A New Yorker rediscovers Houston, Ike Dike case, 2004 vs. 2017 Houston, and more
This week's items:
A Tale of Two Super Bowls: Houston in 2004 vs. 2017. Some pretty cool statistical comparisons, like nearly double the hotel rooms, ~25% more airport flights, 67% more restaurants (!), and the Galleria has almost doubled its annual visitors! And how crazy would it be if the game is an exact rematch? But here's to hoping it's the Texans instead, which are looking pretty solid with a 3-0 preseason.
"In 2004, the New England Patriots defeated the Carolina Panthers 32-29 at Reliant Stadium. According to sports analysts, we could see this exact same matchup in the newly renamed NRG Stadium in 2017. Will Cam&Crew have a major chance at redemption? Only time will tell…"
Most of the country’s new apartments are going up right here in Houston. Almost a quarter of all apartments under construction in the country are in Texas, and Houston has the most in the state, which I would at least partially attribute to the lack of zoning, which often tends to be anti-apartments in most cities.
Finally, a longer but great piece in Thrillist, "Houston Has No Problem" by local that moved to NYC and has been amazed by how the city has matured since.
In New York City, I noticed the difference over the years. It went from people saying “Why would you ever go to Houston?” to “I wanna check that place out!”
It does an amazing job extolling Houston's virtues and what makes us a great city. It'll make you a proud Houstonian all over again. Highly recommended.
Zoning shrinks the economy, TX cities as people, Astrodome, appreciating townhomes, helping homeless, and more
Lots of smaller items this week:
A cool video proposal for what to do with the Astrodome. The proposal is to strip it to its frame as a park for events. Great visuals. An Eiffel Tower for Houston. That is somewhat appealing, but I hate to give up the potential enclosed, air-conditioned, climate-protected space, especially given Houston's harsh weather. Couldn't it be a park and events space while staying enclosed? And I think that's the county's current concept/plan. Then there'd be a place we could hold events and festivals in the summer and winter, instead of just the spring and fall.
"Bryan Mistele, the CEO of traffic tracker Inrix, argues in the Seattle Times that proposed new light-rail lines will be “obsolete before they are built.” Specifically, he says, automated, connected, electric, and shared vehicles–which he abbreviates as ACES–are already changing how people travel, and those changes are accelerating.
Sound Transit, Seattle’s regional rail transit agency, wants voters to approve a $54 billion ballot measure this November for more light rail. This, Mistele points out, is more than twice the cost of the Panama Canal expansion, yet isn’t likely to produce any significant benefits."
$54 *billion* (!!). Wow - that's a lot of money for what will soon be a very large white elephant. Thank goodness Houston METRO isn't trying to jump off a similar cliff...
"Cashman’s argument is that self-driving cars won’t be “affordable,” while public transit is. Excuse me? In 2014, American transit agencies spent $59 billion to move people 57 billion passenger miles (see page 106). That’s more than a dollar per passenger mile.
All spending on cars and driving, meanwhile, amounted to $1.1 billion (add lines 54, 57, and 116 of table 2.5.5). Highway subsidies in 2014 were about $45 billion (subtract gas tax diversions to transit and non-highway purposes from “other taxes and fees”). For that cost, Americans drove 2.7 trillion vehicle miles in light-duty vehicles. At an average occupancy of 1.67 people per vehicle (see table 16), that’s 4.5 trillion passenger miles, which works out to an average cost of 26 cents a passenger mile.
In other words, transit is only “affordable” because three-fourths of the cost is subsidized, while less than 4 percent of the cost of driving is subsidized. I’m in favor of ending both subsidies, but someone has to pay those costs; when adding them in, driving is four times more affordable than transit."
"Whatever they look like, townhouses increase the housing supply in a relatively low-impact way. They can help keep Houston affordable while its coastal rivals commit economic suicide."
“...a study published last year by Chang-Tai Hsieh and Enrico Moretti which estimates that the U.S. economy is 14 percent smaller as a result of constraints on housing development.”
If Texas cities were people
Collin County (North Dallas): A Dad trying to be cool.
Austin: A Hipster trying to be cool. Lives at Urban Outfitters.
Fort Worth: Urban Cowboy.
San Antonio: Fort Worth's tejano buddy.
Houston: A nerdy kid that doesn't care about being cool.
Dallas: A dudebro that blows money at Neiman Marcus.
El Paso: Isn't that in New Mexico?
Dallas: I'm cool because I blew 500 dollars at Neiman Marcus.
Austin: I'm cool because I blew 500 dollars at Urban Outfitters.
Houston: What is cool anyways?
"During my time there, I figured out a lot—about Houston. My hometown, I realized, is easy. The mail comes on time. You don’t have to wait for an hour, crammed in a small space with dozens of other people, just to get a prescription. You can use a full-size grocery cart at the grocery store. You don’t have to ask an employee to use his hook to pull down a package of toilet paper for you. You don’t have to lug your heavy groceries six blocks home. You don’t reach the end of May and find yourself trudging through sludgy gray ice, incredulous that it can still be so…darn…cold. You don’t find yourself freezing, needing a restroom, waiting for a train that never comes, before giving up and spending money you don’t have on a cab. Instead, you get to drive.
That’s what I learned about Houston during my time in New York. What did I learn about New York? It’s a great place to visit. In the very late springtime."
"This new evidence adds to the extensive body of work demonstrating that land-use regulations reduce the stock of housing relative to what we would see in a free market. It’s particularly important in California, home to some of the country’s most regulated cities and the cities where land-use liberalization could have huge potential benefits in terms of allowing more people to live in high-productivity places."
"In the 1980s, Japanese cities were experiencing the same inflated housing bubbles that U.S. cities are today. Their planning methods, moreover, were rooted in Western notions about separating uses and limiting density. The federal government recognized that these regulations were the problem, so in 2002, it passed the Urban Renaissance Law. The law stripped municipalities of the ability to control private property. As a result, owners can build a variety of uses on their land, regardless of resistance from local bureaucrats or neighbors."
Who would have guessed that the Japanese could be more free market than America? Could you imagine if states or the federal government did something similar here?!
"The line accounts for 2.6% of Austin’s transit ridership, while using 8.5% of the annual operating expenses for transit.
Each trip taken on the rail costs taxpayers dearly, according to data provided by Capitol Metro. In 2014, the rail line had an operating deficit of $12.6 million. The upfront capital costs of $140 million, when amortized at 2% over 30 years, creates an additional $6.2 million annual cost to taxpayers. Add these two sums up, and then divide them by the line’s number of annual unlinked trips—763,551—and the per-trip subsidy works out to $24.62. Another commentator estimated that this figure is $18, compared to $3 for every bus boarding. Jim Skaggs, the retired CEO of Tracor and a local rail skeptic, wrote on his blog that “each average daily, week-day, round trip rider is subsidized an average of about $10,000 per year.”"
"Their causes for success are multi-faceted, and refute some of the received wisdom, but mostly boil down to their open economies. According to Site Selection magazine, Houston and Dallas were second and third, respectively, among the nation’s 10 largest metro areas in economic development in 2015. Texas was the leading state for economic development, and the two metros accounted for 70% of this...The recent growth has bolstered two metros that already have among the strongest corporate presences in America, and a state that has become famous for poaching companies and people from California, Illinois and New York. Much of it can be attributed to their good business climates at both state and local levels.
This begins with taxes. Texas is one of seven states that currently have no income tax, and has the fifth-lowest overall state tax burden, according to Forbes data. Texas and its various localities, including Houston and Dallas, also have light regulations regarding land use, labor rules, business permitting and compliance costs. Together, these two factors—light taxes and regulations—explain why Dallas, for example, was named America’s best business climate by MarketWatch.com, and why Texas routinely ranks near the top in economic freedom, recently improving its score even as economic freedom declines nationwide.
...
While NIMBYs often get road projects canceled around the nation (not to mention housing, offices and other aforementioned projects), this hasn’t stopped Houston and Dallas from building them. Both metros are among the leaders in per capita highway miles, sporting a large network of tolled and untolled highways. This has enabled multiple corporate job clusters to develop throughout both metros.
...
Indeed, Dallas and Houston reaffirm the notion that corporations and their workforces seek out places less for the generic lifestyle reasons, than for reasons that are simple, even blunt. They want reduced costs, whether that means low taxes, subsidies, or cheaper labor. They want ample space to expand, and a regulatory climate that allows this expansion. And they want infrastructure that will efficiently tie it all together. Texas’ two biggest metros are providing these conditions for economic development, and that is why they’re getting so much of it."
Houston tops global city outlook, GDP, and brand rankings; 100 years of zoning now smothering the economy, and more
Back after some summer vacation time with a lot of smaller items to catch-up on:
As far as this Chronicle article on the expansion of Houston freeways, somebody is going to have to explain to me why it's a big success if a subway or train fills up requiring new tracks or train cars, but it's a failure if an expanded freeway fills up and needs further expansion? Don't we want the government to build popular infrastructure that gets high utilization? Isn't that the best and most efficient use of taxpayer dollars?
"Houston ranked No. 7 as one of the best brands in the U.S., based on place, product, programming, people, prosperity and promotion, per Resonance Consultancy's 2016 U.S. Place Equity Index... The next Texas town on the list, Dallas, ranked No. 15. Austin came in at No. 23, and San Antonio took the No. 29 spot." (if you hit a paywall problem, try opening the link in an incognito browser window) Full report here (hat tip to George).
"One can never be certain about these things, but it’s quite possible that excessive land-use restrictions are among the major causes of our long national economic malaise."
This is part of why presidents and the federal government are having so much trouble reviving the economy - the regulations causing the problem are outside of their control.
Futuristic Simulation Finds Self-Driving “Taxibots” Will Eliminate 90% Of Cars, Open Acres Of Public Space. I don't think this is completely true, especially in America. People like owning their own cars. It's part of their identity in some cases, and in other cases it carries around a portable version of their home and/or office (think family minivan), which is not amenable to switching over to on-demand autonomous taxis.
Houston tops global city outlook, GDP, and brand rankings; 100 years of zoning now smothering the economy, and more
Back after some summer vacation time with a lot of smaller items to catch-up on:
As far as this Chronicle article on the expansion of Houston freeways, somebody is going to have to explain to me why it's a big success if a subway or train fills up requiring new tracks or train cars, but it's a failure if an expanded freeway fills up and needs further expansion? Don't we want the government to build popular infrastructure that gets high utilization? Isn't that the best and most efficient use of taxpayer dollars?
"Houston ranked No. 7 as one of the best brands in the U.S., based on place, product, programming, people, prosperity and promotion, per Resonance Consultancy's 2016 U.S. Place Equity Index... The next Texas town on the list, Dallas, ranked No. 15. Austin came in at No. 23, and San Antonio took the No. 29 spot." (if you hit a paywall problem, try opening the link in an incognito browser window)
"One can never be certain about these things, but it’s quite possible that excessive land-use restrictions are among the major causes of our long national economic malaise."
This is part of why presidents and the federal government are having so much trouble reviving the economy - the regulations causing the problem are outside of their control.
Futuristic Simulation Finds Self-Driving “Taxibots” Will Eliminate 90% Of Cars, Open Acres Of Public Space. I don't think this is completely true, especially in America. People like owning their own cars. It's part of their identity in some cases, and in other cases it carries around a portable version of their home and/or office (think family minivan), which is not amenable to switching over to on-demand autonomous taxis.
An open dialogue on serious strategies for making Houston a better city, as well as a coalition-builder to make them happen. All comments, email, and support welcome.