[Urbanpdx]

I found an interesting "tour" that contrasts Houston to Portland, Houston has about the same population and is about 10% less dense than Portland, read on:

http://www.rentalcartours.net/rac-houston.pdf

FAST FACTS Similar To
Metropolitan (Labor Market) Population 5,200,000 Atlanta, Madrid, Toronto,
Urbanized Area* Population 3,825,000 Tianjin, Barcelona, Guangzhou,
Sydney
Urbanized Land Area: Square Miles 1,295
Urbanized Land Area: Square Kilometers 3,350 Detroit, Miami, Dallas-Fort Worth, Nagoya
Population per Square Mile 2,950
Population per Square Kilometer 1,152 Portland, Dallas-Fort Worth, Calgary, Adelaide
*Continuously built up area

Few, if any, urban areas have been as successful in controlling their traffic congestion as Houston. Houston is one of the fastest growing metropolitan areas in North America. By the early 1980s, the area had managed to develop the worst traffic congestion in the United States, even worse than Los Angeles. Businesses were beginning to tell local officials that they were no longer interested in locating in Houston, just as is occurring now in Portland due to the smart-growth generated traffic congestion in that urban area.

But, in this “can do” urban area, local officials did not huddle together with their sweaters in Carteresque pessimism and whine about “an era of limits” or “our best days are behind us” or even, as Anthony Downs would have us
believe, that we had better start likin traffic congestion. Instead, they set about to solve the problem and in fact built enough new roadway capacity to make things better now than they were in the middle 1980s, and to fall to 14th in traffic congestion in the United States, behind Los Angeles, Portland and other urban areas.

It is important to note that Houston did not make things better just by expanding the freeway system. Like Atlanta, Houston had an underdeveloped arterial street system --- actually the situation here was better than in Atlanta, but much worse than many other places. So the program included expansions and improvements to arterial street systems. Much of this occurred under the leadership of my friend, former Mayor
Robert Lanier.

Even so, there are problems with the Houston freeway system. A number of interchanges suffer from the old 1950s design flaw that assumed less through-capacity would be needed, because traffic would be going off to the side toward the crossing freeway. Of course, the lane changing that occurs at interchanges creates a need for more, not less capacity. Now there are major programs underway to further expand Houston’s freeways, but before the present construction some of the busiest freeways in the urban area narrowed to two or three lanes in each direction when they went through interchanges. But there are very wide freeways here. The reconstruction of Interstate 10, to the west, will reportedly include up to 22 lanes, which would make it the widest freeway in the world. The Harris County Toll Road Authority has built a beltway within the urban area, which if it were in Beijing would be Ring Road #3 (Ring Road #2 is Interstate
610, and Ring Road #1 is the downtown loop formed by Interstates 10 and 45 and US-59). Work has already been started on Ring Road #4, the Grand Parkway. But Ring #5 is largely completed and #6 is under construction in Beijing, so Houston has some catching up to do. Houston is not exceedingly blessed by cross-town freeways, but has managed to build Ring Roads #2 that double as cross town freeways, by virtue of their nearly square or box-like design. The Toll Road Authority has recently opened North America’s second fully automated toll road, following in the footsteps of Canada’s most automobile oriented urban area, Toronto. But drivers need to be
careful here. While the Canadians send you a bill, based upon your license plate if you don’t have the necessary transponder, these Americans send you a traffic ticket.

Many freeways have special lanes for buses and car pools in the center. Unfortunately, they are one-lane reversible facilities, which means that they improve mobility toward downtown in the morning and away from downtown in the evening. Despite the impressive towers that have been
built downtown since the 1960s, downtown represents little more than five percent of jobs.

The urban area has recently opened a light rail line and has plans to extend it to serve small segments of the community within Ring Road #2. It is, of course, neither here nor there with respect to transportation. Its role is to
consume money and to give the local “railigious” an altar at which to burn incense.

Houston is the urban area that defined edge cities. It had multiple centers before Atlanta gained perhaps the premier reputation for these peripheral business centers. There is the Post-Oak Galleria business district, which contains what was built as the Transco Tower (64 stories, 900 feet), now called the Williams Tower. When opened in the 1984, this was the tallest building in the world outside a central business district. One web-site (www.architecture.about.com) still credits the building with the tallest-
outside-downtown title, but in fact there is at least one taller, the Citic Tower in Guangzhou (80 stories and 1,050 feet), built in 1997. There may be others.

Post-Oak Galleria is larger than most downtown areas. But, since it is too far from downtown to take advantage of the radial transit system, there is little express service to the area. So the transit market share is well below what would be expected for a downtown area. There is also the Texas
Medical Center, to the south of downtown and a number of smaller centers, such as Greenway.
Out west on Interstate 10 is one of the most decentralized centers in the nation, the energy corridor. Even more decentralized commercial development will be found all over the urban area --- smaller business centers with high rise buildings.

That is not to suggest that Houston does not have an impressive central business district. It is the usual American-sized 100,000 to 150,000 job employment center, along with Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, St. Louis, Cleveland, etc., etc. Also, like these places, the height and
prominence of the towers misleads considerably with respect to relative importance. In Houston, little more than five percent of employment is downtown. Thus, Houston’s world class cost light rail system starts with a potential market of barely five percent, of which, of course, it will
capture little.

But, like Los Angeles, Houston is somewhat unique in having a CBD with little history. Virtually all of the largest buildings are products of the 1960s or later. Indeed, downtown Houston has some of the best examples of post-modern office building construction that will be found in the United States. Nearly all were built by banks. The buildings are still there, but most
of the banks have either failed or been taken over by others. But Houston and Texas never suffered the humiliation of San Francisco and California, which saw their world’s largest bank (Bank of America) fall considerably down the rankings, and then be taken over by a Charlotte bank. The Bank of America name survives today only because the acquiring company thought that it was a better name than Nation’s Bank. We agree.

Houston is the antithesis of Portland. There is no zoning here, but at the neighborhood level, things look little different from US urban areas that have zoning. There is no smart growth here, and the community is better off for it. The average house price in 2004 was under $140,000,nearly one-
third below slower growing Portland, and competitive with prices in two other urban areas growing faster than Portland: Dallas-Fort Worth and Atlanta --- urban areas in which people’s preferences determine where development occurs not the Soviet bread-line style land rationing that produces small, ugly housing in Portland.

This is, of course, good for people who live in the area. It is especially good for lower income households and minority households, which typically have lower incomes. In the Houston metropolitan area, for example, African-American home-ownership is 20 percent higher than in Portland. The gap is even greater in Hispanic home ownership, with Houston having a 42 percent higher rate based upon 2000 US Census data. Houston, unlike Portland, seems to favor people over what urban planners and architects view as good planning. Good for them.

Houston, like Los Angeles and Sao Paulo, is a city of hope. Here the aspiring have come from the Northeast and Middle-West of the United States rather than the Northeast of Brazil. They have also come from Mexico and other Latin American countries. It is here that William Lewis,
founder of the McKinsey Global Institute, noted that comparatively uneducated workers from Latin America are as productive in house building as any construction workers in the world.

Houston has been one of the fastest growing urban areas in the United States since World War II. The metropolitan area (labor market area) has added more than 4,000,000 new residents and grown more than 500 percent. Houston, with Dallas-Fort Worth, Miami and Atlanta has led the
nation strongly in population growth among the metropolitan areas with more than 5,000,000 population (Atlanta, the fastest growing major metropolitan area in the high-income world, reaches that level this year).

The Houston urbanized area is comparatively more dense than might be expected. At 2,950 persons per square mile, Houston is little more than 10 percent less dense than compact city “model” Portland and 20 percent less dense than Phoenix. Houston is approximately the same density as Dallas-Fort Worth, but is less than one-half as dense as Los Angeles or the average European urbanized area.

But there is room to grow here. And Houston is growing. Unlike so many other US urban areas, Houston is making the transportation investments that will make it more competitive in the future, despite the billions that will be wasted on light rail. If any US urbanized area deserves the appellation of “can do,” it is Houston.

[PacificNW]

Another W. Cox article...you are going to get hammered Urbanpdx. I lived in Houston for 2 years. I returned to Seattle in 1990. Houston is a mess, generally speaking. I enjoyed my stay there but I sure can not recommend the city as a place to live.

[seaskyfan]

Since when does Houston have "about the same population" as Portland? MSA-wise Houston is over 5 million and Portland is just over 2.

I'm always surprised when folks point to low property values as a symbol of urban success. By this measure Buffalo is doing awesome.

[bvpcvm]

holy shit, that is REALLY fucking vibrant!

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y237/bvpcvm/houston.jpg

fuck this portland bullshit, i'm moving to where there's PLENTY OF FREE PARKING.

[mhays]

Free parking!? Yeah, but don't forget the 10-lane freeways!

The article was hilarious!

[James Bond Agent 007]

Disregarding the Wendell Cox-ness of this article . . .

Does anyone really have built-up area and population stats for both Houston and Portland? It would be interesting to compare their relative densities with reliable data. Just for the heck of it.

[65MAX]

"FAST FACTS Similar To
Metropolitan (Labor Market) Population 5,200,000 Atlanta, Madrid, Toronto,
Urbanized Area* Population 3,825,000 Tianjin, Barcelona, Guangzhou,
Sydney
Urbanized Land Area: Square Miles 1,295
Urbanized Land Area: Square Kilometers 3,350 Detroit, Miami, Dallas-Fort Worth, Nagoya
Population per Square Mile 2,950
Population per Square Kilometer 1,152 Portland, Dallas-Fort Worth, Calgary, Adelaide
*Continuously built up area"

These numbers make absolutely NO sense.

Houston is compared to Hell because it IS Hell. (No offense to Houstonians)

[seaskyfan]

Disregarding the Wendell Cox-ness of this article . . .

Does anyone really have built-up area and population stats for both Houston and Portland? It would be interesting to compare their relative densities with reliable data. Just for the heck of it.

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/GCTTable?_bm=y&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U&-CONTEXT=gct&-mt_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U_GCTPH1_US25&-redoLog=false&-_caller=geoselect&-geo_id=&-format=US-10|US-10S&-_lang=en

Here's Census Metro Are density data for 2000:

Houston CMSA: 606 people/square mile
Houston PMSA: 705 people/square mile

Portland CMSA: 325 people/square mile
Portland PMSA: 381 people/square mile

Sure surprised me.

[bvpcvm]

I have to wonder just how built-up the Houston CMSA and PMSA are. The Portland PMSA (Mult/Wash/Clack/Clark counties, right?) includes places like Forest Park and Sauvie Island and all that area to the west of Banks up into the Coast Range, doesn't it? The CMSA (I thought the Census Bureau eliminated those?) includes Yamhill and Marion counties; there's lots of open empty space there as well.

[65MAX]

I have to wonder just how built-up the Houston CMSA and PMSA are. The Portland PMSA (Mult/Wash/Clack/Clark counties, right?) includes places like Forest Park and Sauvie Island and all that area to the west of Banks up into the Coast Range, doesn't it? The CMSA (I thought the Census Bureau eliminated those?) includes Yamhill and Marion counties; there's lots of open empty space there as well.

Yes, usually they're not comparing apples to apples. Even if they include just what's inside the city limits, I'm pretty sure Houston proper doesn't have massive tracts of land like Forest Park, all of the Columbia Slough area, all of our huge parks, etc. Remember, there's about a 12-15 mile length of the half-mile to mile wide Willamette within our city limits as well. All of these areas have zero to very few residents, but count towards our total area, so comparing us to other cities that dont have equivalent open space within its city limits (including Seattle) is pointless.

[zilfondel]

Oftentimes those CMSA's also include water, which we have a lot of. Not sure if it does in this case, however.

Perhaps comparing neighborhoods? Not sure which census tracts would work, but a nice slice of inner SE/NE and outer SE Portland would give a good indication of (kind of) average density of Portland. Obviously the Pearl and NW will be fairly high.

You could then nab some tracts in Hillsboro/Gresham/Beavertronia in the burbs and might see some good comparisons, if they don't have much open space and freeways.

[Black Box]

Choices.

[Drew-Ski]

I am really suprised at all the Portland bashing going on around the country. Folks from Seattle, Houston, Pittsburg, San Fran, and the James Watts of the world (remember him?), are real strongly opposed to Portland's form of Urbanization. Having lived or visited in every one of these cities and many more, there is absolutely no ground for critism. The arguments being used are weak, ego-centric, and banner waving ( Miller Light vs Bud Light mentallity). The European Institute of Urban Affairs (EIUA) considers Portland one of the world's most successful cities. Only 7 cities worldwide were selected, and Portland is the ONLY American City that made the cut. Why is Portland a most honored city? In their analysis (EIUA) wrote, " Some of the characteristics of those cities are that they are visionary, and willing to put certain constraints on vehical traffic, and they are recognizing the importance of Public life to Society and to the safety and enjoyment of Cities". That's powerful! I find it real hard to compare Portland to any city, given what is happening there, is different, and yes, is opposite in terms of individual planning styles, values, or choices going on in other cities. Instead of critising Portland and it's urban culture , perhaps it might be wiser to learn and emulate it.

[Shasta]

I am from Houston but I adore Portland. It is easily one of my favorite U.S. cities and her growth policies make me jealous.

That said, there are a lot of misconceptions about Houston going on in this post and I am not sure most residents of the CITY OF HOUSTON would want Wendell Cox speaking for us!

Houston has a ton of water (multiple bayous, the ship chanel, Galveston Bay, two large lakes) in the city. It also has 3 large airports and two of the nation's largest urban parks, one of which is a massive flood plain inside the city limits. Also, don't forget that there are HUGE industrial areas that line the ship chanel for miles that are inside the city limits but have ZERO residents.

Now, as for Cox's slams at Houston's light rail; he couldn't be more wrong. The inititial line that connects UH-Downtown, Downtown, Midtown, the Museum District, Hermann Park, the Texas Medical Center, and the Reliant Stadium/Convention Hall area has been a HUGE success. Daily ridership per mile has been greater than any other new system. In fact, just this past week, the 7.5 mile line saw 61,000 people board in ONE day, setting the highest single weekday ridership number (the Super Bowl was the highest ever as over 62,000 rode the rail from their downtown hotels to the stadium).

We're getting ready to add the critical east-west rail next as well as numerous bus-rapid-transit lines. The east-west connector will start at the University of Houston on the Eastside and cut through Texas Southern University, the Third Ward, Midtown, Montrose/Museum District, Greenway Plaza, and on into the Uptown area. Unfortunately, there is a fight about where to put the rail when it hits the westside of town. Most folks want it to run down Richmond Avenue, the most direct route. However, Rep. Culberson (R) and some wealthy ranch home owners in Afton oaks want it to run down the Southwest Freeway.

[oilcan]

^That's odd I really don't see much Portland bashing at all to include this particular thread.. I don't think there are many people on this site who have displayed negativity towards Portland at all. Sure you are always going to have people with differences (that is allowed) and then you can expect the ones who have the whole "My home turf is better" (insert beat on chest) mentallity.. Just a way of life but overall, the majority people in here (who actually have been/payed attention) understand the vivarance of Portland Oregon....

[Urbanpdx]

I am from Houston but I adore Portland. It is easily one of my favorite U.S. cities and her growth policies make me jealous.

That said, there are a lot of misconceptions about Houston going on in this post and I am not sure most residents of the CITY OF HOUSTON would want Wendell Cox speaking for us!

Houston has a ton of water (multiple bayous, the ship chanel, Galveston Bay, two large lakes) in the city. It also has 3 large airports and two of the nation's largest urban parks, one of which is a massive flood plain inside the city limits. Also, don't forget that there are HUGE industrial areas that line the ship chanel for miles that are inside the city limits but have ZERO residents.

Now, as for Cox's slams at Houston's light rail; he couldn't be more wrong. The inititial line that connects UH-Downtown, Downtown, Midtown, the Museum District, Hermann Park, the Texas Medical Center, and the Reliant Stadium/Convention Hall area has been a HUGE success. Daily ridership per mile has been greater than any other new system. In fact, just this past week, the 7.5 mile line saw 61,000 people board in ONE day, setting the highest single weekday ridership number (the Super Bowl was the highest ever as over 62,000 rode the rail from their downtown hotels to the stadium).

We're getting ready to add the critical east-west rail next as well as numerous bus-rapid-transit lines. The east-west connector will start at the University of Houston on the Eastside and cut through Texas Southern University, the Third Ward, Midtown, Montrose/Museum District, Greenway Plaza, and on into the Uptown area. Unfortunately, there is a fight about where to put the rail when it hits the westside of town. Most folks want it to run down Richmond Avenue, the most direct route. However, Rep. Culberson (R) and some wealthy ranch home owners in Afton oaks want it to run down the Southwest Freeway.

And imagine, you Houstonians do all this without planning and zoning! Nice job!

[seaskyfan]

I am really suprised at all the Portland bashing going on around the country. Folks from Seattle, Houston, Pittsburg, San Fran, and the James Watts of the world (remember him?), are real strongly opposed to Portland's form of Urbanization.

Folks from Seattle bashing Portland's form of urbanization? That must be why we're copying it so intently.

[Dougall5505]

someone should post this in the city discussions thread and see what kind of reaction it gets

[Urbanpdx]

Folks from Seattle bashing Portland's form of urbanization? That must be why we're copying it so intently.

Or is it because you are copying it so intently that they are bashing?

[Drmyeyes]

Shasta, if you're still following the conversation, tell us more about Houston and its absence of planning and zoning that urbanpdx alleges is the situation there. Did you see the picture that bvpcvm posted back on comment number 4? Would that relate to the question of no zoning and planning?

[Black Box]

Folks from Seattle bashing Portland's form of urbanization? That must be why we're copying it so intently.

I don't get that Seattle bashes Portland for it's planning policies. Hogwash! Not many people I know are into urban planning and related subjects, but many of them, maybe all of them, would prefer the Portland model over Houston. That being said, I'm glad that Seattle is adopting similar policies to Portland. I should add, I do not think that Houston is EVIL for carrying on the way it does. I just would not choose to live there. I hope this does not turn into a moral superiority thing.

[der Reisender]

"Houston is often an example of evil here"--do you mean the Northwest forum? cause i don't recall us talking about houston here until this thread was posted...weird...

[PacificNW]

Houston is not as bad as some people feel...even without zoning/planning. What I didn't care for, while living there, is the oppressive humidity and the general necessity of having a car. Some great architecture, though. AND possibly the best medical center in the world.

[PacificNW]

Also, I missed the mountains of the PNW...but the fishing in the Gulf was incredibly fun!

[JAM]

The person who wrote the above article did minimal research before putting it before the public. It tells half the story, sort of like post #4. You can tell this person drove down the freeways and wrote an article. Big deal. I wouldn't put too much stock in it.

IMO, Houston's lack of zoning is really the free market at work. Why everybody gets down on this is beyond me. Let Houston live. She is what she is, because she is. Houston is an example of an extremely free market system. It is a metropolis in the making, and the free markets will dictate where the buildings are placed to a large degree. Cool by me. 5.4M people can't be wrong.

As for the humidity, yep, on the coast. As for the heat, yep, in the south. I enjoy both. Luckily, its only oppresive a few days out of the year. You should be there now. Very nice.

[pdxman]

Every city has its positive and negative attributes...its a moot point

[mhays]

Or is it because you are copying it so intently that they are bashing?

Bashing? Some do, but the mainstream doesn't. We've repeatedly voted to keep growth management.

For example, in 2006 Washington voters voted strongly against a "takings" initiative like the one that's currently damaging Oregon's protections. In the same election, King County voters approved a 20% increase in bus service, which means we probably remain the top transit city in the Northwest per capita.

[mhays]

The person who wrote the above article did minimal research before putting it before the public. It tells half the story, sort of like post #4. You can tell this person drove down the freeways and wrote an article. Big deal. I wouldn't put too much stock in it.

IMO, Houston's lack of zoning is really the free market at work. Why everybody gets down on this is beyond me. Let Houston live. She is what she is, because she is. Houston is an example of an extremely free market system. It is a metropolis in the making, and the free markets will dictate where the buildings are placed to a large degree. Cool by me. 5.4M people can't be wrong.

As for the humidity, yep, on the coast. As for the heat, yep, in the south. I enjoy both. Luckily, its only oppresive a few days out of the year. You should be there now. Very nice.

But it's much tougher to live without a car, and there's a general lack of dense, urban neighborhoods, particularly walkable ones. Houston has large nodes and it's great that rail is growing, but it doesn't look/feel/act like a big city.

Weather not oppressive? It's all relative. For me, 85 and humid is oppressive, and nearly unbearable unless I'm at the beach or distracted because I'm in a great city like Hong Kong or Athens. Seattle has a few oppressive days per year. Houston has many.

[JAM]

Weather not oppressive? It's all relative. For me, 85 and humid is oppressive, and nearly unbearable unless I'm at the beach or distracted because I'm in a great city like Hong Kong or Athens. Seattle has a few oppressive days per year. Houston has many.

Your exactly right. It was 60 degrees in Austin today and I was miserable. I can't want to get back above 80 :)

[bvpcvm]

But it's much tougher to live without a car, and there's a general lack of dense, urban neighborhoods, particularly walkable ones. Houston has large nodes and it's great that rail is growing, but it doesn't look/feel/act like a big city.

No kidding; check out the city photos section, there's a thread showing all kinds of high rise condos and whatnot, but there's virtually no ground-floor retail and barely any people at all in the pictures.

[mhays]

No kidding; check out the city photos section, there's a thread showing all kinds of high rise condos and whatnot, but there's virtually no ground-floor retail and barely any people at all in the pictures.

I've seen it, and even commented. My main issue was the lack of sidewalks in some cases. Also, many projects had driveways with port cocheres, and sometimes even surface parking, meaning the units per acre is often low even with high-rises. It's not a recipe for urbanity.

That thread and others have also shown low-rise urban-style districts in Houston, including an arts-focused area that looks pretty cool. But even these lacked sidewalks in some places, and didn't look dense at all.

I'll take a good Seattle neighborhood with sustained density and retail within walking distance anyday. And weather that doesn't keep a permanent sheen of sweat on my forehead.

[JAM]

No kidding; check out the city photos section, there's a thread showing all kinds of high rise condos and whatnot, but there's virtually no ground-floor retail and barely any people at all in the pictures.

On the contrair, those are old Houston neighborhoods that we're built during the "great expansion". Modern Houston puts in too many sidewalks. There are sidewalks on the side of the freeway feeder roads where no one walks. Talking about a waste of $$. Luckily, Houston has $$ to waste.

Houston is pretty much a country by itself. Diverse in culture and architechure. There is probably as much pedestrian oriented area's as anywhere, they just are not concentrated in one specific area. But if you visit and live for a while, you'll find a spot where you never have to venture far and can leave your car parked except for your commute to work. Unfortunately, the freeway system has made it pedestrian unfriendly, as it is with all big Texas cities.

OK, I'm done. The only way to know for yourself is to visit a friend who lives there inside the loop, and can show you around.

Best wishes Portland

[PacificNW]

Things must have changed inside the loop. I left Houston in 1990 and there weren't that many sidewalks to navigate...except in downtown. Nice people live there, though. Very friendly and diverse. It seemed like there were a lot of old money people in Houston vs. new money people found in Dallas.

[thewack]

If there are cities bashing Portland for its planning model, it is more out of jealously than anything else. While Portland certainly is not like NYC with transit, for a West Coast city and for a city of its size, it is doing a good job preparing for the future.

If and when the oil crash happens, I would much rather be in a city with an effective mass transit system than one without. Since oil would be rationed, it would make the most sense to use the oil on public transit.

Furthermore, perhaps light rail and other transit modes that run off electricity could have zero emmissions and essentially be free of the oil grid if they were to run off wind, solar, or another renewable energy source.

[JAM]

If there are cities bashing Portland for its planning model, it is more out of jealously than anything else. While Portland certainly is not like NYC with transit, for a West Coast city and for a city of its size, it is doing a good job preparing for the future.


I have never heard anyone bash Portland. I've only read in magazines and seen on TV good things. I was under the impression that Portland is a case study that many cities use to to guide their planning efforts.

[bvpcvm]

^ trust us, it happens. there's a little coven of libertarian anti-portland survival-of-the-fittest types out there that criticize us regularly. luckily, it seems the majority of people don't actually want what the libertarian social engineers tell us we want.

[65MAX]

I have never heard anyone bash Portland. I've only read in magazines and seen on TV good things. I was under the impression that Portland is a case study that many cities use to to guide their planning efforts.

It is a case study.

The only people I've heard bash Portland are a few local malcontents (Jack Bog, Jim Karlock, Urbanpdx, Randall O'Toole, John Charles) and anyone who has libertarian or objectivist (Ayn Rand) views. For them, planning is EVIL, every man/woman for him/herself, screw public institutions, survival of the richest, just don't cut funding for our superhighways.

[Shasta]

Shasta, if you're still following the conversation, tell us more about Houston and its absence of planning and zoning that urbanpdx alleges is the situation there. Did you see the picture that bvpcvm posted back on comment number 4? Would that relate to the question of no zoning and planning?

Unfortunately, we don't have zoning although the lack of zoning has nothing to do with the picture posted showing the amazing number of surface parking lots on the eastside of downtown.

Houston has voted on zoning a few times and it has never won. The big $ developers come out, spend millions on clouding the issue and painting it as a property rights issue and then they win.

That said, several neighborhoods have strict deed restrictions which are basically the same thing as zoning. Of course, its the wealthier neighborhoods that have them because their home ownership groups can spend the money to make sure the deed restrictions are current and enforced.

The flip side is that older neighborhoods that had fallen into decay can quickly transform themselves without zoning. The old 4th Ward just west of downtown was a ramshackle neighborhood of falling down crack houses and shotgun houses literally in the shadows of downtown. Then, the townhome developers moved in and in less than 8 years, the old neighborhood is pretty much gone. It's been great in the sense that the land is now filled with higher density townhomes and apartments and is a much nicer place to be. Of course, it's also meant that the poorest of the poor were displaced and that Houston's original African-American neighborhood and all its history has been pretty much wiped out before the historians and preservationists couldn't even blink. The rate of transformation there was astounding and I don't think it could have happened so quickly with zoning.

Now, as for the photo showing the downtown lots, that has little to do with zoning and everything to do with rabid land speculation in the old 70s/80s oil boom. That part of downtown was old and full of run-down Victorians, gas stations, and other blight. Speculators cleared those things waiting for the next 50-70 story office tower that never came. That land is slowly starting to fill back in. In the past 10 years, we've built the ballpark, two new loft buildings, expanded the convention center, built a hotel, the Toyota Center for the Rockets/Comets, two parking garages, and an office tower (5 Houston Center). This past month, a new downtown park (Discovery Green with undergground parking) broke ground that will turn 4-6 lots into green space and the 501 foot tall One Park Place (37 level apartment tower) broke ground on the lot across the street. Then, in this past week, the 3 block long Houston Pavilions broke ground. The Pavilions will have a 200,000 office tower and over 370,000 square feet of retail including a House of Blues, a Lucky Strike, a Books-A-Million, and much more. Things are looking up.

[alexjon]

Haha, Houston has no defined "urban growth boundary", but don't be fooled. Building in Houston is like squeezing blood from a turnip, and the only reason growth goes on generally is because the developers are all lining the government there.

It took portland-style progressives to make the above listed advancements, not some kind of laissez-faire money first/people last ideology that urbanpdx is pushing.

[Drmyeyes]

Shasta, thanks much for that very substantive answer. Lots to think about. What you offer suggests that some of the standard forces are in effect there; wealth has the ability to look out for it's interests where poor doesn't. Culture and architectural heritage are thrown to the winds of speculative gain.

It must have been tough on the black community to have been summarily eradicated from its long term location in the city. In the long term, I wonder if this will be considered to have been in the city's best interest. Same with the run down victorians. Those building's run down appearance deceptively suggests a condition and value contrary to their actual integrity. They tend to feature extraordinary craftsmanship and only lack for upgrading to relatively modern standards. University of Oregon (think I got that right) is currently doing just that to a really fine example here in Portland. It's got lots of cast iron ornamentation, interior support poles, etc.

Houston, through lack of zoning, appears inclined to wipe resources of their own like that, out, at the sight of dollar bills waving in the wind.

The upside you mentioned about lack of zoning has a point though. Things can move fast without it, and in Houston' case according to what you say, it's being done positively. Here in Portland, achieving development progress can be prolonged and intense, involving a lot of back and forth discussion and negotiation between different interests. That said, I'm inclined to think this process prioritizes greater fairness, as well as respect for people and resources historic and material. It takes more patience and compromise, often to the surprize of those who aren't used to applying it, and hopefully produces a better city.

[Shasta]

To be fair, most African-Americans had fled the old 4th Ward long ago. It was the poorest of the poor that lived there. Vacant lots and burned out shells of houses and churches were more common than actual occupied homes. The old 4th Ward had been the home to Houston's professional black class but by the early 1900s, that class began to move to the 3rd Ward. The population in the 1990s was less than half the number it had been in 1940. To be honest, there really wasn't much left to save. I used to do social work there in 1995 and tried hard to save the public housing in the area so I hope you don't assume that I am definitely in favor of what happened to the old 4th Ward.

The 3rd Ward is the battleground now. Neighborhoods like Riverside Terrace, Washington Terrace, and University Oaks are under attack from the condo boom. But, unlike the 4th Ward, there is home ownership and pride in place in the 3rd Ward. It is not uncommon to see yard signs with "The Third Ward is Our Home and IS NOT FOR SALE" proudly displayed near the U of Houston, Texas Southern U, and along the beautiful mansions in Riverside Terrace that have long been home to Houston's black doctors, lawyers, and business people.

What happens in the 3rd Ward will be the true test. My fear is that much of what is there will be gone over the next 30 years. However, with Houston growing so quickly, I don't see any other way. It just doesn't make sense to have so many single family homes on large lots that close to the city center.

Interestingly enough, the Houston Chronicle had an article this morning talking about how by 2035, density levels Inside the Loop will increase by 1,700 people per mile if current trends continue. Here's a link...

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4598864.html

[mhays]

From what to what?

[Drmyeyes]

Shasta, no, I don't presume that you favored the widescale demolition of the 4th ward in Houston. Where your heart is seems pretty clear to me. Haven't yet read the article you provided a link too, but I will. I think what you see happening in the 3rd ward today compared to what happened in the 4th ward years back is to be expected given the type of change that characterizes the way people look upon development.

Where people are able to establish and build good, strong neighborhoods, avoiding the decay of absolute poverty, vulnerability to developer dominated development subsides. In such situations, residents often are inclined to be aware of and able to recognize and defend positive attributes of their neihborhoods, conserving them as new development occurs within.

I expect what might happen in a place like the 3rd ward, is that as the controversy goes on, on an increasingly grass roots level, much more thought will go into evaluating the neighborhood and picking the best architectural resources it has and keeping them on while the worst make way for new development. Doing it this careful methodical way bugs the hell out of developers, property owners and certain city officials, but at least residents don't have to take it in the shorts so bad every time some big shot developer wants to plop some ugly condo tower on a site that requires a great old building be demolished in order to make way for it.

[Urbanpdx]

The most poingnet line has to be:

"Its role is to
consume money and to give the
local “railigious” an altar at which
to burn incense."

Describing most of you guys as "railigious fundamentalists" is all too apropos! And kind of funny too! :)

[MarkDaMan]

I'm so glad I took a mini-vacation over my long weekend because I'm relaxed and have no desire to respond to the bunches of rubbish I've seen in this thread. In my opinion, the Mod should have deleted this thread as one rule of the forum, as I understand it, is that versus threads aren't allowed. Now, you could say this was 'comparing' but whatever.

Seriously though, UrbanPDX isn't here to talk about buildings, architecture, urban planning, he's here to incite and already several forumers from the Northwest section have indicated they no longer post because of the libertarian, off subject, baiting and arguing.

Might I suggest each time something as asinine as urbanpdx's post show up here, that y'all just e-mail the mods and have the threads/posts deleted or closed. Reading through several threads today, especially in this one and the Portland Transit, really, mods, this guy isn't adding anything to the discussions here, I see no loss in ending his involvment on this page. If he is really interested in urban planning and the goings on in our city, he can access the same information as a visitor.

[alexjon]

The most poingnet line has to be:

"Its role is to
consume money and to give the
local “railigious” an altar at which
to burn incense."

Describing most of you guys as "railigious fundamentalists" is all too apropos! And kind of funny too! :)

You're not pro-road/pro-urbanism, you're anti-rail, pure and simple.

Tsk tsk tsk!

[mcbaby]

I'm so glad I took a mini-vacation over my long weekend because I'm relaxed and have no desire to respond to the bunches of rubbish I've seen in this thread. In my opinion, the Mod should have deleted this thread as one rule of the forum, as I understand it, is that versus threads aren't allowed. Now, you could say this was 'comparing' but whatever.

Seriously though, UrbanPDX isn't here to talk about buildings, architecture, urban planning, he's here to incite and already several forumers from the Northwest section have indicated they no longer post because of the libertarian, off subject, baiting and arguing.

Might I suggest each time something as asinine as urbanpdx's post show up here, that y'all just e-mail the mods and have the threads/posts deleted or closed. Reading through several threads today, especially in this one and the Portland Transit, really, mods, this guy isn't adding anything to the discussions here, I see no loss in ending his involvment on this page. If he is really interested in urban planning and the goings on in our city, he can access the same information as a visitor.

you took the words right out of my mouth.

[Urbanpdx]

Compared to Houston, Portland’s Transit Saves Time

http://web.mac.com/msetty/iWeb/Publictransit.us/The%20Publictransit.us%20Blog/675E2CDC-B5E1-435F-B655-C7803D465D06.html

Analysis is kind of flawed but it is on topic.

[JAM]

Compared to Houston, Portland’s Transit Saves Time

http://web.mac.com/msetty/iWeb/Publictransit.us/The%20Publictransit.us%20Blog/675E2CDC-B5E1-435F-B655-C7803D465D06.html

Analysis is kind of flawed but it is on topic.

What exactly is the link between Portland's transportation issues and Houstons? Surely there must be a better comparison out there?

[MarkDaMan]

^there isn't a need to compare Portland vs. Houston's transit, they are two different cities, two different topographies, two different political mindsets, two different tax structures.