This past summer. I'm not denying that there are things to do here, but in COMPARISON to some of those other cities, it isn't the same. Nobody in this country considers Houston to be a tourist city and I don't see that changing.
You don't consider it a tourist city because you live here. I've been to NYC, Boston, LA, San Francisco, Seattle, Philadelphia, Washington D.C. and Chicago (and all over the midwest) all within the past twelve months. I've been to concerts, shows, sporting events and countless restaurants when I travel.. and NONE of them are leaps and bounds better than Houston. They're simply different. Is NYC bigger? Sure. Do DC, Boston and Philadelphia have more historical importance? You bet. But there are PLENTY of things to see and do in Houston, just like those cities. The problems is Houstonians get in a groove and never actually experience everything our city has to offer. The perception IS changing, and this article is proof of that. One thing Houston has over every other city and while I could probably never leave: Mexican food... well, and barbecue, so that makes two. I have yet to find a city with a better Mexican/Barbecue combo than Houston (not including other Texas cities obviously). EDIT - If I could get comparable pay raises I'd move to Seattle or San Francisco, love those cities... but missing Mexican food and good barbecue would make it extremely tough.
hell yeah. if i lived in rome or amsterdam i would be like whaaaat moody gardens lets buy the plane tickets now!
All of Houston's attractions are concentrated to the Southeast, with only one even in the city in any technicality. Unless you count the Downtown Aquarium. But Galveston, Kemah, JSCenter, and when they build that theme park near the Tanger Outlets in Texas City, that as well will be the main attractions of the area.
The problem with Houston is that it's so doggone spread out and it doesn't have the celebrity/plastic/Hollywood culture to bail it out like LA. If there were more attractions grouped closely and the city didn't demolish so much of it's history people may have more reason to come here. Houston needs something like an "Oil-Town Strip" featuring maybe live music, interesting museums for all people, maybe something celebrating Texas culture. I don't know, anything to have a solidified tourist attraction. Vegas is just as spread out as Houston but they've got The Strip and Downtown and that's all that matters to tourists. Miami is spread out to a lesser extent but it has nearby Miami Beach, which has South Beach, which covers up the warts of the real Miami (To be fair, MB and SB is basically like Galveston to Houston). Atlanta has stuff like CNN and Coca Cola and the Olympics were once staged there. Nashville is known for County Music. Memphis has Beale Street and the blues. So Houston needs to find it's niche and everything will be okay.
But see those things like Hollywood for LA and the Strip for Vegas have been established for years and years, and they're really what define both cities. Just finding an attraction still won't make it like those cities who've made their names on their attractions for decades. One big thing about Houston is the lack of public transportation. That HAS to improve, you need a car to get anywhere around Houston. LA and Miami (two cities that have their cores spread out) still have public transport. The rest of the other cities have a center core mixed with public transport.
I gotta chance to check out The Pass and Provisions. I would recommend it to others. Oxheart is next.
Houston has more seats in the theater district than Chicago, LA, Boston, etc. Houston's museum district is superior than most cities. The biggest problem with Houston is lack of transportation and proximity to the attractions. The reason why San Antonio River Walk is great is because everything is walkable. Not in Houston. Houston has a music scene ...but you need to know exactly where to find it and you need a car. You can't just park and walk like Austin. Houston IS great city to visit ...if somebody is willing to show you around.
More seats means what exactly? Houston isn't known for theater like NYC, Chicago, or even LA. Houston is certainly not superior in the museum dept. to NYC, D.C., Chicago, or Boston. Again, it's a great city and it has great things to do, but in comparison to some of those other cities, it's below par.
I don't think you know a lot about the arts. Granted no city can truly compare w NYC but Houston's art scene is one of the best and best supported in the country.
It means there is a lot of culture here and ahead of 99% of the of the country. Houston has more theater seats than Chicago and LA and is 2nd only the NYC. Its without question above par. If you cherry pick a handful of cities to compare it to, then your case is valid. But compare Houston to the whole nation.
I wouldn't argue with ItsMyFault about cities.. He has a unique perspective on those kinds of things http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=6864395&postcount=49
I don't know a lot about arts. I do know what cities are known for though. If you want to go look at lists of top 10 cities for museums, or top 10 cities for theater, you should check out where people rank Houston for the most part. It's behind those cities I mentioned. My point here is that Houston is not a tourist city, not that it's a bad city or that it doesn't have things to do. Chicago's known for theater more than Houston is. It's undoubtedly a better city for theater. Again, Houston, i'm sure, is a great city for theater, but I'd rank Chicago ahead of it. The reason I'm comparing it to a handful of cities is because I'm comparing it to tourist cities in the country. Not every city in the country is known to be one. In comparison to tourist cities, it's below par. I'm not trying to knock Houston here, I'm just simply stating what it isn't which is a tourist city. Yeah, in comparison to San Antonio, Houston is boring when you're talking about a short vacation, at least for me. Maybe that has partly to do with me having lived in Houston my entire life, so I may find some of the same things boring. But even when I lived in San Antonio for a short while, it seemed to be a city with some vibe in the core of it. I'm not sure if San Antonio would have more or less to do in terms of amenities, but it seems to be more tourist friendly than Houston.
I don't get it when people say there is nothing to do in Houston. There is always new and fun stuff to check out
Worked and lived Houston 2y 2months from 99-2001. I definitely had found memories of my stay. Because of my job I also been quite few cities included all one below. Based on my experience Houston and Orlando had the friendliest people. Anyway did quick search tourism numbers and found this. http://www.forbes.com/2010/04/28/tourism-new-york-lifestyle-travel-las-vegas-cities_slide_11.html 1. Orlando 2. New York City 3. Chicago 4. Anaheim/Orange County 5. Miami 6. Las Vegas 7. Atlanta 8. Houston 9. Philadelphia 10. San Diego 8. Houston, Texas: 31,060,000 visitors Largely a regional travel market, 60% of Houston's tourists are in-state and come to the city to visit attractions like the Space Center and Kemah Boardwalk. Hotel occupancy rates were at a surprising low, falling 17% from 2008, although convention hotels still seem to be faring well. The tenth destination for foreign travelers, Houston had around 7 million visitors come from Mexico.
Chicago is my favorite city I've been to, and a large part of that is because of mass transportation that helped me to get wherever I needed to go - quick and cheap. Houston is a great city that is largely hindered by its sprawl. If there is ever mass transit built that links downtown to the med center, the universities, theater and museum district, the space center, and can shuttle people to Galveston, Houston's popularity as a "tourist" city would skyrocket. If you know where you're going and have a way to get there, it's a great place to visit.
y'all know that the OP article is not about Best City...it's about Best Places to Go in 2013... Y'all are arguing about best city too much, and not trying to figure out what the article meant by 2013....not to say Houston should be #7 or anything. just pointing out the article title.
