William Whyte and Houston: Revisiting Houston Center - The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces

As I begin to prepare to take the AICP exam, the American Planning Association's professional institute, I was again reminded of the fantastic work of William H. Whyte (1917-1999). To those outside of the urban planning field, the name might not ring a bell, but, you've probably been influenced by his work. He spent much of his life studying corporate norms and organizational structures. While writing for Fortune Magazine, Whyte coined the term "Groupthink". After releasing his 1956 book The Organization Man, Whyte turned his attention to cities.

Whyte took to studying how people use our cities; how they interact with one another, with their environment. The Project for Public Spaces notes that "What emerged through his intuitive analysis is an extremely human, often amusing view of what is staggeringly obvious, but often goes unnoticed, about people’s behavior in public spaces." I agree.

The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces

In his work The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, Whyte studies how New Yorkers use plazas and open spaces. These were plazas that were provided by builders in exchange for increased floor area ratios. Builders installed more plazas, but what resulted was empty spaces. Whyte is famous for his quote, "It is difficult to design a space that will not attract people. What is remarkable is how often this has been accomplished." Turns out, there were many spaces that were built that actually repelled people. The same holds true today.


The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces: William H. Whyte from Nelly Oli on Vimeo.

Some plazas did have lots of people though. So, Whyte and his research team went to work to figure out what made them work. The Planning Commission of New York City claimed that if Whyte and his team could create a set of factual claims, that they would alter the open space requirements contained in the city's zoning code.

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.

"We're on a Mission From God" - Urban Churches Face Development Pressure; Sojourn Houston's Story

The Blues Brothers - "We're On A Mission From God"

More and more people continue to move to Houston and other large cities as housing and transportation preferences continue to shift toward the desire to be in more urban, dense neighborhoods. For better or worse, many people will feel the effects on their established neighborhood experiences and rhythms. Churches are no exception. Churches in Houston and in cities all over the country are facing increasing pressure from developers to sell their land to accommodate increasing demand for residential or commercial redevelopment. These attempts seem to perpetuate the greedy reputation of developers, who are typically perceived as effectively careless about a neighborhood's established social fabric. There are certainly times to be critical of redevelopment, especially when it is pressed upon active churches or those intending to live out their entire lives in their homes. In other cases, redevelopment certainly makes sense and can be crucial to the repair or betterment of a neighborhood.

Established churches, and those with buildings in the urban cores of cities face advantages and disadvantages being situated on somewhat larger tracts of land. Urban churches, which vary greatly in size and demographic of their congregations, are advantaged because they are close to large centers of population, including international populations, families and other people groups. Urban churches are also close to unchurched or underserved populations, which are at the heart of a church's mission. Congregations can also serve residents in neighborhoods through providing programming and space for community events, not to mention through personal relationships with parishioners.

As a disadvantage, churches that maintain large properties that are prime targets for multifamily or commercial development. These properties, unfortunately at times, also make excellent locations for the all-too-familiar townhouse subdivisions. Existing churches that serve their neighborhood can fall prey to the temptation of a large payment for their property, sometimes to the detriment of their congregation and surrounding neighborhood. I have said it before, Houston needs more dense housing, including townhouses, especially within the I-610 loop. But sometimes it makes little to replace existing, contributing establishments, especially ones that make valuable social contributions to a neighborhood.

(If you know of any examples of churches that have been re-purposed into multifamily housing or other interesting developments, please leave a comment.)

Urbanist Discussion of Urban Churches

A question, which was considered a few weeks ago on the StreetsBlog website by Angie Schmitt asked "Do modern churches facilitate isolation or community?" The consensus from author, and president of Strong Towns, Charles Marohn, (whose account about his church's response to bicycle lanes prompted Ms. Schmitt's article) was that the modern, suburban mega-church campuses that are prominent in many communities facilitate isolation. This question was prompted by Marohn's parish priest announcing that bike lanes threatened to displace some of the parking that exists in front of their church property, and that the church intended to oppose any such bike lanes being built. Marohn, in his dissent offers that, "Not only should we not be opposing bike lanes, church leaders around the country should be doing everything they can to reconnect the social bonds of our communities." Churches around the country can often be opposed to urban inconveniences, such as bike lanes that take away street parking, as evidenced in this case from Washington, DC. I agree with Marohn, that churches, if part of the community, should see the benefit that can come from changes in urban design and the placemaking of neighborhoods.

Marohn also questions how many parishioners would really like a deeper connection with their church, and the Church as a whole, but just don’t find it convenient as they live isolated in their easily accessible suburban homes. Instead of finding community among their physical neighbors, he suggests many people find more of a sense of community in their local Costco instead of their church.

Marohn ponders "just how much more fulfilling our lives would be if we did not live in such isolation. If God dwells in each of our hearts – and I truly believe that is the case – then seeking to live in communion with God should mean that we seek to have lives immersed with each other. To truly live in this way cannot be an active pursuit, one in which we have to get in the car and drive 25 minutes to a parking lot at a set time for a scheduled event with a self-selected group of people. It must be passive, where our natural day-to-day existence includes random interactions with the humanity that makes up our community, be they Christian or not. Be they affluent enough to own a car or not."

As a Christian, I believe that Marohn is spot on in his question and statement highlighted above. The near-recent trend of mega church campuses fails to allow ministry to happen in neighborhoods if everyone is driving from a radius of many, many miles to gather. (Not to mention, the Houston Press named the six ugliest churches in Houston in 2011, and without surprise, half were mega churches). With a suburban church model, urbanites fail to experience the enactment that Jane Jacobs talked about in her book The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Jacobs' "sidewalk ballet", is never able to occur near suburban church campuses. At least urban churches provide an opportunity for this to happen! Jacobs saw interactions between children, nine-to-fivers, and others, all working in a sort of rhythmic cooperation, leading to her "sidewalk ballet". As the Church, what better way is there to serve the residents of your neighborhood than during times of need in their everyday rhythms?

Emily Badger from The Atlantic Cities asked in November of 2013 whether the Christian church has forgotten its urban roots. I pray that it has not. Badger's article focuses its comments on Why Cities Matter: To God, the Culture, and the Church, a book written by pastors Stephen Um and Justin Buzzard. Um and Buzzard declare that, "We believe there is an anti-urban bias within the Christian community." This bias without a doubt a detriment to cities. Badger postulates that "perhaps cities have become associated with secularism because there's so much else to worship there: either the promise of cities themselves, or the prospects for good jobs or other forms of success." It is the success of cities and their industries that tempt people to find ultimate satisfaction in high-paying jobs and upscale living, which ultimately will never prove to be totally fulfilling. Um states that "we're not saying, as Christians, that cities are our ultimate hope. We're saying the God of our cities is our ultimate hope."

In The Space Between: A Christian Engagement In With The Built Environment Eric Jacobsen lays a framework for the importance of the urban environment in the Christian faith. As part of this understanding he defines churches as either "embedded" or "insular". Embedded churches tend to facilitate direct connections between the interior space of a church building and the public realm, while insular churches tend to be insulated from the public realm by their own parking and landscaping, and are unfriendly to any pedestrian traffic. Jacobson closes his chapter on traditional church forms by saying "If the church hopes to be an agent of redemption in the built environment, it needs to think more carefully about the various ways its members interact, not only within the walls of the church or in their private homes, but with the world that exists right outside of the church's doors."

Sojourn Heights and Other Houston Churches

St. Philip Presbyterian Church in relation to the Galleria

A recent topic posted on Houston's real estate news site Swamplot further demonstrated the pressure on churches to sell their land, especially in major activity centers like Houston's Galleria. Pastor John Wurster of St. Philip Presbyterian Church in his Easter Sunday sermon expounded on the subject saying that the issues of urban life, like traffic, are discussed within the walls of his church, while;

"The real estate conversations seem to happen exclusively with those outside of the church. These are the people who call expressing an interest in buying the church property. I explain that we’re not looking to sell. Of course, you are. Everyone is willing to sell at some point. Just tell us what that point is. No, really, we feel like this is where God has called us. This kind of theological talk tends to bring no response beyond bafflement, as if it’s not possible that one could be in a place and not be willing to leave it if the price were right, as if it’s not possible that decisions and actions might be motivated by something besides money."

Recently approved townhouse subdivisions near Sojourn

St. Philip Presbyterian is not alone in being asked to sell their land. My home church, of which I am a covenant member, Sojourn Community Church in the Houston Heights neighborhood has experienced the same pressure. Sojourn has been asked to sell their building at various times, and most recently within the past few weeks. A local apartment developer recently approached Sojourn, announcing that "it's always been a dream to turn a church into apartments." This is exactly the type of action that perpetuates the greedy, uncaring reputation of multifamily developers. Approaching a church with a growing congregation that serves and cares for its neighbors can portray a cavalier attitude about anything more than the physical development of a neighborhood, or personal profit.

Housing demand within Houston's I-610 Loop forces builders to solicit these offers. It's been going on for years, and it will continue as long as their is demand for housing within the more urbanized parts of Houston. Sojourn Heights may have actually never settled into 608 Aurora Street, had Minimum Lot Size or Minimum Building Line restrictions never been approved for its block. The property at 608 Aurora, and that directly to its south, were to be sold and developed into townhouses. The plat for Aurora Heights Grove Subdivision was approved by the Houston Planning Commission in 2006, but nothing happened with the land. A few months later an application for Minimum Lot Size and Minimum Building Line was applied for, then approved by Houston's Planning Commission, and ultimately City Council. It is interesting to see what could have happened to another one of Houston's urban churches had the former owners decided to give in to this development pressure.

Sojourn Heights

The neighborhood around Sojourn continues to change, as two townhouse subdivisions were approved by the Houston Planning Commission, Argos and Argos Villas. Six townhouses will be built across the street on two vacant lots, further solidifying a more urban, walkable environment. The Houston Heights continues to see development on its fringes that allows for greater density and facilitates interactions between residents in the realm of the street. 

What Sojourn could have been

Last week Sojourn closed on the property at 608 Aurora. It now belongs to the members of Sojourn, and will be stewarded to further our mission and vision in Houston. Sojourn purchased an urban church building so that we as a body can work at fulfilling our mission and vision of saturating the culture of Houston with the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the glory of God and the good of the city. Specifically, Sojourn envisions:

"...a movement that renews the cultural fabric of this city. We see a movement of people uniting under their new identity as the people of God to form hundreds of small communities (Neighborhood Parishes) sent to engage the unique needs of their neighborhoods with the gospel. We see these Neighborhood Parishes forming new churches throughout the city, each cultivating communication, creativity, art, and renewal in their regions. As these churches partner with national and international church planting networks, we see the gospel spreading to the far corners of the Earth. But ultimately, we see a movement that is centered on the gospel of Jesus, carried out by the church of Jesus, and focuses on the mission of Jesus."

Churches Belong In the Urban Landscape

Churches in urban areas provide a great deal of benefits for neighborhoods, offering meeting space for civic clubs, providing outdoor recreation opportunities, offering parking for city events, and offering programming and care for city residents. For example, Sojourn Heights offers their meeting space to the West Sunset Heights Association for monthly meetings. Sojourn also recognizes the prevalence of the arts in the Houston Heights and Montrose neighborhoods, offering the Sojourn Studio Residency. Artists can utilize unused space within Sojourn's building, using it as a free design space for a period of time, concluding with an opportunity to host an exhibition of their work with other residency artists.

Church attendance continues to be in decline and many young people continue to define themselves as having no religion. Many young people do not see religion, and church specifically, as a part of their lives. I can't help but think that this is partially due to a lack of neighborhood churches that have set out to seek to love and serve their surrounding neighborhoods. Declines may also be attributed to the burden that is placed on parishioners having to travel miles and miles to be a part of a congregation during people's already busy weeks. Unfortunately, many churches are taking congregations further and further away from the central city and into the suburbs, including here in Houston. Ordinary community cannot take place in this environment.

It's quite alarming to Christians that regular church attendance is somewhere near 37 percent for Americans, and is estimated to be much lower in Houston's inner-loop neighborhoods. In urban areas churches and parishioners are better equipped to love their neighbors, and to weave together their social, personal and spiritual lives, instead of spending time in traffic. Christians continue to hold firm to the belief that churches and God belong in their cities.

As cities continue to grow more dense there will be continued demand for housing and commercial development. It's my hope that churches continue to have a presence in this new urban development. As we saw in the Blues Brothers, without an urban church, Jake Blues may never have received his message from God that led him to put the Blue Brothers band back together. Jake and Elwood believed they were on a mission from God. Without that, it would have made for a much shorter, and much more disappointing movie. Urban churches in Houston and abroad, when pressured with redevelopment can say, "We're on a mission from God."

Houston's Front Porch: Why So Messy? Updated March 12, 2014

I love our city, and especially our city's governmental buildings and parks. Houston is blessed to have such a large system of parks, and should be the envy of many cities. For those working downtown, City Hall Plaza and Hermann Square provide an opportunity to admire our city's history and get a bit of fresh air.

This really is Houston's front porch! It should show the best we have to offer. (And it does, hosting festivals and regular events like the Urban Harvest Market on Wednesdays, as well as other more spontaneous sights, like the older gentlemen who regularly play baseball catch on the grass.) It also allows people to demonstrate their First Amendment rights. It is a space for all, and it is valuable to civility in Houston.

Over the last few weeks, however, it has been getting noticeably more messy. During my walk into work, as well as to and from lunch each day, it is hard to miss the group that gathers daily to spend their day around City Hall. Most people appear to be homeless or without normal work hours, simply spending time loitering for the entire day in Hermann Square or the area outside the Houston Public Library (UPDATE 3/12/2014: Sources tell me that within the last few weeks loitering is no longer being tolerated near the Houston Public Library, as the Houston Public Library Plaza is for library patronage only. Those loitering were told they would not be able to stay there, and would need to find somewhere else to go. It seems they have chosen Hermann Plaza.) Typically, these days seem to be spent without incident, but one can suspect this may be why there is such a large amount of refuse left in the park. These are areas for all, but there are also opportunities exercise the civility that the City of Houston encourages.

This morning (Tuesday, February 25, 2014), this is what Hermann Square looked like. This is not what our city's front porch should look like to welcome citizens, visitors and city employees. I don't know what should be done, but this saddens me that right under the shadow of City Hall, our parks are treated like this. Clearly, there are many violations of the City of Houston Parks and Recreation Department's rules and regulations.

This is an opportunity to extend grace to those who do not follow the law or respect the civility of our city or the public good of our parks. But, we should not tolerate this treatment of our public places. As someone who loves cities and the people they represent, I am aware of the impact that public spaces have on a city's reputation. City halls and government buildings are typically the "front porch" of most cities, and should be respected, serving as a comfort, welcoming to all.

EDIT: These photos have been added for the mornings of March 11, 2014:

 .....and March 12, 2014.