Rice Military Information & Developments

[musicman]

What kind of daily amenities on the west side are you referring to, that are lacking at Rice Military?

Perhaps, grocery store? I don't mind driving a little bit far, so it's no big deal for me.

more options in general but if you like to drive then no problem.

[Marksmu]

First,

A townhome owns the land and yard upon which his house is situated. If there is no maintenance fee there is often a contract entered into between the parties that share "improvements"

If the townhome has common walls and common roofs, etc. some townhomes have contracts for maintenance as well as colors, gardneing, etc others do not. If there is no contract for maintenance on each half, walk away. I have a friend who bought a nice $300K townhome in a trendy area near Washington, that had massive foundation problems. The builder went out of business, then the homeowners were left to fend for themselves. Since there was no contract, they had shared a common insurance policy to protect themselves from this. The other owner, filed the claim first, and got $49,000 to fix the problem. However, he didnt fix it, and bought a new car. My friend went to the insurance company,and they refused to pay again on the same policy. his only recourse was to sue the neighbor, who a few weeks later went bankrupt. So, my friend has a townhome that is falling on on one wall, that he cant afford to fix, that insurance paid to fix, but was not fixed, and now he cant do anything about it.

So be careful. I always strongly advise people to never share common walls, b/c you lose the ability to repair your house. Its for some people, but not me. I prefer more sound investments. Townhomes land values also go up more slowly than standalone homes. What you save upfront, you lose on the back end.

Though I have never used a buyers agent, I know of one at www.westurealestate.com

Its a good site for general houston info, and she is an exclusive buyers agent. *** I have not used her, only her sites info, so I make no recommendation.

Greetings,

This is great forum, I am glad I found it.

I have been following home prices in Houston with great interest in the past couple of years. Finally the wait is over, I am finally ready to purchase my first home.

The areas that I am interested in are Rice Military and Memorial-77079 (east of Beltway).

They both close to I-10, which is one of my criteria and within my less than 300K budget.

Due to my budget, I believe my choices are limited on both location.

I realize the two areas are opposite to each other, one is a dense area with townhomes, the other is houses with big yard and mature trees.

Currently, I am leaning towards Rice Military, partly because the thought of taking care of house with yards is daunting for me. The townhome is newer, so perhaps, it is easier to maintain. It is also closer to places that I usually go as well.

This brings up to my questions.

1. For townhome, do you own the land? I believe so, however I would like to confirm this with you.

2. If townhome shares wall and rooftop and there is no maintenance fee. How do the owners fix their homes in case of issues? My concern is this could potentially cause an issue with my neighbor.

3. From HAR.com, I notice that Rice Military's price/square foot has fluctuated over the years. Is that the trend that you see in the future as well? Although this is going to be my only home (thus people say it is not an investment), I still would like to see decent appreciation in years to come.

4. Townhome quality. I understand it varies between townhomes. When I see townhome, it looks like it is not build as well as house. I am not a structural engineer, so this could be well off. I am wondering if a townhome could last 50-70 years easily just like a house, with proper maintenance, of course.

5. How do you find exclusive buyer agent?

I learn a lot by just reading this forum, and I intend to continue learning from you.

Thanks in advance.

[Blackfield]

First,

A townhome owns the land and yard upon which his house is situated. If there is no maintenance fee there is often a contract entered into between the parties that share "improvements"

If the townhome has common walls and common roofs, etc. some townhomes have contracts for maintenance as well as colors, gardneing, etc others do not. If there is no contract for maintenance on each half, walk away. I have a friend who bought a nice $300K townhome in a trendy area near Washington, that had massive foundation problems. The builder went out of business, then the homeowners were left to fend for themselves. Since there was no contract, they had shared a common insurance policy to protect themselves from this. The other owner, filed the claim first, and got $49,000 to fix the problem. However, he didnt fix it, and bought a new car. My friend went to the insurance company,and they refused to pay again on the same policy. his only recourse was to sue the neighbor, who a few weeks later went bankrupt. So, my friend has a townhome that is falling on on one wall, that he cant afford to fix, that insurance paid to fix, but was not fixed, and now he cant do anything about it.

So be careful. I always strongly advise people to never share common walls, b/c you lose the ability to repair your house. Its for some people, but not me. I prefer more sound investments. Townhomes land values also go up more slowly than standalone homes. What you save upfront, you lose on the back end.

Though I have never used a buyers agent, I know of one at www.westurealestate.com

Its a good site for general houston info, and she is an exclusive buyers agent. *** I have not used her, only her sites info, so I make no recommendation.

Thanks for the insights and link, they are very informative.

Although I realize there is always such unfortunate stories everywhere, your friend's story makes me think twice about buying townhome.

I have to give this some serious thoughts.

[sowanome]

jm1fd,

Thanks for the insight. The loud train sound, was that from the horn sound or the actual sound of the train passing by?

If you could hear the train passing by, it is pretty bad.

Can anybody give me an idea how frequent the train passes by during the weekday, weekend, and the night?

I am easily awaken as it is, I do not need train noise to make it worse, .

I own a townhome in that area (between Feagan and Floyd) and the key is the quality of construction of the townhome. Train noise is rarely an issue if the home is constructed pretty well and most of the homes are built with the front of the homes being very well insulated. I can say that I've never had an issue hearing the television, but you will hear the noise faintly, therefore it was not a big deal while I lived there. Good luck and check out Spotts, Buffalo Bayou and Cleveland Parks in that area...really unique.

[Reefmonkey]

Blackfield,

I live in Ashford Forest, NE corner of Dairy-Ashford and Memorial. Since I have filed an HCAD tax protest, I currently have access to actual sale prices in my neighborhood. Average sale price over the last two years for a 1-story, 4 bedroom, 2200 sq.ft. home is $272K.

Note if you are looking at Ashford Forest, there are parts to it. The part south of Buffalo Bayou has lower-priced houses and is zoned for HISD. The part I am in is north of the bayou and zoned for SBISD (same district Rummel Creek is in). My part blends seamlessly into Nottingham Forest - you wouldn't even know they are considered different neighborhoods.

[Reefmonkey]

I am done with the club life, . It is nice to be close to restaurants and Memorial park.

Blackfield,

If that's the case, I really recommend west side. Up until 2006 I was an innerlooper, living in West U. I had outgrown the club scene, but part of me dreaded moving to suburbia where the restaurant choices would be Joes Crab Shack or Macaroni Grill.

Fortunately, moving to the west side didn't turn out to be that way. There are all sorts of great little non-chain restaurants right around me. Even walking distance, there are two indian restaurants, two japanese restaurants, two casual italian restaurants, one upscale italian, a lebanese restaurant, a Russian cafe, a Vietnamese restaurant, and more I'm probably forgetting. In about a 5-mile radius there are several good mediterranean restaurants, including Cafe Caspian a great Persian restaurant, several great Japanese restaurants (I go to japan at least twice a year, so I know good japanese), a great Spanish restaurant with tapas and more called Rioja, french restaurants, you name it, the west side has any kind of ethnic food you can get in town, and for some genres the choices are better, because of the far Bellaire chinatown, korean enclave on Long Point, Indians and middle easterners who settled out here, etc.

I still sometimes miss running at memorial park, just for old times sake, but Terry Hershey Park and Barbara Bush park, and Bear Creak park together have everything Memorial has and more.

[Modernceo]

Im used to using Comcast Cable modem, however Id like to know what else is out there that I can use.

Ill be moving into a townhome in Rice Military in the next week or two and CANT have much internet downtime..

Btw, I looked and it seems as if ATT's Uverse isnt available in the neighborhood.

[jm1fd]

Im used to using Comcast Cable modem, however Id like to know what else is out there that I can use.

Ill be moving into a townhome in Rice Military in the next week or two and CANT have much internet downtime..

Btw, I looked and it seems as if ATT's Uverse isnt available in the neighborhood.

What about DSL? They're now allowing you to get DSL without having to pay for a phone line....quite handy. I'm quite happy with my DSL service and even happier with my bill...HALF what it was with ComCrap.

[77007]

Would like to get your feedback on land prices in the Rice Military / West End area. Is $30/sq.ft a reasonable price or is that high or on the low side.

Will be interesting to get feedback on this question now and 5-6 years later once all the development on Washington has taken place, and Yale is redone with the new Walmart and the fancy gas lamps on the repaved bridge across the Bayou!!!

[TheNiche]

Would like to get your feedback on land prices in the Rice Military / West End area. Is $30/sq.ft a reasonable price or is that high or on the low side.

Will be interesting to get feedback on this question now and 5-6 years later once all the development on Washington has taken place, and Yale is redone with the new Walmart and the fancy gas lamps on the repaved bridge across the Bayou!!!

You're going to have to be more specific in terms of location and the size of the parcel.

But I feel like I have to point out that once the Wal-Mart is built, the entire neighborhood (and the Heights) will be locked into a veritable nuclear winter of traffic and carcinogenic auto fumes. Nobody will be able to get in or out, and when the next hurricane hits, the runoff from the parking lot will cause epic flooding. It'll be like Hurricane Katrina for white people; they will run amok, set everything ablaze, a firestorm shall ensue, and the whole of the concurrently-flooded neighborhood will burn. And when its all over, land prices in the area will have fallen precipitously (in spite of the high rate of inflation).

[s3mh]

That is a good point about traffic. Walmart and the feeder will bring the level of service for Yale and Heights at I-10 to an F. It will be very difficult to get a traffic impact analysis approved for new development after Walmart goes in for any development that will impact that area. It is impossible to provide any real mitigation without having to widen Yale, which would cost millions. But for now, Ainbinder is getting over $50 per sq foot from the City (i.e. taxpayers--you and me) for a right of way to extend Koehler from Yale to Heights. Speculation is that this amount per sq ft is about what Walmart is paying to acquire the land from Ainbinder. Thus, Walmart is paying about 20-30x what they usually pay for land acquisition in the burbs, meaning it will take at least a decade for that store to break even, if ever. $30-35 per sq ft is about what HCAD is valuing land. Larger parcels will probably get more per sq ft so the strip mall developers can execute their plan to make the West End and the Heights indistinguishable from FM 1960.

[RedScare]

A perfect example of the above post can be found on Montrose, where traffic counts are roughly quadruple that of Yale, yet land prices are in excess of $50 psf. As you can see, traffic counts cause land values to plumm....err....nevermind. Maybe the above post was simply made up.

[TheNiche]

That is a good point about traffic. Walmart and the feeder will bring the level of service for Yale and Heights at I-10 to an F. It will be very difficult to get a traffic impact analysis approved for new development after Walmart goes in for any development that will impact that area. It is impossible to provide any real mitigation without having to widen Yale, which would cost millions. But for now, Ainbinder is getting over $50 per sq foot from the City (i.e. taxpayers--you and me) for a right of way to extend Koehler from Yale to Heights. Speculation is that this amount per sq ft is about what Walmart is paying to acquire the land from Ainbinder. Thus, Walmart is paying about 20-30x what they usually pay for land acquisition in the burbs, meaning it will take at least a decade for that store to break even, if ever. $30-35 per sq ft is about what HCAD is valuing land. Larger parcels will probably get more per sq ft so the strip mall developers can execute their plan to make the West End and the Heights indistinguishable from FM 1960.

WHITE PEOPLE KATRINA! WHITE PEOPLE KATRINA!

[RedScare]

BTW, I was at the Target on Sawyer/Taylor yesterday and today. The parking lots, as one would expect, were packed with Christmas shoppers. Why is this relevant? Because the parking lots in front of Target and Petsmart contain 870 spaces! The proposed Walmart will only have 664. I had no problem whatsoever driving up to or away from the store. The only inconvenience was the fact that I had to park much farther away than normal. But, street traffic was fine.

Keep in mind that there are also parking lots for Staples, Chilis and the banks, adding another 387 parking spaces. There are another 500 or so for the apartment complex. This development has parking for approximately 1,750 vehicles, yet somehow s3mh thinks that a Walmart parking lot one-third the size will cause gridlock.

Want proof? Here's a link to the Target shopping center layout. Add up the parking for yourself.

http://www.propertycommerce.com/flyers/flyer44.pdf

[barracuda]

^ To be fair, there is a steady flow of traffic in and out of this development coming from both directions on Sawyer/Taylor. Anyone who regularly uses the bike trail will notice this when trying to cross the intersection to Spring Street, regardless of the time of year. In my experience, it's the busiest street one must cross along the entire Heights bike trail. Yale would come second, with the traffic being more dispersed due to the distance from any major source. But regardless of the traffic caused by the development, the street system near Target seems able to handle the load, and most of the traffic appears to be limited between I-10 and Washington Ave.

For the Walmart development, having both Yale and Heights along with Washington and I-10 should provide enough opportunity for traffic dispersal without overloading the system. I would expect a similar situation to the Target development, with most traffic being isolated between I-10 and Washington Ave. I wouldn't want to live on Koehler or Center St near this development and deal with the added traffic on a daily basis, but the folks living there were apparently okay moving in adjacent to an active railway and near a noisy stone lot, so maybe they are used to the noise, and the added traffic load won't be much of a bother. There are plenty of alternative routes, such as Bonner or taking Koehler to Patterson to alleviate a heavy concentration of traffic.

[samagon]

BTW, I was at the Target on Sawyer/Taylor yesterday and today. The parking lots, as one would expect, were packed with Christmas shoppers. Why is this relevant? Because the parking lots in front of Target and Petsmart contain 870 spaces! The proposed Walmart will only have 664. I had no problem whatsoever driving up to or away from the store. The only inconvenience was the fact that I had to park much farther away than normal. But, street traffic was fine.

Keep in mind that there are also parking lots for Staples, Chilis and the banks, adding another 387 parking spaces. There are another 500 or so for the apartment complex. This development has parking for approximately 1,750 vehicles, yet somehow s3mh thinks that a Walmart parking lot one-third the size will cause gridlock.

Want proof? Here's a link to the Target shopping center layout. Add up the parking for yourself.

http://www.propertyc...ers/flyer44.pdf

Hey there, don't forget, Target it only open for a certain number of hours, forcing all shoppers to shop within that timeframe, however the WalMart will have some random people shopping at 3am cause they aren't forced to shop at normal business hours.

So while Target has to fit 60,000 cars* down that one street every day within business hours, Walmart will only have to fit 20,000 and that will be at all hours of the day.

* I made the 60,000 number up based on numbers S3MH has used in the past to figure how many cars will visit the Walmart, and since there are 3x as many parking spots, I decided there are 3x more cars. S3MH logic is easy!

[Angostura]

$30-35 per sq ft is about what HCAD is valuing land. Larger parcels will probably get more per sq ft so the strip mall developers can execute their plan to make the West End and the Heights indistinguishable from FM 1960.

Currently HCAD seems to be valuing land along the Washington corridor at around $35 (see, for example, here, which is where the Counter and Givrals are located). Residential land between Washington and Memorial seems closer to $40. Camp Logan is $65 or so.

I personally don't believe that "the developers" have any sort of nefarious plan to make over this area to look like FM 1960, and land prices are a good reason why they won't. Presumably the most disagreeable aspects of strip mall and big-box development are the large setbacks and surface parking lots. Assuming there's no change to the minimum setback rules (which aren't as bad as they used to be) and the minimum parking requirements (which are), the only way this type of development ceases to become the most practical is an increase in land prices.

Based on some admittedly cursory Google research, mutli-level parking costs around $10,000 to $15,000 per space. A surface parking space is about 300 s.f., so at $10/s.f. for land, that's $3000 per space, so pretty much all parking will be surface lots. But when land values start to get north of $30-40/s.f. the cost balance starts to shift in favor of multi-level.

And how do we get land value up to those levels as quickly as possible? Densification. So everyone who's against "suburban-style development" ought to thank a townhouse-builder. After all, the alternative to suburban development is urban development. Next time you see a bungalow get knocked down and a 10-unit townhouse complex with a central driveway goes up in its place, find the developer and say, "Thank you for keeping my neighborhood from looking like FM 1960!"

[s3mh]

Currently HCAD seems to be valuing land along the Washington corridor at around $35 (see, for example, here, which is where the Counter and Givrals are located). Residential land between Washington and Memorial seems closer to $40. Camp Logan is $65 or so.

I personally don't believe that "the developers" have any sort of nefarious plan to make over this area to look like FM 1960, and land prices are a good reason why they won't. Presumably the most disagreeable aspects of strip mall and big-box development are the large setbacks and surface parking lots. Assuming there's no change to the minimum setback rules (which aren't as bad as they used to be) and the minimum parking requirements (which are), the only way this type of development ceases to become the most practical is an increase in land prices.

Based on some admittedly cursory Google research, mutli-level parking costs around $10,000 to $15,000 per space. A surface parking space is about 300 s.f., so at $10/s.f. for land, that's $3000 per space, so pretty much all parking will be surface lots. But when land values start to get north of $30-40/s.f. the cost balance starts to shift in favor of multi-level.

And how do we get land value up to those levels as quickly as possible? Densification. So everyone who's against "suburban-style development" ought to thank a townhouse-builder. After all, the alternative to suburban development is urban development. Next time you see a bungalow get knocked down and a 10-unit townhouse complex with a central driveway goes up in its place, find the developer and say, "Thank you for keeping my neighborhood from looking like FM 1960!"

The FM 1960-ification is starting at Walmart and will proceed along the new feeder road on both sides of I-10. There are large chunks of land that will become prime targets for big boxes and strip centers on both sides of I-10 (where White Oak bayou isn't in the way). This FM-1960-ification will also proceed down the major thoroughfares. Studemont has a big tract by I-10 (just north of Arnies) that is going to be big boxed very soon.

The 10 unit townhouses crammed into single family lots on streets with 21 ft streets is the idoit's densification. The streets cannot handle the cars that will not fit in the small garages of each unit, much less the parking needed for visitors. The smart and efficient way to promote densification is to do it on the larger tracts. That way you can plan for sufficient multilevel parking for residents, visitors and customers of mixed use businesses instead of leaving it to chance whether the streets will fill up with extra cars (it is just a matter of time before parking makes Shady Acres unbearable). Thus, with the Walmart tract, you could have put up housing for several hundred without any impact on parking. Instead, the FM 1960 development model pushes residential into an area that is not suited for densification due to narrow streets.

[sowanome]

And how do we get land value up to those levels as quickly as possible? Densification. So everyone who's against "suburban-style development" ought to thank a townhouse-builder. After all, the alternative to suburban development is urban development. Next time you see a bungalow get knocked down and a 10-unit townhouse complex with a central driveway goes up in its place, find the developer and say, "Thank you for keeping my neighborhood from looking like FM 1960!"

AMEN

[JJxvi]

Thus, with the Walmart tract, you could have put up housing for several hundred without any impact on parking. Instead, the FM 1960 development model pushes residential into an area that is not suited for densification due to narrow streets.

I imagine you could do a lot of awesome things, but would you make as much money on it?

[brian0123]

The FM 1960-ification is starting at Walmart and will proceed along the new feeder road on both sides of I-10. There are large chunks of land that will become prime targets for big boxes and strip centers on both sides of I-10 (where White Oak bayou isn't in the way). This FM-1960-ification will also proceed down the major thoroughfares. Studemont has a big tract by I-10 (just north of Arnies) that is going to be big boxed very soon.

I predicted this about a year or two ago on this site and was shouted down by several people (I think Niche and I got into it for awhile ). This Walmart development further proves my point. I moved away from Washington and into Midtown three years ago in order to avoid another FM 1960 setting (I grew up along 1960... so I recognized the signs along Washington). Three years since I moved, traffic is far worse along Washington, more shopping centers have sprung up, a Walmart is moving in (as well as other retailers not yet mentioned), and the entire avenue is stuffed with cars and crowds that the infrastructure will never be able to handle. I think in the next five years, you'll see more shopping centers spring up, some "fancy" restaurants will be replaced by more generic chain restaurants, traffic will get worse, and other retailers will move in while the "scene" moves elsewhere. I wouldn't be surprised if an American Eagle or something like that opened up as well. Some people will love the new look of the street, others will hate that the place is so suburban.

[lwood]

You're going to have to be more specific in terms of location and the size of the parcel.

But I feel like I have to point out that once the Wal-Mart is built, the entire neighborhood (and the Heights) will be locked into a veritable nuclear winter of traffic and carcinogenic auto fumes. Nobody will be able to get in or out, and when the next hurricane hits, the runoff from the parking lot will cause epic flooding. It'll be like Hurricane Katrina for white people; they will run amok, set everything ablaze, a firestorm shall ensue, and the whole of the concurrently-flooded neighborhood will burn. And when its all over, land prices in the area will have fallen precipitously (in spite of the high rate of inflation).

Try Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People.

[JJxvi]

They'll need to run bulldozers from Westcott to Houston Ave, 2 blocks north of Washington and 2 blocks south of it at some point in the future (not to mention bulldoze several brand new developments that are definitely urban) to get anything resembling "suburban" development on Washington. I'm not sure I can think of any particular property on Washington Ave right now that can be described as such, nor any chunk of land of any suitable size. A 1960 size retail center would require blocks and blocks on Washington, maybe the WalMart could be considered "suburban" development in some people's world, but of course, it isn't actually on Washington Ave at all.

[JJxvi]

I mean I guess at some point there will be (GASP!) more chains and things moving into centers, but it would take a hell of an apocalypse to change Washington Ave into something other than what anyone would describe as "urban" at this point.

[s3mh]

I imagine you could do a lot of awesome things, but would you make as much money on it?

It is not a question of whether mixed use developments can make money. They can. City Centre is quickly filling up, even after opening in the middle of the recession. There is a very high premium on the Post Oak apartments on W. Gray (the ones above Cyclone Anayas, etc.). West Ave preleased most of its retail space.

Ainbinder originally wanted to do a large mixed use development (including theater, residential, fitness club). But he chickened out when the economy tanked. Fact of the matter is that Ainbinder is a stip mall guy. Always has been, always will be. It takes a different level developer with substantial financial resources to get a mixed use development done. Strip malls and big box developments are cheaper and have less financial risk. So, the answer is yes, you can make excellent money on a mixed use development. The problem is that very few developers can get it done. It is far easier to tilt-wall up a bunch of pads and call in the chains than to build a residential/commercial/retail development. And when the City is ready to put 6 mil up for infrastructure, you can count on the strip mallers to win every time.

[brian0123]

I mean I guess at some point there will be (GASP!) more chains and things moving into centers, but it would take a hell of an apocalypse to change Washington Ave into something other than what anyone would describe as "urban" at this point.

To be clear, when I say 1960ish I don't mean exactly like 1960... I mean a scaled down version. In fact, I don't view Washington as very "urban". It already has a ton of small strip malls w/ parking lots fronting them. You can't really walk anywhere because everything is so spread out up and down the avenue (hence the reason for the "Wave"). Also, it is one main road (Washington) that everything branches from. When I lived along Washington... I had to drive everywhere, and the only place I could really walk to was the corner drug store. Even then, I was almost run over each time I crossed the road.

[RedScare]

To be clear, when I say 1960ish I don't mean exactly like 1960... I mean a scaled down version. In fact, I don't view Washington as very "urban". It already has a ton of small strip malls w/ parking lots fronting them. You can't really walk anywhere because everything is so spread out up and down the avenue (hence the reason for the "Wave"). Also, it is one main road (Washington) that everything branches from. When I lived along Washington... I had to drive everywhere, and the only place I could really walk to was the corner drug store. Even then, I was almost run over each time I crossed the road.

If Washington Avenue was never urban to begin with, since it has always been one long street, then neither Walmart, nor any of the developments built along it, have changed it whatsoever. You and s3mh have taken to blaming all of the development for suburbanizing Washington Avenue, when in fact you admit that it has always been what it is. What is even more strange is that you and s3mh are complaining of the effects of DENSIFICATION! If you do not like density, and it's resulting traffic, quit crying that we need more urban spaces! Washington Avenue is exactly what happens when a locale becomes more urban. More people live there, shop there, and visit there.

I have to say that I am amused at your claim to almost being run over on Washington, when you ended up in Midtown which has at least 4 major thoroughfare that can cause the same result.

[samagon]

If Washington Avenue was never urban to begin with, since it has always been one long street, then neither Walmart, nor any of the developments built along it, have changed it whatsoever. You and s3mh have taken to blaming all of the development for suburbanizing Washington Avenue, when in fact you admit that it has always been what it is. What is even more strange is that you and s3mh are complaining of the effects of DENSIFICATION! If you do not like density, and it's resulting traffic, quit crying that we need more urban spaces! Washington Avenue is exactly what happens when a locale becomes more urban. More people live there, shop there, and visit there.

I have to say that I am amused at your claim to almost being run over on Washington, when you ended up in Midtown which has at least 4 major thoroughfare that can cause the same result.

well, they are also suburbanizing west gray around Shepherd as well.

[brian0123]

If Washington Avenue was never urban to begin with, since it has always been one long street, then neither Walmart, nor any of the developments built along it, have changed it whatsoever. You and s3mh have taken to blaming all of the development for suburbanizing Washington Avenue, when in fact you admit that it has always been what it is. What is even more strange is that you and s3mh are complaining of the effects of DENSIFICATION! If you do not like density, and it's resulting traffic, quit crying that we need more urban spaces! Washington Avenue is exactly what happens when a locale becomes more urban. More people live there, shop there, and visit there.

I have to say that I am amused at your claim to almost being run over on Washington, when you ended up in Midtown which has at least 4 major thoroughfare that can cause the same result.

I love density (that's why I moved to Midtown). I'm just saying Washington Avenue will only be able to handle so much before it pops like 1960 did and people will be sitting in a long line of cars down the street. I moved to Midtown because I believe Downtown/Midtown are better suited for handling density. Yes, we have major thoroughfares running through the neighborhood... but lights are timed, crosswalks have good signals, we have decent sidewalks, the streets are very wide and one way, streets are also in nicely connected grid instead of dumping onto one main street, and I can hop on the light rail instead of getting in my car. To me, it's night and day from when I lived on Washington.

[Highway6]

I'm just saying Washington Avenue will only be able to handle so much before it pops like 1960 did and people will be sitting in a long line of cars down the street.

Washington is 3 miles long. It is in the middle of the urban grid with a major intersection every 3/4 miles.

While it could be considered a major urban road, considering it parallels I-10 not 1/2 a mile away, it really isn't

1960 is 13 miles from 290 to 45, even longer if you count past 45. It is a major radial thoroughfare that everyone who lives within a few miles of must use in order to get to 290,45,249, or Hardy in order to get to another part of town.

Comparing Washington traffic to 1960 traffic is really really dumb, for realz.