Contrasts between Houston and Dallas (apples to oranges)

[JJG]

Originally Posted by Mister Nifty

You don't think that tornado could have scared some of those Fort Worth billionaires away from doing a project or two downtown?

... I know the tornado didn't scare away any projects. Do you think the Omni would be mostly glass if developers were scared, seeing the damage done on the glass towers back in 2000?

The reason why we don't have the same kind of pace in development for the central core like Austin or Dallas is because Fort Worth is ultra-conservative when it comes to big time projects. Our visionless leaders voted down the streetcar study (JUST A STUDY) and we even have some who want to get rid of this...

If tornadoes were really a factor, then Dallas wouldn't have the skyline it has now.

[Panteran]

Originally Posted by JJG

... I know the tornado didn't scare away any projects. Do you think the Omni would be mostly glass if developers were scared, seeing the damage done on the glass towers back in 2000?

The reason why we don't have the same kind of pace in development for the central core like Austin or Dallas is because Fort Worth is ultra-conservative when it comes to big time projects. Our visionless leaders voted down the streetcar study (JUST A STUDY) and we even have some who want to get rid of this...

If tornadoes were really a factor, then Dallas wouldn't have the skyline it has now.

I agree with this. I read a study somewhere that said Dallas actually had a higher chance of being hit, and historically has been hit more than Ft Worth. Ft Worth just happened to be the most recent and right at downtown.

Second sister cities tend to have less significant development regarding projects from my observation (just an opinion of things I've noticed.) St Paul, San Jose, Durham, and Ft Worth all have mediocre skylines compared to their companions. Perhaps it's just easier for developers to build in the bigger cities that have had success in such projects before.

[Mister Nifty]

Originally Posted by JJG

... I know the tornado didn't scare away any projects. Do you think the Omni would be mostly glass if developers were scared, seeing the damage done on the glass towers back in 2000?

The reason why we don't have the same kind of pace in development for the central core like Austin or Dallas is because Fort Worth is ultra-conservative when it comes to big time projects. Our visionless leaders voted down the streetcar study (JUST A STUDY) and we even have some who want to get rid of this...

If tornadoes were really a factor, then Dallas wouldn't have the skyline it has now.

That looks really awesome. Outside of the box, downtown Fort Worth has a lot of potential. See, that is another contrast between Houston and Dallas. While the city of Houston has tended to concentrate more on developing the central core of the downtown area, the city of Dallas has tended to focus on developing the immediate areas surrounding downtown Dallas. In my opinion, the city of Dallas should get its fingers out of the process of further development downtown as when the eight surrounding square miles are developed, that will leave downtown as a vacuum. In contrast, the city of Houston has cut off development to its surrounding eight square miles by building elevated freeways on all sides of it. Also, though it would appear that the city of Houston was thoughtful in constructing the baseball and basketball stadiums along with the city convention center and convention center hotel along the eastern portion of its downtown, they are all laid out in such a fashion as to, along with the elevated freeway, build a huge barrier to development. This might seem trivial, but, even in a fast growing metropolitan area like Houston, there is only so much prime to go around. When the price of real estate rises, those barriers make the property less attractive.
What is happening in downtown Houston right now? Well, consider all the wonderful things it has done in the last five years are now quickly aging and becoming old news. Think about it. The real reason to build anything in midtown Houston isn't because of downtown Houston to the north, but because of how it transitions into the Montrose area to the west.
This should all be a lesson for the city of Fort Worth. Although citizens would desire for the city core to grow, the best way to go about it is to build transitions like the park you posted. As all the surrounding areas around downtown Fort Worth better develop, eventually a critical point will be reached when downtown Fort Worth will benefit as a result.

[Mister Nifty]

Originally Posted by Panteran

I agree with this. I read a study somewhere that said Dallas actually had a higher chance of being hit, and historically has been hit more than Ft Worth. Ft Worth just happened to be the most recent and right at downtown.

Second sister cities tend to have less significant development regarding projects from my observation (just an opinion of things I've noticed.) St Paul, San Jose, Durham, and Ft Worth all have mediocre skylines compared to their companions. Perhaps it's just easier for developers to build in the bigger cities that have had success in such projects before.

Well, it isn't like downtown Dallas is the prime area in Dallas - Fort Worth for office and retail space. See, this is an important point in understanding the Dallas area. Neither is Uptown for that matter though it is actually closer to prime. Thing is, Uptown is just close to the true prime area which, in my opinion, is an area within a triangle made up of Preston Center, Highland Park Village, and Lemmon Avenue.
Take a look at CityPlace to the northeast of downtown Dallas. Just consider how it sits and think back now to the reason why it was developed? It sits at a crossroads! First off, there is Central Expressway, that is a given. Second, it sits at the beginning of Lemmon Avenue which stretches to Love Field. Third, it stretchs to the southeast towards Baylor Medical Center and the Dallas Fair Park by way of Haskell. And, of course, downtown and Uptown are just to the southwest of it.
CityPlace is no less significant now as it was then.
In Houston, where are the prime areas for office and retail space? In contrast to Dallas, as downtown Dallas went stagnent after the mid eighties, the Uptown area of Houston went stagnent during the same period. Meanwhile, downtown Houston did fairly well in comparison while the suburban areas of the Platinum corridor, the Telecom Corridor, and Las Colinas boomed in the Dallas area.

[nicaraguag]

Been to both. Houston is better, by a notch and a half.

[Mister Nifty]

Originally Posted by nicaraguag

Been to both. Houston is better, by a notch and a half.

I wasn't asking what is better. That information doesn't do most of the world's population any good. Instead, what is the prime real estate in terms of office and retail space in the Houston area? As the airports aren't as close in proximity to its urban core area like they are to the business districts in the Dallas - Fort Worth area, where are the prime areas located? Is downtown Houston still the central commercial shopping district in the metropolitan area? (Hint: The answer is no) Then what and where are they located?

[Mister Nifty]

To contrast a point, I had to use an opinion expressed in another thread:

Houston, on the other hand, is looking better arranged and dense/planned. Also, another thing I noticed is that its infrastructure seemed to be in much better shape. For example, I was 45 miles north of downtown Houston, just south of Huntsville, and was already in an 8 lane freeway lighted by high masts / freeway type signage / lighted message boards all the way in, freeways growing wider in town and all the way into Galveston/the coastline. Literally 90 miles of continuous "city". It was impressive! Same thing goes from east to west heading to San Antonio. In DFW I did not see this as the case. Between those cities, the freeways get reduced to 4 lane highways with large medians/green areas and even NO lighting at all in some stretches.

As for now, both areas are growing at about the same rate. Ft Worth is growing a bit faster in DFW(?). I would have to call Houston the premier metropolis in Texas hands down, with DFW as a whole carrying more population. In the future I can see (as an Architect) that all the above might give Houston obvious advantages when planning/growing as a city. Obviously the energy/oil industry also help in that regard, although it might dictate a bit more cyclical growth.

From what I gathered, this individual is saying that Houston has the premier metropolis in Texas. So, understand that he isn't saying that the entire population of the city of Houston is contained within a premier metropolis. See, this is the subtle point. Figure that the metropolis portion of Houston has a population of 400,000 people living in it and is located within an area equalling about sixteen square miles, a high estimate for both, while the entire city of Houston has a total population of over 2,250,000 within a total of 529 square miles. So, where are the other of the remaining population of over 1,8250,000 living within the remaining area of the remaining 512 square miles? (529 - 16 square miles or the approximate size of the inner Houston Metropolis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston
http://www.houstontx.gov/abouthouston/houstonfacts.html

The metropolitan area of Houston is approaching six million, so that would be 5,600,000 people living around and outside of the Houston Metropolis of 400,000. In other words, while the inner core Metropolis in Houston might appear impressive, it certainly isn't Manhattan Island.

In contrast, the Dallas - Fort Worth area is a multi-polar metropolitan area with numerous business districts (metropolises). As the gentleman mentioned above, these developing metropolises are spreat out about ten miles apart from each other. They include the Addison / Galleria area, the Telecom Corridor, central Dallas, downtown Fort Worth, and the Las Colinas urban area.
While at first glance this might appear less of a metropolis, just consider? With DFW having a total population approaching 6.5 million, the spread out metropolises spread out about the area are closer in convenience to the total population.

Indeed, the city of Houston and the Houston metropolitan area does have other smaller business clusters and districts as well.

To further contrast the two areas, while downtown Houston is the main confluence where the freeways in the area converge, the Dallas - Fort Worth area has three areas of concluence with these being downtown Dallas, downtown Fort Worth, and, believe it or not, DFW airport. In fact, while some of the freeways leaving the freeway interchanges of Fort Worth and Dallas tend to lead to no particular place or places of great significance, DFW airport is more imbedded in the metropolitan area as every freeway leaving it leads to another place or other places of significance.

[Trae]

I think it's interesting that the Houston Metro area grew faster than DFW this past decade, after it looked like DFW was puling ahead. Real counts are more accurate than yearly estimates. Instead, Houston grew faster, though by just 21,000. That doesn't take into account Houston's upcoming challenge, which will add upwards of 150,000 people (it'll probably be half that, realistically). There aren't any cities in DFW challenging, to my knowledge.

[Mister Nifty]

Originally Posted by Trae

I think it's interesting that the Houston Metro area grew faster than DFW this past decade, after it looked like DFW was puling ahead. Real counts are more accurate than yearly estimates. Instead, Houston grew faster, though by just 21,000. That doesn't take into account Houston's upcoming challenge, which will add upwards of 150,000 people (it'll probably be half that, realistically). There aren't any cities in DFW challenging, to my knowledge.

Indeed, but it is interesting that the metropolitan area of Houston gained so little on the Dallas - Fort Worth area while it was the one that had the booming energy economy while the North Texas economy suffered along with the rest of the nation. I don't know if you are old enough to be aware of what happened in Texas during the oil depression of the mid to late eighties. That was when the Dallas - Fort Worth area out grew the Houston area. In fact, the city of Houston actually lost population during that time and there was times when the suburb of Plano was adding more population annually than the much larger city. You do understand what makes Dallas - Fort Worth the larger overall market of the two, don't you? The Houston metropolitan area could even grow to be a good deal larger than Dallas - Fort Worth and the northern metropolitan area would still be the larger market.
That is another thing that contrasts between the two cities. While the Dallas - Fort Worth area is more like Chicago, the Houston area is more like Detroit was when it was a one business town with the booming Automobile industry based there.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Mister Nifty

Indeed, but it is interesting that the metropolitan area of Houston gained so little on the Dallas - Fort Worth area while it was the one that had the booming energy economy while the North Texas economy suffered along with the rest of the nation. I don't know if you are old enough to be aware of what happened in Texas during the oil depression of the mid to late eighties. That was when the Dallas - Fort Worth area out grew the Houston area. In fact, the city of Houston actually lost population during that time and there was times when the suburb of Plano was adding more population annually than the much larger city. You do understand what makes Dallas - Fort Worth the larger overall market of the two, don't you? The Houston metropolitan area could even grow to be a good deal larger than Dallas - Fort Worth and the northern metropolitan area would still be the larger market.
That is another thing that contrasts between the two cities. While the Dallas - Fort Worth area is more like Chicago, the Houston area is more like Detroit was when it was a one business town with the booming Automobile industry based there.

Again, that is without the challenge. With it, Houston will have gained 100K more residents than DFW at least. DFW lost it's lead on Houston population wise by 2%.

And no, the North Texas economy did not suffer more. It suffered as much as Houston did, and faired a little better actually, as Houston reached higher unemployment and lost more jobs. Still, over the entire decade, Houston gained over 100K more jobs than DFW, which makes sense do to it's faster growth (percentage wise and by raw numbers).

And Houston is no where near Detroit. You do understand that there is more to energy than oil, right? You also understand how much smaller the energy industry's percentage of Houston's economy today versus the 80s, right? IMO, Houston has a higher ceiling/potential than DFW. I think DFW will cap off sooner. Being near the coast is a huge asset for Houston (especially once Project Panamax is complete). Coast cities, or cities along large bodies of water are the ones that have excelled past inland cities. Both have tons of potential, but I believe Houston has more. This past Census showing that, especially after the challenge.

[Mister Nifty]

Originally Posted by Trae

Again, that is without the challenge. With it, Houston will have gained 100K more residents than DFW at least. DFW lost it's lead on Houston population wise by 2%.

And no, the North Texas economy did not suffer more. It suffered as much as Houston did, and faired a little better actually, as Houston reached higher unemployment and lost more jobs. Still, over the entire decade, Houston gained over 100K more jobs than DFW, which makes sense do to it's faster growth (percentage wise and by raw numbers).

And Houston is no where near Detroit. You do understand that there is more to energy than oil, right? You also understand how much smaller the energy industry's percentage of Houston's economy today versus the 80s, right? IMO, Houston has a higher ceiling/potential than DFW. I think DFW will cap off sooner. Being near the coast is a huge asset for Houston (especially once Project Panamax is complete). Coast cities, or cities along large bodies of water are the ones that have excelled past inland cities. Both have tons of potential, but I believe Houston has more. This past Census showing that, especially after the challenge.

Well, this post wasn't started to argue. It was created to contrast the huge differences between the two areas. What is truely going on?
Indeed, the contrast you mention between the two cities is something outsiders should know about. After the mid to late eighties, the Houston area went from about 70% employment in the oil and gas business to, let's say, around 45%. Compaq computers, the makers of the world's first lap top computer, was created in Houston as a result of the monumental economic collapse that happened there. Continental Airlines ultimately merged its way to settling on being based in Houston. Other larger companies in other industries were indeed started in the Houston area.
But what has happened since then? Well, Continental Airlines got bought up by United Airlines, Compaq got bought up by Hewlett Packard, and other industries outside of the energy industry in the area went hurting right along with the rest of the nation's economy.
Also, after the late eighties, for all practical purposes, the energy business that was once based in the Dallas - Fort Worth area moved in abundance to the Houston area. Before the late eighties, the energy business was actually divided between the two cities, but then Haliburton (with much of Dresser Industries) and PetroFina decided to relocate from Dallas to Houston. Diamond Shamrock was once based in downtown Dallas along with a major division of Arco. Mobil Exploration shut down on the Stemmon's Corridor.
Helping relieve the pain of the Enron collapse in Houston, Anadarko and Phillips 66 both relocated to the area.
So, what has happened as a result of this shift? Surely the Houston area is now more energy related than it was before. Maybe not the 70% it was prior to the mid to late bust of the eighties, but certainly more than the 45% it had become prior to the drastic economic changes that have happened there in the last five years, namely Compaq getting bought up by Hewlett Packard and Continental Airlines by United Airlines.
You failed to address the point about the differing market sizes between the Dallas - Fort Worth area and the Houston area. That is the main reason the northern metropolitan area is projected to have the higher growth rate in future population than the southern one. As the price of a gallon of gasoline has continued to rise, that has had an adverse effect on retail business in Dallas - Fort Worth because of how regional shoppers have had to cut back on their traveling.
Recent events should have a positive effect on DFW business districts however. Preston Center, even during one of the nation's worst economies, has continue prospering. The Arts District continues to expand in downtown Dallas transitioning and melding both it and Uptown Dallas into a single urban area. Also, DART is about to expand in the Las Colinas urban area by opening up three new stations. The Telecom Corridor should prosper as a result of the recent earthquake and tsunami that devasted Japan will force the numerous major electronics firms based there to consider building back up facilities in the future.
You know, things might not be better in Dallas - Fort Worth than in Houston, but they are certainly a lot different. Whether that difference amounts to being better is dependent on a person's point of view.

(I'm confused on a point. If the economy did fare better in Dallas - Fort Worth, how did Houston, the smaller metropolitan area, manage to create 100,000 more jobs? A recent phenomenon did happen during this latest economic collapse. You see, I'll bet you that as lots of illegal aliens returned to Mexico, just about as many moved back to the Houston area from the contracting economy in the Dallas - Fort Worth area. I mean, the legal tolerance of the business of contracting out illegal aliens is a dirty secret about the Texas economy that outsiders should become aware, right?)

[Trae]

Go to Houston.org, and see for yourself. Even with companies merging, that doesn't mean they cease operations in Houston. For example. United is making IAH their largest hub (and no, not by total passengers), and the Gateway to Latin America (an emerging market). DFW was projected to grow faster than Houston this decade, and that didn't happen. Houston is actually further up in it's future projects by about five years, compared to DFW's three.

As for the confusion, if Houston grew faster than DFW by about 100K (if the challenge is correct), then it makes sense. DFW loss less jobs during the recession and started gaining jobs again before Houston.

[Mister Nifty]

Originally Posted by Trae

Go to Houston.org, and see for yourself. Even with companies merging, that doesn't mean they cease operations in Houston. For example. United is making IAH their largest hub (and no, not by total passengers), and the Gateway to Latin America (an emerging market). DFW was projected to grow faster than Houston this decade, and that didn't happen. Houston is actually further up in it's future projects by about five years, compared to DFW's three.

As for the confusion, if Houston grew faster than DFW by about 100K (if the challenge is correct), then it makes sense. DFW loss less jobs during the recession and started gaining jobs again before Houston.

I already contrasted the city airports. No matter how you shake and bake the figures, Houston is many years behind the city of Dallas in connecting itself by way of light rail with its major airports. You aren't being honest in your point of view as you have ignored the obvious in place of what shines the best light on IAH. See, the philosophy is vastly different in each metropolitan area and always has been in regards to the utilization of the airports. What the Houston area can't do anything about is how far away the major airports are situated from the urban cores. In contrast, the Las Colinas urban area, central Dallas, and the Addison / Galleria area are all intimately served by DFW, Love Field, and Addison airports.
If you would, please answer my question below in regards to what is the prime real estate in Dallas - Fort Worth. I isolated that area to be in and around CityPlace and Near East Dallas (Henderson).
Why? Well, the limited area of Preston Center is the prime area for office space, Lemmon Avenue is the prime avenue for shopping exotic vehicles, Preston Road is the prime corridor for upscale retail, Highland Park Village is the prime upscale retail store along Preston, and Turtle Creek is the prime area for condominium construction.
Significance? Well, the Arts District between downtown Dallas and Uptown Dallas is only prime in regards to central Dallas. In actuality, for the metropolitan area as a whole, the Harwood development in the northern section of Uptown is closer to true prime because it has a street which better connects it to Lemmon Avenue. So, in my opinion, the true prime for office space in Dallas - Fort Worth is Preston Center, the Harwood development, and, ultimately, CityPlace.
(Let me explain this reasoning a little better. A significant crossroad is the point in which Lemmon and (what will become) Preston Road cross. But high rise construction isn't allowed at this point because of how the runways were built at Love Field. The height restrictions put on this area is what pushes prime to the southeast and just beyond the prime real estate for condominium construction which is CityPlace. In regards to long term investment, this is the area to lay down a ton of money.
Just consider the area where Victory Park sits? It is just outside of prime in both how it sits to the Arts District in downtown Dallas and in regards to how it connects up to Lemmon Avenue. The Harwood development is sitting a lot prettier in regards to location, location, location.)
Could you please contrast the Houston area? Where are all the prime areas for condominium, office, and retail space located?
Thank you.
(As this is contrasting, I forgot to mention the Port of Houston. Obviously, the Dallas - Fort Worth area doesn't even have a sea port. Are you following my method here? Most people living outside of Texas and thinking about relocating won't find out anything by learning how one area is better than the other. They learn more by contrasting each area as if they are both crap. As we both know, there are lots of hillbillies in Texas who live outside the major metropolitan areas of Dallas - Fort Worth and Houston.)

[blakeaustin]

Austin is better than both cities mentioned by far. The swampy, mushy, insect infested Houston with raging drivers is not better than Dallas. Dallas is flat with no appreciable elevation changes throughout the entire city and has really bad pollution. Whenever we're driving through Dallas near dusk or dawn I notice the brown hazy horizon as compared to the clean healthy skies in Austin. Austin is also less prone to tornadoes and hurricanes. I prefer the people in Austin also... so yeah, both cities fail. lulz
Anologies:
Austin ; delicious peach
Dallas ; mediocre red apple
Houston ; orange gone bad

[TexasStar]

Originally Posted by blakeaustin

... Dallas is flat with no appreciable elevation changes throughout the entire city ...

I absolutely love Austin. And I'm not going to get into blind city comparison contests. But, since I actually live in the hills of southwest Dallas. I can't let this little inaccuracy go without comment.

Of course, Southwest Dallas is nowhere near as hilly as Austin. But it is far from flat.

image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr

[blakeaustin]

I know where this is. Everytime we go to Six Flags we pass through this area on I think it's I-30. The hills in Austin and in west Texas are way better, like I said no appreciable elevation changes.

[TexasStar]

Originally Posted by blakeaustin

I know where this is. Everytime we go to Six Flags we pass through this area on I think it's I-30. The hills in Austin and in west Texas are way better, like I said no appreciable elevation changes.

No, Blake. This is not on I-30. It's Mountain Creek in far southwest Dallas proper (south of I-20). And until you actually see it, I suggest you tap the brakes on that "no appreciable elevation change" comment.

Clearly you haven't seen enough of Dallas to make blanket statements.

[blakeaustin]

Oh I-20, sorry I wasn't for sure. But yeah i've seen it a few months ago when on the way to Kenedale. I wasn't for sure exactly where I was but all I know is that it wasn't far from Cedar Hill. Trust me I remember seeing this because I remember the ugly powerlines and thinking how they ruin the landscape. My parents looked at homes over here and all I could think about was how lame it would be to leave collin county for this place and leaving Allen High School. The best school ever!!!

[blakeaustin]

Your pictures validate that I have actually seen it. I think you need to tap the brakes sir... AWW YEAH!