaps I should'nt have generalized so strongly. Anyone know of any other nice areas in that zone? My wife and I have visited the areas adjacent to South Main, Stella Link, and off 290.

I have a question I've been meaning to ask for some time now. When my wife and I look at new homes, the builders often stress how they are energy star compliant or better. How much does the electric bill usually run for newer homes in the 1800 - 2600 sq ft range? Some useful information would be the square footage, A/C setting, and monthly bill.

I think location and original quality of an area's homes are very important. Danax, take West U versus your area. In West U, the location was more important than the original construction, so most became teardowns. In Eastwood, I believe fewer will be torn down in the coming years as the area won't support teardowns of well-built older homes. Bellaire has a good location, but much of the original immediate post-war housing was not built to last like West U's and Eastwoods brick bumgalos.

I think Houston's future problems will be in the homes built in the 70s-80s that ring the beltway and to a certain extent 1960/highway 6. Those areas are far enough to not be centrally located, and also far enough where people making homebuying decisions will just decide to go farther out to the newest subdivisions. I think those areas are destined to become Houston's 21st century slums.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with Heights guy. Location, location, location is the mantra. A neighborhood has to attract continous investment in order to thrive. Otherwise, the housing stock will decline, people will move, and only those unable or unwilling to move will remain, while people with little connection to the neighborhood come in. Jane Jacobs' book "The Life and Death of Great American Cities" deals with this topic in great detail, and is available at the library.

I think the critical feature that is missing from many Houston neighborhoods is 1) a connection to something other then a roadway and 2) variety in the housing stock. As people age, they tend to look for housing with more amenities. Houses in the surburbs while newer, usually don't cut it, except for young families such as my own. When the kids go their own way, families move and a critical part of the foundation of the community is lost. Variety in the housing stock is crucial because it allows people to maintain that connection to the community; it provides an option to maintain a connection to the community by simply changing homes in the same general neighborhood.

As far as I'm concerned, most Houston neighborhoods between 610 and the Beltway are slums in the making. My wife already disdains these areas, because they just don't look very nice. We'd faster look in 3rd ward, because of its proximity to amenities. Many of the newer communities in Spring and out west, I just don't see them aging very well at all.

In summary, continuous investment is necessary to maintain the quality of a neighborhood, and I believe location provides the strongest incentive for that investment.

I agree.  It will happen eventually in H-town.  Terrorrism has existed way before Sep 11( Oklahoma, WTC bombing, IRA.....) it will be around for hundreds of years after we're gone. I won't let it get me down here I sure as hell won't back at home.

I'll be in the U.K. around September too(Manchester), then H-town can't wait!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think anyone would waste time attacking Houston, it has insufficient density to provide a real scare. The only viable targets here are the refineries. A major attack on those could do some damage, given our economy's dependence on relatively low fuel prices.

The Katy desperately needed to be widened.... 3 lanes in each direction is ridiculously insufficient... it should have been widened a couple of decades ago.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you don't mind my asking, why do you say three lanes is ridiculously insufficient? I'm sure when it was built, three lanes were all that was required. In the future, the new four lanes configuration may prove to be insufficient. Atlanta has freeways that are six lanes to a side. They're just as bad, if not worse, then any of the freeways here.

Increasing capacity does nothing to reduce congestion in the long term. It might move more cars, but from an individual perspective, I don't think we really care about total capacity, we care about time from A to B. Expanding the freeway with free lanes may get more cars through, but in the long run it's not going to get you as an individual there any faster. It would seem the saving grace of the Katy expansion was the inclusion of Toll lanes configured for congestion pricing.

You know.. I could understand someone bitching about 610 or the belt being expanded in lieu of public transit, but do you have any idea how selfish and retarded you sound trying to make the point that expanding I-10 is bad?

Don't forget that thousands of vehicles have to use I-10 to pass through Houston daily. Houstonian's are not the only ones using the road.

I say "Ugh" to whiners.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A very valid point. Perhaps the reconstruction should've been limited to tolled lanes for paying drivers. This way people in a rush passing through would have the option to pay for quicker travel. I'm not quite sure I understand the purpose of the extra free lane and expanded feeders. There's tremendous potential for profit in limiting expansions to pay only roadways. Surburban drivers would have the option of getting there quicker on those days when the need arrives.

Interesting that you mention Seattle for comparison.

I could name poster children off the board for each side, but I don't know that the guilty parties would see the humour in it...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We're all adults here, name names. An interesting topic would be to field teams for opposing sides...then have them argue their opponents position.

Yeah, and the street life in the seventh sucks...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No streets I'm sure the natives(penguins) love it though. Perhaps we should drill there for oil, then we can get some roads, then developers will come, etc.