Some seem to think Houston doesn't take pride in its appearance. Thoughts? (Arp: apartments, renters)

[theSUBlime]

Originally Posted by jfre81

"In the city limits" here can mean 25 miles from downtown though. The city limits is pretty much just a political/tax boundary. And within this you also have former industrial sites which probably should not be developed. That figures into why we have the so-called "black hole" south of 610 along 288. So this is one limitation we do have. That, and the fact that people aren't as keen on living east of Houston and closer to the refineries and chemical plants as they are in commuting even further out northward or westward.

So what limits to other cities that are supposedly prettier have? Sure, there's NYC mostly on islands and San Francisco on a small peninsula. Density developed there out of necessity. But what about Chicago? You've got the lake on one side but on the other side is the flat, wide-open Midwest. Thus, Chicagoland has sprawled out halfway to Rockford.

That's exactly part of the problem though, Jfre. Many other cities are much more exclusive BECAUSE of their boundaries. You also have to remember that there are quite a few Chicago's suburbs that are just as dense as some of the Sunbelt cities (if not denser), though there are gaps in development, there are not as many as there are here.

[jfre81]

Originally Posted by theSUBlime

That's exactly part of the problem though, Jfre. Many other cities are much more exclusive BECAUSE of their boundaries.

If they're not actual physical boundaries they don't mean much, not with Texas' lax annexation laws.

It's not like the clutter along I-45 looks any better in League City or Dickinson.

[TexasTheKid]

Originally Posted by jfre81

If they're not actual physical boundaries they don't mean much, not with Texas' lax annexation laws.

It's not like the clutter along I-45 looks any better in League City or Dickinson.

1960 between 45 and 249 is well outside the city limits, and it seems to be where all the ratty apartments and strip malls go to die.

The city only took to the annexation frenzy when it needed to increase its tax base to support services that those who used the services didn't pay for. When a 'burb becomes dense enough and large enough to become a parasitic financial burden on the host city, I say it only makes sense for the city to absorb it and exact some compensation for services rendered. Kingwood and Clearlake residents use Houston city streets too, don't they?

It's funny when you consider the political demographic of those types of 'burbs most likely leans pretty heavily to the right. A lot of the people on the right complain about the freeloaders on the welfare system getting goods and services they haven't paid for, yet they put up a fight when the city of Houston wants them to pay for goods and services they had been using using for free.

I digress... The point was the city borders make little difference. They're in place for taxation purposes only. The limits do little to curb organic growth. It is what it is.

[theSUBlime]

Originally Posted by jfre81

If they're not actual physical boundaries they don't mean much, not with Texas' lax annexation laws.

It's not like the clutter along I-45 looks any better in League City or Dickinson.

Well, it means something...I was kinda going along the lines of what TexasTheKid said. Some people don't want to live in suburbs and some people don't want to live in the city. Some people want to be close to both and well, in Houston it might take a little more planning than a smaller place (like 7x7 San Francisco). It may not make a difference in the area growth, but it makes a difference in the housing choices people are making, and perhaps the attitudes some people exhibit.

[N. Buck]

I was just in Houston last week (had a great time!) and we brought a friend with us who grew up in Philly. She was shocked at the number of abandoned strip malls on 45-S coming from FM1960. I didn't have anything to say except that I believe it is due to people moving FAR from the city (ie. Woodlands) or moving back to the city (urban hipsters). Everything in between was cut off as neighborhoods developed and it was no longer necessary to go to 45 to shop for a computer when there was a new store that opened up right in front of the neighborhood.

As far as pride is concerned, are Houstonians just too busy to clean it up? Honestly no one is going to do anything with those abandoned car lots that sit off of 45. While in Houston I decided to view the city with "tourist eyes" rather than my "yay-I'm-home eyes". I saw so much traffic it made me sick. Philly only has 2 major freeways. No loops, No US Highways, No toll roads (close to the city) No HOV lanes. Granted, about half of the traffic heads over the bridge to New Jersey, but I think a large factor is the public transportation system. I think that when you sit in traffic for 2 hours a day you become numb to the amount of blight around you and when you get home you are too tired to lobby for change.
Imagine hoping on the train and turning your stressful 1.5 hour comute into 45 minutes with the ability to get work done while you travel! During the weekend you decide to take your family downtown to see the rodeo and you find that while driving you notice the city looking kinda rough. On Monday you send out a few emails while you are on your way to work (while on the train) and advocate for a better looking city. Yeah! Traffic makes people numb to blight. BEEF UP METRO!
I guess I will get used to it though. Wifey and I are moving back in 7 weeks! I'm very excited. And I hope to become a METRO regular.
So enough with my rambling. Those are my peanuts.

[AK123]

Originally Posted by AK123

...what I really dislike is the way some parts of town are just massive apartment complex after apartment complex after apartment complex.
Sometimes I wish a developer would buy up a big chunk of them and turn it into single-family home subdivisions.

Originally Posted by jfre81

Would you move there if they did? If they can't sell it, it won't get built.

Gulfton, Fondren Southwest etc. are kind of a no-man's land, too far out for the people who want the urban experience but too close in for those who want suburbia. You'll see the inner loop fully gentrified before anything happens out that way.

I don't know about that. It's got Bellaire just east of it, Lamar Terrace and Briar Meadow nearby. The location would be much more convenient for getting into town than it is from most suburbs.

Would I move there? Maybe not right now with small children and wanting great schools, but as a more adventurous younger person with no children or as an empty-nester needing housing that's closer to the Medical Center or Galleria area than the suburbs are, yeah I might. It would be much like this subdivision near Gulfton, except newer. And with big chunks of the apartments gone, the area would immediately be better.

You'd be surprised at how many empty-nesters I see moving into NEW homes in the suburbs. I don't get it. Both homes on either side of me are that way. I'm thinking, why are they here? And what do they tell me? "We wanted something newer we wouldn't have to do renovations on, but we can't afford $500k+ in the city." A lot of older people don't want to deal with renovations or problems that come along with older homes. Plus, they don't want to walk up all those flights of stairs in these new three-story townhomes being built in town.
My parents are looking to move into Houston and share the same sentiments. I keep trying to get them to look at my former area, Briargrove Park, but they don't like the older homes (that often need work/maintenance) and that don't have the open floor plans. They looked around Montrose, Bellaire, and even some three-story places in Memorial Heights near downtown (which were nixed for being multiple levels). Still looking...

[jfre81]

Originally Posted by AK123

Would I move there? Maybe not right now with small children and wanting great schools

Therein lies the problem. Of course, a "great" public school is still a public school and it's all about the lowest common denominator in the end.

The adventurous youngsters tend to want a more urban experience than a subdivision.

[AK123]

Originally Posted by jfre81

Therein lies the problem. Of course, a "great" public school is still a public school and it's all about the lowest common denominator in the end.

But a lot of empty-nesters don't care about the schools. They just want something newer that doesn't cost a fortune. Of course with their tax base, the schools would start to improve.

Originally Posted by jfre81

The adventurous youngsters tend to want a more urban experience than a subdivision.

I didn't. Six months out of college, I bought a townhouse in Briargrove Park. It's a suburb but it's inside of the Beltway, so it was in the city enough for me and convenient to the Galleria area and everything along Westheimer. Most of my friends did similar, in Houston and Austin. We all lived in apartments/dorms all through college, and were worn out on that high-density lifestyle.

[EasilyAmused]

School taxes on homeowners 65+ are frozen. So actually their taxes are worth less than us younger working smucks who get it hiked annually.

Edit: I looked up the school tax deal.

[AK123]

Originally Posted by EasilyAmused

School taxes on homeowners 65 and up are frozen or they don't pay? I forget.

Hmm, not sure. But, my parents aren't yet 65 and have been empty-nesters for a long, long time.