Three commuter lines being studied

[august948]

LA has a growth boundary on the west side, but the town sprawls for 80 miles to the east....

 

Houston will densify.  Its densifying now.  In 26 years I'll wager the Loop will be a lot denser than what it currently is.  Why?  Because of the want for living in a city for some - not all - but some residents.  If we add 6+ million (as we're projected to over those 20+ years) then why not see the Loop add the additional 400,000 ?  What is Katy going to be a city of 300,000?   Sugar Land a city of 500,000?

 

No doubt it will be denser, I'm of the opinion, though, that the densification will be more gradual and spread out than it is in LA, SF or Chicago.  We've got no shoreline to crowd onto.  I'm also of the opinion that much of the future growth in the metro are will center around various edge cities.  We may become (if we're not already) the leading example of that.  So you may get a dense, sparse (relatively), dense pattern as you go down, say, I10, 45, or 59, etc.

 

[arche_757]

Yes, we will see that.  No doubt.  But Houston proper - namely the big urban business zones inside and around the Loop will still be quite dense.  And I still see the Loop as a very dense area, if only because of proximity to jobs + accessability via transit or walkability.  Who knows how expensive transportation will be in 20 years?  Could be cheap (doubtful) or very expensive (most likely - even if it isn't mostly oil based).

 

I'm not saying we will have SF density everywhere, but certainly in some areas.  Probably there will be more "slums" (if that is the right word) like Harwin than there will be high-end highrise zones full of rich folks... but there will still be density.  Places like The Woodlands, Sugar Land, Pearland etc will also be quite populated and have dense cores (even if they're small) that radiate out only a few blocks.

[bachanon]

speaking of density.  i've been saving addresses of new high rises on google maps.  notice the line between waugh and allen parkway to the museum district.  curious isn't it?

 

https://goo.gl/maps/KHepC  (actually, i'm not sure if the saved places will be there for everyone.  let me know if not and i'll try something else)

[august948]

speaking of density.  i've been saving addresses of new high rises on google maps.  notice the line between waugh and allen parkway to the museum district.  curious isn't it?

 

https://goo.gl/maps/KHepC  (actually, i'm not sure if the saved places will be there for everyone.  let me know if not and i'll try something else)

 

Not there for me.  Would like to see it, though.  Maybe you can post a screenshot?

 

[samagon]

If you've doing that drive recently, it's because of the widening of Bellaire.  I've been driving up and down it for the past 15 years and it's no big deal.  But maybe I have a greater tolerance for traffic.  I'd say the Galleria is worse on any given Friday or Saturday night.

 

 

I lived in a neighborhood very close to Bellaire and Kirkwood up until 5 years ago (well, almost 6 now). I lived in Alief pretty much my whole life up until I bought my house in the east end, so I got to watch the area grow and change. I may have been the most unlucky man in the world to hit traffic just right every saturday and sunday morning but most specifically the traffic leading up to BW8 because of the signal on Rosedale (I always assumed cause that's about when traffic really started to suck).

[Slick Vik]

To you and your lifestyle. Not everyone lives the same way you do. More and more people, even in Houston, are living less car-centric lifestyles. You shouldn't pretend that the solution that works best for you is the solution that works best for everyone.

This. Plus, saying people drive a lot when there are minimal viable alternatives is disingenuous.

[bachanon]

Not there for me.  Would like to see it, though.  Maybe you can post a screenshot?

 

 

[august948]

This. Plus, saying people drive a lot when there are minimal viable alternatives is disingenuous.

 

Oh yeah!  I forgot people don't drive in places where there are extensive alternates, like NYC and San Francisco.  Oh, wait a minute...nevermind.

[cloud713]

I think he means people drive S

as opposed to take mass transit. If there is no decent mass transit in place then of course everyone is going to drive, but that doesn't necessarily mean driving is their preferred mode of choice.

[IronTiger]

I think he means people drive S

as opposed to take mass transit. If there is no decent mass transit in place then of course everyone is going to drive, but that doesn't necessarily mean driving is their preferred mode of choice.

 

For some it is (even if mass transit IS available). It's usually not a matter of choice (like picking what shirt to wear one morning) it's what works and what's most effective for you (or available). In many cases, mass transit (usually rail-based) IS the best choice but isn't some pre-programmed choice ("take roads only if rail is not available") nor a given ("if you have X people, you MUST have rail"). If both are available and accessible equally, you can take which one you actually prefer.

[august948]

I think he means people drive S

as opposed to take mass transit. If there is no decent mass transit in place then of course everyone is going to drive, but that doesn't necessarily mean driving is their preferred mode of choice.

 

Conversely, if there are decent mass transit alternatives, but people choose to drive anyway then wouldn't that be their preferred mode of choice?

 

[cloud713]

Conversely, if there are decent mass transit alternatives, but people choose to drive anyway then wouldn't that be their preferred mode of choice?

Of course, but you won't know that without having alternate modes of transit in place, so saying everyone in Houston prefers to drive because everyone here drives is disingenuous when we have no decent alternatives besides busses for people outside of 610.

[august948]

Of course, but you won't know that without having alternate modes of transit in place, so saying everyone in Houston prefers to drive because everyone here drives is disingenuous when we have no decent alternatives besides busses for people outside of 610.

 

Well, number one I don't think i said that everyone in Houston prefers to drive.  My point earlier was that the most telling votes people make are with their feet and their pocketbooks.  If anything even close to a majority put mass transit high on their lists of requirements when they choose where to live, the loop would be far more crowded than it is.  But, that's not where they are moving and there isn't a whole lot of pressure being put on the powers that be to get it going.  There's been some talk about rail bias here, but the reality, I think, is that there is also significant mass transit bias.  Many people would prefer to sit in their own car than rub sholders with the hoi polloi on a bus or a train.  Those folks tend to look first to the suburbs because it fits their lifestyle and preferences.

 

Number two, and this is why I brought up NYC and San Francisco earlier, even in places where there is a significant mass transit prescence you still see an overwhelming preference for driving rather than taking the train or the bus.  So, is it disingenuous to draw conclusions from the examples of cities where mass transit has been built up much more than it is here?  Should we assume that Houston is somehow exceptional in that way?  If we build rail, the majority will decide to get rid of their cars?

 

Number three, is the bus, particularly the P&R bus, not already a decent alternative?

 

[lithiumaneurysm]

 

It may be true that more people are getting interested in, or exploring, less car-centric lives here and elsewhere, and if that's what they want to do more power to them.  I don't think we can assume that more and more means anything close to even a simple majority of Houston metro residents, 80 to 90% of whom live outside the loop and a good portion of that are also outside the beltway.

 

To be sure, not everyone lives the same way I do, but here, in Houston, I think we can safely say the vast majority do.  You also can't pretend that solutions that work best for a small demographic are the solutions that work best for everyone.

But, that's not where they are moving and there isn't a whole lot of pressure being put on the powers that be to get it going.  There's been some talk about rail bias here, but the reality, I think, is that there is also significant mass transit bias.  Many people would prefer to sit in their own car than rub sholders with the hoi polloi on a bus or a train.  Those folks tend to look first to the suburbs because it fits their lifestyle and preferences.

 

Number two, and this is why I brought up NYC and San Francisco earlier, even in places where there is a significant mass transit prescence you still see an overwhelming preference for driving rather than taking the train or the bus.  So, is it disingenuous to draw conclusions from the examples of cities where mass transit has been built up much more than it is here?  Should we assume that Houston is somehow exceptional in that way?  If we build rail, the majority will decide to get rid of their cars?

 

This is certainly not the conclusion drawn from the Rice Kinder surveys over the past few years. Since the 2013 pdf doesn't seem to be working with Chrome, here are some statistics from the 2012 report (percentages have only shifted slightly; there have been no statistically significant changes in opinion over the past year):

 

In the 2012 survey, 56% of the participants from Harris County said that the development of a much improved mass transit system is "very important" for the future success of the Houston area. This is not much different from the 60% who felt that way in 2000, but up significantly from 1991 and 1993 when only 46% thought improvements in mass transit were very important for the Houston future.

 

In recent years, respondents ahve been asked what they would prefer if they were free to choose any kind of housing in the Houston area. The proportion who said they would like to live in "a single family home with a big yard, where you would need to drive almost everywhere you want to go," dropped from 59% in 2008 and 58% in 2010 to just 47% in this year's survey. In 2008 and 2010, 36% and 39% said they would opt instead for a "smaller home in a more urbanized area, within walking distance of shops and workplaces." In 2012, the percentage of Harris County residents who would choose a more urbanized lifestyle jumped to 51%.

 

By 51% to 44%, a clear majority in Harris County want more taxpayer money to be spend on improving rail and buses rather than on expanding existing highways. The numbers have not changed since the question was first asked in 2007. For the respondents in the surrounding counties, the figures were reversed, if only slightly, with 47% calling for transit improvements and 50% for better highways.

 

Survey participants this year were asked whether we should "continue to use 25% of the funds from Metro for street improvements and other nontransit projects, or should all Metro funds be dedicated to transit improvements?" A solid majority of Harris County residents, by 55% to 40%, want all Metro funds to be used for transit, and by 61% to 33%, the surrounding counties were even more emphatic in their opposition to using the funds for nontransit purposes.

 

Interest in surburban living has declined during these years [since 1999] so that today the figures are reversed: 33% of all Anglo suburbanites in this year's survey expressed an interest in someday moving to the city, but only 28% of city residents in 2012 said they would be "very" or "somewhat" interested in moving to the suburbs.

 

This is a scientific survey of the entire Houston metropolitan area – all ten counties. There is clearly roughly half of the metropolitan population vying for denser, less auto-centric lifestyle options in Houston – yet it's obvious that only a sliver of the metro population actually has access to these amenities, which explains why there is such high demand for inner-loop housing and a continuing debate over expansion of the rail network. It's definitely not a small demographic desiring these changes in how Houston views transportation.

[august948]

 

 

 

 

This is certainly not the conclusion drawn from the Rice Kinder surveys over the past few years. Since the 2013 pdf doesn't seem to be working with Chrome, here are some statistics from the 2012 report (percentages have only shifted slightly; there have been no statistically significant changes in opinion over the past year):

 

 

 

 

 

This is a scientific survey of the entire Houston metropolitan area – all ten counties. There is clearly roughly half of the metropolitan population vying for denser, less auto-centric lifestyle options in Houston – yet it's obvious that only a sliver of the metro population actually has access to these amenities, which explains why there is such high demand for inner-loop housing and a continuing debate over expansion of the rail network. It's definitely not a small demographic desiring these changes in how Houston views transportation.

 

 

I'm curious why you chose the 2012 report when the 2014 report is available...

 

https://kinder.rice.edu/content.aspx?id=2147485300&blogid=306

 

The trends seem to reverse themselves in the 2014 report.

 

[lithiumaneurysm]

I'm curious why you chose the 2012 report when the 2014 report is available...

 

https://kinder.rice.edu/content.aspx?id=2147485300&blogid=306

 

The trends seem to reverse themselves in the 2014 report.

 

 

Not necessarily. You still have 47% opting for smaller, urbanized homes, 51% wanting mixed-use developments, and 49% preferring spending more on buses and rail than highways. The changes in those percentages from 2012 are roughly within the margin of error for the survey (which was roughly 3.5% in 2007, having trouble finding more recent statistics). Besides, trends don't change over the course of just two years (or one edition of the survey), it would take multiple years (or multiple Kinder reports) of decreasing support for automobile independence to make such a claim. We've seen the opposite occurring over the past two decades: Houstonians are clearly clamoring for alternative transit options and residential choices. The 2014 document you cite even states that the surveys provide "continued evidence across a variety of questions that area residents now are evenly divided in their support for improved transit or expanded highways and for living in single-family residential areas or in more urbanized neighborhoods with a mix of developments." I attended a talk by Dr. Klineburg of the Kinder Institute a few days ago where he clearly outlined the increasing demand for mass transit options and urbanized development among metropolitan Houston residents – and he was using data through 2014 to support that claim.

[august948]

And yet the suburban fringes of the metro area continue to march onto the Katy praire.  And the house prices there can range upwards of $550k.  Surely that kind of money would buy something inside the loop?  Why would you spend half a million dollars on a house that requires you to drive everywhere?  I've heard Dr. Klineberg has a noted urban-centric bias.  I don't know if that's true or not, but sometime what people say and what they do are very different.  I'm inclined to trust what they actually do rather than survey results.  When 47% of residents start moving into smaller houses in the urban core and leave the suburban McMansions to rot, then I'll give greater credence to such a survey.

[lithiumaneurysm]

And yet the suburban fringes of the metro area continue to march onto the Katy praire.  And the house prices there can range upwards of $550k.  Surely that kind of money would buy something inside the loop?  Why would you spend half a million dollars on a house that requires you to drive everywhere?  I've heard Dr. Klineberg has a noted urban-centric bias.  I don't know if that's true or not, but sometime what people say and what they do are very different.  I'm inclined to trust what they actually do rather than survey results.  When 47% of residents start moving into smaller houses in the urban core and leave the suburban McMansions to rot, then I'll give greater credence to such a survey.

 

It's true that there's still a powerful subset of newcomers who want that suburban lifestyle. But the Katy Prairie is far from all half-million-dollar homes. There's a plethora of lower-income people who are also pushed out to the fringe, a trend that will only persist with increasing inner-city home prices. Regardless of Dr. Klineburg's rumored bias, the Kinder Survey is a respected and long-running institution by a renowned research university. It's about as objective a view you're going to get of the opinions of Houston residents.

 

You can't attribute the lack of people moving into denser areas – or the lack of available housing in dense areas – to the choice of people not to move there. The fact is that Houston's current regulatory environment gives credence to suburban-style development, as it has for many decades. Everything from strict parking requirements to wide variance setbacks contribute to this style of development. People are moving into the Loop. This is a noted trend over the past decade. Demand is so high that only a small number of high-income people is able to do it, and developers are catering almost exclusively to that market due to the cost of land. This is what happens when a historically underdeveloped area suddenly becomes sought after. As has been noted numerous times on this forum and others, $550k will not buy you anything significant in the Loop unless you're willing to move to the quickly gentrifying east parts of town – which are still struggling with high crime rates and poverty. The current state of the inner-Loop property market is completely hostile to the middle class, which is why the suburbs continue to grow. It's a sad state of affairs, but a $700k townhouse in Rice Military – your stereotypical model of current development trends in urban Houston – is simply not within reach for a vast majority of metro area newcomers and existing residents. It's not correct to try and equate a desire of half of the metro population to move to dense areas with their actual ability to do so – exurban growth is not necessarily done out of choice.