A Town Square For Houston

[cloud713]

Rail stations were brought up with popular squares.. How about a square at the Wheeler station for when the university line intersects the main st line. That should be the most popular station in the light rail system once it's built out in full.

Or a square at hardy rail yards site since that's a likely spot for a high speed rail station/Light rail connection. But the wheeler station is a much better location I think..

[HoustonIsHome]

Most of the successful squares in these cities did not become what they are until after decades if not centuries of urban evolution.

Exactly. They did the home work for us. They saw the value in creating urban out door breathing space, why not emulate them?

Houston is just beginning to rediscover its urban core and we do not even have more than a handful of people walking on downtown streets yet.

ExActly, exactly!!!!!

Cars took our downtown pedestrians away. We need urban features that draw then back.

I know you are not proposing just sitting back and waiting for them to come are you? Or just just filling in the population density while creating retail deserts? Its easier to develop with growth in mind than to build and then correct mistakes.

It is fun to speculate, but it is impossible to guess at this point which block will have the ingredients of a great public gathering place once there are actually people outside to be gathered.

huh????

That is not how things work.

If you read back I said you build with interaction in mind. The same way the city provided incentives that attracted skyhouse, and the others planned for downtown they can do the same around a square with tightly detailed specifications for the ground floor facing the square.

You don't guess at the ingredients, you lure them.

Guessing it's what the city is doing now with its plans for the shopping district

The city has made several forays into the public square development business.

the city has developed parks, it has never delved into urban squares.

Market Square is a good bar/restaurant neighborhood spot, but as you say, doesn't have retail (but then, what does?).

As I mentioned above, market square is a park but not a square. A square can be a park but not all parks are squares. A square must be intimately tied to its surroundings which are very pedestrian friendly. Preston, Milam, Travis and Congress are not little intimate streets you casually cross. They are all major thoroughfares with 4 lanes of traffic.

Tranquility Park is an abject failure as a people spot, although it does at least provide some nice greenspace in front of our skyline. Main Street Square is a work in progress, but will need at bare minimum for a couple of the parking garages to be got rid of before it takes off. It at least has public memory and history going for it, which you lose as you go further afield. We might just end up closing off Main Street to traffic from there to the bayou and the whole thing becomes our square.

Yes main street functions as a square, but it is so narrow.

Discovery Green, although it doesn't look like it will have much retail directly on it, might nonetheless evolve into a great crossroads of everything that is happening in east downtown.

discovery green is more Central Park than Madison Square.

Furthermore, just adding retail won't make an area a square. Houston planners are very poor at getting projects to interact with each other. They would line westheimer with projects from Pasadena to El Paso but not one of them would interact. The projects between Highland Village and Uptown are perfect examples.

I don't think we can expect the city to make any new ventures into downtown square develoment anytime soon

expect a truly urban development for Houston??? We are talking about Houston Texas right???

unless an amazing opportunity were to come along (e.g. Skanska tears down Houston Club building, the economy crashes, nothing gets built there, and the city somehow gets the land for a bargain).

I don't get it? Why does ask of that have to happen? Why is that land a must? Have you seen all the emptiness on the east side? That kills four birds with one stone:

1. Creates a point of interest that would help define Houston and create a point of interest for tourists.

2. Give downtown the best chance of attracting major retail.

3. Attract more residential downtown.

4. Most importantly, it would get rid of a ton of lots

In the long run, I think our best hope is one of the squares already mentioned. But there needs to be people out there first. Otherwise it's like planning your living room before you even have a house.

Totally disagree.

First off, we don't have any squares yet, and secondly we have to grow with the city not wait for dysfunction then try to remedy it. Our car centric way of life is already way too expensive to remedy.

You build the darn thing in an empty spot downtown. You woo macys back, you lure more residential to the area, businesses attract more businesses, maybe another anchor will take interest, and you go from there.

[HoustonIsHome]

Rail stations were brought up with popular squares.. How about a square at the Wheeler station for when the university line intersects the main st line. That should be the most popular station in the light rail system once it's built out in full.

Or a square at hardy rail yards site since that's a likely spot for a high speed rail station/Light rail connection. But the wheeler station is a much better location I think..

Yeah, Wheeler would make an excellent location for another square, but we still need one downtown. I don't know how one would work at Hardy. The plans are still far off so it's hard for me to picture. But the way lower midtown is improving, a square at the juncture of those two rail lines would be interesting

[Texasota]

I would reiterate the argument that both Market Square and Discovery Green *DO* function as squares, and will improve significantly as development continues.

 

Discovery Green: Surrounded by hotels and apartments, a significant amount of hardcape, regular market events, backs up to the convention center (and Avenida de las AMericas is planned to be narrowed)

 

Market Square: bars and restaurants on 3(ish) sides, more hardscape than youre giving it credit for, distinctive fountain and sculptural pieces, as the hines and (hopefully) international (or whatever its called) towers get built potentially more retail as well as residential. 

And the idea that the surrounding streets are too wide and busy? There are lights at all four intersections. There is no opportunity for traffic to get up to a significant speed. Is it ideal? Maybe not, but it's still pretty comfrotable from a pedestrian standpoint.

 

And, being on opposite sides of downtown, these two sites complement each other well.

 

Ultimately though, the most important factor in a successful square has nothing to do with design. It's people. Downtown needs a much higher concentration of residents to make a square anything like what you've described work. I do think that, as various new residential projects begin popping up, it will start to become much clearer if our existing public spaces are adequate or if theres some enormous unmet need somewhere. 

[kylejack]

Well I guess how I said that was stupid.

There is a lot in and around Market Square but I don't think there is any major wow factor that would be a must see.

The clock is interesting but its not really in the square.

When I said it lacked anything major I meant a nice statue or an interesting fountain....

 

Cotswold Fountain #3, the tall fountain in the middle of the Square, the Lauren's Garden fountains... I find all of those fountains very interesting, and the clock tower is right across the street.

 

"wow factor that would be a must see"

I don't know of any such fountains in the United States. Rome has some real stunners, but over here we don't really do fountains that are a must-see, because that's not what people tour America for.

[H-Town Man]

Exactly. They did the home work for us. They saw the value in creating urban out door breathing space, why not emulate them?

ExActly, exactly!!!!!

Cars took our downtown pedestrians away. We need urban features that draw then back.

I know you are not proposing just sitting back and waiting for them to come are you? Or just just filling in the population density while creating retail deserts? Its easier to develop with growth in mind than to build and then correct mistakes.

huh????

That is not how things work.

If you read back I said you build with interaction in mind. The same way the city provided incentives that attracted skyhouse, and the others planned for downtown they can do the same around a square with tightly detailed specifications for the ground floor facing the square.

You don't guess at the ingredients, you lure them.

Guessing it's what the city is doing now with its plans for the shopping district

the city has developed parks, it has never delved into urban squares.

As I mentioned above, market square is a park but not a square. A square can be a park but not all parks are squares. A square must be intimately tied to its surroundings which are very pedestrian friendly. Preston, Milam, Travis and Congress are not little intimate streets you casually cross. They are all major thoroughfares with 4 lanes of traffic.

Yes main street functions as a square, but it is so narrow.

discovery green is more Central Park than Madison Square.

Furthermore, just adding retail won't make an area a square. Houston planners are very poor at getting projects to interact with each other. They would line westheimer with projects from Pasadena to El Paso but not one of them would interact. The projects between Highland Village and Uptown are perfect examples.

expect a truly urban development for Houston??? We are talking about Houston Texas right???

I don't get it? Why does ask of that have to happen? Why is that land a must? Have you seen all the emptiness on the east side? That kills four birds with one stone:

1. Creates a point of interest that would help define Houston and create a point of interest for tourists.

2. Give downtown the best chance of attracting major retail.

3. Attract more residential downtown.

4. Most importantly, it would get rid of a ton of lots

Totally disagree.

First off, we don't have any squares yet, and secondly we have to grow with the city not wait for dysfunction then try to remedy it. Our car centric way of life is already way too expensive to remedy.

You build the darn thing in an empty spot downtown. You woo macys back, you lure more residential to the area, businesses attract more businesses, maybe another anchor will take interest, and you go from there.

 

Too much here for a point-by-point response. But... how is the city going to have "tightly detailed specifications for the ground floor facing the square" if it doesn't have zoning? If the streets surrounding Market Square are too wide for pedestrian interaction, what square on the east side of downtown is not surrounded by streets this wide? And what squares in the cities you mentioned are not surrounded by streets this wide? Also, can you give me examples of places where a city took empty lots and said "this lot shall be a square" before there was any development around it, and it actually evolved into a successful public square?

[H-Town Man]

I don't get it? Why does ask of that have to happen? Why is that land a must? Have you seen all the emptiness on the east side? That kills four birds with one stone:

1. Creates a point of interest that would help define Houston and create a point of interest for tourists.

2. Give downtown the best chance of attracting major retail.

3. Attract more residential downtown.

4. Most importantly, it would get rid of a ton of lots

 

 

It's not a must, but it is surrounded by major landmark buildings spanning Houston's urban history. It is also very centrally located. You seem to think that the main factor for a square is having retail, but plenty of famous squares have little or no retail. I think a block like this, if it were possible, would make a much more successful square than building out in open space and hoping new development coalesces around it.

[HoustonIsHome]

It's not a must, but it is surrounded by major landmark buildings spanning Houston's urban history. It is also very centrally located. You seem to think that the main factor for a square is having retail, but plenty of famous squares have little or no retail. I think a block like this, if it were possible, would make a much more successful square than building out in open space and hoping new development coalesces around it.

On the contrary, I have been saying the opposite.

When you guys keep going on and on about market square I keep repeating that just having stuff near doesn't mange the area a square.

Im the one who keeps saying its the sum of the parts and how they interact with each other that makes it a good square.

I disagree with you because the block you propose would be in the exact same situation as Market Square, i.e. it will not have that close in intimate feel of a square because it will divided by four busy streets.

You guys seem to think the square is the central part only. The square includes the inner square and the outer square of buildings.

Busy streets inbetween the inner and outer squares = failed square

[HoustonIsHome]

Too much here for a point-by-point response. But... how is the city going to have "tightly detailed specifications for the ground floor facing the square" if it doesn't have zoning? If the streets surrounding Market Square are too wide for pedestrian interaction, what square on the east side of downtown is not surrounded by streets this wide? And what squares in the cities you mentioned are not surrounded by streets this wide? Also, can you give me examples of places where a city took empty lots and said "this lot shall be a square" before there was any development around it, and it actually evolved into a successful public square?

All off the questions you asked are answered in the posts above.

[Sky-guy]

Main street is still the number one convergence street for public transportation and downtown has by far the highest daytime population of any area in Houston.

A huge percentage of the busses dump passengers on main street.

Westheimer and Montrose is rather the sleepy in comparison.

Westheimer and post oak world probably be the worst intersection for a square in all of Texas.

Squares are anti car and you suggest taking the most heavily car dependent corner in all of the southern United States and building a square there?

Most highly functional squares are blocked off to cars altogether or have narrow slow moving car lanes.

Downtown already has the high concentration of public transportation, it us surrounded by fairly well developed neighborhoods and the through car traffic on the east side of downtown isn't as hazardous as post oak.

A block or two of traffic can easily be removed without much notice because many already don't go all the way through.

Try blocking off any spot along Westheimer and see how that goes. Blocking westheimer at post oak would be kind closing off uptown's Aorta. Leaving it open would result in a drive by square.

Why would anyone want to improve downtown and build the square 6 miles away next to a huge enclosed mall?

Enclosed malls are highly suburban, white squares are highly urban features. i don't get it.

You are taking one feature (highly travelled areas) and ignoring a dozen others.

Westheimer and post oak had the density but it fails in every other category.

Uptown had the makings of a modern central business district, but urban it is not. The only business district which feels as urban as Downtown is TMC.

HoustonIsHome, I partially agree with you. A town square would not be ideal in Uptown. At least not today in Houston. I was in SF this past summer and I spent about 5 hours in Market Sqare. The traffic was horrendous (Thank God I was walking) and it probably is many days. Especially during the rush hour parts of the day in a city w/ 4+ million people. What I'm trying to say, is that a square would not fail if placed in an area with very little, if any, pedestrian activity. A square is what will, in fact, help bring the pedestrian activity. If the city of Houston were to make a town square today, it would be in downtown, probably market square. I think that in 7-10 years from, the best place to put a town square, that would be extremely successful, is at the Post Oak/San Felipe intersection either where the Calufornua Pizza kitchen is currently, or across the street, almost next door to the Astoria. Here's why:

-BLVD Place: defineatly going to add at least some pedestrians to the area.

/Residential nearby: (the Astoria, Hannover, etc.) will provide more need for a square for the nearby residents.

-Almost everyone I know who has come to visit Houston, has stayed in Uptown, I mean where else would you stay? Downtown, mabey. But it doesn't give that welcoming urban feel like other cities. No one will stay in the med. center unless they're here for something medical related. Not Greenway. The only place that is nice to stay when visiting houston, is Uptown. It has Good food/entertainment/shopping in the area. It would work really well to have a square on uptown, at that location, especially that by then the area will also look great with the gables tower going up and the dense feel the area is going to have in 7/10 years. if it became something like union square in SF, with retail/hotel/Resi, that would be perfect. I can imagine a "BLVD Square" in uptown in a few years. the only problem I can think of is the lack of public transit.

[H-Town Man]

All off the questions you asked are answered in the posts above.

You'll have to pardon me, but I am not finding these answers.

[Sky-guy]

HoustonIsHome, I partially agree with you. A town square would not be ideal in Uptown. At least not today in Houston. I was in SF this past summer and I spent about 5 hours in Market Sqare.

Forgive me, I meant Union Square

[htownproud]

it sounds like no one can disagree with you, so just for clarification--you want something like the Woodlands, Sugar Land, and City Center squares plopped down in DT with big box retail and the sort (with of course narrower surrounding streets and historic, wow monuments)?

[Sky-guy]

it sounds like no one can disagree with you, so just for clarification--you want something like the Woodlands, Sugar Land, and City Center squares plopped down in DT with big box retail and the sort (with of course narrower surrounding streets and historic, wow monuments)?

 

Who are you asking?

[HoustonIsHome]

it sounds like no one can disagree with you, so just for clarification--you want something like the Woodlands, Sugar Land, and City Center squares plopped down in DT with big box retail and the sort (with of course narrower surrounding streets and historic, wow monuments)?

Sugar land and The Woodlands come close, but they are still car centric. It would be nice if they included a better public transportation component

Yes, narrow streets or blocked off streets help make better squares.

And it's not a matter of not disagreeing, I said what I was proposing is an urban square, a place of heightened pedestrian activy. I said from the start that Market Square doesn't create that feel so it doesn't mange sense bringing it up unless you propose blocking off Preston, Milam and Travis, and I know that would never fly. The only places reduced car traffic would work would be places where it is already reduced (near Main Street Square, next to Minute Made Park, South East Downtown. Its not an agree or disagree thing. Travis won't be shutting down any time soon and having to cross done of the busiest streets downtown isn't creating what I proposed- the feel of an urban square.

[HoustonIsHome]

You don't think Downtown can create something along the lines of Market street but more reliant on buses and rail? And something with Downtown as a destination in mind?

Not just another darn park. Something that identifies just as much with the surroundings as it does with whats in it.

[H-Town Man]

Lots of great squares with a busy street on one or more sides. Union square in NY, Madison Square in NY, Water Tower in Chicago, Trafalgar in London. I agree they can't all be busy though.

[HoustonIsHome]

Lots of great squares with a busy street on one or more sides. Union square in NY, Madison Square in NY, Water Tower in Chicago, Trafalgar in London. I agree they can't all be busy though.

That's why I said Discovery Green has had missed opportunity. It has only one street with real traffic. But it has nothing but concrete walls all around.

Market square would be nicer if Milam and Preston was more like congress and if those streets were not all so heavy with traffic.

Union Square in SF has a busy street too, but like you said, its still not all busy streets. I think that is the Problem Cleveland its having with their Tiwn Square too. It is surrounding by a perfect mix of buildings but it is bisected by busy streets.

[kylejack]

Sugar land and The Woodlands come close, but they are still car centric. It would be nice if they included a better public transportation component

Yes, narrow streets or blocked off streets help make better squares.

And it's not a matter of not disagreeing, I said what I was proposing is an urban square, a place of heightened pedestrian activy. I said from the start that Market Square doesn't create that feel so it doesn't mange sense bringing it up unless you propose blocking off Preston, Milam and Travis, and I know that would never fly. The only places reduced car traffic would work would be places where it is already reduced (near Main Street Square, next to Minute Made Park, South East Downtown. Its not an agree or disagree thing. Travis won't be shutting down any time soon and having to cross done of the busiest streets downtown isn't creating what I proposed- the feel of an urban square.

 

If pedestrian traffic is increased in the area, then car traffic will be increased as well, thereby eliminating one of your requirements. If you create a big draw for people to go to South East Downtown, for example, then people will drive their cars near by so they can get to this pedestrian utopia. But wait, cars in the area ruin the square for you. You're creating an unsolvable equation.

[HoustonIsHome]

If pedestrian traffic is increased in the area, then car traffic will be increased as well, thereby eliminating one of your requirements.

not necessarily. You don't have to drive there. Thousands of people park somewhere else and ride the train to TMC or to the sports complexes so driving right up to something is still thinking in the past.

If you create a big draw for people to go to South East Downtown, for example, then people will drive their cars near by so they can get to this pedestrian utopia.

they can, but this utopia would also include

Tourists in nearby areas, tourist from other areas, residents in the immediate area (remember the area is growing rapidly), and residents who come in from other areas by PT.

But wait, cars in the area ruin the square for you. You're creating an unsolvable equation.

like I said, you don't have to drive to get there, and even if you did, you can park near and walk or take public transportation. You do know that just about every city has these things right?

I don't know what you are taking about unsolvable problem. You mean to tell me you have never taken the train to minute Maid or Reliant?

I don't know why you are making this so difficult. People use public transportation and walk everyday.

The numbers on park And ride per day is like tens of thousands. The rail is at 35k plus, all together metro carrys 400k. I don't see what's so complicated

[kylejack]

not necessarily. You don't have to drive there. Thousands of people park somewhere else and ride the train to TMC or to the sports complexes so driving right up to something is still thinking in the past.

Those two places are a good example of exactly what I'm talking about. Busy streets, huge parking garages and parking lots. Things which are not allowed in your town square model. This is a car town and making a draw for people necessarily makes it a draw for motorists.

[H-Town Man]

That's why I said Discovery Green has had missed opportunity. It has only one street with real traffic. But it has nothing but concrete walls all around.

Market square would be nicer if Milam and Preston was more like congress and if those streets were not all so heavy with traffic.

Union Square in SF has a busy street too, but like you said, its still not all busy streets. I think that is the Problem Cleveland its having with their Tiwn Square too. It is surrounding by a perfect mix of buildings but it is bisected by busy streets.

Sounds like it would be easier to narrow two streets on Market Square than to start from scratch somewhere in east downtown.

[HoustonIsHome]

Sounds like it would be easier to narrow two streets on Market Square than to start from scratch somewhere in east downtown.

Which two? I cant imagine narrowing any of them. Travis and Milam handles traffic to and from 45 along with a ton of metro buses, so it is kinda sandwiched in a busy area already.

[HoustonIsHome]

Those two places are a good example of exactly what I'm talking about. Busy streets, huge parking garages and parking lots. Things which are not allowed in your town square model. This is a car town and making a draw for people necessarily makes it a draw for motorists.

I don't want to be rude but are you familiar with these places?

TMC has far far far less parking than any comparable employment center in Texas. Why do you think the rail is so heavily used in TMC? Most workers park at Smithlands and ride the rail in. That's how urban centers work, and like it or not that is how core centers in Houston is heading as it gets more and more dense.

As for the Stadia downtown you are mistaken too. The streets on that side of town are sleepy compared to Smith, Louisiana, Milam, Travis, Fannin, San Jac.... Plus there are not adequate parking as you imply. Its a mess during huge events.

Have you try riding the rail when Houston is having a big sporting event? The flood of people is crazy.

A draw for people may be a draw for motorist, but I will reiterate, these people need not need to drive IN the square to get to the square. They may be any of the 200,000 people who work downtown or the 400,000 people who ride metro or the 200,000 people who live within 2 miles of downtown or the millions who visit each year

[H-Town Man]

Which two? I cant imagine narrowing any of them. Travis and Milam handles traffic to and from 45 along with a ton of metro buses, so it is kinda sandwiched in a busy area already.

 

I don't want to be rude, but are you familiar with this place? Preston right now has two lanes, Congress has three. Get Congress to two and we should be set. I can see the city doing this much easier than I can see it embarking on a new square project in southeast downtown.

[Texasota]

Yeah, I'm sorry, but the idea that traffic is bad around Market Square is bad (from a pedestrian persepective) is absolutely insane. It *can't* be that bad. Even if there's a relatively constant flow of traffic in the area (and there usually isn't) there are stop lights at every intersection. That both calms traffic and provides protected crossings at every corner of Market Square. 

[HoustonIsHome]

I don't want to be rude, but are you familiar with this place? Preston right now has two lanes, Congress has three. Get Congress to two and we should be set. I can see the city doing this much easier than I can see it embarking on a new square project in southeast downtown.

I am in that area just about everyday. And to me its busy. I am usually along Milam in the mornings (9ish) and Travis in the afternoons (5ish) and both are heavy with traffic and I cant imagine them with less lanes.

Congress I could see with less lanes.

Preston too. But Travis and Milam seems really busy to me.

[HoustonIsHome]

Yeah, I'm sorry, but the idea that traffic is bad around Market Square is bad (from a pedestrian persepective) is absolutely insane. It *can't* be that bad. Even if there's a relatively constant flow of traffic in the area (and there usually isn't) there are stop lights at every intersection. That both calms traffic and provides protected crossings at every corner of Market Square.

I don't think I said traffic is bad (I might have, my memory is not what it used to be). I think streets like Louisiana, Smith... have bad traffic.

Milam and Travis has heavy traffic because of 45. Again where market square sits is not as lazy as the east dude if downtown. I cross streets on the east side without more than a glance. West of Main is much busier

[Montrose1100]

I would really like to see all 4 blocks of Montrose @ Westheimer redeveloped to include a cohesive "square" plaza with a huge LED rainbow beaming across the intersection from Aladdin to the Specs strip center. So, an open square plaza with fountains on opposite sides. A big open gathering space with tall palm trees, places for vendors during pride, underground parking, a boutique mid-rise hotel over looking the intersection, and mid-rise apartments surrounding the rest of the square with ground floor retail/restaurant space.

 

Of course all are welcome, and the rainbow should not be "just a gay thing", but an everybody thing. It should represent all the colors of the racial spectrum, and religious, a monument to the diversity shared not only by our city but our whole world. With a plaque that reads "Diversity - Unity above everything else". 

 

I feel like this is the center of the neighborhood and really one of the last stretches of urban westheimer that has yet to be fully developed.

 

Sorry for the fantasy.

[H-Town Man]

I am in that area just about everyday. And to me its busy. I am usually along Milam in the mornings (9ish) and Travis in the afternoons (5ish) and both are heavy with traffic and I cant imagine them with less lanes.

Congress I could see with less lanes.

Preston too. But Travis and Milam seems really busy to me.

I thought we had established that many great squares have busy streets on one or two sides. Market Square has two busy streets and two smaller streets. This should be workable. Yes, the east side isn't busy now because there's not much there, but what will happen when more development comes along?