Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,594,858 times
Reputation: 9169
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by polo89
Inner loop Houston is very dense
Not by Toronto standards, the "old city of Toronto", the 37 sq miles it had before the 98 annexation of Etobicoke, Scarborough, York, North York and East York; was over 21k ppsm
But Houston requires multiples of the amount of parking per unit that urban Tokyo typically gets. Even the densish five-story woodframes with solid streetwalls are typically not terribly dense due to Dallas doughnut above-grade garages, nor are the highrises which typically have massive parking podiums and extremely high parking counts per unit.
Although some of these things are true, it doesn't take away the fact that Houston's core (which stretches about 100 square miles), has a density of about 7,000 and getting denser annually. Also have to add that parking minimums are decreasing in three core neighborhoods which are becoming denser the fastest: Downtown, East End, and Midtown. You're already seeing some of the effects of those minimums going away with the proposals that have come up.
In Houston, you get the typical urban style you see in other cities in the US, but also a different East Asian-type density. A lot of midrise apartments are going up with the residential highrise sprinkled in here and there.
This is in Midtown near the Midtown Park, where there's a cool infill development happening with a residential highrise: https://goo.gl/maps/Z7BxSu1S9fiQ6yNbA
People complain because the last two links don't look "classic" urban or that Houston is not as dense as the city they live in currently. This growth style allowed Houston to create an organic urban core that's shaping into one of the larger ones. Houston's core at 100 square miles (maybe 80-85 if you exclude the industrial east side of the core) is the size of some large American cities so there's a lot to fill in, but the difference from even five years ago is pretty drastic. Houston itself is a large American city so it makes sense that it's core also covers a large area. In 10 more years with improved transit connections, it'll be very interesting to see how Inner Loop Houston shapes out.
The best part is, Houston residents really aren't opposed to building up the city and that's not only contained to the core areas. You see this in the west and southwest sides of the city. With some of the recent flooding issues due to lax regulations and fringe suburban growth, some people are giving up their house/yard for highrise living. This is especially true for people who are now retiring or downsizing, but want to stay in Houston and get closer to the action.
100 square miles at 7,000 per square mile isn't dense. My mid-sized newish city fits more into less, and we're not dense either. Hit 10,000 before claiming density.
100 square miles at 7,000 per square mile isn't dense. My mid-sized newish city fits more into less, and we're not dense either. Hit 10,000 before claiming density.
You want to be so quick to say "my city is at 7k and we're not dense" as if you're the density gatekeeper, but where did I even say that in my post? I only commented on Houston getting denser. It's not at less than 5k per sqmi like in 2000 in the core...
Also you need to realize that not all cities are the same, and some small suburb with a 7k density over a much smaller area is not equal to a large American city's core stretching 100 square miles with the same number. Also keep in mind that the 100 sq./mi includes a port, a few refineries, and other industrial uses so the density is actually higher.
100 square miles at 7,000 per square mile isn't dense. My mid-sized newish city fits more into less, and we're not dense either. Hit 10,000 before claiming density.
No, Houston is never going to have Toronto-like density in our lifetimes.
No, Houston is not going to be larger than LA for the 2nd largest city.
To be fair, this isnt specific to Houston. You could insert any city for that.
I love Houston and Im thrilled I get to call it home. However, you have to love your city for what it is and not what it has no chance to be. Houston is incredibly ethnically diverse, has one of the best culinary scenes in the country, is cultural, is very laid back for a huge city, and has low COL. Houston is no urban utopia and it never will be. It will always be a sprawl based city. Houston will never pass LA in population and honestly who cares? Its not like the cities become different just because they pass a population mark.
Houston, like LA, Phoenix, DFW, and Atlanta are just sprawlvilles. That doesnt mean that all the above havent densified in many ways or are making improvements, but thats just the way they are.
Due to its lack of zoning, Houston does not have the construction red-tape that plagues most US cities. So while Houston may not reach Toronto's density by 2040, it indeed has very little (legally) standing in the way of rapid densification. The infill in Houston could more resemble the modern constructions in the big South American/Asian cities rather than anything in the US, honestly.
This is kind of how I see it happening - nothing is going to stop particularly the inner loop from becoming ever more dense, and the city already has multiple skylines.
The Asian city that reminds me the most of Houston is actually Bangkok - it's flat, green, huge, hot, and humid with multiple skylines in different parts of town.
It's hard to find a picture that does the Bangkok skylines justice online, but they are interspersed with large areas of significantly lower density development just like Houston.
But no - I don't see the huge kinda continuous level of development that Toronto has in Houston's future.
But Houston requires multiples of the amount of parking per unit that urban Tokyo typically gets. Even the densish five-story woodframes with solid streetwalls are typically not terribly dense due to Dallas doughnut above-grade garages, nor are the highrises which typically have massive parking podiums and extremely high parking counts per unit.
The city has exemptions for the parking requirements carved out in sections of the Inner Loop, though the inflated demand from elsewhere in the city still leads to units being built with amounts of parking.
So yes the regulations for parking/setback hinder the setup for urban density.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
I admire your enthusiasm and hope for Houston to be a city of high-rise to super-talls and even mega-tall living....
I'm not actually suggesting anything will happen, just that the city has the ability to easily do so legally due to its circumstances.
If this was a polled question, it would probably be at 95% no, and only the hardcore Houston boosters would comprise of the 5%.
Houston is not going to be the next Chicago, SF, Toronto, whatever. Enough with the population thing. It will get denser but even then it will be nowhere near these three cities in terms of urbanity. Like never ever.
I say all of this as someone who likes Houston and especially Texas. It's just never going to reach that level of significance, even considering the impressive growth the city has seen. If anything, Dallas and Austin will see a higher influx of inner city density in the future. But even those, to the level of Toronto even 20 years ago? I don't think so.
Austin????? Mass transit is awful there. No way Will they have a high density core. All the Texas cities will struggle to build a sense core. It's just not the Texas way. Austin has its advantages over Houston but density isn't one of them.
This is kind of how I see it happening - nothing is going to stop particularly the inner loop from becoming ever more dense, and the city already has multiple skylines.
The Asian city that reminds me the most of Houston is actually Bangkok - it's flat, green, huge, hot, and humid with multiple skylines in different parts of town.
It's hard to find a picture that does the Bangkok skylines justice online, but they are interspersed with large areas of significantly lower density development just like Houston.
But no - I don't see the huge kinda continuous level of development that Toronto has in Houston's future.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
