I read comments about Houston, at the end of articles that claim that Houston is one of the best places to live or has a great skyline or in general portrays Houston in a positive light, and all the comments are so negative. People think our city is ugly, fat, and generally unattractive. Why is everybody always picking on us?
It's mostly just one section of Houston but they don't know about the rest of the parts so they just project and generalize and lump them all into one.
Youve never been out of this city I assume? Houston is pretty meh. But so is Dallas. Only reason Houston is worth living in is because it's affordable and relativity good place to raise a family. Prime examples of beautiful US cities: Seattle, So. Cal. (SD and LA), San Fran, Denver, etc
Just remove all of the crap on 45 from downtown to the woodlands. That would make it look a little more appealing.
dallass is the stuck up girl that won't talk to you ATX is the bad ass party girl everyone loves Houston is the fat ugly girl that once you get to know her you see she's got a great personality.. In a nut shell..
Because the city limits are 600 square miles and then in addition that is all the unincorporated areas that is technically under city territory. That's why Cypress, Spring, Katy (outside the city), Atascocota, etc., look ugly. Thats why a lot of the city does. If these areas were broken up into smaller cities, and say the city limits for Houston don't go past Beltway 8, then these areas woule be easy to maintain. You would see more sidewalks, better streets, and more local pride I think. I saw it living in DFW with all their cities. They have sidewalks all over, better roads, more landscaping, etc. It makes the otherwise bland rolling prairie DFW sits on look interesting. I do see more landscaping done around the Houston area lately and it is starting to make a difference. I always drive on the Katy and now and some spots, I can't even see the feeders because the trees are all grown. It looks way better. There has also been better utilization of the bayous in both the city and suburbs. Houston just did not really care for aesthetics until very recently, imo.
Houston is geographically the largest city in the country. There are areas that are ugly and areas that are nice. Overall Houston is in the middle of the major cities as far as how pretty it is. It doesn't have the beautiful downtown area that Chicago has, but it has a lot of attractive areas outside of downtown. Also part of it is that people are jealous of the economy in Houston. Plus every city is criticized. I live in Chicago right now and you wouldn't believe the level of criticism this city gets from people living here.
Actually OKC and Jacksonville are larger geographically. Amd Chicago is a good example of a city that is flat, but used great planning to be aesthetically pleasing. That lake helps too.
I was off at school in Lubbock from 1999 to 2004 and since I've moved back here, I've seen some pretty serious growth in making Houston more aesthetically pleasing. The difference between 20 years ago and now (which includes the creation of MMP and the Toyota Center) is night and day. You take the good with the bad as far as that goes... look at Washington. It needed to be "spruced up" a bit, but the gentrification robbed it of all of it's charm. I'd rather walk down that street now than in 2004 though.
Not true. There are some very ugly parts of LA, SF and other major cities. In Seattle there are a lot of people that complain about the weather. Houston isn't really any uglier than most other major cities. The economy is exceptional, I don't think people living in the city realize how lucky they are.
It is ugly and now its getting expensive to boot. One of the main reasons I'm probably moving to Washington State.
That has something to do with West Coast cities. Even most of the hoods or highest crime areas out there (especially LA) looks aesthetically pleasing with manicured lawns and tall palm trees.
Outside of downtown, Chicago is not very aesthetically pleasing at all. The Lake and Mag Mile/GC is very beautiful but it is a tiny part of the city. There are huge areas of Chicago that are about as ugly as any place you will see.
Well let's see... it's flat so there is no natural scenery. No mountains, hills, large bodies of water. Everything is too spread out so there is a lack of density. Drive down the average road in Houston and chances are you aren't looking at much. Severe lack of true landmarks, great parks, etc. Lax zoning laws, so ugly buildings and strip malls pop up throughout the city Dearth of public transportation Everything interesting/unique has to be indoors because it's too damn hot outside.
No zoning/lack of planning + total dependency on automobiles = ugly ass city Not to mention the natural terrain is either mud or standing water in most places. Plus it's too hot, so everything is built to be tucked away indoors.
I think a lot of that has to do with the decline in the city in general, but the bones are pretty good. Things like alleyways and putting power lines down those instead of the city streets is something that cleans up the whole area. If Chicago was growing like Houston, I don't think there would be a question. And I also think that's why Houston is changing so much recently. So many folks moving here from all over aren't real fans of that "rough rider" look Houston gave off.
I've never lived outside of Houston and I have done little traveling, but Houston is awesome. I don't think about cities in terms of them being ugly because I usually witness them through video, photography, or someone else's experience. People live to put things down and make it as if their opinion is the defining element other's should perceive as truth. Beauty and ugliness exist in harmony, maybe that's too deep for this thread.
