Jump to content

A Tourist's View Of Houston


brian0123

Recommended Posts

The musems are nice, its their bland surroundings thats not very friendly to a tourist. Where are the near by sidewalk cafes? Where are the gift shops? Where are the street performers? Where are the people period?

Bull. Unless you're traveling around where the actual houses are, there's plenty of people walking around in the museum district.

As for the whole "people and street performers", I've heard this before. One of the responses was that if you were looking for a "constant street circus", you could pay a homeless person a few dollars to entertain you.

If you were looking for "street entertainment" that isn't exploitation, you should visit places like Montrose and parts of Midtown after the bars close.

Seriously, though: when I went to New York City, I didn't see very much "street entertainment" (at all) as NYC is often known for having, and when my parents went to San Francisco, they didn't see a lot of weird things like that either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 151
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I've lived in Boston and New York and almost moved to San Fran. Want to know where the street performers are in those cities? Faneuil Hall, Times Square, and Fisherman's Wharf. Those are places local residents avoid at all costs. They're tourist traps. Houston doesn't have major tourists traps because we don't get busloads of school kids looking at Bunker Hill, loads of Europeans taking pictures of seals, or a bunch of people from Podunk, Iowa coming to look at the lights and eat at Bubba Gump to get that real New York City feel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The musems are nice, its their bland surroundings thats not very friendly to a tourist. Where are the near by sidewalk cafes? Where are the gift shops? Where are the street performers? Where are the people period?

 

Some day, when you tire of masturbating over renderings of Dallas and Atlanta proposals, you should actually come visit Houston.  And then maybe you should also some day actually spend some time in the real Dallas and the real Atlanta.  You might be surprised by reality, once you get out of your College Station closet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The musems are nice, its their bland surroundings thats not very friendly to a tourist. Where are the near by sidewalk cafes? Where are the gift shops? Where are the street performers? Where are the people period?

The gift shops are in the museums. There are cafes and restaurants, but not as obvious. Any good tourist that has a smart phone on hand or took some time to research the area will know. Asking locals is also a great way to find them.

I don't know if street performers are going to ever be in the museum district. Personally I'd put them in the same boat as panhandlers that perform a trick for your coins rather than hold up a sign at an intersection. I don't like them. I have seen hot dog and pretzel stands in Hermann Park. Maybe once or twice someone played an instrument with the case open for people to drop cash in.

As far as mass transit goes, it is a great tool in foreign countries when you don't speak the native tongue, or if the price of cabs are astronomical (London). When I was in LA I rented a car. Took a cab when I went out. In NYC I rode the subway twice. I took a cab everywhere. For day time family destinations it makes sense to rent a car. We all know this city has plenty of parking wherever you go. When you go out at night in the loop/galleria area, cabs are cheap. You don't need mass transit.

Even when I stayed in Dallas a couple years ago Downtown, cabs are the way to go. I'm sure if I ever make it to Atlanta again, I'll be hopping into a cab.

I get that you wish for Houston to have the same brightness as Times Square, street performers and all, but we aren't that type of town.

And for what it's worth the museums around Hermann Park do see a lot of pedestrian activity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a way, Citykid kind of reminds me of my early days on the HAIF, someone who maybe went to Houston once or twice (along with other, much larger cities) and is enamored by the concept of mass transit. I know I made some early mass transit posts better off forgotten. That said--since then, I've gone to Houston many times, enough to get a feel for it more and more. I'm STILL learning--I realized I hadn't even seen the skyline at night until that last trip.

I definitely don't judge cities by rail-based mass transit, otherwise Dallas would win over Houston hands down (sorry), nor do I hold the philosophy that the larger a city is the better and all cities must pattern themselves after that. Walmart is the (arguably) the world's biggest grocery retailer ("arguably" if you think it doesn't count because it's not a real supermarket chain) but I don't think it should be the blueprint for every retailer to achieve. Despite the wide variety of items it contains, Walmart kinda sucks. I don't think I need to defend that--most of you would agree with that or at least know what I mean.

A lot of what Citykid and Slick are talking about is an experience found only in places like NYC or San Francisco (at best), or perhaps a theme park. But that's not all what city tourism is about...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a way, Citykid kind of reminds me of my early days on the HAIF, someone who maybe went to Houston once or twice (along with other, much larger cities) and is enamored by the concept of mass transit. I know I made some early mass transit posts better off forgotten. That said--since then, I've gone to Houston many times, enough to get a feel for it more and more. I'm STILL learning--I realized I hadn't even seen the skyline at night until that last trip.

I definitely don't judge cities by rail-based mass transit, otherwise Dallas would win over Houston hands down (sorry), nor do I hold the philosophy that the larger a city is the better and all cities must pattern themselves after that. Walmart is the (arguably) the world's biggest grocery retailer ("arguably" if you think it doesn't count because it's not a real supermarket chain) but I don't think it should be the blueprint for every retailer to achieve. Despite the wide variety of items it contains, Walmart kinda sucks. I don't think I need to defend that--most of you would agree with that or at least know what I mean.

A lot of what Citykid and Slick are talking about is an experience found only in places like NYC or San Francisco (at best), or perhaps a theme park. But that's not all what city tourism is about...

New York, Vancouver, San Francisco, Chicago, Copenhagen, boston, DC, Mexico City, Tokyo, Seoul, Amsterdam, London, Paris, Delhi, Istanbul, Madrid, Barcelona, Berlin, Toronto, Montreal, milan, and the list goes on and on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say our museums are dumpy. They are quite good, perhaps world class and comparable to many others. But what I said is museums alone won't make houston a tourist attraction. A very small segment of the population even goes to them in the first place.

 

There are far more people who make trip plans to a city and are concerned more with museums than there are that are concerned with rail based mass transit being an option.

 

So please, can this thread not be about mass transit?

 

The musems are nice, its their bland surroundings thats not very friendly to a tourist. Where are the near by sidewalk cafes? Where are the gift shops? Where are the street performers? Where are the people period?

 

Bland surroundings? Have you been to museums in other cities? Outside of the Louvre, I can't think of another art museum I've been to that has what you are talking about. In fact, I'd say that the museums in the museum district of Houston have terrific surroundings. Big old trees, tranquility, plenty of space, an awesome sculpture garden, so much more to make them really fit. In fact, of the museums I've been to (even the Louvre) their surroundings are dominated by the same thing that Houston's museums are surrounded by.

 

Besides, people who consider going to a museum in a city aren't going to judge it based on the number of street performers, gift shops, or sidewalk cafes that are near the museum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New York, Vancouver, San Francisco, Chicago, Copenhagen, boston, DC, Mexico City, Tokyo, Seoul, Amsterdam, London, Paris, Delhi, Istanbul, Madrid, Barcelona, Berlin, Toronto, Montreal, milan, and the list goes on and on.

 

With the exception of Mexico City, and Delhi, this is an excellent list of known tourist traps.

 

"Gosh, I really want to visit Alaska, but dang it, there just aren't any street performers!"

-- No one ever

 

"I was going to visit Cancun, but once I saw that they had no rail based mass transit, I decided that it wasn't where I wanted to go"

-- No one ever

 

"I went to Yellowstone expecting a wonderful experience, but there were no sidewalk cafes"

-- No one ever

 

Point is, it's the activities that one can do in these places that make them tourist destinations, not the street performers, sidewalk cafes, or endless miles of gift shops with random tchotchkes that end up cluttering a closet as a reminder of your vacation that make a destination a destination. 

 

If Houston ever becomes a vacation travel destination the street performers that distract you as their buddy scans the crowd for a mark to pickpocket will come, the endless rows of gift shops with random junk tchotchkes will come, the overpriced sidewalk cafes dying to accept the money from vacationers will come. Don't worry about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People are entitled to prefer whatever they do, and by the sheer ubiquity of sidewalk cafes, street performers, and gift shops that are placed in the path of throngs of people, I can only assume that there is some fairly popular utility derived from them being present near every attraction around the globe. But get away from The French Quarter, Times Square, Fisherman’s Wharf or Pike Place Market, and those cities look scarcely different from Houston.

 

In my experience, sidewalk cafes catering to customers that they know will never come back generally get by with poor service and poor quality food to make up for the high rent they get charged.  This has been true in Florence, Rome, Amsterdam, New York, Seattle, and New Orleans to name a few that I have sampled personally.  That kind of “tourist trap” economy works to sustain some additional low skill jobs, but my impression is that people living in those cities generally avoid them, as I certainly would if Houston developed a center of activity like that.

 

Street performers always give me the scam artist/pickpocket bait vibe. I find their schtick offputting. Some seem to have genuine talent, that they haven’t been able to employ it in a more regular gig always gives me pause. Many people just adore New Orleans, but my own personal hell looks a lot like Bourbon Street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Street performers belong on the Galveston seawall in front of the Pleasure Pier or maybe hanging around Kemah. But DEFIANTLY NOT in front of the Menil.

Slick Vic, this thread is about tourism not mass transit. Listing cities that have far better rail transit systems in no way has anything to do with tourism or boringness. Why does EVERYTHING have to do with transit in your world? It is only ONE aspect of life. In fact, mass transit doesn't even qualify as ANY aspect of life for most Houstonians or people that visit here because everyone has cars. Mass transit isn't what makes a city attract tourists or cause or prevent a significant number of people from being bored except for the urbanists and no one gives a rats ass what they want. It's like listening to a baby cry. Eventually, you just tune it out or stick a pacifier in it's face. In the end, it accomplishes and means nothing.

So you can't handle the fact that some visitors actually enjoy Houston and have nice things to say about it (the topic of this thread) - so you immediately start in with the juvenile "Houston is boring" bash-troll routine we've already seen from you a million times. Everyone calls you on it except someone called city KID, so you start bashing the transit system (as usual) and somehow try to tie tourism, boringness and mass transit together. Now we get to read a long list of cities that have great mass transit system and it still doesn't mean a hill of beans to anyone interested in Houston tourism and it definitely has nothing to do with the reason the OP started this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People are entitled to prefer whatever they do, and by the sheer ubiquity of sidewalk cafes, street performers, and gift shops that are placed in the path of throngs of people, I can only assume that there is some fairly popular utility derived from them being present near every attraction around the globe. But get away from The French Quarter, Times Square, Fisherman’s Wharf or Pike Place Market, and those cities look scarcely different from Houston.

 

In my experience, sidewalk cafes catering to customers that they know will never come back generally get by with poor service and poor quality food to make up for the high rent they get charged.  This has been true in Florence, Rome, Amsterdam, New York, Seattle, and New Orleans to name a few that I have sampled personally.  That kind of “tourist trap” economy works to sustain some additional low skill jobs, but my impression is that people living in those cities generally avoid them, as I certainly would if Houston developed a center of activity like that.

 

Street performers always give me the scam artist/pickpocket bait vibe. I find their schtick offputting. Some seem to have genuine talent, that they haven’t been able to employ it in a more regular gig always gives me pause. Many people just adore New Orleans, but my own personal hell looks a lot like Bourbon Street.

 

 

Why isn't street performing itself a regular gig? Some of these folks probably enjoy performing before thousands of casual people each day. It's one of the world's most regular forms of entertainment throughout history.

 

You might be surprised to learn that many of the people who adore New Orleans actually hate Bourbon Street. It's considered "inauthentic" by people who live there, kind of like Times Square in New York. This is not just in contrast with the rest of the city, but even other parts of the French Quarter.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why isn't street performing itself a regular gig? Some of these folks probably enjoy performing before thousands of casual people each day. It's one of the world's most regular forms of entertainment throughout history.

 

You might be surprised to learn that many of the people who adore New Orleans actually hate Bourbon Street. It's considered "inauthentic" by people who live there, kind of like Times Square in New York. This is not just in contrast with the rest of the city, but even other parts of the French Quarter.

 

 

Just my impression on the street performers that I have come across where their approach to soliciting tips comes across as very similar to that of an aggressive panhandler. If it works, it works, so more power to them, it just comes across skeevy to me personally. I imagine that it is more volatile than a reguar gig at a club, but I could certainly be wrong there.

 

I have heard the same thing about Bourbon Street re: locals, but that's where the gift shops, street performers, and sidewalk cafes (ok, bars) are located, so I was addressing that "dynamic" in my comparison. The city as a tourist destination puts Bourbon Street front and center. Whatever other reasons there are to like N.O. are not because it is prototypically tourist friendly/appealing following the criteria discussed earlier.

 

FWIW, I found the remainder of the French Quarter to be interesting to look at for about an hour, but I did not find much of a reason to want to spend any more time there and I have no urge to ever go back. I also find nearly anything that is revered as "authentic" and therefore superior by locals to be usually good, but still overrated (Austin BBQ is exhibit A here).

 

All that said, I’m not much of a tourist one way or the other, so I am probably the wrong guy to get this far in to the discussion anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Street performers belong on the Galveston seawall in front of the Pleasure Pier or maybe hanging around Kemah. But DEFIANTLY NOT in front of the Menil.

Slick Vic, this thread is about tourism not mass transit. Listing cities that have far better rail transit systems in no way has anything to do with tourism or boringness. Why does EVERYTHING have to do with transit in your world? It is only ONE aspect of life. In fact, mass transit doesn't even qualify as ANY aspect of life for most Houstonians or people that visit here because everyone has cars. Mass transit isn't what makes a city attract tourists or cause or prevent a significant number of people from being bored except for the urbanists and no one gives a rats ass what they want. It's like listening to a baby cry. Eventually, you just tune it out or stick a pacifier in it's face. In the end, it accomplishes and means nothing.

So you can't handle the fact that some visitors actually enjoy Houston and have nice things to say about it (the topic of this thread) - so you immediately start in with the juvenile "Houston is boring" bash-troll routine we've already seen from you a million times. Everyone calls you on it except someone called city KID, so you start bashing the transit system (as usual) and somehow try to tie tourism, boringness and mass transit together. Now we get to read a long list of cities that have great mass transit system and it still doesn't mean a hill of beans to anyone interested in Houston tourism and it definitely has nothing to do with the reason the OP started this thread.

 

and you jumped on me for telling him to get lost. save your energy dude.... he's a troll and his tune isn't changing no matter how logical your counter arguments. still can't figure out why we don't have an ignore function on here.... quality threads like this wouldn't get derailed by the same jokers time and time again.

 

regardless, as a tourist destination Houston is fine. not only that, it's getting better EVERY FREAKING DAY. on top of that, its perception outside of here is slowly but surely changing for the better. world class museums, sports, dining and entertainment. believe it or not, those are what a lot of people travel for nowadays. who cares if we don't have a time square or a french quarter?? as nate99 mentioned, those places are littered with cheesey gift shops, terrible dining establishments and hordes of uncouth tourists who's idea of a good time is paying $50 to take a picture in front of a statue and eat at an oversized chilis.

 

Houson is better than that. Houston is REAL - it's a real city with real people and it doesn't try and pretend to be anything else. the places tourists would enjoy are usually the same places a native Houstonian would enjoy. when i travel, i avoid the touristy areas like the plague - never been to the statue of liberty in nyc, never been to alcatraz in SF, never been to the hollywood sign or sunset strip in LA because those places bore me to tears. intelligent, smart, savy travelers visit less to "see the sites" than they do to immerse themselves in the native culture. don't believe me? ask my friends from NYC or London or India who visit.

 

Houston has plenty of faults including the lack of a more comprehensive mass transist system... but to claim that it is boring b/c it doesn't have "street performers" and kitchsy tourist attractions or bc it doesn't have adequate rail throughout the entire city isn't just wrong, its asinine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

and you jumped on me for telling him to get lost. save your energy dude.... he's a troll and his tune isn't changing no matter how logical your counter arguments. still can't figure out why we don't have an ignore function on here.... quality threads like this wouldn't get derailed by the same jokers time and time again.

 

regardless, as a tourist destination Houston is fine. not only that, it's getting better EVERY FREAKING DAY. on top of that, its perception outside of here is slowly but surely changing for the better. world class museums, sports, dining and entertainment. believe it or not, those are what a lot of people travel for nowadays. who cares if we don't have a time square or a french quarter?? as nate99 mentioned, those places are littered with cheesey gift shops, terrible dining establishments and hordes of uncouth tourists who's idea of a good time is paying $50 to take a picture in front of a statue and eat at an oversized chilis.

 

Houson is better than that. Houston is REAL - it's a real city with real people and it doesn't try and pretend to be anything else. the places tourists would enjoy are usually the same places a native Houstonian would enjoy. when i travel, i avoid the touristy areas like the plague - never been to the statue of liberty in nyc, never been to alcatraz in SF, never been to the hollywood sign or sunset strip in LA because those places bore me to tears. intelligent, smart, savy travelers visit less to "see the sites" than they do to immerse themselves in the native culture. don't believe me? ask my friends from NYC or London or India who visit.

 

Houston has plenty of faults including the lack of a more comprehensive mass transist system... but to claim that it is boring b/c it doesn't have "street performers" and kitchsy tourist attractions or bc it doesn't have adequate rail throughout the entire city isn't just wrong, its asinine.

 

My bad. I'm sorry. I mis-read your post the other day about being "what would be swell". I thought it was directed at me the first time I read it and got too defensive. I was going to tell you go back re-read but I just now followed my own advice and realized that what I said was based on my own misunderstanding. My post directed at you was uncalled for and misguided.

Sorry again. BTW, I agree with everything you said above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and you jumped on me for telling him to get lost. save your energy dude.... he's a troll and his tune isn't changing no matter how logical your counter arguments. still can't figure out why we don't have an ignore function on here.... quality threads like this wouldn't get derailed by the same jokers time and time again.

regardless, as a tourist destination Houston is fine. not only that, it's getting better EVERY FREAKING DAY. on top of that, its perception outside of here is slowly but surely changing for the better. world class museums, sports, dining and entertainment. believe it or not, those are what a lot of people travel for nowadays. who cares if we don't have a time square or a french quarter?? as nate99 mentioned, those places are littered with cheesey gift shops, terrible dining establishments and hordes of uncouth tourists who's idea of a good time is paying $50 to take a picture in front of a statue and eat at an oversized chilis.

Houson is better than that. Houston is REAL - it's a real city with real people and it doesn't try and pretend to be anything else. the places tourists would enjoy are usually the same places a native Houstonian would enjoy. when i travel, i avoid the touristy areas like the plague - never been to the statue of liberty in nyc, never been to alcatraz in SF, never been to the hollywood sign or sunset strip in LA because those places bore me to tears. intelligent, smart, savy travelers visit less to "see the sites" than they do to immerse themselves in the native culture. don't believe me? ask my friends from NYC or London or India who visit.

Houston has plenty of faults including the lack of a more comprehensive mass transist system... but to claim that it is boring b/c it doesn't have "street performers" and kitchsy tourist attractions or bc it doesn't have adequate rail throughout the entire city isn't just wrong, its asinine.

Whatever. You are emotional and defensive instead of honest and rational. You won't admit reality and admit houston is simply not a tourist destination and never will be. Seattle, New York, Chicago, Austin, Portland, San Diego, San Francisco, LA, DC, Boston, Miami, San Antonio, New Orleans, Denver, Las Vegas, orlando, charleston are tourist destinations in the US. Houston and Dallas for that matter are not and will not be on that list.

Why would someone come here when you can get dining entertainment sports and entertainment plus GENUINE tourist attractions in many other cities?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever. You are emotional and defensive instead of honest and rational. You won't admit reality and admit houston is simply not a tourist destination and never will be. Seattle, New York, Chicago, Austin, Portland, San Diego, San Francisco, LA, DC, Boston, Miami, San Antonio, New Orleans, Denver, Las Vegas, orlando, charleston are tourist destinations in the US. Houston and Dallas for that matter are not and will not be on that list.

Why would someone come here when you can get dining entertainment sports and entertainment plus GENUINE tourist attractions in many other cities?

 

Well, to be fair Austin hasn't always been a tourist destination neither has Denver...or Portland or Seattle.  There were times all of those cities were far less attractive than they currently are!

 

To say Houston will never be a tourist destination isn't rational either.  Never is forever, right?  If so, then how can you say that it'll always be the same?  Fact is Houston is far more of a tourist destination than it was just 5-10 years ago.

 

What "Genuine" tourist attractions are there in Austin, Portland, Denver?  State Capital Buildings and a bridge over the Columbia River?  I mean please explain their genuine attractions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ slickvic - you lost me at San Antonio, Austin, Charleston and Denver. In fact, you lost me the first time I ever read anything you ever wrote. There is nothing stopping Houston from having, building or organically creating anything a tourist might travel to see in most of those other cities you mentioned in the future. A river walk? Amusement Parks? A music scene? That stuff comes and goes.

If anyone is interested enough to travel to other cities to see that crap, they would travel to see them in Houston. You were better off when you ridiculously started comparing Houston to places with crystal clear beaches and mountains. Just because you have an affinity for cheap road-side attractions doesn't mean that you have a clue about what attracts tourism, ESPECIALLY quality tourism.

Your predictions of the future sound about as clouded as your perception of the hear and now - and it's hardly honest or rational.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would someone come here when you can get dining entertainment sports and entertainment plus GENUINE tourist attractions in many other cities?

 

You can get all of those things in Houston as others have pointed out before in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and you jumped on me for telling him to get lost. save your energy dude.... he's a troll and his tune isn't changing no matter how logical your counter arguments. still can't figure out why we don't have an ignore function on here...

 

You'll be happy to know there is an ignore function!  There is a drop-down menu on your member name in the upper right-hand corner.  From there click on "Manage Ignore Prefs".  It's one of board's best features.  I highly recommend it.  ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, to be fair Austin hasn't always been a tourist destination neither has Denver...or Portland or Seattle. There were times all of those cities were far less attractive than they currently are!

To say Houston will never be a tourist destination isn't rational either. Never is forever, right? If so, then how can you say that it'll always be the same? Fact is Houston is far more of a tourist destination than it was just 5-10 years ago.

What "Genuine" tourist attractions are there in Austin, Portland, Denver? State Capital Buildings and a bridge over the Columbia River? I mean please explain their genuine attractions.

Seattle Denver and Portland also have the advantage of being near mountains and hilly hiking areas in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pray tell, what is a "GENUINE" tourist attraction that other cities have and Houston doesn't? A theme park?  <_<

 

What Citykid needs is a day trip to Houston in parts of town where he's never been before.

What Slick needs is to study what actually attracts tourism. There are whole college majors about this, and I suggest that even hanging out in a university library might start to give you a better idea about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'll be happy to know there is an ignore function!  There is a drop-down menu on your member name in the upper right-hand corner.  From there click on "Manage Ignore Prefs".  It's one of board's best features.  I highly recommend it.  ;-)

 

done!

 

first time in all of my internettin' days that i've actually utilized the ignore function but man... i couldn't take that drivel anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seattle Denver and Portland also have the advantage of being near mountains and hilly hiking areas in general.

 

So only mountains constitute genuine tourist destinations?  If that is the case why is El Paso not a tourist destination?  Its the safest big city in the US, has mountains nearby and there are tourist attractions within a few hours at most of the city?

 

Seattle, Denver and Portland all caught on early in the urban blight removal and central business district redevelopments that took place in the 1980s-2000s and have reaped those rewards since.  There was a time when the ONLY reason you went to Denver was to get to the Rockies.  You didn't linger in town.  They redeveloped their downtown and now have a lot more tourists.

 

I too love mountains, but I don't find them the only reason to visit a place.  There are a lot of towns and cities around the world that do not have mountians or really any attractive geographic features: London, Paris, Bangkok, Toyko, Beijing, Cairo, Amsterdam, Charlestown, New Orleans (which has even worse topography than Houston), Boston... the list goes on and on.  You can argue that the Seine, the Thames and other creeks/rivers/waterways around those towns are pretty - but they aren't.  Boston is built on a landfil and the actual Boston waterfront is nothing to look at as beautiful.

 

I'll give you that Houston *should* have worked harder to revitalize and protect its Galveston Bay frontage.  As it stands we have few public areas along the bay.

 

I still question what makes Austin a tourist town?  Word of mouth?  And I still ask you: "How long has Austin truly been considered a tourist town?"

 

Here's the answer to that last question: (whispers) "Just a few years, maybe 8 or so at the very most!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So only mountains constitute genuine tourist destinations? If that is the case why is El Paso not a tourist destination? Its the safest big city in the US, has mountains nearby and there are tourist attractions within a few hours at most of the city?

Seattle, Denver and Portland all caught on early in the urban blight removal and central business district redevelopments that took place in the 1980s-2000s and have reaped those rewards since. There was a time when the ONLY reason you went to Denver was to get to the Rockies. You didn't linger in town. They redeveloped their downtown and now have a lot more tourists.

I too love mountains, but I don't find them the only reason to visit a place. There are a lot of towns and cities around the world that do not have mountians or really any attractive geographic features: London, Paris, Bangkok, Toyko, Beijing, Cairo, Amsterdam, Charlestown, New Orleans (which has even worse topography than Houston), Boston... the list goes on and on. You can argue that the Seine, the Thames and other creeks/rivers/waterways around those towns are pretty - but they aren't. Boston is built on a landfil and the actual Boston waterfront is nothing to look at as beautiful.

I'll give you that Houston *should* have worked harder to revitalize and protect its Galveston Bay frontage. As it stands we have few public areas along the bay.

I still question what makes Austin a tourist town? Word of mouth? And I still ask you: "How long has Austin truly been considered a tourist town?"

Here's the answer to that last question: (whispers) "Just a few years, maybe 8 or so at the very most!"

And that is encouraging houston has potential to improve itself to where it may be a tourist destination. But it still needs one wow attraction. Austin has sixth street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that is encouraging houston has potential to improve itself to where it may be a tourist destination. But it still needs one wow attraction. Austin has sixth street.

 

I wouldn't list Sixth Street as a tourist destination.  Bars and one-off restaurants mostly filled with college age kids or recent grads are not unique tourist destinations!

 

Austin is like Portland - it really doesn't have any tourist destinations - they just do well convincing people that they'll have fun visiting, they have shops and restaurants which are hardly unique (every big city has good places to eat) and a "vibe" or some other hippy-esque status that they give off.  Houston could learn from them, since they've achieved so much with so little.

 

I think they're just nice places to live.  Which is what I would hope Houston would continue to stive for, rather than some ubiquitous status symbol of "tourist destination."  Expanded rail service and continued growth in the central core will ensure that there will be more and more for people who simply enjoy exploring cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a little complex down south of here, called the Johnson Space Center that has a heck of a lot more "wow" factor than 6th St. in Austin. To top that off, Houston has the POTENTIAL to improve itself? You've not been here long, obviously. Houston has improved dramatically within the last 20 years, and it didn't take a 6th St. type scene to accomplish it.

The problem with the ignore feature is when someone else responds to the individual you have ignored. It totally breaks up the flow of the discussion when you start reading the response and ask yourself what that person is talking about, because you can't read what initiated the post you are currently reading. That is just as frustrating as reading the poster's thoughts you want to ignore in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have heard the same thing about Bourbon Street re: locals, but that's where the gift shops, street performers, and sidewalk cafes (ok, bars) are located, so I was addressing that "dynamic" in my comparison. The city as a tourist destination puts Bourbon Street front and center. Whatever other reasons there are to like N.O. are not because it is prototypically tourist friendly/appealing following the criteria discussed earlier.

 

Lots of sidewalk cafes, etc. on the gentler streets of the French Quarter and in other neighborhoods, including the most famous café of all, the Café du Monde. I think the whole French Quarter is put front and center, with Bourbon Street being where you go to get smashed and experience sleaze. Other streets have a very different atmosphere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of sidewalk cafes, etc. on the gentler streets of the French Quarter and in other neighborhoods, including the most famous café of all, the Café du Monde. I think the whole French Quarter is put front and center, with Bourbon Street being where you go to get smashed and experience sleaze. Other streets have a very different atmosphere.

right, and 6th street isn't all that Austin is made up of either. There's the capitol, the lbj library, the lady bird johnson wildflower center, there is literally, tons of stuff to do there, but there's no gift stores, sidewalk cafes, street performers, or public transportation, but I bet our friends think it's a lovely place to vacation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...