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

[oil capital]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

A major factor is the size of attendance (due to the stadium itself). Fewer games, more people per game, thus more land footprint needed (for stadium and parking / tailgating). Hard to do in the denser core areas.

All true, but see my post on the prior page: there are a ton of NFL stadiums in urban locations; relatively few in far-flung suburban locations.

[atadytic19]

We won't be around to see it, but I have seen estimates of North Texas having 30M + people.
I wonder if that does happen, will the residents there still sing the praises of spreading amenities around the metro and talking about locating things centrally in the metro?

There has to be a point when Dallas and Fort Worth realizes they each have to go back to concentrating things in their respective cores.

The shared amenities are cute for some things, the airport for example was genius. But dang, they can't do that for everything

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by oil capital

All true, but see my post on the prior page: there are a ton of NFL stadiums in urban locations; relatively few in far-flung suburban locations.

I wonder how many acquired sites decades ago when urban land was much cheaper and there may have been derelict industrial sites.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by godrestores

Too many times. And yes you and atadytic agree there, but I'm not sure why.

Neither city has a well defined grid, but e.g. if you look at a map of the northern and southern burbs of Dallas, you have entire blocks all the same size, all at right angles. This does not exist in the Houston area.

Its very regular and fairly complete. You can drive from 1960 to Missouri City on one road (with several names). You've got a set of thoroughfares, for example N-S, from downtown, you have Montrose, Shepherd, Greenbriar, Kirby, Buffalo Speedway, Wesleyan, Post Oak, Chimney Rock, Renwick, Hillcroft, Gessner, Wilcrest, Kirkwood, Dairy-Ashford, Eldridge, Highway 6. You've got similar E-W roads From Fuqua in the south to Greens Road and 1960 in the north. And there are a lot of non-arterials in a grid between these major streets. Below is the major thoroughfares map which shows the plans out into the ETJ.

https://www.houstontx.gov/planning/t...2-MTFP-Map.pdf

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by atadytic19

We won't be around to see it, but I have seen estimates of North Texas having 30M + people.
I wonder if that does happen, will the residents there still sing the praises of spreading amenities around the metro and talking about locating things centrally in the metro?

There has to be a point when Dallas and Fort Worth realizes they each have to go back to concentrating things in their respective cores.

The shared amenities are cute for some things, the airport for example was genius. But dang, they can't do that for everything

"There has to be a point when Dallas and Fort Worth realizes they each have to go back to concentrating things in their respective cores."


Says who?

[SanJac]

Originally Posted by EDS_

"There has to be a point when Dallas and Fort Worth realizes they each have to go back to concentrating things in their respective cores."


Says who?

Right? Actually the airport is about the only thing they do share. Each city already stands on its own when it comes to amenities.

[atadytic19]

Originally Posted by EDS_

"There has to be a point when Dallas and Fort Worth realizes they each have to go back to concentrating things in their respective cores."


Says who?

Common sense

[Redlionjr]

Originally Posted by atadytic19

The market drives (no pun intended) the developments in Houston.

I would bet my last dollar that the weekend vacation urbanist who cry about not feeling safe walking would never shell out the dollars to live in these urban neighborhoods.

People who live in the heights like it how it is. New Orleans is more walkable than any of these Texas Cities but you mainly see visitors out walking because New Orleans is so dang hot.

Developers know this. Caydon had big plans for a walkable section of midtown. The idea was cool but it sold poorly. Even with deep discounts the building was slow to get tenants. Why? Walkable neighborhoods, TODs or any of that stuff is just not a big sell as y'all make it out to be.

I know y'all going to attack my opinions like it was blasphemy, but Im just being realistic and have become jaded from 15 years of projects that were supposed to be game changers but ended being cancelled all together or the eventual result is a shadow of the original plans.

I know most on here live in the burbs. They complain about their commute and talk up walking everywhere, but know deep down that they would not do it. Find me 5 people who would say they would gladly go car-less in Houston even if it becomes more walkable and you would have found 5 liers. Nothing wrong with being an urban tourist, but please give up the hypocrisy

The Stockholm syndrome is strong with you. It's quite comical at this point. Houston's history of loose regulations, poor city planning, extreme growth post WW2 are the reason the city looks the way it does now.

Now if the market drives development in Houston then what does that say about Houston? Does it say Houstonians even in urban areas still want car-centric development?

And if the market drives these developments to continue building around the automobile then why would the city of Houston aim to make it more walkable and transit-oriented in the first place?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYYtc4E_6kI

This totally contradicts your statement. Care to explain? Clearly the city of Houston see's that there is some infrastructure in the city that needs to be redeveloped and focused more on pedestrians. But I'm the problem here? LOL

As far as being a weekend urban vacationist have you ever thought that maybe some people can't afford to live in places like the Heights. How can you shell out what you don't have? You sound like a uppity snob out of touch with reality with that comment. Yeah if I could afford to live in these walkable neighborhoods and if they had diverse schools with decent public education sure I would live in any of those neighborhoods in a heart beat. But that combination just doesn't exist in Houston and to be fair majority of America's major cities. There's various other reasons as to why people choose where they live especially when kids come into play. Do you have children?

Btw, whenever I'm in New Orleans I see a healthy mix of locals and tourist walking about. You gotta stop making excuses for **** poor development man. People walk!

Btw, I'm curious as to where you live in Houston?

Originally Posted by SanJac

So sidewalks and crosswalks is not good enough for you? Would you like a red carpet? Should we close off the streets for you?

What you want is manufactured walkability in a sterile environment. You don’t want a true urban, gritty, organic environment. That’s why you like Dallas’ walkable areas better than Houston. They are much closer to that Disneyland/Disney-world feel that you seem to be craving for.

Why don’t you see streets in the Heights lined with townhomes? Actually there are plenty of those type of streets but the Heights is a neighborhood filled with craftsman-era bungalows. That’s the true soul of the Heights. Unfortunately they are slowly being torn down and replaced with Victorian-era replica mansions.

I mean can I get some continuity instead of random haphazard development? Have you tried walking from that part of Heights down to White Oak? It's not pedestrian friendly. I don't want Disney world Faux urbanism, can I just get WIDER SIDEWALKS that don't look like sh*t? Is that too hard to ask for HOUSTON?

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7816...8192?entry=ttu

Look at those sidewalks? That's pathetic dude and here you are making excuses for this type of development. Wider sidewalks and not putting parking lots in front of businesses is Disneyworld urbanism to you?

Everything you described is exactly Midtown, Houston's most walkable neighborhood.

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7521...8192?entry=ttu

You think this is gritty? You think this is a true urban environment? Or is this Faux urbanism?

And I like Dallas walkable areas better than Houston's because their actually more walkable. The only walkable area that fits your description in Dallas is Uptown. And I'm not completely against Midtown Houston or Uptown Dallas either. It's better than the pockets of walkable areas in the Heights.

Which btw, Heights is one of my favorite neighborhoods in Houston. I just wish the neighborhood had a more cohesive walkable pedestrian friendly environment that's all. That and uniformity. There's some truly beautiful craftsman-era bungalows and even Victorian-era replica mansions. I'm not mad at those, it's the fact that Heights lacks the continuity in certain areas of the neighborhood. Decades of Houston's haphazard development ruined what could have been so much more better.

[SanJac]

Originally Posted by Redlionjr

I mean can I get some continuity instead of random haphazard development? Have you tried walking from that part of Heights down to White Oak? It's not pedestrian friendly. I don't want Disney world Faux urbanism, can I just get WIDER SIDEWALKS that don't look like sh*t? Is that too hard to ask for HOUSTON?

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7816...8192?entry=ttu

Look at those sidewalks? That's pathetic dude and here you are making excuses for this type of development. Wider sidewalks and not putting parking lots in front of businesses is Disneyworld urbanism to you?

You've made my point with your post. You want your "walkable" areas to be "pretty" and I guess that is your prerogative. Perhaps I'm too provincial but I see absolutely nothing wrong with the sidewalk above. It's a sidewalk and it serves its purpose. I'm all about functional.

Next time you are at Juice Land in The Heights instead of walking to Stude Park go west on the walking/biking trail. It's a trail designed for walkers. You would have walked to the very popular development on Heights Boulevard.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/x4wrrZoHV4b3BTqQ7

Crossing Heights and Yale you would eventually arrive at MKT. That's if you continued on the walking trail.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/LBKtzJkE22FWrA8H7

Had you chosen to walk North on Heights Boulevard you would have hit 11th Street and a new set of restaurants/development.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/EqwyuSxvYRq7WtZP6

Try that next time. The sidewalks won't meet your specifications but they will get you to some cool places.

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by SanJac

You've made my point with your post. You want your "walkable" areas to be "pretty" and I guess that is your prerogative. Perhaps I'm too provincial but I see absolutely nothing wrong with the sidewalk above. It's a sidewalk and it serves its purpose. I'm all about functional.

Next time you are at Juice Land in The Heights instead of walking to Stude Park go west on the walking/biking trail. It's a trail designed for walkers. You would have walked to the very popular development on Heights Boulevard.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/x4wrrZoHV4b3BTqQ7

Crossing Heights and Yale you would eventually arrive at MKT. That's if you continued on the walking trail.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/LBKtzJkE22FWrA8H7

Had you chosen to walk North on Heights Boulevard you would have hit 11th Street and a new set of restaurants/development.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/EqwyuSxvYRq7WtZP6

Try that next time. The sidewalks won't meet your specifications but they will get you to some cool places.

Quit making excuses for 4-foot sidewalks sliced up by driveways on streets lined with commercial businesses in the heart of the city. You know that this should NOT be the case.