Houston as Tourist Destination (Dallas, Fort Worth: inspection, malls, garden)

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by Spade

As I said before, Los Angeles does sprawl but the density is also heavily underrated. It is one of those special cases due to size, location, and amenities. Los Angeles gets that pass. You can not compare Houston to that.

Exactly, large areas of Los Angeles were built in the 1920s and are very walkable. Even stuff from the 1950s-60s is more walkable relative to Houston (thought the architecture is often not very appealing). I was impressed with the level of walkability there and felt jealous. It may have lots of sprawl, but for walkable nodes it's on a different level from places like Houston and Phoenix.

[Spade]

^^Truth. People like to say LA is like the sprawling sunbelt cities but it isn't.

Originally Posted by Redlionjr

I do believe efficient transit system plays a part, I mean look what Dallas did by adding the M Trolley. People actually do ride that to get around and especially people visiting the city for the first time. But aside from a good transit system the other problem with Houston is there's not enough CENTRALIZED family friendly attractions for a out of state or international tourist to go to. The "Museum District" is the closest thing to a centralized tourist destination but even that area doesn't have a plethora of restaurants/mass parking/ sidewalks/ and a energy that's inviting to families.

Houston has some cool stuff for a tourist to appreciate but it's just no structure. Discovery Green and the revamped George R. Brown convention center is really nice to hit up. Definitely worth checking out if you book a hotel downtown. Main street is picking up activity. But those attractions downtown are seriously lacking. I'm supposed to take my family to that "Aquarium"? LOL Say what you want about Dallas but they have a world class Aquarium and have added some new attractions over the years that is much more impressive than Houston.

And I think another thing that hurts Houston as a popular tourist destination is it's identity is still unknown in pop culture. Most tourist destinations are popular because we see them on tv shows and films. Houston is more popular when it comes to "Houston we have a problem" or hip-hop music but beyond that you don't see the city a lot in these platforms. Again even Dallas is more popular in that sense because of the Cowboys, Dallas tv show, JFK assassination, hell even Texas Ranger Walker, Debbie Does Dallas. That resonates with the general public and peaks their interest in visiting a city. Even if that city rarely lives up to it's tv or film persona(Miami for me definitely overrated).

I missed your post from last year but this basically goes back to what I was saying with cohesion and connectivity. Long burst high dense attraction areas flowing nearly seamlessly with an adequate mass transit system. Most of the tourist and/or vibrant cities around the world has this. Houston has the amenities. More than most cities might I add. If they had even a shred of an adequate mass transit system, I bet you wouldn't see many people say Houston is "boring".

[bu2]

Originally Posted by Pine to Vine

Understating your case shows you actually don’t have a substantive reply to the post in question.

He's right that those cities aren't "tourist" destinations. But his explanation is nonsense.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

Exactly, large areas of Los Angeles were built in the 1920s and are very walkable. Even stuff from the 1950s-60s is more walkable relative to Houston (thought the architecture is often not very appealing). I was impressed with the level of walkability there and felt jealous. It may have lots of sprawl, but for walkable nodes it's on a different level from places like Houston and Phoenix.

Where? Santa Monica maybe.

Now LA is pretty dense compared to other auto centric cities. But I don't see it as walkable.

Its a tourist city because of all the attractions. Disney, the beach, the studios, Rodeo Drive for people watching.

[jfre81]

It doesn't matter what you have there, if there isn't an efficient way to get people around once they're there.

In New Orleans, the St. Charles streetcar taking people from Canal Street to the Garden District is all the transit the average NOLA tourist needs, and a lot of them don't even need that and will just stick to the Quarter like it's the only thing in the city. Same with the Strip in Las Vegas. There's no single point of interest anywhere near that level in Houston, where they're told to go ten different places in a 60-mile radius of the city center and they're on their own getting there.

That's not going to deter some people. I meet visitors from overseas here in Chicago, who mention visiting Houston and enjoying it. They're either the sort who don't mind or even enjoy driving in strange cities, or have enough of a budget that they can take $70 Uber trips like normal folks pay METRO fares. Good on them, but that's not going to be everyone's jam. Not where Houston makes it on the "destination" map for much beyond conventions and the like, where people are largely working and aren't going to stray too far from downtown anyway.

[kemahkami]

Originally Posted by bu2

Its a tourist city because of all the attractions. Disney, the beach, the studios, Rodeo Drive for people watching.

And guess what? None of those attractions would be near as successful if they were to have been sprawled out and autocentric like Houston.

Like what's Rodeo Drive? An entire luxury shopping corridor, lined with street-level retail boutiques and entertainment. And what's the equivalent in Houston? A literal suburban mall...

[theurbanfiles]

I feel like I see what you're saying, and sort of agree halfway. It's one of those chicken or the egg type things though. As I mentioned, there are very walkable places (moreso, as a unit, than Los Angeles), that are far less popular as tourism destinations, and vice versa. I agree overall with LA being more urban than it gets credit for. But that still doesn't fully explain away places like Orlando and Atlanta that have roughly the same level of walkability as Houston does overall.

It is important to understand that while those attractions are indeed clustered, a fair number of those are not especially easy to get to sans car. It certainly is more urban, but not necessarily sans car.

To be fair in terms of Rodeo Drive, Houston appears to have somewhat of an attempt at that in the form of the River Oaks District across the freeway, as well as Rice Village being popular. None of those are quite the scale or feel of Rodeo Drive which is really near unique in the world though. However, in spite of iconic status, I would probably argue that The Galleria is probably more analagous with The Grove as that seems like the most popular tourist shopping visit for actual shopping. Granted, Houston's is indoor-but I feel like that is to be expected, as the climate in Houston just isn't as ideal for year round outdoor retail in Houston as it is in LA.

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by bu2

Where? Santa Monica maybe.

Now LA is pretty dense compared to other auto centric cities. But I don't see it as walkable.

Its a tourist city because of all the attractions. Disney, the beach, the studios, Rodeo Drive for people watching.

• Downtown LA and its subdistricts
• Hollywood
• Koreatown
• Various enjoyable neighborhood districts (Melrose Ave., Los Feliz, Atwater Village, Silver Lake, Westwood, etc.)
• Downtown Long Beach
• Venice

And more I'm sure. Houston, Phoenix, etc. don't have anywhere near this prevalence of walkability. Heck in Houston, you rarely find on-street parking outside of the Downtown to TMC corridor.

[3shipguy]

Build something on the scale of Universal Citywalk, the Grove, Irvine Spectrum, and Downtown Disney anchored with some nice hotels with occasional outdoor festivities. We have the Astroworld plot sitting there with rail already attached to it.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by ScrappyJoe

And guess what? None of those attractions would be near as successful if they were to have been sprawled out and autocentric like Houston.

Like what's Rodeo Drive? An entire luxury shopping corridor, lined with street-level retail boutiques and entertainment. And what's the equivalent in Houston? A literal suburban mall...

They ARE all sprawled out all over Los Angeles. Its a hard city to even run in except along the beach, let alone walk from destination to destination.