dbigtex56

How does one determine what "its lowest level" might be? For example, the neighborhood in which I live wasn't as well maintained 20 years ago as it is today. It has been resurrected, yet it could have sunk considerably lower. "Its lowest level" would be nothing short of post-apocalyptic destruction, wouldn't it? This statement follows the same fatuous logic as "How come my keys are always in the very last place I look?". (Because you've found them! Why would you keep looking?) Communities can always be improved; does that mean we're all at our lowest levels?

Among the definitions of 'common': Vulgar; unrefined; coarse (which would explain why the common Houstonian wouldn't know about a museum.)

A midrise for the Heights (not this project) is shown in their slideshow. Any idea where that one will be located? If the illustrations are any indication, their designs seem sensitive to and appropriate for the various locations.

This ad for Anta athletic shoes was shot this past spring at Strake Jesuit in Houston. I'm one of the people you can't see in the background... It will be broadcast only in China.

The "Donnie Darko" soundtrack includes some great late '80s music: "Never Tear Us Apart" - INXS "Head Over Heels" - Tears for Fears "Under the Milky Way" - The Church "Love Will Tear Us Apart " - Joy Division "The Killing Moon" - Echo and the Bunnymen "Notorious" - Duran Duran "Stay" - Oingo Boingo

I've come up with a term to describe this unfortunate style of architiecture. Neo-Kinky: Resembling, or inspired by the artwork of Thomas Kinkade. Characterized by saccharin sentimentality, a confused, anachronistic mish-mash of architectural styles, and unconvincing faux 'natural' materials.

It'll compliment the future occupant's huge collection of Thomas Kinkade prints.

I hate to see these things going up. They attract a bad element.

It's OK if they displace low-income families. They're a charitable organization.

Corrected spelling on title from Rot Square to Root Square.

Salads, monkeys and clowns? If the manager irked me, I'd scream, "Salmonella! Monkeypox! John Wayne Gacy!", and dash out.

I see your point, and thanks for the clarification. I hope City Council wastes no time in reviewing these ordinances. In parts of the city they're unnecessary, and sometimes counterproductive. In my neighborhood (the Montrose) the ill effects are especially noticeable.

The building itself is also a 'real' reason people visit the Menil Collection. Renzo Piano is a highly regarded architect; his and Mrs. Menil's creation of a building which relates to the surrounding neighborhood has earned international interest and praise. GreatBuildings online link Menil Collection by Fondazione Renzo Piano - book review

Yes, and it's my impression that even Houston has such requirements. Anyone know what they are, and if they vary (depending on location)? Could you steer us to said ordinance(s)? Please stop before billing hours kick in. You're painting New Urbanists (whatever that means) with rather a broad brush, Red; one more suitable to battleships than portraiture. The caricature you've drawn is amusing, so long as it's acknowleged as such. The legitimate questions of how new development affects property values, and transportation, and aesthetic concerns, and lifestyle options, and return on investment, and enviromental impact, and access by pedestrians and the handicapped and anything else that might spring to mind ought to be asked about ANY [sic] and EVERY [sic] new development in our city. I might also point out that you responded to a comment about surface parking by defending parking garages against some (unattributed) slam. Quit beatin' that poor straw man! To expect investors and developers to cheerfully lose money is ludicrous, and anyone who thinks he can force them to do so is both naive and annoying. However, to show an interest in responsible development doen't rigidly define one as a New Urbanist. For some, it's considered a civic duty. Public sentiment can be - should be - powerful. We're the ones who'll have to live with the crap.

LOS ANGELES (AP)

'The Curve' is in the 1400 block of Westheimer, near Windsor and Mulberry St. In the mid-80's a neon store and several other merchants in the area installed neon signage and promoted it as the 'Neon Curve'; it was really quite flashy. There was even a neon sign which said 'Shop The Curve'. Most of the neon is now gone, but locals still refer to it as The Curve. Back to the poll - you want me to do what? Ever see "Sophie's Choice"?

I'm of the impression that the city requires a certain number of parking spaces to be provided in realtion to the square footage of any new commercial construction. If I'm mistaken, someone please correct me. If not, this well-intentioned ordinance has doomed us to the building patterns of a half century ago. And please don't buy into this whole 'free market' myth. There isn't - and shouldn't be - any such thing.

Great question, and welcome to HAIF! My feeble response is that we celebrate history where we find it in Houston. Were it not for the efforts of the local neighborhood associations, there would be even fewer historic houses.

I've given up on the Galleria; too much uninteresting walking. I'd rather take my chances on the 82 or 25 or 78, or the rail.

Tell me I'm not alone. It's difficult to decide where an elderly parent will be best cared for.

Thanks - topics have been merged. Link to parallel thread.

Yep, I can see how something like that could end a friendship!

You're welcome, and that was very gracious of you to remark on it. Most (all?) of us have entered this conversation already holding an opinion about the desirablilty of rail. Perhaps it's human nature to defend one's position rather than change it. For example, as a rail proponant, I've been hoping that no one would bring up the matter of rail's vulnerability to sabotage. Yet, it's a legitimate concern. I'm of the opinion that our lives should not be controlled by fear of terrorism. To use a cliche' which was tired five years ago, to do so "means the terrorists have won." But, golly. If I set out to commit a terroristic act, a train would be more tempting than some stupid bus. (Disclaimer: I have no plans or desires to commit terroristic acts.)

I looked it up: busses is an acceptable alternative spelling of buses. Either plural of bus is correct. Isn't it nice to know that, just this once, we can express ourselves differently without someone being proven wrong?

Park and Ride buses have only one narrow entrance, which involves climbing stairs, and fares are collected as passengers board. Trains have multiple, wide entrances flush with the boarding platform, and fares are collected prior to the arrival of the train. These features may not seem very important - especially to those who are not elderly, handicapped, or who never take public transportation, anyway - but for those of us who have ridden each, and have seen the delays and hassles caused by the intrinsically poor design of buses, we'll take the train, hands down.