Traverse City's Growing Pains: Big Buildings in Traverse City

This past summer, my wife and I recently took a trip back to my homeland of Michigan. We flew directly into Traverse City, Michigan. It's one of the most beautiful and vibrant small cities I've ever visited. I've been there many times, doing what southern Michiganders do in the summer: going up north. This past summer we stayed on Old Mission Peninsula, just outside Traverse City, and it was fantastic. I recommend the area to anyone who wants to see sparkling blue water, hike some dunes, drink good wine and cider, and swim in the cleanest fresh water around. It's not my intent to push Traverse City as a travel destination though. I'd want more of your time to do that. Trust me, just visit, and you'll love it.

What's more important right now is that Traverse City is in an identity crisis. The city is being forced to see itself as something it hasn't in the past. Instead of a tourist town, it's now becoming a permanent (or semi-permanent) home and regional commercial and business center. People want to live there, not just spend a few months in the summer there, or visit for a weekend.

It's a foodie town now too. Terms like "gastronomic tourism" are a thing, and it's a primary force in overall tourism, alongside recreation. Traverse City has taken cues from larger cities like Portland and Austin, and has grown a healthy arsenal of food trucks. Given the variety of fresh produce available in the area, summer menus for these trucks, and brick and mortar restaurants, must be great. Even Food Network chef Mario Batali now annually vacations in the area. This wasn't something that would have been predicted in Traverse City 10 years ago. Years ago people from southern Michigan flocked to Traverse City just to get away and swim. Now people from all over come for much more.

It's undeniable in summer as to how popular the city is for seasonal vacationers. The streets are busy with people walking in Downtown Traverse City. There are a number of new restaurants and shops (I'd highly recommend Brew Coffeehouse and Cafe). People are biking everywhere (on the TART trails; Get it? Cherries, tart?) and the beaches and parks (Clinch Park) surrounding Grand Traverse Bay are as busy as ever. But as my wife and I drove around, there were a number of apartments and mixed use projects being built, especially around the western edge of the city's downtown district. I don't know that Downtown Traverse City has seen this sort of development interest in the near-past.

But now, it seems that the interest in Traverse City has pushed the limit of some. Back in August, the Traverse City Planning Commission voted to grant a special use permit that would allow the 9-story, 96-foot tall, two building, River West mixed use development at 305 West Front Street to be built. Residents filed petitions and pushed for Traverse City to put the issue to a referendum vote. Unfortunately, a 2006 Michigan law within the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act prevents that from happening. Judge Philip Rodgers, of Michigan's 13th Circuit Court, ruled early on Monday that "...all counsel agree that a municipal zoning ordinance such as Traverse City’s cannot be amended by citizen initiative." His opinion closed with "The plaintiffs’ hope to delete buildings of a height greater than 60 feet from the zoning code at this time can be accomplished neither by initiative nor referendum."

Following that decision led to Monday night where the Traverse City City Commission heard public comment until 12:45 AM local time early Tuesday morning. I can't wait to see a video or transcript of that meeting! (view the entire meeting here, thanks to Up North Media Center). The City Commission voted 5-2 to approve the special land use permit. Northern Michigan's 9 and 10 News has a recap of the hearing here.

A rendering of the River West proposal

The property in question on Monday night was one that is zoned C-4c (Regional Center District, Chapter 1346), which allows for 60 foot buildings by right. The zoning ordinance allows for buildings up to 100 feet in this zone, as long as 20 percent of the building is used for dwellings. At minimum, buildings in any C-4 district must be at least 30 feet tall. (See Chapter 1368 for the city's size and area requirements.) The zoning ordinance also details many site plan and design guidelines, so residents can be given a reasonable expectation as to the design of the structures, unlike here in Houston, where an architect's imagination can run wild in the absence of a citywide zoning ordinance (unless you're in a historic district).

The site of River West is highlighted in red.

The River West site is also within the downtown neighborhood as detailed in the city's master plan, focusing on high intensity, regional and commercial activity. River West plans to have 162 dwelling units above 20,000 square feet of street-level retail. I'd say it meets those descriptors. As this was a special land use permit, the City Commission had to consider the standards for approval that are found in Chapter 1364 of the City of Traverse City Zoning Ordinance. The decision of the City Commission is final and cannot be sent back to the city's Zoning Board of Appeals. Of course, there is always the outside chance that there may be legal challenge ahead.

The zoning map of Downtown Traverse City

When I first heard about this case, it was reminiscent of the Ashby high rise case here in Houston. The development of the Ashby high rise is on a much larger scale than River West, and frankly, not nearly as noxious, as the Ashby high rise would be built adjacent a single family neighborhood, well outside any major activity center. In Houston, without a zoning code, it's not uncommon to find buildings that are completely out of character to their surroundings. But, like in the case of River West, that sort of development is allowed by city codes. Houston's building and development codes do not contain any sort of height restrictions, but do maintain other development rules.

Back in Traverse City, River West will provide the area with workforce housing. Now, don't confuse this with what many people know as affordable housing. This is not a government housing project, but housing that is intended to be affordable to those who are working retail and seasonal jobs, which make up a large part of Traverse City's economy. Developers say that 64 of the units will be affordable workforce housing serving workers earning between $8 and $17 per hour. "The workforce housing units will be priced to be affordable to downtown workers earning $10-$15 per hour, with estimated monthly rental prices ranging from $557 to $784.  The workforce housing element is pledged for a minimum of 45 years." The State of Michigan only requires workforce housing agreements to be a minimum of 15 years, so an additional 30 years provides a predicable number of workforce housing options for Traverse City residents. The hope would be that a number of other developments are built to complement River West.

I'd expect increases in those rental rates over the years, but the allocation of workforce housing, when not mandated by ordinance, is admirable, especially considering the growing rental rates in central cities over the last number of years, and that most new rental housing is built for those with greater incomes. I'd expect the workforce rates to increase as time goes on. I'd be interested to know what standard the developers are using to define their rental rates as "workforce", and what costs they will need to recover through the market rate units in order to make up for the workforce housing prices.

As someone on the outside, it's interesting to note in this case it's not outside investment companies coming into a city and turn some dirt and rake in cash. The project team has established relationships with business owners, employees and residents of the city. They communicate a desire to provide for those who might be moving to Traverse City to start careers. Erik Falconer, a life-long area resident, owns a local family wealth advisory company. (Interestingly, he is a brother of Ben Falconer, a former pastor of the church I attended while at Michigan State University.) Falconer penned a recent opinion in the Traverse City Record-Eagle advocating the approval of River West's special land use permit, noting that "Great towns and cities are not static — they constantly change. The character of our city is not just about its buildings. It is about its natural resources, open spaces, and most importantly, its people. And a diverse mix of people living and working in downtown Traverse City will continue to keep our city great."

A street view of West Front Street today

A view of West Front Street with River West

In an information video about the project, developers provide testimonies from business leaders who support the project, which at the end of the video is billed as "Vertical, Viable, Vibrant, Diverse". The vertical nature of the building allows more people to live near the city;s job center, adding to the city's vibrancy. And, to be honest, on my trips to Traverse City, I've not ventured much past North Union Street, as a number properties are parking lots. This, of course, is changing. It's interesting to note that the River West project does not require parking, but will provide 177 parking spaces, and a number of bicycle racks.

Traverse City's BATA provides transit to the area, and BATA's Hall Street Station is about a 0.2 mile walk from the River West development. This provides residents an opportunity to travel without a car, although I would be skeptical of higher income residents using public transit given the frequency of trips in Traverse City. Without a grocery store or affordable general retailer close by, (think clothes, home goods), residents, especially those without disposable incomes, will still need to complete car trips. I wonder if this is a perfect opportunity for the developers to consider a car-share system, such as Zipcar.

As with many other resort towns and cities that rely on agritourism, maintaining the surrounding area's natural physical beauty and resources are very important. Providing affordable housing in the center of the city (especially on a vacant lot) helps to partially lessen the need for apartments on the outskirts of town, in what would likely be sprawling greenfield development. Traverse City residents have repeatedly noted their desire to protect their natural landscape, and rightfully so. It's vital to the city's economy.

Some in Traverse City may see a city that is falling victim to its own success. As travel and tourism demands change, it is difficult to predict development pressures. It is a lesson to smaller cities and towns that their zoning and building codes and planning guidelines likely provide for many more opportunities to build large buildings than the general population would imagine. (If you take a look at Traverse City's zoning map, any property in the C-4b, C-4c, D, GP, NMC-2 or H-2 districts could possibly be developed with buildings anywhere from 30 to 45 feet, and in some cases, up to 100 feet, as in C-4c areas.) I would certainly not be an advocate of modifying the ordinance at this point to eliminate any chance of a building being more that 60 feet, as these are only approved by special land use permit, and will likely be the exception to the rule.

The age of these ordinances are relatively new when compared to the settlement of a city, and I wonder if this is now the time to make a wine analogy. Traverse City might be in one of these times where a winemaker is toys with the composition of a wine. As wine ages, different tastes and experiences are noted. A more complex taste may result. The more refined the taste and experience, the more people want it. There is a greater demand. Just ask many of the area's wineries and cideries. It's no different with an urban experience. (If we're talking about wine, let me quickly recommend Traverse City's Left Foot Charley urban winery in the redeveloped The Village at Grand Traverse Commons for some of their Riesling, or a bottle of their Cinnamon Girl cider. Verterra, Chateau Grand Traverse and Forty Five North are other favorites.) It will take different projects for the public to engage in a conversation to answer questions like "how tall is too tall?"

In many cases, cities already have ordinances that would allow someone to build something that might seem out of scale or character. It just takes someone with enough capital to do it. It's not an "if?" question, but a "when?" question. The question of "if?" has passed in Traverse City. Now, residents will await the answer to "when?"

Left Foot Charley in Traverse City's The Village at Grand Traverse Commons

Tandem Ciders, north of Traverse City

Hair Ye, Hair Ye! (Again), Black Swan Yoga, Juiceland - The Houston Heights Becoming Austin East

In August, plans on the Mosley Commercial website included the "Heights Plaza" property at 420 E. 20th Street in the Houston Heights. The website listed the popular Austin-based Birds Barbershop as its first tenant. It's taken a while, but it looks like plans are starting to roll again for the shopping center, which is now being developed by Radom Capital, the same group responsible for Heights Mercantile between Yale and Heights Blvd. at 7th Street. I rode by last night and noticed that the parking lot had been resurfaced, likely pointing to interior renovations to starting soon. (The rest of this post is kind of old news, but still worth a refresher.)

420 East 20th Street in August, 2015.

420 East 20th Street in December, 2015.

Proposed: 420 East 20th Street

The plans are significantly different than those originally posted by Mosley Commercial back in August, and for the better I might add. A sophisticated classiness is brought to the shopping center, clad in bright white paint and simple lines. The potential restaurant depicted has a classic early 1960's Corvette convertible (perhaps imported from Europe, given that the steering wheel is on the right side of the car?) parked in front. The renderings look great. Also noted in the Historic Commission notes are a suggestion to include a 5-foot sidewalk along Columbia Street, which currently terminates at the site's parking lot. 

Hair Ye, Hair Ye! - Houston To Get A Cut of Austin with Birds Barbershop?

A leasing sign from Moseley Commercial suggesting a remodel of the commercial strip center at 420 E 20th Street, the former home of the Sunshine Washateria and Frenchy's Sausage Company, is now posted at the site. The site plan for the future Heights Plaza includes a Birds Barbershop, the popular Austin salon chain. Houston residents may soon be able to enjoy the same Shiner Bock hair wash that Birds is currently offering to Austinites.

Mattress Manifest Destiny Part 2: Mattress Firm, Mattress Pro and Mattress 1 One

Houston's mattress population continues to rise. Mattress Firm, Mattress Pro and Mattress 1 One locations continue to open at a pretty fast pace. Those three chains alone account for 169 mattress stores in the Houston area. Swamplot showed that Mattress 1 One is slated to open a location on the 5800 block of Houston's Memorial Drive. A while ago I looked at all of the Mattress Firm and Mattress Pro locations in the Houston area, and compared them to a few basic demographics. What we found wasn't really surprising: people who are more educated, with more money, who move more tend to buy more mattresses. Or, at least mattress stores want to be located near people who fit into those demographics.

Well, the same is pretty much true for Mattress 1 One. But, the chain does have some locations in areas where household incomes are less than Houston's city median household income. Mattress 1 One also does not seem to be as intent on positioning itself in direct competition to a neighboring Mattress Firm or Mattress Pro. Mattress Firm seems to be locating along corridors, saturating them with stores (Westheimer!). Perhaps this provides shipping efficiency. Mattress 1 One on the other hand seems content to cast a wider net, blanketing the city.

Median Household Income, 2013

Percent of Population, Bachelors Degree and Higher

Percent of Population, Different Residence 1 Year Ago

Percent of Population, English Spoken at Home

Total Population, 25 to 34 Years

Mattress Manifest Destiny in Houston: Mattress Firm and Mattress Pro

If you live in Houston, you might notice the seemingly rapid growth in the number of Houston-based Mattress Firm locations, especially within Houston's 610 Loop. Mattress Firm locations have been springing up in prime locations around town, blanketing neighborhoods, including three recent stores in Montrose alone, at West Gray and Montrose Boulevard, Westheimer and Wesleyan, and Westheimer and Montrose Boulevard. Across the country Mattress Firm has opened and acquired 118 new stores in its fourth fiscal quarter this year alone, including many here in Houston. They're on a king-sized mattress manifest destiny across the nation! (Mattress Firm even had four pop-up-like locations at the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo this year, with three in the NRG Center, and one in NRG Park.)

A Mattress Firm booth at the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo

"Houston...Today", Today - The Urban Land Institute's 1974 Houston Spring Meeting Brochure

I always enjoy reading about Houston, especially when it comes to how the city developed. I recently came across the 1974 Urban Land Institute's "Houston...Today" report, compiled for the 1974 ULI Spring Meeting. (A full scan of the PDF can be found here.) The brochure incorporated information about major development projects in Houston in 1974, either as being "Downtown", inside the Central Business District, or "Suburban", outside the CBD.

Geography on Set: Connecting Real Places to Parks and Recreation - Future Gryzzl Headquarters

If you're following along with the final season of Parks and Recreation, you know that Pawnee is undergoing some rapid changes. One of those changes is evidenced in the recent "Save JJ's" episode. (See here for a recap). A new company Gryzzl has been a thorn in the side of Leslie Knope, as the company planned to build their new sprawling campus on a rural site owned by the Newport Family. Leslie had also been pursuing this property as the site for a national park. The National Park Service just couldn't match the $125 million put up by the Newport family.

Ben Wyatt and Leslie Knope address media and residents at Gryzzl's future Pawnee headquarters

For as much as Gryzzl has helped communication in Pawnee, the company eroded the community's trust through spying on their customers. Never to be outdone, Leslie and her crew put together quite an economic development package for Gryzzl. They convince the company that relocating their headquarters to a rural area will be much more expensive (upwards of $100 million), than revitalizing a warehouse complex in Pawnee's Beachview Terrace district. The development of Gryzzl's campus in this area will also allow the loved-but-shuttered JJ's Diner to relocate to a more affordable location, and create a customer base for the diner.

Redevelopment in Huntington, West Virginia; The Jewel City

This week I saw a tweet announcing that Strong Towns, the non-profit that supports models of development that allow cities, towns and neighborhoods to become financially strong and resilient, would be visiting my old stomping grounds of Huntington, West Virginia for a few days. The City of Huntington and the non-profit Create Huntington will host Strong Towns at their Chat and Chew tonight. (I was happy to see that Charles Marohn was also able to visit Huntington just over a year ago as well.) Strong Towns will be working with the City of Huntington on implementation strategies for their updated comprehensive plan, Plan2025.

Championing Downtown Houston

I moved to Houston almost three years ago, and since then I've spent most of my time in Downtown Houston. It's where I work and regularly recreate. In just less than three years there has been tremendous change. I know, the beginnings of that change were in motion long before I moved to Houston, but it is with excitement that we are seeing those changes come to fruition. Downtown development doesn't happen at the speed of light in most cities, but it does happen pretty fast here in Houston. (For a full list of priorities for Downtown Houston, see this presentation from Central Houston from January, 2015).

A city may have many areas of commerce, but traditional downtown centers give a city an identity. It's usually where the city's tallest buildings are, so it establishes iconic skylines. Downtown districts are normally the hub of commerce and arts, law, politics and governance. Over time, these characteristics may change. Downtown districts lose major sports teams and their facilities to the suburbs. Collections, much like the Texas Medical Center, need more space for their growing work, so they find refuge on the fringes. In this way many cities become polycentric. Houston is arguably one of the most famous examples of a polycentric city, featuring the Texas Medical Center, Uptown, Greenspoint and Greenway Plaza. But, if I'm like many other visitors to large cities, I want to first see a city's downtown district, not a satellite district. Downtowns may not be as important as they were perceived in the past, but I'd contend that they're still the most important district of a city.

Looking Forward to the Texas Big Six 2040: Potential Discussion Topics

This Friday city planning and development leaders from Texas' largest cities will gather at Texas Southern University for a day-long workshop and panel discussion to discuss each city's plans, policies and projects that will continue to "shape the livability, resiliency, and competitiveness" of each city and their surrounding regions. It will be the first time that all six of these directors has gathered to talk about development each of Texas' largest cities.

I wrote some thoughts two weeks ago about the benefit of this type of event, especially for a city like Houston. This week I'd like to explore some of the things that we might hear about from each city. Even though each city has different development circumstances, economic backgrounds, populations and governmental controls, we can still learn from each of them. So, planning and development issues what might we hear about from each of Texas' largest cities on Friday?

Houston

Houston is embarking on developing a General Plan. Perhaps we will hear more about the plan's progress, as well as the review of the city's Historic Preservation Ordinance. And, in a city without zoning, some might wonder what land use and development regulations the city and its citizens actually has at their disposal. 

Dallas

We might hear about Dallas' continued development in its downtown, and may be able to learn more about how the city uses Historic Districts and Conservation Districts top provide for community planning. We might also hear more about the decisions Dallas faces in zoning areas of the city for continued infill development and growth, including the city's recent review of the Oak Cliff neighborhood, just to the southwest of Downtown Dallas.

San Antonio

San Antonio may be able to discuss the continued growth of its neighborhoods, including the amending of its area plans, as well as the growth outside of the city's limits. We might also hear about how water accessibility has a role in development in San Antonio.

Austin

Austin may be able to tell us about what might lay ahead for the city after the failure of a proposed light rail expansion. More importantly, Austin may give us an update on the efforts the city is making in their CodeNEXT initiative. It's an attempt to "simplify the development rules but find ways to fit more housing and development in the city’s core, especially along major roads." This is something Houston might be able to learn from, as Austin seems to be allowing itself to accommodate a greater amount of infill development as the city grows in population. We also might be able to hear more about Austin's continued interest in learning more about tiny homes and micro-units.

Fort Worth

Fort Worth may be able to shed some light on its town and gown relationship with TCU, especially given the recent halt on single family housing permits surrounding the TCU campus. Fort Worth is also considering raising the minimum parking requirements for single family dwellings around the TCU campus, assuming that parking for rental homes is leading to an increase in street parking. The city is also in the process of adding parkland through the city's 2015 Parks, Recreation and Open Spaces Master Plan. Even though it is not a plan developed by the Planning and Development Department, it is an important planning topic, especially in a growing city. (City of Fort Worth Parks and Community Services survey).

El Paso

El Paso might be able to tell us more about its recently launched Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line, the Sun Metro Brio, as well as the continued development of El Paso's downtown.

These are all speculative topics that we might hear about from each city. There will be a time for questions and answers, so if these topics, or others of the public's interest, aren't answered in each director's presentation, there's a time to ask them.

More information about the event can be found on the Houston APA website, and if you're interested in attending you can sign up to attend the event here.

The Texas Big Six 2040 Event Page

Fri, Nov. 21, 2014

8:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m.

Texas Southern University - Barbara Jordan / Mickey Leeland School of Public Affairs

Houston, Texas

The Texas Big Six 2040 - Planning For Texas' Largest Cities

It's not often that you can gather leaders in a particular field from each of a state's largest cities. You might get them all in one place, but they probably won't all sit down and talk about a common issue. Well, the Houston Chapter of the American Planning Association has done just that. On Friday, November 21, 2014, city planning and development leaders from Texas' largest cities will gather at Texas Southern University for a day-long workshop and panel discussion to discuss each city's plans, policies and projects that will continue to "shape the livability, resiliency, and competitiveness" of each city and their surrounding regions.

The Texas Big Six 2040 workshop and panel will feature planning and development directors from each of Texas' largest cities; Houston, San Antonio, Dallas, Austin, Fort Worth and El Paso. Each of the panelists will provide presentations about how their cities and region will grow into "livable, desirable world-class places that sustain the health, vitality, and happiness of residents, businesses, and visitors." A portion of the event is also planned to be used for a question and answer period including all of the panelists. It should be an opportunity to learn about what each city is doing in the way of planning, but the chance to hear raw questions from the audience should prove to be the most worthwhile component.

It's no secret that Texas' cities are among the fastest growing in the country. Texas is gaining population so quickly, and as a result its cities are continually ranked at the top of all those "top places" lists, whether it's job growth, moving rates, U Haul destinations (in 2013 Houston ranked first, San Antonio fifth, and Austin sixth), or Creative Class population. Take it for what you will, but even Business Insider presented 18 Facts that Make Houston The Best City In America earlier this year. You name a category and a Texas city is likely to be a front runner, for better or worse. Without question, people are paying attention to Texas cities (even though some see Texas cities as B-List cities, not up to snuff with the likes of New York, L.A., Chicago or Boston).

Silos - Flickr

We're benefiting from a collection of growing industries, predominantly oil and gas and healthcare, as well as the ancillary engineering and support services that go with them. It's estimated that three out of four new jobs in Texas through 2040 will be within one of these six largest cities or its metropolitan area. The "Creative Class" population is growing not just in Houston, but in other Texas cities as well. Houston saw the biggest gain in Creative Class movers (ranking second behind Washington, DC), while Dallas came in sixth, and Austin twelfth.

Most of Texas is also blessed (or maybe cursed?) with a geography that allows cities to continue to expand into the horizon. There are few natural barriers to consider in urban (errr, should I say suburban?) development and, as evidenced here in Houston, land is being gobbled up for subdivisions at a rapid pace.

With this change in population, as well as overall growth in population, major planning decisions need to be made regarding housing, transportation, resiliency and sustainability. This is something Texans can no longer ignore. The public may ignore the complexity and interconnectedness of our cities, but our elected leaders and local government cannot.

There's much to be discussed. Texas is struggling with exceptional drought in many areas. All of our cities rank pretty poorly in terms of having the worst traffic, and building more freeways (or toll roads) hasn't helped. With some exception of Dallas's DART, our public transit systems (especially rail and bus rapid transit) have plenty of room for improvement when compared to cities of similar sizes. Our cities are rapidly aging (population and infrastructure), and there will be a great deal of older residents that must be served. And, for as affordable as people think Texas housing is, our cities are increasingly becoming prohibitively expensive for many long-time residents and many new comers.

Traditionally in Houston there has been a hesitancy to allow long range planning to take place. In most other Texas cities you don't have this issue. (In fact, Houston City Council just approved appropriations this week to continue with our city's General Plan.) Whether it is simply the distrust of government or the staunch desire to maintain property rights, Houston has been hostile to planning. But, given Houston's continued growth, loss of tax revenue, and difficulty in providing needed infrastructure improvements, we may not be able to ignore a more holistic approach to planning our city. When we look at our city's (and state's) changing demographics, is it so far-fetched that people may actually desire a greater amount of long range, interconnected planning processes?

As the Creative Class continues to grow here in Texas, as people move from other metros, and as millennials come to age and settle down, it's no doubt that people's preferences about what they value in terms of quality of life, will change. More people than ever want to live close to cities. It's certainly happening in Texas cities, with housing prices in our urban areas at an all time high. There's a residential boom in downtown districts that wasn't there even 10 years ago. To be able to respond to this increased demand on our cities and their ability to provide essential services, coordination and communication are key. Not only among each city's departments, but between different cities.

There are also many things that we can learn from other cities. We cannot discount the successes of other cities, and we cannot overlook policies and practices that may not have proven to be successful in others. Houston, certainly, is in no position to be an overall authority on successes of urban development, but we can continue to learn from others and adopt practices to allow Houston, and other Texas cities, to continue to grow.

I like to look to Toronto on many issues, especially because of the leadership of Toronto's Chief Planner, Jennifer Keesmaat. On her Own Your City blog, she recently discussed The Future of Urban Planning, and the need for more of it as our cities continue to grow. Keesmaat says;

Urban planning has a significant impact on some of the most important challenges that society is facing today. We have the opportunity to make people’s lives better  – or not – and to improve quality of life – or not.

Every single day I’m challenged by the work that I do. I’m constantly learning. I’m always also meeting interesting people who broaden my understanding of the world. City planning, in many ways, is at the heart of a democratic society. Think about it – how we plan our cities is about how we negotiate living together. Have you ever lived with someone? It can be pretty tricky.  This is why city planning is a complex discipline that is technical, political, and artistic all at the same time. It is often about brokering deals for our shared future. It is also about figuring out what we’re going to share or not share, what we value, and the kind of legacy we want to leave for future generations.

It'd be foolish to expect immediate effects as a result of a single workshop and panel discussion. But in an age where we desire to "tear down silos" between departments within organizations, why not start to tear down of silos between cities themselves? I am looking forward to attending and learning what the other five largest Texas cities are planning for and how they're doing it. I look to providing some thoughts from the event, and to further the dialogue of how Texas' largest cities can continue to support one another as we work to provide the best quality of life for our residents as possible.

More information can be found on the Houston APA website, and if you're interested in attending you can sign up to attend the event here.

The Texas Big Six 2040 Event Page

Fri, Nov. 21, 2014

8:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m.

Texas Southern University - Barbara Jordan / Mickey Leeland School of Public Affairs

Houston, Texas

Downtown Houston, Families and Residential Development

It's easy to be excited about the increase of multifamily housing developments in Downtown Houston. They're popping up all over the place. They're announcing new projects weekly. I hesitate to call all these developments multifamily, as most of these units are not likely accommodate families, but instead high-income singles, couples, or roommates. Take some time for yourself and examine the most recent 2008-2012 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates on the American FactFinder site for US Census Tracts 1000 (most of Downtown Houston) and 2101 (the part of Downtown Houston north of Buffalo and White Oak Bayous and south of I-10). The ACS population numbers for Downtown Houston are probably much lower than current conditions when considering the growth that has taken place in Houston. However, the trends revealed are valuable. It may be more trustworthy to look at more recent retail analyses when inquiring about more recent population numbers. 

Investment, especially in residential properties, is a great thing for Downtown Houston. Keep it coming! We need more residential investment,
especially as we continue to attempt to attract retail and entertainment opportunities. If retail and entertainment establishments are to be viable, Houston needs more residents near its core, or people need to see Downtown Houston as a destination. Right now, both of those realities are relatively weak when compared to other cities, but they are getting stronger.

To boost Downtown Houston's residency, in 2012 the Houston Downtown Management District and the TIRZ#3 Downtown Living Program of the Downtown Redevelopment Authority partnered to create the Downtown Living Initiative Program. The program provides development incentives for multifamily and mixed use developments that construct more than 10 new dwelling units, are within the program boundary area, and help to enhance the pedestrian environment. The program was originally intended to provide incentives for 2,500 units, but was expanded to provide incentives for up to 5,000 units total. Developers can take advantage of the program until June 30, 2016, or until all 5,000 units are accounted for. With a dozen residential projects either completed or scheduled, more than 3,800 of the 5,000 units are accounted for. The funding of up to $75 million is not a small amount of money.

If you take notice of what is happening in most large cities, and especially in North America, people, especially millennials, want to live in cities, especially urban cores. To many Houstonians, this doesn't make sense. Many claim that people move to Houston because they want a single family home with a large yard, which they can drive to in their air conditioned car. Urbanism? We don't need no stinkin' urbanism. People want suburbanism! But yet, there's those that argue against the "Keep Houston, Houston" position, claiming our recent parks and urban development progress as making this city a better place to live. The juxtaposition of these views is what keeps Houston from really making meaningful changes in how things look on the ground here, and how the city operates as an organism.

Houston, Zoning & the New Donut Model

Mmm, donuts.

A few weeks ago on Urbanophile Aaron Renn discussed a historical concept of urban development known as the "donut" model. This concept takes place when a city's outlaying areas see more development than a city's urban core. This has historically been the development trend in many cities, including many rust belt cities like Detroit, Cleveland, Chicago, Saint Louis and Minneapolis, as well as some southern cities like Atlanta, and even here in Houston. European cities haven't been exempt to this pattern either.

Renn then categorized the current development trend of many cities with gentrifying and revitalizing downtown districts, calling it the "new donut" paradigm. Some urbanists have attributed some of the effects of this new paradigm to the existence of traditional zoning in cities, claiming that existing zoning restraints effectively renders parts of cities unable to address the needs for increasing housing or development needs. As evidenced here in Houston, and recently in Minneapolis, among many other cities, Renn notes that:

Filling in the hole became every city’s mission. Pretty much any city or metro region of any size has pumped literally billions of dollars into its downtown in an attempt to revitalize them. This took many forms ranging from stadiums to convention centers to hotels to parking garages to streetcars to museums and more. It’s popular today to subsidize mixed use development with a heavy residential component.

Mmm, donuts. In Houston, when you discuss donuts, the topic rapidly shifts to Shipley's. It's Shipley's versus the rest of the world here, although Dunkin Donuts is making a push for a Houston presence. I'm not really sure how fried breakfast foods ended up being an analogy for discussing urban development, but they're both things I enjoy, so I don't mind it at all. And, since it's now fall, all this talk about donuts brings back the memories of Blakes Cider Mill in Armada, Michigan, sitting in the middle of an apple orchard, chowing down on freshly fried donuts washed down by fresh-pressed apple cider.

Courtesy of Urbanophile.com

While I love donuts, I like bagels too. Houston's development, and the downtown development in many cities, is more like the experience of having a cinnamon crunch bagel at Panera, which one can argue is much like a donut anyways. You know the bagel has a hole in it somewhere. It's just filled in with sweet, cinnamon-y toasted sugar. You know the hole is there in the middle of the doughy periphery, it's just filled in. Maybe that toasted cinnamon sugar filling is the gigantic amount of sweet public funding that cities have dedicated to building these stadiums, convention centers, and even residential developments. It's not at all that these attempts are wrong, but we've just invested a lot of taxpayer money in them. More to follow on residential development, specifically here in Houston, in the coming week or so.

Courtesy of Urbanophile.com

Okay, back to cities now. This "new donut" paradigm is precisely what has happened recently in Houston. The Astrodome was replaced with Minute Maid Park. It's only fitting that in a discussion about cities and breakfast foods, that we have a stadium named for a brand of orange juice. There's not much that we can thank former Enron Chairman Kenneth Lay for, other than his insistence that the Astros establish a downtown field, ultimately incorporating the former Union Station into the stadium's design. The Rockets then moved from The Summit to the Toyota Center, the George R Brown Convention Center was built, along with many hotels, parks and offices.

Houston: The Adolescent City

Recently, people have struggled to describe Houston, to give it an identity.

We've got a new slogan that touts Houston's endless possibilities, but that can also evoke thoughts of our seemingly endless suburban sprawl. Houston used to be "Space City, USA", but now the space program faces colossal cutbacks. We still house NASA's Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, but its role has been cut back drastically.

Houston used to be more widely known as "Clutch City", a description of the dramatic fashion in which the Houston Rockets won their 1994 and 1995 NBA Championships. But, the Rockets haven't been the same team since, so that one's lost its descriptive luster.

Houston's also known as the "Bayou City". And, even though Houston was founded on the banks of the confluence of White Oak and Buffalo bayous at Allen's Landing, it hasn't been until recently that the city or its citizens have understood the value of the city's bayous. They've got much greater value than simply being utilized as channels to collect the runoff from our suburban sprawl.

In the 1900's we were once named "The Magnolia City", but many of our magnolia trees were plowed under as our city grew.  Our oil economy afforded us the name "The Capital of the Sunbelt" in the 1970's. Due to our mass of oil and gas companies, we're also known by some as the "Energy Capital of the World."

Culturally, Houston has been called "H-Town". Hip hop and rap music fans know our city as "Screwston", in tribute to DJ Screw's "Chopped and Screwed" style.

The city of Houston's seal was influenced by our railroad heritage, but that seems to be something long forgotten. We've got no nickname for our history in that arena, and our utilization of rail in our city leaves us on the other side of the tracks of our heritage, and when compared to other large US cities. We've also imitated the moves of a bunch of other peer cities, and took out some pretty neat street car systems.

Houston has always done its own thing and wanted to doing things "uniquely Houston", whatever that is supposed to mean.That's why we might be best suited to call Houston "The Adolescent City".

Downtown People Movers; Houston's People Mover Past

A few weeks ago METRO Houston board member Christof Spieler posted some pictures from a recent trip to Detroit. Like any visitor to Detroit, Mr. Spieler commented on the misunderstood and seemingly useless Detroit People Mover. It only takes a few minutes to ride the 2.9 mile loop through Downtown Detroit, but it gives you an opportunity to see different parts of Downtown Detroit, and it actually makes downtown navigation quite easy if you're headed to a concert or sporting event, especially in those cold Michigan winters. It has a certain understated charm.

Given my Metro Detroit roots, nothing gets me riled up like criticisms of Detroit. Not to be misunderstood, the People Mover is probably one of the biggest blunders in public transit history. It's both loved and hated by Detroiters, and is even the subject of a Down With Detroit T-shirt. Captions from Down With Detroit detail Detroit's "Misguided attempt at being a major city, instead of putting light rail, we got a tour guide style monorail, only useful if you are going in a circle downtown." But Detroit may have just happened to be on the bad side of transit history luck. It surely wasn't the only city that applied for a Downtown People Mover (DPM).

As chronicled in this 2011 City Lab post from Eric Jaffe, Detroit was just one of the approximately 70 cities that applied for federal funding to build a people mover system in the early 1970's. Jaffe notes that "The idea for the people mover emerged in response to amendments in the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, which called on the housing and urban development agency to encourage new systems of urban transportation that will carry people and goods within the metropolitan area speedily, safely, without polluting the air, and in a manner that will contribute to sound city planning." In 1966, the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) was created, and it became responsible for developing new forms of transit.

The UMTA outlined some major goals in their DPM assessment:

(1) to test the operating cost savings which automated transit
systems might deliver;  

(2) to assess the economic impact of improved downtown circulation
systems on the central city; and  

(3) to test the feasibility of surface or elevated people movers
both as feeder distributors and as potential substitutes for
certain functions now performed by more expensive fixed guide-
way systems, such as subways.

"Tomorrow's Transportation: New Systems for the Urban Future" was a 1968 report that intended to ease the transit problems of Americans who live in or commute to cities. A DPM was just one of the recommendations made in the report, along with the seemingly Jetson-like personal rapid transit proposal, personal capsules, and the moving belts. We can be thankful that many of the report's findings never made it any further.

What resulted were proposals for DPM's from some of America's largest cities. The UMTA received and selected proposals from Los Angeles, St. Paul, Minnesota, Cleveland and our very own Houston. These were the four cities that were to receive federal funding to build a people mover system in their downtown. But a short time later Houston and Cleveland withdrew their applications, and St. Paul voters turned down the project. Miami and Detroit were chosen as alternate cities, and were the only two projects to result in built people movers.

Houston's People Mover Past

What would a Downtown People Mover have looked like here in Houston?

The City of Houston's 1976 proposal to the UMTA called for a 1.09 mile system, composed of 2.25 lane miles of track bisecting the "heart of the downtown core", stretching from the Cullen Center to the Harris County complex. It was intended to be fully owned, operated, planned and financed by the City of Houston, and was said to garner "strong and wide local support".

As one of the four cities chosen for the DPM program, the system was "viewed locally as a highly visible first step to improve public transit in Houston", and it was expected to be the central element of a city transit system.  Houston was reported to receive approximately $33 million to build their people mover, hoping it would "serve a rapidly expanding market for internal daytime circulation trips, and would stimulate new growth and development in the older north end of the city."

In the original proposal, the DPM was expected to attract 24,000 ADT, or over 20,000 passengers per system mile. To gain some perspective, Houston's METRO rail 12.8-mile Red Line carries about 41,000 riders per weekday in 2014, or approximately 3,200 riders per mile per day. These ridership estimates seem wildly optimistic, especially for circulation in such a small area. By 1985, the project was intended to service 8.5 million riders per year, or an average of just over 33,000 trips per day, with an estimated 74 percent of those trips being made going to and from work.

A major aspect of the DPM proposal was how a "DPM can act as a distributor for regional bus transit." It was an objective of the "City's transit program to intercept automobile traffic in the suburbs or to provide direct express service rather than to encourage auto use in the downtown." For those that currently work in Downtown Houston, we all know that these goals were not met.

Proposed route maps show eight stations starting at the Cullen Center, and extending clockwise to the Allen Center, the former Foley's Department Store, the Bank of the Southwest Building at 919 Milam, to the Pennzoil Building and Jones Hall, a North Main Terminal near Market Square, and looping over to the Harris County Courthouse, and back down to the Exxon Building before returning back to the Cullen Center.

The City of Houston contracted Sperry Systems Management and Howard R. Ross Associates to put together a preliminary report for a people mover. The report set out to "review some of the transportation problems facing downtown Houston", "discuss how a people mover could alleviate problems of access and circulation, and could interface effectively with downtown stations of the rail transit system when built."

The report contains a variety of possible people mover routes, with one route extending north and south along both Main and Smith, looping between Prairie and Pease, and another route extending from east to west generally along Dallas and Walker, looping just to the west of US-59, through what is now Discovery Green and the George R. Brown Convention Center. It is noted that the routes are for illustration only, but that these routes provided an extended range for lunchtime shopping and dining. And, with the availability of a climate controlled-circulation system, riders would not be limited by fatigue and discomfort.

Some of the most interesting content of the preliminary report is the projected transit use in Houston. The plan recognized that Houston, and the downtown core in particular, would see continued growth in the number of trips taken by commuters. The preliminary report notes that only about 35 percent of the anticipated growth in trips would be able to be absorbed by the freeway system. The report made a claim that by 1990, transit must account for 40 percent of the trips to and from the downtown area.

Source: 2013 Central Houston Commute Survey 

According to the 2013 Central Houston Commute Survey Report, this is in stark contrast to conditions now as nearly 57 percent of workers in Downtown Houston drive into work alone, and another 9 percent use some sort of car pool or van pool. That means that 68 percent of Downtown Houston workers are arriving to work in a vehicle. This falls well short of the projected transit goals laid out in the preliminary people mover report. The 2013 Central Houston report actually concluded that a greater number of people drove along in 2013 than in 2009, as "More downtown workers drove alone, and fewer chose public transit, vanpools, or carpools."

In 1978 steps were made to create an interim regional transit authority, following provisions by Texas State Legislature. Immediately after its formation, the authority put together what was called the "METRO Plan", highlighting near-term and long-term transit improvements in the region. As a result of the authority's planning, the Houston Office of Public Transit decided that the DPM plan should take a backseat. Finally, on August 12, 1978, Houston area residents voted to create the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (METRO). METRO's board of directors "determined that the function of the DPM had to be re-examined in the light of the new regional transit authority committed to implementation of the METRO Plan."

The DPM was no longer viewed as the focal point for transit within Houston. It might, at best, simply be an integral part of a regional transit system. What resulted was a Downtown Mobility System (DMS) Study. This study still considered the DPM as part of what was called Automated Guideway Transit, as well as the birth of Bus Priority Systems, which impact on Houston's traffic today.

On July 16, 1979, the METRO board voted unanimously to withdraw from the UMTA's Downtown People Mover program. The board noted that bus priority systems and reserved transit lanes would be more cost effective than any Automated Guideway System, and that other activity centers within the city would have more severe traffic congestion, and would require some form of automated distribution system in the future. (This clearly never happened!)

The METRO board felt that they should give up their DPM program status to allow cities with more pressing needs to take advantage of the program, and wanted to give increased consideration to focus on transit options that complemented the Main Street Transit Mall, which was a result of the METRO board's Downtown Mobility Study. Main Street was intended to be constructed as a four-lane, bus-only, facility. The board also felt that a DPM-like system "may well be appropriate at another time in the CBD, or in other Houston activity centers where Bus Priority Systems would be more difficult to implement." The Main Street Mall was intended to have capacity for at least 150 regional express buses per hour.

I am glad that the Main Street Mall project never materialized and limited traffic to buses, although this is somewhat the current state of Main Street, as this is METRO's Red Line light rail route. On that day the METRO board bolstered regional transit in the name of local downtown circulation. A downtown people mover would be a unique element in Houston's already interesting streetscape, and something else that gives Houston its unique nature. Some renderings in the preliminary report are quite interesting. Image having arrived at Foley's in a train on an elevated track. (In the renderings it also looks like DPM cars would have been pushed away from the track into loading bays depressed into the second floor of Foley's.)

In the past Houston has never been one to aggressively pursue alternative forms of transportation, given the influence of oil companies here in Houston, much like the auto manufacturer's influence in Detroit. But this was probably one transit project that we can be glad was never built, at least in terms of function. METRO's Greenlink bus service essentially provides the same service as a people mover would have, but likely without the same service times, and at a much lower cost, with almost no added infrastructure. It also covers most of the same ground that several of the routes in the Houston people mover's preliminary report.

Transportation Sec. William Coleman, right, looks at plans for Downtown People Movers in five U.S. cities in 1976. (AP Photo/Harvey Georges)

But, I can't help but think that Houston may have missed out on having a unique form of transit within its downtown. As is the case with Detroit's cold winter weather, a system like this would certainly be a comfort for downtown workers and visitors in Houston's extreme heat. It sure would have made for a much better conversation piece than our current clogged (during rush hour!) downtown streets, and would allow people to traverse the city above ground and at street level, as opposed to through Houston's tunnel system. Now that the METRO rail is almost complete, it's not too late to add this to Houston's transit wish list!

__________________________________________________________

Below is a collection of snapshots (I apologize for any poor quality photos) of the City of Houston's proposal for the Downtown People Mover program proposal, as well as supporting documents, including the Preliminary Report for a People Mover System for downtown Houston, and the preliminary engineering grant application. Finally, captures of the METRO Houston Downtown Mobility Survey are included. All items are available for view at the Houston Metropolitan Research Center (HMRC), located within the Julia Ideson Library in Downtown Houston.