Why did Houston and DFW develop so differently? (Dallas, Irving: landscaping, buy)

[walker1962]

I see most of this thread focusing on the Cities but not the region which really is more equitable.
Houston and DFW are twins at all. Not in governance, scenery, style or economy
Houston's economy is energy, the TMC and the seaport
DFW is a financials services hub, a huge logistics hub, a telecom center, and a retail center (Nieman's, Frito lay, Pier 1, Sally Beauty Supply, Dickies, Penneys, Haggar slacks, Fossil Watches, TGIF, Brinker restaurants) i.e. a more balanced economy
Houston is more diverse than DFW
DFW is wealthier.
Houston is more humid, DFW is hotter and colder.
Houston worries about Hurricanes and flooding. Dallas worries about Tornadoes and wind damage.
DFW is a bigger sports town from high school to pros, having the only NHL team in Texas. several minor league baseball teams, and a WNBA franchise which Houston does not have.
DFW has two zoos, Six Flags, several lakes and the State Fair. Houston has a zoo, Galveston, The Pleasure Pier and JSC but lost Astroworld.

UofH grad now in DFW.

[SanJac]

Originally Posted by walker1962

I see most of this thread focusing on the Cities but not the region which really is more equitable.
Houston and DFW are twins at all. Not in governance, scenery, style or economy
Houston's economy is energy, the TMC and the seaport
DFW is a financials services hub, a huge logistics hub, a telecom center, and a retail center (Nieman's, Frito lay, Pier 1, Sally Beauty Supply, Dickies, Penneys, Haggar slacks, Fossil Watches, TGIF, Brinker restaurants) i.e. a more balanced economy
Houston is more diverse than DFW
DFW is wealthier.
Houston is more humid, DFW is hotter and colder.
Houston worries about Hurricanes and flooding. Dallas worries about Tornadoes and wind damage.
DFW is a bigger sports town from high school to pros, having the only NHL team in Texas. several minor league baseball teams, and a WNBA franchise which Houston does not have.
DFW has two zoos, Six Flags, several lakes and the State Fair. Houston has a zoo, Galveston, The Pleasure Pier and JSC but lost Astroworld.

UofH grad now in DFW.

The point of this thread was not to compare the two cities... the OP is questioning how different Houston would be if it grew the way Dallas did... with a small city limits and hemmed in by smaller municipalities...

so feel free to chime in on that...

[Frustratedintelligence]

Originally Posted by walker1962

Just for comparison, Houston square miles is the same as London's square miles, 600+. However, London has twice as many people as Houston. So I don't think size NYC is half the size of Houston with 3 1/2 more residents. I think that puts a strain on city services.

Both London and NYC are composed of somewhat self-governing boroughs/counties. Houston is just one giant blob.

[Redlionjr]

Originally Posted by walker1962

Way to car-centric is something that can describe 90% of the cities (metro area over 1 million) outside of the old eastern core. All the big southern towns that grew post WWII, the great SW and the west coast, except for say SF and Portland. Even in SF, because its on a peninsula, traffic is not good. I'm a native Houstonian and live now in DFW. The latter metro definitely has more walkable areas. That said, most of America was built around the car and walkability was not something factored into many urban planning models 40-60 years ago. Being "walkable" hasn't kept people in Detroit, Cleveland, Baltimore or Pittsburgh. Portland has more walkability too but from some reason, companies and private citizens haven't found it as attractive as Houston or DFW. So maybe walkability is overrated for many?

Walkability is "overrated" in the United States because most Americans only know of a society where the automobile is the main source for getting to point A to B. Also keep in mind most walkable neighborhoods in a lot of major cities happen to be the most expensive areas as well. Unfortunately, it's expensive to walk in this country.

With that said, there's not many MSA's with core cities in the top 20 in America that are as car centric as Houston and Dallas. Phoenix, Riverside, Atlanta and Tampa are the other ones that are just as sprawling and car centric as Houston and Dallas and even Atlanta has a more walkable pedestrian friendly urban core than Houston and Dallas.

So while most of America does rely on the automobile to get around most are not as overwhelming in size as DFW and Houston. That's the difference. And because of that size and layout is why both are more identical in how they function than are dissimilar. As car centric as LA is it's developed a lot different than both cities.

With that said, we know walkability alone doesn't keep people. That's clearly not what I was saying but 8 out of 10 of our largest MSA's are way more walkable and desirable(if one could afford) than Houston and Dallas where COL and employment is much more of a factor for most Americans.

[spacecitytx]

Except that I never said that Houston doesn't have any flaws. There are plenty, to be sure. Just don't see how the supposed "ugliness" in the city is any greater than Dallas'. Perhaps because Dallas is smaller...and therefore the ugly parts are hit or miss, as compared to Houston which is double the size and therefore more noticeable because you have drive for miles longer in those areas?

And I never said that Dallas doesn't have scenic views...only that nothing in Dallas compares to the specific view I gave in the earlier post. The fact that one can capture almost all of the major hotspots in Houston in that one view is amazing to me.

[R1070]

Originally Posted by spacecitytx

This is the first time I've heard of Houston being boring. How on EARTH would Dallas not be boring, yet Houston is? That doesn't even make sense, lol.

I was calling out you saying that people find Dallas boring. If Dallas is boring then Houston definitely is.

[Mr. Clutch]

Originally Posted by walker1962

I see most of this thread focusing on the Cities but not the region which really is more equitable.
Houston and DFW are twins at all. Not in governance, scenery, style or economy
Houston's economy is energy, the TMC and the seaport
DFW is a financials services hub, a huge logistics hub, a telecom center, and a retail center (Nieman's, Frito lay, Pier 1, Sally Beauty Supply, Dickies, Penneys, Haggar slacks, Fossil Watches, TGIF, Brinker restaurants) i.e. a more balanced economy
Houston is more diverse than DFW
DFW is wealthier.
Houston is more humid, DFW is hotter and colder.
Houston worries about Hurricanes and flooding. Dallas worries about Tornadoes and wind damage.
DFW is a bigger sports town from high school to pros, having the only NHL team in Texas. several minor league baseball teams, and a WNBA franchise which Houston does not have.
DFW has two zoos, Six Flags, several lakes and the State Fair. Houston has a zoo, Galveston, The Pleasure Pier and JSC but lost Astroworld.

UofH grad now in DFW.

Most of this post is pretty good, but I wish folks would stop saying the bolded. It is not true and hasn't been true in recent decades. I'm honestly not sure its been true at any point in recent memory other than the 80s, but I'm too lazy to go back and look up all the historical numbers. But Houston has a higher per capita personal income and GDP. DFW has a slightly higher total GDP, but also has nearly 600,000 more people.

DFW has caught up in recent years to some extent, and is closer to Houston now than it was 10 years ago, but Houston is still overall the wealthier metro.

[Treasurevalley92]

This isn't a very hot take, but I can't think of two large metros that are more similar than Dallas and Houston.

I think the political borders are less important than the physical landscape. For Example I live in Irving and my neighborhood is just like maybe 70% of the neighborhoods in Dallas, Car based suburbia, same as Houston. Yes, Dallas is more walkable, but not for the vast majority of people who live here.

You have neighborhoods that differ mostly by what decade of suburbia they are. I live in a 50s/60s suburbia. Other near by neighborhoods are built in the 70s, 80s, and 90s respectively. They arn't that different from homes built in those decades in Dallas city limits, or Houston city limits.

Neither metro is winning any beauty contests.

And yes, if you have money, yes you can buy a brand new large home, or maybe a cool mid mod home in a neighborhood full of people like yourself. Those neighborhoods can have nice landscaping and be a nice place to live. Thing is, those exist anywhere, there is nothing particularly unique about it. You'll find similar places all over the place.

Heck, I like my neighborhood quite a bit as far as suburbia goes, it is ALMOST semi walkable, but it is litterally no different from almost walkable 50s suburbs or suburban areas of Denver, Houston, Atlanta, Boise, anywhere really.

But anyway what I find most remarkable about Dallas and Houston is how they aren't more different, considering the zoning... but of course we all already know that Houston isn't truely unzoned...there are tons of regulations that produce the same results more or less.

I think most of the people who think the cities are super different are from one of them and have some homer bias that makes them see the differences vs the numerous similarities.

[ParaguaneroSwag]

Originally Posted by Treasurevalley92

But anyway what I find most remarkable about Dallas and Houston is how they aren't more different, considering the zoning... but of course we all already know that Houston isn't truely unzoned...there are tons of regulations that produce the same results more or less.

The only reason I haven’t brought this up is because this thread was originally (I know it later took turns) about the development years. Houston did have early regulations but nothing to the degree of what you see now. In 2021, every single last construction project misread be approved and they aren’t as lenient as they once were. But again, this is 2021. Pre millennia is a very different story. And the more restricted building regulations are the reason newer Houston developments are trending walkable.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by Mr. Clutch

Most of this post is pretty good, but I wish folks would stop saying the bolded. It is not true and hasn't been true in recent decades. I'm honestly not sure its been true at any point in recent memory other than the 80s, but I'm too lazy to go back and look up all the historical numbers. But Houston has a higher per capita personal income and GDP. DFW has a slightly higher total GDP, but also has nearly 600,000 more people.

DFW has caught up in recent years to some extent, and is closer to Houston now than it was 10 years ago, but Houston is still overall the wealthier metro.

DFW has more rich and very rich people and I think more people who earn $250K and up. I'll do some digging tomorrow.


The GDP difference isn't going to be slight for '21 either.