totheskies

Not necessarily. I'm thinking more like a college hang-out place than a bookstore. Coffee houses, etc.

UofH might actually meet its goal of having all Freshman on campus by 2014. Once that class goes through, it's going to be a very different university. The culture is changing rapidly from its commuter-college ways. But we're still hurt by the severe lack of area retail.

I have instantly fallen IN LOVE with the No-Tsu-Oh festival!! We should bring it back, and incorporate the Art Cars!! We could have a short, nighttime parade that starts at Discovery Green, and ends at Market Square. It would be a great move to promote Houston Preservation. Anyone else interested in this? Seriously???

As someone who works full-time at UofH, it's really exciting to see so much activity. You can tell how much the new dorms contribute to campus.

Now we really need to recruit some more area retail. More bars, an off-campus bookstore with amenities (we lost the College Store, but I'm thinking more like a full-service Barnes and Noble with coffee and lounge area), and late night places to hang out.

Retail would be really great if you place it near Elgin and Scott. That will be the eventual meeting of the two rail lines.

So back to the hotel...

I would argue that the demand has been there for a while. It's in the number of Conventions that have been lost to the GRB/ Downtown Houston due to a lack of adequate hotel space in the vicinity. More rooms close to the Convention Center means bigger conventions can come to downtown. It also means more conventions overall, as it decreases the wait time for attendees to have to wait on hotel rooms (checking in/checking out). Downtown Houston is still at a massive lack for hotels rooms in downtown when compared to other cities.

I presume you meant the HIlton Hotel garage, not the HIlton Hotel itself? Yes, the Master Plan calls for removing that garage and replacing it with additional convention center space. The hotel itself survives, as is clearly depicted in the rendering.

Yes, the Master Plan discusses the need for the north-end garage addition to accommodate the MetroRail line on the ground floor.

So it'd be Houston's version of "Mockingbird Station"?? That solves the major retail component right there. Factor in increased retail need from nearby Dynamo games, and you've got a good recipe for retail in the area.

The vast majority of cities which were not purpose-built as tourist attractions (e.g.. Las Vegas, Anaheim and Orlando) don't actually see all that many pure-tourists. Sure, there are a few exceptions - probably, Paris and NYC - but not many at all.

Neither were Memphis, Nashville, New Orleans or San Antonio, but they do handle tourists quite well.

I'm not sure how you distinguish between tourists and visitors; I suppose that the difference is that the latter are people who solely come here for leisure travel, while the latter includes (among others) business travelers and medical travelers. This is not an unreasonable distinction, but I'm not sure it's a useful one.

The vast majority of cities which were not purpose-built as tourist attractions (e.g.. Las Vegas, Anaheim and Orlando) don't actually see all that many pure-tourists. Sure, there are a few exceptions - probably, Paris and NYC - but not many at all.

I don't think we should attempt to turn Houston into an Orlando or something of the sort (or lament the fact that it's not). Our goals should be enhancing quality of life for residents and economic/social development. To the degree that tourism infrastructure helps us achieve these goals, then we should improve it.

By most superficial definitions of tourism, however, it's not something that is purpose-built. Sure, we could encourage development in the city that enhances the tourism experience, but most 'tourist destinations' (by your definition, I think) either have a significant amount of preserved and curated history or are known for their geography/climate. Houston has neither of these (in spades), so our tourism seems to suffer.

But, does it really? As I've pointed out on another, similar thread, Houston doesn't actually do as poorly as some people think in visitorship figures. For example (as pointed out in that link), Houston has roughly 12 million non-regional visitors per year - versus 14 million for Chicago. As Niche pointed out above, much of a city's visitorship is related simply to population and demographics.

I disagree with Niche on one point, however: that the appropriate tourism strategy for Houston would be founded on gambling. Yes, legalized gambling in Houston might draw people to the city, but this is likely to be a statewide lifting of gambling bans - and places like San Antonio and Austin are more likely to capitalize on it than Houston, in my opinion.

Instead, I would argue that a focus on technology and engineering goes to our strengths. I did a recent analysis of number of engineers by metropolitan division (where appropriate, otherwise using MSA). According to the BLS, the Houston metro has more professionals with 'engineer' in their title (45,740) than any other metro area in the country. By comparison, the LA metro division has 41,260, and the combined Bay Area has 42,760. Houston also has one of the most diversified engineering/technology employment bases in the country (i.e., they're not primarily in one dominant field).

Hardcore engineering is one of our strengths, and technology follows. We have some amazing developments here - especially in the emerging bioengineering and biotechnology arenas. If we could capture this development as a tourism strategy, we'd have something unique which could be rivaled by few cities in the world. To do this requires a coordinated effort, however - probably by the engineering/tech companies in the region, as well as organizations such as the TMC and JSC. It could be done, however - with the right mindset.

That, at least, is my opinion.

I agree that we shouldn't bank our whole economy on tourism, because it's not a primary reason that people visit Houston. No one expects us to do that.

However, the city does very little to promote the things that we do have which could be of great interest to visitors. If someone comes to Houston and they are a big-time American Art buff, they'd probably want to know about the Moores Opera House at UofH. But if they come to town for some other reason and never find out, that's an opportunity missed. It's also an opportunity that is missed by UofH to promote it's school, or by local East End-area businesses to make some extra revenue for the day.

To me what makes the difference is that a "true tourist" comes to a destination with money to burn, and they plan on burning it. It's a big opportunity that our city is ripe for.

Don't take my word for it... check out the evidence.

Houston ranked 16th in the nation for drawing overseas tourists (that's actually DOWN one spot from 2008)...

http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/morning_call/2011/05/houston-16th-in-us-for-overseas.html

A Chron article "Looking for fun? Tourists say it's not in Houston"...

http://www.chron.com/business/article/Looking-for-fun-Tourists-say-it-s-not-in-Houston-1615260.php

GLBT is a rapidly growing sector of the tourism industry. With Mayor Parker's election, the GLBT community is now well-informed about Houston, but it still ranks 22nd in the nation among GLBT tourist destinations. There's room for improvement there.

http://www.communitymarketinginc.com/documents/temp/CMI_16thLGBTTourismStudy.pdf

Again, no one is expecting us to become NYC or New Orleans overnight. We know that's not going to happen. But it's silly for us to just pretend like Houston's on autopilot and that no one cares either. If we took some simple, targeted initiatives, Houston's tourism appeal could improve significantly. Something as simple as better signage can make a difference!!

What little tourist traps we have in the Greater Houston area are terrible. Only because it will cost you $6 for a long neck (kemah). Also, $20 for a low quality dish at a poorly managed eatery... I'm glad Houston isnt a tourist city. What we need are attractions that are not cookie cutter themed boardwalks & piers.

Edit: I guess I should include my top 10.

1. Bayou Bends

2. Hermann Park

3. The Galleria

4. Downtown Observation Decks/Discovery Green

5. The Woodlands Waterway

6. Galveston

7. The Westheimer Strip

8. E.T. Park

9. San Jaciento Battleground

10. The Heights

These are the places I always take friends or family visiting.

I disagree... tourism and a tourism economy can be a very

A lot of tourism has something to do with visiting extended families, which is a function of sheer population, demography, and (I would speculate) religiosity. These are strengths of ours.

And sure, tourism creates jobs. But...those jobs mostly suck and have very limited potential for career development.

I disagree... the tourism industry can be a very healthy part of an urban economy when managed well. It would be very easy to make Houston more accommadating to tourists without sacrificing the things that we already like about the city. Take the Gulf Building for example. Stunning Art Deco architecture that would surely draw a crowd, but it just operates as a whatever downtown office building, and it doesn't stay open for any extended hours. Same thing with St. Paul's church, the Esperson Buildings and a host of other historic structures. These are places that would definitely be of interest to people if we only lifted a finger to promote them, especially as they creep closer to being a century old. In particular with structures like the Gulf Building and the recently renovated Harris County Courthouse and Ideson Library, we as taxpayers spent a lot of money to preserve and restore these buildings. They are tourist-ready,and we should promote them as such.

I don't disagree with the spirit of your post, but I'd like to point out that Houston is the 8th most visited metro area in the country - with over 30 million visitors, comparable to Philadelphia. You know... Philadelphia... the birthplace of modern democracy and historic center of the US. Not too shabby!

Visited for what?? It's definitely not for tourism. If it were then we'd have a more tourist-friendly infrastructure throughout the city. This is a huge job creator that Houston continues to ignore.

My point with the thread is that we have lots of great things going on in Houston!! I was in NYC earlier this week, and yes, the city has lots of stellar sights and historical significance. But we've got some really great things too. If we did a better job at promotion, Houston could be a real tourism competitor.

Here's mine

On the rail line...

1. Discovery Green Park

2. Gulf Building (Chase)

3. MFA H

4. HMNS

5. Neils Esperson

6. Houston Zoo

7. Minute Maid Park/ Old Union Station

8. Chase Tower Observation Deck

9. St. Paul's Church (though there's several beautiful old churches in the area)

10. Sam Houston Park

Elsewhere around town/ metro

1. Space Center Houston

2. San Jacinto Monument

3. The Galleria

4. Waterwall

5. Galveston Strand

6. Galveston Pier (opening soon, but sure to be a big attraction)

7. Old Town Spring

8. Children's Museum

9. Houston Ship Channel

10. Kemah Boardwalk

11. Menil Collection

12. Bayou Bend

Things that could/should be touristy, but for some reason are just off the radar...

-The 1940 Air Terminal Museum

-The Houston Fire Museum

-The Villa de Matel

We all know that Houston is no hotbed for tourists, but there are some pretty cool sites here, and many become more treasured by the day. And slowly but surely, our tourism sector is growing. What are your Top 10 Houston Tourism sights and activities? For transit lovers, can you find a Top 10 in the vicinity of the rail line?

I clicked on this thread with the hopes of some "breaking news" pertaining to the U Line. This argument was a big let down

Is any retail ever going to go on West Dallas?? There's plenty of need for it.

Westheimer is a terrible option inside the loop. No center lane plus narrower than average lanes. No bueno.

While I agree that from residential and commercial access standpoint, it would be ideal.. it just wouldn't be a feasible LRT route.

Lots and lots of those buisnesses would plowed under to get the ROW neccessary for both LRT and vehicle lanes to work... which would then defeat the purpose of using Westheimer to begin with.

Dream up a subway or Westheimer L.. then I'll go w/ your parallel line fantasy.

The Green line is already planned to continue down Washington. It was originally refferred to as the Inner Katy LRT in Metro's Phase III

I think Shepherd has the same drawbacks as Westheimer.. Too narrow in too many places with no center lane... and It's too important a NS route to lose vehicle lanes. There was talk at one point though to Montrose and HEights to be used as an old school Trolly line circulator that would act as a NS link for the Red Line, Universities, and future Washington line

Has anyone actually done a cost comparison for a grade-separated vs at-grade guideway?? It would be "more expensive", but definitely worth it. Ridership numbers for the 81/82 alone should justify that an "L" type system along Westheimer would be successful.

It would be ideal to have that in combination with the rail that is already planned.

I'm quite torn about this too. The city has a vested interest in creating this ordinance because they have to clean up after the people when they on public grounds. I get that. But somehow an ordinance to be able to feed the homeless doesn't seem like a good idea. I would rather they create an ordinance to encourage the churches/organizations to help clean the area after they're done, or pay a service fee to de-fray the costs. It shouldn't be illegal to feed the homeless.

Hey everyone,

Just wanted to share that I've started my own blog...

http://texasleftist.blogspot.com

It covers, national, state and local politics, and a few other things. Check it out, and I'd love to have your feedback!!

The Exxon building has always screamed "Residential" to me. Huge windows, very apartment-like design. This could be a very successful conversion project.

Since most of the P&R routes only serve downtown, I'd be interested in seeing data on what percentage of P&R commuters are also LRT commuters. In that sense, the two services work in tandem and one cannot be shortchanged without shortchanging the other.

For the purposes of comparing the effectiveness of future investment in the different modes, it is also useful to subtract out those commuters that only use LRT as a shuttle between the TMC and outlying parking lots (because that kind of captive ridership cannot be replicated on any future LRT route). Including trips from and back to the Smithlands lot, this accounts for 5,728 average weekday riders.

It's also worth pointing out that whereas the average LRT trip is about 2.4 miles (estimated from passenger mile stats in this document compared to ridership stats you linked to), the average P&R trip is probably ten to fifteen miles (if I had to guess, because unfortunately P&R is not broken out from other bus services in the data). So in terms of vehicle miles and mitigated congestion, it is by no means clear that LRT is the better investment. In fact, the document I just linked to indicates that METRO's vanpool program is already achieving about 2.6 times the number of passenger miles of LRT (and a lower operating cost per passenger mile than LRT).

But probably the thing that most favors the development of P&R service and HOV/HOT corridors is that urban ROW is scarce. Whether its an LRT guideway or bare pavement, each has the potential to accommodate extra capacity; with LRT (as implemented by METRO), that potential is largely sacrificed. But the HOV/HOT lanes used by P&R allow their extra capacity to be utilized first by vanpoolers, then by carpoolers, and lastly by a small quantity of toll payers...but not so many as to exceed the capacity and induce congestion. (Note that there are bound to be hiccups, but that the implementation process takes time to get right.) Unlike LRT, HOV/HOT lanes do not interfere with other modes of regional mobility, and actually serve to take pressure off of congested roadways while giving a bump to transit ridership once people are inside the City.

MetroRail and P&R are tough to compare on a per-mile basis, and at present they serve different purposes. MetroRail is only 7.5 miles long, but I'm sure the average P&R trip is at least twice that anyway. More people live in Sugarland or Katy than live within a walkable distance of the rail line, but at the same time, a lot more people live in Central Houston that don't own a vehicle at all. It's an apples to oranges comparison in my view, but we should be investing in both.

Of course the other elephant in the room... you get what you pay for. If we had grade-separated rail, then it wouldn't interfere with street-level traffic, and could move people more efficiently.

Parking in the Medical Center has become abysmal. Many more people are getting Q Cards for that sole purpose. But METRO is also working to align more routes into the rail line, so I think we're starting to see the benefit of that.

It's nothing special, but I just wanted to some information about my band The Collective Racket. We shot a music video in Downtown recently. If you're curious please check it out along with our other videos!!

Here's the video...

WHOA they have music there??? How cool is that?!!

I've never so much as seen a Forever 21 bag.

I had figured that it was oriented to upper middle class women and was bringing the attention of monied individuals to the downtown area as an option for their shopping needs. That's the sort of foot traffic that it takes to develop a viable shopping district. But if its only attracting poor people to spend money on items that they can scarcely afford, then screw it. It serves no purpose compatible with social policy. Thank you; your comments have soured me to the prospect that a subsidy of Houston Pavilions has any redeeming qualities.

Forever 21 has mass appeal. It's a not a super high-end store, but on the same competitive field as Old Navy (which would have been an even better retail choice for HP I think) and draws a wide spectrum of shoppers.

Yeah sure, rail to the barrio will drive sales at Houston Pavilions. Maybe the new owner can generate interest from pawn shop operators and refresquerias, and then strike it rich!

So I take it you don't ride the 50, 52 or the 30 very much?? I've been on each of those buses and seen 4 or 5 Foever 21 bags on them at a time. 2nd and 3rd Ward know about Houston Pavillions, and the rail lines are gonna make for a faster trip.

I've been now 3 or 4 times, and I just totally love it. Agreed, the first floor gets a bit bunched up in the pita/ deli section, but aside from that it's an amazing addition to Downtown. Store layout feels a lot more like a European grocer than anything in the states. The second floor may be small, but that's where the really good stuff is... mega-sized cans of hummus for $2!!