Some seem to think Houston doesn't take pride in its appearance. Thoughts? (Austin: real estate, apartment complex)

[dh281hou]

Originally Posted by TexasTheKid

What's with the haphazard placement of the dividing barriers separating I-45 North's HOV lane from the mainlanes? Those things zigzag all over the place. Didn't anyone think to measure how long they needed to be rather than just start putting them in all willy-nilly? That was such a simple thing to get right that it boggles my mind it was done so randomly. Couldn't the city afford a tape measure?

Thats not the City of Houston's responsibility-its either Metro or TXDOT.

[dh281hou]

[quote=C2H (ComingtoHouston);9980780 Houston on the other hand, many of the freeways (exept West Loop, and Katy Freeway) appear muddy and old. Anyone ever pay attention to the medians in the middle of 45 separating the HOV lanes by University of Houston at Main Campus? Next time you travel, i would suggest you do. You will see the paint peeling. Looks atrocious.[/quote]

Several of these posts on here are suggesting that the City of Houston is the culprit on the way various Interstates/US Freeways like 45, 59, etc look like asthetically-the city is not responsible for the upkeep on these roads-they are the responsibility of TXDOT which like other state highway departments is in a budget crunch/cutback.

[TexasTheKid]

Originally Posted by dh281hou

Several of these posts on here are suggesting that the City of Houston is the culprit on the way various Interstates/US Freeways like 45, 59, etc look like asthetically-the city is not responsible for the upkeep on these roads-they are the responsibility of TXDOT which like other state highway departments is in a budget crunch/cutback.

So... the city has absolutely zero to do with the maintenance and construction of highways within its borders? I find that claim suspect. I'm sure the reason 59 through Montrose and Rice looks nice (as nice as a freeway can) is because the city wanted it that way. I'm sure TxDOT couldn't care less about aesthetics as long as the road is functional. And, I've always seen METRO as an extension of city government. Is that wrong? Isn't that part of the reason the bus line doesn't go up to the Woodlands or out to Galveston - it's too far from the city limits?

[jmunks]

I went to Oklahoma a few weeks ago for the first time, and I was in som much awe about the cleanliness of the city (Tulsa). even in the poorer areas, I couldn't find an old tossed tire, a bubblegum wrapper, glass from a car accident or a grafitti painted building. I think that that's our biggest problem. Here, it appears that even city employees doesn't leave debris during service pickups and lawn manicuring.

[houstoner]

Originally Posted by jd2008

They call frontage roads here "feeders" which makes me laugh every time I hear it because it makes me think of some obese Houstonian pulling into a Whataburger off the highway stuffing his face, but I digress.

Funny image, I guess, but frontage roads are called feeder roads in every part of Texas I've lived in and visited, not just in Houston.

[houstoner]

I'll add my $.02.

Houston is too big. Too spread out. There's simply too much of it. If it were smaller, more contained, all the attendant stuff people complain about would be contained as well. As it is, it's more noticeable there because there's no rhyme or reason to how the city has developed, and keeps developing. There are very few real boundaries, no real districts. Strip centers, apartment complexes, subdivisions, etc. abound everywhere in all directions. Enforcing building codes and similar codes on the books would be a step in the right direction in helping the city appear more aesthetically cohesive. Because I don't think "pretty" is the problem exactly, it's that the city lacks cohesiveness so everything looks jumbled, odd, and messy. There's the attitude, 'well, it's my property so I can do what I want with it' rather than a tendency towards civic-mindedness so business and land owners run amok and unchecked there just like the developers. The fines for littering need to be higher and actually enforced. There is very little support for historic preservation.

You don't realize how numb you get to the way the city looks until you leave and go someplace else (outside the region because I think all of Texas is like this really, to lesser degrees), so I think that's why some residents may not see it.

[sevfiv]

^I agree with the numbness factor - there's also a bad case of collective amnesia here when it comes to preservation.

[Spade]

Originally Posted by finnisher

Funny image, I guess, but frontage roads are called feeder roads in every part of Texas I've lived in and visited, not just in Houston.

It's primarily used in Houston though. In Austin and Central Texas for instance, they mostly call it service roads or access roads.

[dv1033]

Originally Posted by finnisher

I'll add my $.02.

Houston is too big. Too spread out. There's simply too much of it. If it were smaller, more contained, all the attendant stuff people complain about would be contained as well. As it is, it's more noticeable there because there's no rhyme or reason to how the city has developed, and keeps developing. There are very few real boundaries, no real districts. Strip centers, apartment complexes, subdivisions, etc. abound everywhere in all directions. Enforcing building codes and similar codes on the books would be a step in the right direction in helping the city appear more aesthetically cohesive. Because I don't think "pretty" is the problem exactly, it's that the city lacks cohesiveness so everything looks jumbled, odd, and messy. There's the attitude, 'well, it's my property so I can do what I want with it' rather than a tendency towards civic-mindedness so business and land owners run amok and unchecked there just like the developers. The fines for littering need to be higher and actually enforced. There is very little support for historic preservation.

You don't realize how numb you get to the way the city looks until you leave and go someplace else (outside the region because I think all of Texas is like this really, to lesser degrees), so I think that's why some residents may not see it.

Houston is very much a cohesive city and it is either hearsay or lack of knowledge that causes one to say otherwise. Houston's inner core contains all of our museums, major universities, biggest shopping districts, nightlife districts, etc. Not to mention that we have 3 100,000+ person employment centers within close proximity of one another plus a 60,000+ and 20000+ people employment center thrown in the mix. Houston is very much centered on the inner core as you will notice the heavy inbound traffic in the morning and outbound in the evening.

I somewhat agree to the comment about numb to it, as it applies to anyone who spends a significant time in one place. However, I recently traveled to Seattle and Vancouver and noticed many of things that people complain about here. There were ugly telephone poles, ugly strip centers, lots of trash, etc. I think some places have the advantage of having natural beauty to help out because Seattle and Vancouver are absolutely beautiful cities but share many of the negative characteristics that Houston gets knocked for.

[houstoner]

Originally Posted by dv1033

Houston is very much a cohesive city and it is either hearsay or lack of knowledge that causes one to say otherwise.

It's neither. It's many years' lived experience, all of it inside the loop, that causes me to say so. I'm talking overall, the general impression of the city and how it looks. Aesthetically, there is no singular look to Houston and for a long time there has been no concerted effort to make things look good or "match," either to each other or to their surroundings. In Houston, places look better inside than out. There are a host of reasons for the city's appearance. I think its size and that it's over-developed are two important reasons. Houston has natural beauty. It's just hidden. Rather than maximize what it's got with its trees, for example, the city bulldozes wooded areas and throws buildings up anywhere willy-nilly. It creates wide roads six lanes across instead of two. An effort to make Houston fit to its natural surroundings, such as growing the city around its bayous, seems to have been abandoned when the automobile was introduced, so there's another reason for you. And so on. And I have to agree with whoever said Houston doesn't seem to know whether it wants to be urban or suburban, another problem related to its growth. Urban planning in Houston seems to consist of a string of bad decisions. Your examples of Seattle and Vancouver serve to prove my point that part of it is size; size matters. The difference is in degree. I don't really understand how pointing out other cities' shortcomings is useful, though, if improving Houston is the goal. Asking ourselves, "What are those cities doing right that Houston can learn from?" seems to be more the way to go.