Houston as Tourist Destination (Dallas, San Antonio: quality of life, place to live, shopping center)

[Treasurevalley92]

Originally Posted by KerrTown

Funny coming from a current S.F. resident. Sunny and cheaper (and more populous) L.A. is what people envision when they visit California. The decrepit yet expensive and bad climate of slowly depopulating S.F. and the Bay Area usually turns up in the back burner. Sadly most SoCalers would rather visit Vegas for the weekend instead of keeping their money in their own state by visiting NorCal.



Actually L.A. has been on a tourism boom since the middle of the decade (recovery from the Great Recession).

https://www.latimes.com/business/la-...507-story.html

Anaheim enacted an ordinance banning Airbnb and other short-term rentals due to neighboring residents' complaints on quality-of-life issues.

Disneyland's Hometown Is Banning Short-Term Rentals | Fortune

What are you smoking? Most people consider the weather in SF to be some of the best in the country.

[Treasurevalley92]

Originally Posted by Surfer Guy

Dallas and Houston are about the same as far as appeal to tourists go, which is not much at all.

Austin and San Antonio are quasi-tourist destinations, mainly for people who live in Texas.

I can't see that changing anytime soon.

This is true.

Most of the "Tourists" in Dallas and Houston are visiting family. Houston is more international, so yeah, it will have more international family visits.

Dallas and Houston get most of their non-family visitors for sporting events or conventions.

Austin gets a decent number of out of state visitors because it is a "Hot" city right now. Also, music festivals.

Not very many visits Houston or Dallas "Just because" as they do with Boston, Chicago, SF or NYC. These are cities you can visit with no agenda or specific event plans and just wander around the city for hours. You can't really do that in Dallas or Houston.

[kwr]

Originally Posted by DeanoSF

No, I live very comfortably in San Francisco, where it’ll be 68-74 and sunny for as far out as my weather app will predict. Why do you people keep defensively bringing up SF?

Houston weather was one of the big factors in my move away from there and is, in my opinion, a major factor in its poor performance as a tourist destination. There are no real opportunities for outdoor recreation worth traveling to do in Houston.

Another is its lack of interesting neighborhoods or points of interest. Houston is a great shopping destination for travelers, but that shopping happens in a mall (again, due to weather). Cities that are great tourist draws usually have great, eclectic, vibrant, walkable districts and neighborhoods for shopping, dining and sightseeing that authentically portray the local character.

Surroundings are another factor. Houston is a suburban style sprawler that sits in miles or uninteresting coastal prairie. There’s just not much to see either in the cityscape or the surrounding area. Interesting little villages and towns? Nope. Mountains, or outdoor recreation? Not really. Galveston is polluted and not very attractive at all. Anything like Wine Country, Yosemite, Lake Tahoe, Monterey, Pebble Beach or Carmel? No way.

Houston’s a great place to live, though. I will never deny that. I’ve loved it all my life and enjoyed its urban amenities, if not its self-consciously suburban construct. It has character that reveals itself to residents over time and visitors don’t ever see. It’s just not a very interesting place to visit for a short time.

I visit it often—for the people, though, not the place

Not sure why you quoted me above before your rant. Never asked if you lived in Houston. That definitely was a misquote.

Glad you are enjoying San Francisco. Again, it’s too cold including the summer. Even with all of the seemingly great things you listed, I’d never want to live there. Clearly, I’m not alone as people continue to relocate away from great (sarcasm) San Francisco as you describe it.

[Scientific]

Originally Posted by DeanoSF

Another is its lack of interesting neighborhoods or points of interest. Houston is a great shopping destination for travelers, but that shopping happens in a mall (again, due to weather). Cities that are great tourist draws usually have great, eclectic, vibrant, walkable districts and neighborhoods for shopping, dining and sightseeing that authentically portray the local character.

It’s funny that I read comments on the Chronicle once about Freedman's Town and the brick streets. Someone commented how the old residents should quit trying to fight progression. Yet the people who travel to Boston and New Orleans point out how great those places preserve their history.

I've accepted long ago, that the city had its chance to at least keep a portion of its charm. The attitude will always be that if you want to see relics of the past, you can drive to New Orelans or San Antonio. NOLA is on the extreme side of the spectrum though. Their mistake was trying to preserve too much if their idenity. Its weird to think 50 years ago, both cities were probably equals in economic power.

[Mr. Clutch]

Originally Posted by Treasurevalley92

What are you smoking? Most people consider the weather in SF to be some of the best in the country.

The weather there is polarizing. I personally hate it - cold summers, fog, and wildfires are not my idea of good weather. There are plenty of people who feel the way I feel.

There's also plenty that feel the way you feel, that its some of the best. Depends on what you like, but I can't stand the weather from San Francisco north (Portland, Seattle) personally.

[Mr. Clutch]

As far as Houston being a tourist destination, I've lived in LA, DC, and Austin - all relatively large tourist destinations.

And I can say with confidence that there is nothing more annoying than tourist season in all of those towns. The crowds, the fact that residents get crowded out of certain activities, the crazy terrible driving when they are lost, long lines to go anywhere cool etc.

I'm always down to see Houston get more new things that residents can enjoy. While visitors can certainly enjoy those things too, I don't see a great need to expressly focus on how we can get more actual tourists when 1) we never needed them before to prosper and 2) their presence won't benefit the average resident.

Though there are obviously many exceptions, great tourist cities often aren't the greatest places for normal people to live (i.e. not rich). I certainly wouldn't have moved back if Houston were a city teeming with tourists all of the time like DC or LA.

[DeanoSF]

Originally Posted by Mr. Clutch

The weather there is polarizing. I personally hate it - cold summers, fog, and wildfires are not my idea of good weather. There are plenty of people who feel the way I feel.

There's also plenty that feel the way you feel, that its some of the best. Depends on what you like, but I can't stand the weather from San Francisco north (Portland, Seattle) personally.

The thread isn’t about SF, but since you persist, the misconception is that there is one Bay Area or even city of San Francisco weather. East of Divisadero St., where I live (on a hill, too, which changes things) and the great majority of tourist attractions are, it’s very rarely foggy and usually sunny and 10 degrees warmer than it is only a mile or so west of there.

Also, Wine Country is north of SF and is often 20 degrees warmer than the City in summer, less than an hour north. Farther up the valley, it’s even hotter. Same with 30 minutes or less east of the City. Valleys and microclimates change the game.

[Mr. Clutch]

Originally Posted by DeanoSF

The thread isn’t about SF, but since you persist, the misconception is that there is one Bay Area or even city of San Francisco weather. East of Divisadero St., where I live (on a hill, too, which changes things) and the great majority of tourist attractions are, it’s very rarely foggy and usually sunny and 10 degrees warmer than it is only a mile or so west of there.

Also, Wine Country is north of SF and is often 20 degrees warmer than the City in summer, less than an hour north. Farther up the valley, it’s even hotter. Same with 30 minutes or less east of the City. Valleys and microclimates change the game.

Which is fair, but we're not talking about Napa or the Central Valley - we're talking about SF. I've been there during the summer and its still too cold on the eastern side of the city. The western portions are worse, sure, but its still far too cold there overall for my tastes. Right now, at nearly noon, its 58 degrees. No thanks - it's nearly June. Plus all of the other issues with SF - double no thanks.

I used to like SF to visit, but recently, its not even a particularly friendly place for visitors in my experience. Now, it's overcrowded, dirty, cold (both in weather and in character), unnecessarily expensive, and has lost most of the people that made it a special, unique place to visit. It's lost a lot of its culture as it has grown in wealth, and I don't even enjoy visiting there anymore to be quite honest...

Glad it works for you though, like you said there are still people moving there. But even if I were rich, I'd pick Houston over SF 100 times out of 100. It's the people more than anything else.

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by DeanoSF

No, I live very comfortably in San Francisco, where it’ll be 68-74 and sunny for as far out as my weather app will predict. Why do you people keep defensively bringing up SF?

Houston weather was one of the big factors in my move away from there and is, in my opinion, a major factor in its poor performance as a tourist destination. There are no real opportunities for outdoor recreation worth traveling to do in Houston.

Another is its lack of interesting neighborhoods or points of interest. Houston is a great shopping destination for travelers, but that shopping happens in a mall (again, due to weather). Cities that are great tourist draws usually have great, eclectic, vibrant, walkable districts and neighborhoods for shopping, dining and sightseeing that authentically portray the local character.

Surroundings are another factor. Houston is a suburban style sprawler that sits in miles or uninteresting coastal prairie. There’s just not much to see either in the cityscape or the surrounding area. Interesting little villages and towns? Nope. Mountains, or outdoor recreation? Not really. Galveston is polluted and not very attractive at all. Anything like Wine Country, Yosemite, Lake Tahoe, Monterey, Pebble Beach or Carmel? No way.

Houston’s a great place to live, though. I will never deny that. I’ve loved it all my life and enjoyed its urban amenities, if not its self-consciously suburban construct. It has character that reveals itself to residents over time and visitors don’t ever see. It’s just not a very interesting place to visit for a short time.

I visit it often—for the people, though, not the place

I wont argue with 95% of this. Its really preference. Maybe its because Im from LA, but I dont really care for SF. I like the South/East Bay a lot more.

You mention that "Cities that are great tourist draws usually have great, eclectic, vibrant, walkable districts and neighborhoods for shopping, dining and sightseeing that authentically portray the local character.". Id argue that LA doesnt have that in its entirety. LA is just as suburban as Houston or Atlanta, its just suburban sprawl on steroids. Yet, after NYC, LA gets more tourists than any other place. Id also argue that LA doesnt really do anything authentically except ethnic food and again, Im from there. I just see the positive and negative in it.

Sounds like you just prefer SF which I totally respect. Good luck to you!

[DeanoSF]

Originally Posted by kwr

Of course you must pack a jacket and a wet suit to visit San Francisco in the middle of summer. It’s always chilly and the ocean is never warm enough to swim. Forget about jumping in a non-heated pool as well.

San Francisco is one of a handful of cities in the US good only for a visit. Living there is a completely different story. I’d live in Houston any day over San Francisco. Visiting a city is entirely different from living there. You live in Houston!

You may have misspoken, but I did not misquote your statement made in response to me.