GreenStreet: Mixed-Use Development At 1201 Fannin St.

[citizen4rmptown]

whoah ,some of us dont even have to type anymore

we have other haifer's answer questions with quotes

brilliant!

[musicman]

i dont know if you're talking to me ,but if you were it was to show that cities with higher pop. density

can have a harder time getting to work than houstonians and have better traffic

and the data you posted also has less dense cities with worse problems.

Edited August 2, 2008 by musicman

[HtownWxBoy]

This is the correct forum to discuss 'Houston Pavilions' isn't it??

[C2H]

Yeah but we're spinning off Houston Pavilions and how it could possibly bring residents and shopping back downtown which would spawn future developments, thus creating a higher density both downtown and inside the loop. So it is a relative topic.

[C2H]

I'm in Denver Colorado this weekend and I am nothing short of amazed on how active downtown is. I knew it was always active but it seems like they're adding more things. The Nightlife here is awesome.

And Denver's density is even about 150p/sq mile less than Houston. So maybe memebag was on to something in her post. Denver is a model that shows that you can have an active city core without having the highest density numbers. But again, Denver doesn't sprawl like Houston and has a far better mass transit system.

Edited August 2, 2008 by C2H

[Houston19514]

As far as density, density works when the infrastructure is there. Houston still has worse traffic and gridlock than cities with higher densities.

?? Care to cite some meaningful examples?

Edited August 2, 2008 by Houston19514

[Trae]

I'm in Denver Colorado this weekend and I am nothing short of amazed on how active downtown is. I knew it was always active but it seems like they're adding more things. The Nightlife here is awesome.

And Denver's density is even about 150p/sq mile less than Houston. So maybe memebag was on to something in her post. Denver is a model that shows that you can have an active city core without having the highest density numbers. But again, Denver doesn't sprawl like Houston and has a far better mass transit system.

Well, Denver is better light rail wise for now, but that's it.

[HtownWxBoy]

Yeah but we're spinning off Houston Pavilions and how it could possibly bring residents and shopping back downtown which would spawn future developments, thus creating a higher density both downtown and inside the loop. So it is a relative topic.

Ooo yes, of course, I see.

[ricco67]

Ooo yes, of course, I see.

<elaborate Jazz Handsy movements>

Exactly, it's all intertwined in a cosmo sort of way.

</elaborate Jazz Handsy movements>

[livincinco]

<elaborate Jazz Handsy movements>

Exactly, it's all intertwined in a cosmo sort of way.

</elaborate Jazz Handsy movements>

Six degrees of Houston Pavilions?

[HtownWxBoy]

<elaborate Jazz Handsy movements>

Exactly, it's all intertwined in a cosmo sort of way.

</elaborate Jazz Handsy movements>

he he he

[C2H]

Well, Denver is better light rail wise for now, but that's it.

Have you been to Denver?

[madmann101]

Houston's downtown has lots of potential become very active and the park is a GREAT start. Houston Pavilions is what is going to get more pedestrians walking downtown, when they walk from the park to the pavilions,etc. I think Houston's downtown a little cramp though and the streets or sidewalks should be made a little wider to give people more space.

Also public transit is a must if you want more people walking around and the density going on in midtown is good, except I just wish there wasn't so many gated communities and parking garages. There should be more street parking, I mean it wouldn't kill anyone to walk atleast 10-20ft to get to their homes.

I'd rather Houston lose all the land outside of the loop and galleria area than keep it because I feel if that is done, more people would move closer to the city center.

[totheskies]

^Yeah, and for those of us that don't have rail bias, BUSES count as public transit. But Houston's bus service is just too sporadic and infrequent. If METRO decided to step up to the plate and run the bus routes every 5 or 6 minutes, our public transit would be great.

[BigSky]

It is interesting that you are comparing, Denver Pavilions to Houston Pavilions. I've spoken to some friends who grew up in Denver and they stated that Denver Pavilions kicked off the renaissiance of Denver Downtown. They said after dP was in place, a signficant amount of development came up around it. I think HP will have the same type of impact that dP had on Denver. With OPP, HP, DG, DGT and MSP all occuring within a year of each other, I can see how this will bring a signifcant amount of development around HP.

[memebag]

I'd rather Houston lose all the land outside of the loop and galleria area than keep it because I feel if that is done, more people would move closer to the city center.

Huh? You're wishing for some sort of donut shaped asteroid impact?

Why do people pick Houston as a residence if they want everyone crammed into downtown? It's never going to happen.

[desirous]

Huh? You're wishing for some sort of donut shaped asteroid impact?

Why do people pick Houston as a residence if they want everyone crammed into downtown? It's never going to happen.

It's called wishful thinking. Every city has sprawl around it... except maybe Hong Kong.

Enjoying density does not mean killing suburban growth. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive.

[WesternGulf]

?? Care to cite some meaningful examples?

From the same study citizen posted, here is a prime example how traditionally built cities, that usually tend to inevitably have higher densities than decentralized cities like Houston, are more commuter friendly:

Varying population densities and development patterns in the nation's cities make gaging efficiency difficult. In Boston, for example, jobs are mostly concentrated in and around the city center. In Los Angeles, offices are more spread out. That means Boston's commuter rail and "T" systems, part of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, are better able to put area commuters closer to their jobs than an identical train system could do for Los Angeles commuters.

Source: http://www.forbesautos.com/news/headlines/...ter-cities.html

[Trae]

Have you been to Denver?

Yeah.

[TheNiche]

From the same study citizen posted, here is a prime example how traditionally built cities, that usually tend to inevitably have higher densities than decentralized cities like Houston, are more commuter friendly:

Varying population densities and development patterns in the nation's cities make gaging efficiency difficult. In Boston, for example, jobs are mostly concentrated in and around the city center. In Los Angeles, offices are more spread out. That means Boston's commuter rail and "T" systems, part of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, are better able to put area commuters closer to their jobs than an identical train system could do for Los Angeles commuters.

Source: http://www.forbesautos.com/news/headlines/...ter-cities.html

According to the Census Bureau's 2006 American Community Survey, there is no statistically meaningful difference (approx. 6 to 12 seconds) in average commute times between the Los Angeles, Boston, or Houston metropolitan areas.

I don't dispute the higher efficacy of a train system in a more centralized city as opposed to a more decentralized city, however I would dispute that that necessarily makes them more commuter-friendly in a general sense. Not many people actually ride trains. Even in Boston, only about 11% of people commute using any kind of public transportation.

[madmann101]

Huh? You're wishing for some sort of donut shaped asteroid impact?

Why do people pick Houston as a residence if they want everyone crammed into downtown? It's never going to happen.

Well the city would be much more progressive and we'd probably already have light rail,commuter rails, and even a subway system. When you have people way out there in the boonies voting for rennovations and public transit inside the core, you have lots of surburbanites out there who love their cars and see no point in voting yes to some type of public transit within the city. The city would also be much more dense and developed. Even though the city would lose its 4th biggest city rank,we'd still be a world class city!

[WesternGulf]

Why do people pick Houston as a residence...

Its cheap and downtown right now is too much of a sacrifice to live in although you may be closer to your job. Yeah one can name all of the cultural amenities downtown has but what about everyday necessities?

edit: and niche, just because most people do not take the trains in Boston, atleast they have the option. Houston has no choice but to sit in traffic as far as commutes.

Edited August 3, 2008 by WesternGulf

[Trae]

I mean, you do have Park and Rides during the weekdays, and it isn't like commuter rail isn't going to happen. Metro is planning it. Takes time.

[livincinco]

Well the city would be much more progressive and we'd probably already have light rail,commuter rails, and even a subway system. When you have people way out there in the boonies voting for rennovations and public transit inside the core, you have lots of surburbanites out there who love their cars and see no point in voting yes to some type of public transit within the city. The city would also be much more dense and developed. Even though the city would lose its 4th biggest city rank,we'd still be a world class city!

Part of the reason that Houston has developed the way it has is that there are no natural constraints to prevent it from happening. Think about the geography of some of the cities that we're talking about.

Manhattan, San Francisco, Hong Kong, Boston - all have had the growth of their downtown areas dictated by constraints of mountains, water or both.

Atlanta, Phoenix, Houston - No geographic constraints on growth leading to sprawl.

Suburbanites don't love their cars. Suburbanites love having a yard and being away from the noise of the city and are willing to accept their cars as a necessary sacrifice.

[KinkaidAlum]

According to the Census Bureau's 2006 American Community Survey, there is no statistically meaningful difference (approx. 6 to 12 seconds) in average commute times between the Los Angeles, Boston, or Houston metropolitan areas.

I don't dispute the higher efficacy of a train system in a more centralized city as opposed to a more decentralized city, however I would dispute that that necessarily makes them more commuter-friendly in a general sense. Not many people actually ride trains. Even in Boston, only about 11% of people commute using any kind of public transportation.

Where in the world did you get your 11% figure for public transportation use in Boston? According to the latest available government stats (2005), 32% of people in greater Boston used public transportation to get to work. It's increased every years since then.

The MBTA operates subway, light rail, commuter rail, buses, and ferry services. It just came out in late July that for the fiscal year of 2008, THREE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY FIVE MILLION trips were taken on public transportation. That's an increase of over 21 million rides in 2007. It's the highest rate in MBTA's history, beating fiscal year 2001 (before 9-11). That's a LOT of cars off of the road, especially considering that Boston ranks 49th out of the top 50 cities in single occupancy vehicles.

Additionally, in 2007, it is estimated that 12.5% of Bostonians (city only) walk to work. I walk to work. It takes me on average 5 minutes to get to work.

[desirous]

One huge advantage of public transit: you can nap on the way. That applies to buses too; I got a pretty good snooze in riding the 255 Kingwood bus.

[TheNiche]

Where in the world did you get your 11% figure for public transportation use in Boston? According to the latest available government stats (2005), 32% of people in greater Boston used public transportation to get to work. It's increased every years since then.

Additionally, in 2007, it is estimated that 12.5% of Bostonians (city only) walk to work.

I already told you (pay more attention!): the Census Bureau's 2006 American Community Survey. That is the latest available government statistic. And I don't know what you mean by 'greater Boston', but I'm talking about the MSA. If you want to look at the CSA (probably more meaningful, given Boston's geography), the percentage of public transit users falls to 8.9% and only 4.2% walk.

I walk to work. It takes me on average 5 minutes to get to work.

I could live across the street from where I work in apartments running the gamut from crappy and super-affordable to very nice and almost out of my price range...or in single-family homes that are well beyond my price range...and also be much less than 5 minutes from a grocery store, multiple restaurants, dry cleaning, a church, schools (K-12), frequent busses, and much more.

The option exists to embrace an even more walkable lifestyle than yours. But I don't want that. It would suck. Other options are available to me that are far preferable (like living closer-in).

Edited August 3, 2008 by TheNiche

[TheNiche]

niche, just because most people do not take the trains in Boston, atleast they have the option. Houston has no choice but to sit in traffic as far as commutes.

Not true at all. Houstonians have free will. They can and do make decisions that balance commuting options with the other elements of their lifestyle preferences.

[Houston19514]

Where in the world did you get your 11% figure for public transportation use in Boston? According to the latest available government stats (2005), 32% of people in greater Boston used public transportation to get to work. It's increased every years since then.

The MBTA operates subway, light rail, commuter rail, buses, and ferry services. It just came out in late July that for the fiscal year of 2008, THREE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY FIVE MILLION trips were taken on public transportation. That's an increase of over 21 million rides in 2007. It's the highest rate in MBTA's history, beating fiscal year 2001 (before 9-11). That's a LOT of cars off of the road, especially considering that Boston ranks 49th out of the top 50 cities in single occupancy vehicles.

Additionally, in 2007, it is estimated that 12.5% of Bostonians (city only) walk to work. I walk to work. It takes me on average 5 minutes to get to work.

Source? Link?

From the same study citizen posted, here is a prime example how traditionally built cities, that usually tend to inevitably have higher densities than decentralized cities like Houston, are more commuter friendly:

Varying population densities and development patterns in the nation's cities make gaging efficiency difficult. In Boston, for example, jobs are mostly concentrated in and around the city center. In Los Angeles, offices are more spread out. That means Boston's commuter rail and "T" systems, part of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, are better able to put area commuters closer to their jobs than an identical train system could do for Los Angeles commuters.

Source: http://www.forbesautos.com/news/headlines/...ter-cities.html

That "study" is not about congestion and gridlock alone. The study ranks "best and worst cities for commuters", only one element of which was congestion (and they made a pretty weak and indirect attempt at that factor).

So, again I ask for meaningful examples of metro areas with higher density and lower congestion and gridlock compared to Houston.

[KinkaidAlum]

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/green/arti...record_numbers/

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachus...feet_are_first/

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/green/arti...on_record_pace/

http://hawk.heraldinteractive.com/news/reg...as_prices_rise/

http://money.cnn.com/2007/06/13/real_estat...mutes/index.htm

Here ya go. Enjoy. Still not finding anything that suggests 11% use the MBTA.

And as for Niche, "greater Boston" means the metro area same as it does when someone refers to "greater Houston."

If I wanted to use percentages for the City of Boston ONLY, they would SKYROCKET but that would be an unfair comparison to Houston.