Why is it that Houston seems to have more of an "energetic vibe" than Dallas? (San Antonio: tenant, moving to)

[atadytic19]

Originally Posted by godrestores

No you missed my point. I was disproving your suggestion that multiple cities with their own grid cannot form a larger cohesive grid for the whole urban area. Chicago & Miami successfully did what Houston did not.

People have a million and one excuses for why Houston looks the way it does and the real reason is poor planning. That's it.

No, I did not miss your point.
Your point is irrelevant.

The Miami metro area is squished between the Atlantic and the everglades.they have no choice to develop in a linear fashion.

Montrose angled their streets how they angled them, that is said and done, and has zero to do with Houston

[godrestores]

Originally Posted by atadytic19

The Miami metro area is squished between the Atlantic and the everglades.they have no choice to develop in a linear fashion.

...and Chicago?

[dallasboi]

Originally Posted by atadytic19

I'm not talking about city limits so that point is irrelevant.

NY urban core is much larger than Houston's.

It all works toward the idea that SIZE never matters....But Houstonians use that as a crutch to always feel superior in comparison to Dallas.


And then get mad because 610 is smaller than Loop 12...

[atadytic19]

Originally Posted by dallasboi

It all works toward the idea that SIZE never matters....But Houstonians use that as a crutch to always feel superior in comparison to Dallas.


And then get mad because 610 is smaller than Loop 12...

Size matters when we are looking at the same thing.when looking at urban cores NY and Chicago are larger than Houston which is larger than Dallas.

In terms of chaotic street layout even Stevie Wonder can see Houston is more regular than Dallas. It is not even a competition.
The poster is just flat out wrong. Dallas just doesn't have the consistency that Houston does

Houston:
https://images.fineartamerica.com/im...n-turnpike.jpg

Dallas:
https://images.fineartamerica.com/im...n-turnpike.jpg

[ParaguaneroSwag]

Originally Posted by dallasboi

...Hmmm...The core of Houston IS larger than the core of NY..

SIZE does not matter so my point STILL stands


And I beg to differ...

NY’s core is a lot larger than the area in blue there. Queens is rarely covered. That literally left out the entire Bronx. And a large chunk of the area in the blue in Houston’s is not in the core. Seriously have you ever stepped out of Texas? That would explain a lot

Your girlfriend lied to you. Size does matter.

[Dallaz]

^^^^^^Phahahahaha




Also…..


Bishop Arts, Lower Greenville, Deep Ellum, Knox St, have all existed for over a century. The major new one from scratch is Victory Park/Harwood/Uptown areas. Generally, north of Woodall Rodgers. Just sayin’

[Mr. Clutch]

Originally Posted by oil capital

Just to educate the clueless on this board, the following MLB ballparks are very much in the central city/CBD

Chase Field - Phoenix
Busch Stadium - Saint Louis
Comerica Park - Detroit
Coors Field - Denver
Great American Ballpark - Cincinnati
Minute Maid Park - Houston
Oriole Park at Camden Yards - Baltimore
Petco Park - San Diego
PNC Park - Pittsburgh
Progressive Field - Cleveland
Rogers Centre - Toronto
Target Field - Minneapolis

Kansas City and Tampa Bay are planning moves to downtown stadiums and a number of others are in very urban locations, while not technically downtown or CBD (think Wrigley Field, Fenway Park).

Lol. Anyone who seriously thinks having a baseball stadium in the suburbs is better than having one in the urban core doesn't understand anything about baseball, economics, or business. I can't tell you the number of times in both DC and Houston I've hit up a baseball game after work with a client or potential client to talk business and potentially make a deal. It's easy to do because in both cases, the stadium is right there.

That's way harder to do in DFW because of the location of the stadium. I know several people on the Dallas side (you know, the side with the money) who don't go to Rangers games because they're not trying to drive to Arlington during rush hour. And that's the only way to get there unlike urban stadiums. Some like to use Truist in Atlanta as an example of a suburban stadium that works, but Truist is at least close to the business center of Atlanta where they can still pick up "day-of" traffic and much more accessible than Globe Life. It also would still be better if it were in the core.

The only reason that Globe Life is where it is, is money. It has nothing to do with space/land, planning, desirability, or any of that other fluff. It was a money call - that's it. Arlington ponied up because they wanted it there and the Rangers didn't want to tick off Ft. Worth/Tarrant fans. No one outside of Arlington would agree that a baseball stadium surrounded by parking lots in Arlington is better than a stadium in Dallas (or even Ft. Worth's) urban core.

Where's the new stadium Las Vegas is building for the A's going? Answer - the urban core. And when MLB expands in the future you can bet they won't be going to a city planning to build a suburban stadium.

[oil capital]

Originally Posted by dallasboi

Those stadiums you named are TRADITIONAL Stadiums......Thats why the other 18 teams didn't think it was a MUST to mimic because FOOTBALL became America's PAST TIME.....

TRADITIONS are broken sometimes.

So....what I really meant was nobody is bragging on having stadiums downtown but Houstonians....Most emerging cities are WOKE and see the importance of space in the CBD for LIFE activities.not monolithic domes the size of a whole district. The general reason it WAS a good idea was because it brought life to the city.

Now it has been realized that residential options and retail that encourage it are far more beneficial for sustaining that bustle that supposedly would come with a quiet GIGANTIC stadium.

No they are not TRADITIONAL stadiums. Quite the opposite. And as I already noted, the two new stadiums currently being developed are going to downtown areas.

And once again, after being exposed, you try to move the goalposts and change what you meant to say, and tell tall tales trying to avoid reality. It's a silly overstatement to say that Houstonians "brag" on having stadiums downtown; they are merely pointing out it is a plus that Houston has, and many in Dallas wish they had. Rest assured people in every other city with a downtown baseball stadium will refer to it as a positive for their downtowns as well, because people like the benefits of downtown baseball stadiums, both major and minor league.

[LocalPlanner]

To respond to a much earlier question from PS, I define "charming" as having at least the veneer of historical structures and businesses with an "only in [insert applicable city]" atmosphere. Less "corporate" feeling, I guess.

[oil capital]

Originally Posted by dallasboi

..EACH...YELLOW...SPOT...IS...A...DIFFERENT...BUILD ING
!!!!.....

Then you should be able to tell us what the buildings are that are being planned. Or point us to a DMN article describing them (Steve Brown does NOT miss a chance to publish an article about new buildings planned in downtown Dallas), or show us where they are in Dallazz's Dallas Core thread.

But of course you can't, because there are no buildings planned, at least not yet.

You should read the items you post more carefully. Again, when you click on the yellow spots, it says Hunt is "planning". It gives no indication of what Hunt is planning. For all we know, Hunt might be planning a baseball stadium.