U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which of the three models of infill best describe the city you live in?
Manhattanization 9 31.03%
Vancouverization 14 48.28%
Brusselization 6 20.69%
Voters: 29. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-09-2016, 06:34 AM
 
619 posts, read 442,324 times
Reputation: 700

Advertisements

Viral I agree with both you and gunion.
Yes that house seems very out of place.
But like gunion said it is out of place because of poor planning.

I do agree though that house would be better suited in Sam Houston park.

The area where that house is located was a residential area (used to be called Cotton Hill or something like that). It was never really impressive, but the entire neighborhood was demolished to build Houston center's version of the city of the future. If that is not the definition of Brusselization I don't know what is.

Crashes in the market resulted in a failed vision and thus area rebounded only after the conversion of a sea of parking lots into Discovery Green.

As for your link to Main Street, I have no idea how so many interesting buildings survived.
The giant glass boxes are progressively marching up Main from Main Street square. I am hoping they do not progress passed Preston. I am a fan of the 609 Main building, however I don't think it fits in North of Preston.
The same builder is building a residential tower in market Square and that looks to be fitting in beautifully.

As for the Ashby Hirise, it is still on. Not dead yet. Don't know why towers are springing up in that location, but the Museum District and Montrose are developing skylines on their own in between Downtown and TMC. Midtown looks to be joining the game too with new proposals from an Australian developer, but I much rather the mid rise developments that's has occurred over the last 20 years ( developments like Post midtown and Midmain)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-09-2016, 07:46 AM
 
Location: Katy,Texas
3,508 posts, read 1,707,992 times
Reputation: 2217
Didn't they put another scraper in The Woodlands 2014. I expect a few in Katy and Sugar Land by 2020. We want skylines too!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2016, 03:35 PM
 
470 posts, read 288,052 times
Reputation: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by atadytic19 View Post
Viral I agree with both you and gunion.
Yes that house seems very out of place.
But like gunion said it is out of place because of poor planning.

I do agree though that house would be better suited in Sam Houston park.

The area where that house is located was a residential area (used to be called Cotton Hill or something like that). It was never really impressive, but the entire neighborhood was demolished to build Houston center's version of the city of the future. If that is not the definition of Brusselization I don't know what is.
But that is where the crux of the issue lies; was demolishing the neighborhood a lack of foresight, or was it an attempt to re-scale the urban fabric to accommodate the population? See, if Houston was to be a large, burgeoning city, and all the houses in that neighborhood were tiny, 1-story shot-gun shacks, then edits have to happen in order for the fabric to be suitable for the population; the historic buildings that fit the scale are preserved. Now, one can say that new developments could have taken place in another area, but you never know, it could be that the old-neighborhood was occupying land prime for urban development.

That's why I find arguments that talk of Houston's supposed lack of care of history to be quite weak; a lot of the time, the arguments are solely emotion based, with no substantive quantification of how much was torn down, or whether other cities tore things down as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by atadytic19 View Post
Crashes in the market resulted in a failed vision and thus area rebounded only after the conversion of a sea of parking lots into Discovery Green.

As for your link to Main Street, I have no idea how so many interesting buildings survived.
The giant glass boxes are progressively marching up Main from Main Street square. I am hoping they do not progress passed Preston. I am a fan of the 609 Main building, however I don't think it fits in North of Preston.
The same builder is building a residential tower in market Square and that looks to be fitting in beautifully.
Sounds like Houston did indeed have a plan, it just couldn't be realized, as per market status. If that is the case, then it could be that this whole talk of the city "lacking foresight, or being careless" in regards to urban planning, might be a bit premature (although one can make a case for Houston having those qualities as it pertains to economic base).

As for the surviving historic buildings on Main, it is like I said; the city won't tear down decent buildings that fit the scale of the city. There is a lot of old historic buildings on the northern and eastern ends of downtown.

Quote:
Originally Posted by atadytic19 View Post
As for the Ashby Hirise, it is still on. Not dead yet. Don't know why towers are springing up in that location, but the Museum District and Montrose are developing skylines on their own in between Downtown and TMC. Midtown looks to be joining the game too with new proposals from an Australian developer, but I much rather the mid rise developments that's has occurred over the last 20 years ( developments like Post midtown and Midmain)
Interesting. But, in trying to classify Houston, I felt that one should look at the ultimate goal of the urban planning, rather than focusing on how it looks like now. Like, right now, it might seem random to have a high-rise sticking out in Midtown, but you never know, that could be the first of many high rises in that neighborhood to connect downtown with the TMC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2016, 05:49 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
5,286 posts, read 4,168,830 times
Reputation: 4350
Quote:
Originally Posted by VIRAL View Post
But that is where the crux of the issue lies; was demolishing the neighborhood a lack of foresight, or was it an attempt to re-scale the urban fabric to accommodate the population? See, if Houston was to be a large, burgeoning city, and all the houses in that neighborhood were tiny, 1-story shot-gun shacks, then edits have to happen in order for the fabric to be suitable for the population; the historic buildings that fit the scale are preserved. Now, one can say that new developments could have taken place in another area, but you never know, it could be that the old-neighborhood was occupying land prime for urban development.

That's why I find arguments that talk of Houston's supposed lack of care of history to be quite weak; a lot of the time, the arguments are solely emotion based, with no substantive quantification of how much was torn down, or whether other cities tore things down as well.



Sounds like Houston did indeed have a plan, it just couldn't be realized, as per market status. If that is the case, then it could be that this whole talk of the city "lacking foresight, or being careless" in regards to urban planning, might be a bit premature (although one can make a case for Houston having those qualities as it pertains to economic base).

As for the surviving historic buildings on Main, it is like I said; the city won't tear down decent buildings that fit the scale of the city. There is a lot of old historic buildings on the northern and eastern ends of downtown.



Interesting. But, in trying to classify Houston, I felt that one should look at the ultimate goal of the urban planning, rather than focusing on how it looks like now. Like, right now, it might seem random to have a high-rise sticking out in Midtown, but you never know, that could be the first of many high rises in that neighborhood to connect downtown with the TMC.
It's easily observed actually. What you do is actually visit these cities, use your eyes and observe them yourself. This is a well known tactic for those of us who have actually experienced the cities we discuss.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2016, 05:56 PM
 
470 posts, read 288,052 times
Reputation: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunion Powder View Post
It's easily observed actually. What you do is actually visit these cities, use your eyes and observe them yourself. This is a well known tactic for those of us who have actually experienced the cities we discuss.
Only except the matter of context and quantification still exists. If I see, for example, that Atlanta has more historic buildings preserved than Houston, then maybe I can hastily jump to a conclusion that Houston is too negligent of its history. Or, I could look through historic data, and see that Atlanta, in fact, had larger populations at earlier times than Houston, which, in turn, lead to more historic stock for preservation. Atlanta broke 100,000 a decade before Houston did:

Houston:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston#Demographics

Atlanta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta#Demographics
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2016, 06:01 PM
 
Location: San Antonio
5,286 posts, read 4,168,830 times
Reputation: 4350
Quote:
Originally Posted by VIRAL View Post
Only except the matter of context and quantification still exists. If I see, for example, that Atlanta has more historic buildings preserved than Houston, then maybe I can hastily jump to a conclusion that Houston is too negligent of its history. Or, I could look through historic data, and see that Atlanta, in fact, had larger populations at earlier times than Houston, which, in turn, lead to more historic stock for preservation. Atlanta broke 100,000 a decade before Houston did:

Houston:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston#Demographics

Atlanta:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta#Demographics
A small amount of time considering the gap in historic structures still standing in both cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2016, 06:21 PM
 
470 posts, read 288,052 times
Reputation: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunion Powder View Post
A small amount of time considering the gap in historic structures still standing in both cities.
1.) That small amount of time can be all the difference.

2.) There are still hidden contexts behind the appearances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2016, 10:17 PM
 
528 posts, read 453,840 times
Reputation: 446
Charlotte= Manhattanization
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2016, 07:25 PM
 
470 posts, read 288,052 times
Reputation: 151
Houston is Vancouverization disguised as Brusselization.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top