- Oct. 20, 2009
- 1:00 AM
Revisiting Cite 73: Houston Traditions
This issue, published in the winter of 2008, could not sit still. It looked forward, it looked back, and then forward again. It considered the reshaping of Houston institutions including the University of St. Thomas and Texas Southern University. The Rurban Horseshoe examined the historically black neighborhoods on the periphery of the city. Rafael Longoria and Susan Rogers wrote, “Houston is still a place of opportunity and constraint, where endless possibilities and extreme limitations co-exist, and its landscape, which reflects both [Mexamerican and Dixie] traditions, is distinctive in that rural farming, ranching, and agriculture survive in the shadow of a bustling metropolis.” Finally, Joel Warren Barna provided a level-headed and still relevant analysis of the debate over the Ashby Highrise.
Table of Contents
Citings
News: Green Matters, Green Works! Gala 2007
Innovations: Computer Craft-Design Fabrication
Preservation: Tax Credits for Restoring Historic Homes
Calendar:Lectures, House Tour, and Burdette Keeland Jr. Design and Exploration Center
Features
Cracking the Egg: The University of St. Thomas Expands
By Michelangelo Sabatino
The Rurban Horseshoe: Historic Black Neighborhoods on the Periphery
By Rafael Longoria and Susan Rogers
Riding on Tradition: Houston’s Annual Rodeo Trail Ride Photographed
By Paul Hester
Builiding a Future: Texas Southern University Constructs Its Legacy
By Bruce C. Webb
Organic Gardens: The Houston Landscape Designs of Thomas Church
By Ben Koush
Erich Mendelsohn’s Cosmopolitan Vision: US Exhibition Gives This German Icon His Due
By Laura B. McGuire
Readings
Hyperborder: The Contemporary U.S.-Mexico Border and Its Future
By Abby Bussel
HindCite
The Ashby High-Rise
By Joel Warren Barna
Email This Entry
Filed Under: Cite, Community, Planning
anonymous student of architecture writes:
10.20.09
8:10 pm
In rereading Hindsight: the Ashby Highrise, the author made an assumption and revealed his slanted opinion in the matter while feigning neutrality throughout the entire article till the very end. First the assumption that “strongly values neighborhood cohesion as a positive force” is a wildly subjective litmus test for any city’s growth. I may ask, who decides the criteria for what that cohesion is and how is it positive? Or better what is the positive attributes for any neighborhood in the vast long term? All too subjective for a single property to be determined by people in the adjacency. The author also clearly ends with emotional hyperbole “Bissonet Canyon,” landowners could only dream to be so lucky. Nice subtle piece of pacifying proganda, I hope you never employ this author for any future articles. As a student of architecture it is obvious that the local institutions are only interested in keeping our profession as the “house-pets for the rich.” I am progress, not perfection.