
Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy - pseudolus
https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/highway-interchange-houston-same-size-city-italy/
======
xg15
> _But it wasn’t strictly an “everything is bigger in Texas” ethos that caused
> Houston to sprawl the way that it does. Rather, Cold War–era urban design
> philosophy in the U.S. prioritized sprawl because older cities that had
> urbanized pre–World War II—New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Detroit—were
> seen as being susceptible to nuclear strikes. Less-dense cities such as Los
> Angeles and Houston were less likely to be targeted for a nuclear attack.
> Sprawl was a deterrent against Soviet aggression._

That's the first time I've heard this theory.

Would that have worked though? I don't know much about nuclear deterrence, but
I'd imagine if the USSR already managed to evade the defenses and other
obstacles and destroy the city center in a nuclear strike, it wouldn't be a
lot of additional effort to send multiple rockets instead of only one and also
target the suburbs.

Not to mention that fallout, breakdown of infrastructure, disease and hunger
that followed a strike would affect the entire city in any case.

~~~
badrabbit
That would be a lot of ICBMs. The city center is not residential. Most people
that work in the city center for city's like houston or LA commute from one of
many different cities. Just to wipe out half of houston you would need to
simultaneously strike at least a dozen different locations. The idea was, if
there is a missile on the way or if other cities are being attacked, the
sprawl would allow evacuating a lot of people.

I do think it is an effective strategy. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, tokyo
and kyoto were spared for different reasons but they were spared. No sense in
wiping out every single city. For the US, a nuclear attack would probably be
against symbolic populated cities like new york, san francisco or chicago,
ideally the US would surrender after that point and if there is no surrender,
military targets would make more sense (hawaii,san diego,san
antonio,anapolis,etc...).

The idea is, if you have a small number of targets to defend you can defend
them better. Just like with infosec, you want to reduce attack surface so you
minimize exposed services or inputs.

~~~
cgriswald
Sparing Tokyo worked because Japan didn’t have the capability to retaliate.
Any launching during the mid-to-late Cold War would have been a massive first
strike and possibly a retaliation at the same scale. In the early Cold War it
may have been a reasonable strategy, but as another poster notes that’s a very
narrow window for changing how a city grows.

Even if there was an effect, I’d be very surprised if the signal wasn’t wiped
out first by railroads and then by cars.

~~~
gpderetta
Also Japan was hit by bombs in the low tens of kilotons. Modern bombs are in
the megaton range.

~~~
andi999
Tsar Bomb has around 50 Megatons. Radius of total destruction 35km.

~~~
leetcrew
scary, but not entirely relevant. most modern launch systems carry (sometimes
multiple) warheads with a much lower yield: 500 kt or less.

------
tuna-piano
It's interesting that protests generally happen in dense parts of cities. Now
imagine a city without a dense part - protesting becomes more difficult.
Myanmar's non-democratic military government actually moved their capital from
a dense city to a new city so spread out and with no downtown area -
potentially to prevent the ability to protest the government.

[https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/inside-burma-s-ghost-
to...](https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/inside-burma-s-ghost-town-capital-
city-which-4-times-size-london-fraction-population-a7805081.html)

I don't think that's why Houston is the way it is, and while there is still a
downtown there, imagining mass protests in Houston seems much different than
Hong Kong - due to the density.

~~~
adolph
"Some of Haussmann's critics said that the real purpose of Haussmann's
boulevards was to make it easier for the army to maneuver and suppress armed
uprisings; Paris had experienced six such uprisings between 1830 and 1848, all
in the narrow, crowded streets in the center and east of Paris and on the left
bank around the Pantheon. These critics argued that a small number of large,
open intersections allowed easy control by a small force."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann%27s_renovation_of_Pa...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann%27s_renovation_of_Paris)

~~~
ucarion
This is pretty widely thrown around, but it should be noted that the central
purpose of Haussmannization was public health and beautification: tearing down
the slums, building proper infrastructure like sewers and aqueducts, and
pretty parks and streets. The article you link to emphasizes this.

The wide boulevards did very little to prevent the Paris Commune, for
instance. Napoleon III just wanted to build a second Rome, not some martial
panopticon.

~~~
paganel
The wide boulevards certainly helped the French Army in drowning the Commune
in blood soon afterwards, though.

~~~
boomboomsubban
The Commune was also fairly unique among French revolts as it did not begin in
Paris, rather it was Paris reacting to their emperor getting captured in
battle.

~~~
throw_away
There was a bit more than just Napoleon III getting captured. Paris was
subsequently sieged and captured by the Prussians. Afterwards, the Prussian
troops were kept nearby and occasionally paraded through the streets. The
Commune arose also due to power disagreements with the new Third Republic and
an attempted seizure of cannons in Paris.

------
exabrial
The elephant in the room is the assumption that _everyone wants to be stacked
on top of each other_.

I do agree that designing cities around cars has ruined a lot of nice places
though.

~~~
crispyambulance

      >  assumption that _everyone wants to be stacked on top of each other_
    

It's also an assumption that everyone wants to begin and end every trip, no
matter how trivial, with a parking spot. It's an assumption that people will
want to drive in traffic for 20 minutes minimum to get to a supermarket, do
anything with their kids, or anything outside their property line.

The notion of "stacked on top of each other" has unpleasant connotations, but
there are many different ways to live in a dense city. Would you feel "stacked
on top of each other" in a Parisian townhouse with a magnificent shared
courtyard, 12 foot ceilings, and everything you could possibly want a short
walk or subway ride away?

~~~
bcrosby95
> It's also an assumption that everyone wants to begin and end every trip, no
> matter how trivial, with a parking spot. It's an assumption that people will
> want to drive in traffic for 20 minutes minimum to get to a supermarket, do
> anything with their kids, or anything outside their property line.

I wouldn't be surprised to find some suburbs with some of the traits you
mention, but it hasn't been my experience with them. I've lived in about 5
different suburbs in my life and a supermarket has never been more than 2
miles away - certainly not a 20 minute drive and it's even within biking
distance. Parks are by schools and there's usually an elementary school fairly
close if you're looking to do something with your kid. Depending upon the
suburb you can also play in the street, which I regularly did growing up.

The traits you are talking about sounds more like a rural area than a suburban
one.

~~~
yason
_supermarket has never been more than 2 miles away - certainly not a 20 minute
drive and it 's even within biking distance_

I'd consider that far, far away.

My walk to the nearest train station is about one mile, takes about 15 minutes
to get there on foot, and that's irritatingly far, too, considering the trip
is two way and repeats every day. Something like a grocery shop should be
accessible within decent walking distance, a five-minute walk or so.

A rule of thumb is that if something is far enough that I have to take the car
in the first place I'll be incentivised to drive further away to a big
supermarket/other big stores while I'm at it.

~~~
binarytox1n
American in Texas here - maybe this is a behavior encouraged by the very thing
we're discussing, but going to the grocery store _every day_ is a big yikes to
me. I go once a week and get everything I need for that week. Because I take
my car, I can carry that amount of stuff.

~~~
trophycase
It all just ties together. Going to the grocery store every day is a big yikes
because you can't walk around the block to pick up fresh produce for dinner

~~~
trthomps
Yeah, I live a block from my grocery store in SF, and I still only go 1-2
times a week unless I need something fresh for today / missing ingredient,
which is rare since I plan ahead and only buy things that will last at least a
few days.

Living in a dense city like SF is great for somethings, but it sucks when you
want to leave, and paying almost $400/month for parking isn't good either.
Both lifestyles have their advantages and I think it really comes out to
personal taste and choice.

------
apacheCamel
>Siena’s history dates back millennia. Houston, meanwhile, was founded in
1836.

Every time I am made aware of just how _young_ the US is, it blows me away.
I've never been to Europe, I would really love to go some day, but I can only
imagine the feeling of actually seeing these really old places/structures in
person.

~~~
RcouF1uZ4gsC
> I've never been to Europe, I would really love to go some day, but I can
> only imagine the feeling of actually seeing these really old
> places/structures in person.

European cities are also relatively young. If you want to see old cities, you
should visit the Middle East or China.

~~~
oblio
Most Chinese cities are younger than Rome or Istanbul or Athens.

~~~
williamdclt
I suppose it's not a fair comparison, "most" chinese cities against the oldest
european ones. How old are the oldest chinese cities? I'd love to know more
about these

------
smcl
A lot of people seem to be reading the headline, getting upset and immediately
heading here to complain and getting on the defensive. The article is actually
pretty interesting and isn't just trying to attack Houston, Texas, the USA or
you personally.

------
blakesterz
"Rather, Cold War–era urban design philosophy in the U.S. prioritized sprawl
because older cities that had urbanized pre–World War II—New York, Chicago,
Philadelphia, and Detroit—were seen as being susceptible to nuclear strikes.
Less-dense cities such as Los Angeles and Houston were less likely to be
targeted for a nuclear attack. Sprawl was a deterrent against Soviet
aggression."

That's the first time I've heard that. Interesting, if true.

~~~
sithadmin
I'm not sure I buy it; it sounds like a 'just-so' story. Sprawl is popular
because it allows for larger properties at lower prices relative to dense
urban development. The vast majority of real estate developers have likely
never seriously considered factors like probability of a nuclear strike as a
criteria for selecting land for development.

~~~
guyzero
I'm sure someone discussed it once, but Pentagon war planners don't set urban
planning policy. People like single family homes, people like yards, people
want racist neighbourhood segregation, people really hated urban centers for a
long time in the US. All much better explanations.

~~~
jandrese
Also people wanted to start building equity in their home and you largely
can't do that in the city because all available properties are rentals.

~~~
jschwartzi
The notion of equity as an investment or savings is a pretty modern invention
alongside the 30 year mortgage.

~~~
jandrese
What? Passing down property has been the primary form of inter-generational
wealth transfer since antiquity.

But the bigger issue is that you can't live inside of a 401k. Since housing is
a requirement you might as well build wealth while you live in it. Assuming no
massive disparity in monthly payments it doesn't make much sense to rent.

------
adrianmonk
One factor that hasn't been mentioned here is climate.

Siena seems to have a very mild climate. Its average high temperature[1] in
August is 28.3°C (82.9°F).

Compare that to Houston's monthly high for August, which is 35°C (95°F).
Houston is also very humid[3].

Most people don't want to take a 10-minute walk when it's 95°F and humid. You
arrive at your destination panting and very sweaty. It's more comfortable to
take a 10-minute drive in an air conditioned car. To some people, it's
preferable even if the drive takes 30 minutes due to traffic.

\---

[1] [https://en.climate-
data.org/europe/italy/tuscany/siena-1089/](https://en.climate-
data.org/europe/italy/tuscany/siena-1089/)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Houston](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Houston)

[3] [https://finance.yahoo.com/news/america-most-humid-
cities-090...](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/america-most-humid-
cities-090000494.html)

~~~
Flobin
You say that as if there are no dense cities in places that have a similar
climate as Houston. What about Taipei, for instance?

Houston has a July average high temperature of 34,7 degrees C with an average
relative humidity of 74,4. The same data for Taipei is 34,3 degrees C with a
humidity of 73.

Yet Houston has a population density of 1398,76/km2 whereas Taipei 9700/km2,
almost 7 times as high.

Data from Wikipedia.

Actually, perhaps this map says it best:
[https://www.dropbox.com/s/tkoekp0or12ppjc/Screenshot%202020-...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/tkoekp0or12ppjc/Screenshot%202020-08-31%20at%2022.51.57.png?dl=0)

(If anything, building densely can create a lot of shade, which can be quite
beneficial.)

~~~
adrianmonk
Arguably Taipei could have the motive, but not the opportunity, not like
Houston does.

The population of Taiwan[1] is 23.78 million, and its land area is 35,808
km^2. The population of Texas[2] is 29 million, and its land area is 676,587
km^2.

So Taiwan has nearly (82%) as many people but 1/20th the land.

Also, Taipei is boxed in by large mountains and the ocean, so there are lots
of natural barriers discouraging sprawl.

Houston is near the ocean, but aside from that there are no natural barriers.
The land around it is super flat in every direction. The closest hill of any
size is probably 150 miles away.

\---

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas)

------
alpineidyll3
These highways suck to drive on and have as much delay as Illinois highways
half the surface area. Its one of my least favorite parts about tx.

The reason is largely that they just scaled up traffic patterns which are fine
for 2 lanes to 6-7 lanes. It's absurd. The local legend in Austin is that the
highway designer later committed suicide. I bike to work.

~~~
ryanmarsh
Surely the traffic can’t be worse than the humidity.

Kind sir I call your attention to the condensation on the outside of your car
windows.

~~~
alpineidyll3
Austin is usually dry. Did you drive to Florida?

------
redm
As someone who lives in Houston, the simple reason there is sprawl is because
its flat and land is cheap. This makes it easy to live on large lots or on
small average. It's also hot, so people spend more time indoors and drive
everywhere.

~~~
wmeredith
I'm glad someone said this. The size of the interchange vs a small town in
Italy is an odd comparison. Land and gas are cheap in one place and they're
not in another. That's basically the end of the story.

~~~
jxramos
(still working to articulate this all precisely)

I think a lot of these country to country comparisons bank off the fact that
people presume they're dealing with an oranges to oranges comparison like two
sporting teams or something equally sized. Evaluating two comparands on some
single concept they both happen share in common without looking to the
specifics is grossly inadequate.

Concepts like city, country, state, hospital system, etc, can indeed both be
shared between two countries at a conceptual level. However those concepts can
take drastically different forms with their reality on the ground. The two
comparands' actualizations of these concepts can be huge simply looking at
scale alone. As far as I can tell the US dwarfs pretty much any EU country in
terms of population, land mass/area, and a bunch of other stuff too I'd
imagine.

I'm awakening more to the fact that without highlighting from the outset any
known differences in scale one can be lead to strange conclusions in the
results of comparison. There's that common software architecture analogy
regarding the techniques to build a single family detached house being
woefully inadequate at building a skyscraper.

It would be nice to have some normalized terminology of city and country etc
that speaks more directly to the population scale at hand.

------
Udik
The comparison is entirely pointless. There are interchanges in Italy that are
of comparable size; just outside my home town, there are medium-sized factory
buildings that are larger than its entire historical center, complete with its
13th century frescoed palaces. The area of the Sistine Chapel - 560 m^2- is
easily dwarfed by that of most small supermarkets.

The fact is that- unless scarce- space is valued- no, wait, it's _defined_ \-
by what it contains and by your relation to it, not by its size. When
traveling on a motorway you cross multiple times per second the entire length
of your living room, a space where a centimetre-sized stain can give you
nightmares. This beauty in the Netherlands ( [https://www.spoorpro.nl/wp-
content/uploads/2019/01/maasvlakt...](https://www.spoorpro.nl/wp-
content/uploads/2019/01/maasvlakte-luchtfoto-hbr-aeroview-20181.jpg) ) is more
or less the size of Manhattan. The Mona Lisa painting is smaller than the
patch in your backyard where you keep your garbage cans. And so?

------
hombre_fatal
Thanks for taking the obnoxious "Yes, this" off the title.

Yes, it's one of the weirdest pet-peeve trends over the past 5-10 years. No, I
do not like it, thanks for asking.

Wait, you didn't ask me? You mean _nobody_ was asking me, it's just something
I decided to couch in a response to a conversation that wasn't going on?

But seriously, I wonder what's going on when we do this. My theory is that it
originally caught on to lend credence to what we're saying when we pretend our
statement is actually a response to an open question, though now it's just
subconscious rhetorical device to emphasize a point, I would imagine.

As for the article, growing up 45min outside of Houston, that interchange is
all I think about when I entertain the idea of moving to Houston or DFW.
There's something grotesque about it and the feeling it gives me. Cars,
traffic, and this need to slave away in a commute.

Austin keeps voting down highway extension proposals. I'm sure anyone who has
to sit in Austin traffic daily hates that, but we can't have every damn city
in Texas becoming a concrete metropolis.

~~~
timbit42
I mean, "Yes, this" isn't as bad as starting with, "I mean".

------
adolph
This is the intersection of East Freeway and East Loop. It occupies about 1.58
km^2. It is an older interchange reflective of relatively modest traffic
volume that set a wide space to ensure room for future growth (which didn't
happen on the eastern side of the city). Many newer interchanges operate at
higher volume and density.

[https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7748476,-95.2664193,17.32z](https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7748476,-95.2664193,17.32z)

------
rdiddly
So Houstonians have to live every single day (probability of occurrence of "a
day": 100%) with an infrastructure optimized for a nuclear attack that happens
effectively never. Well, it was somebody's best guess at the right thing to do
65 years ago. But that's the sticky issue with large-scale infrastructure like
this. If you get it wrong, or if you get it right but conditions later change,
the costs associated with it start to balloon & become astronomical. But the
short-term costs of changing it are even greater, so nobody wants to tear the
band-aid off, and you're stuck bleeding money and productivity forever.
_(contrary mixture of metaphors there... heh)_

~~~
bluGill
If they are right and there are a nuclear attack they survive, will your city?
You fall for the same falicy as those who are saying covid isn't dangerous.
(not that I disagree with you, but you haven't made a good argument)

~~~
rdiddly
As far as I know, I haven't made _any_ argument.

Regardless, the odds of COVID-19 transmission between two people standing
together without masks must be at least 1000X higher than the odds that a
nuclear attack will happen while they're standing there. That's enough for me
to consider the two risks "different" shall we say, and guess which one I'm
more likely to prepare for.

Nobody prepares for _every_ contingency. Most people look for some value of
risk reduction divided by cost. If I decide to protect my house from school-
bus-sized meteorites, the chance I will bankrupt myself trying to construct an
adequate shield is near 100%, whereas the chance of such a meteorite hitting
the house is pretty small. Given how much more likely plain old thievery is,
and how cheap locks are, I should probably prioritize just buying a lock for
the front door and remembering to lock it. Just like people prone to die from
heart disease or just slowly waste their lives away in traffic should probably
prioritize a simpler lifestyle above nuclear war prep.

However and nonetheless, note that even with the small purchase of a door
lock, I've already agreed to take on a (more than zero) costly and (to some
degree) onerous preparation for something that may never happen. Who knows
what the chance of a burglary is; you could estimate based on crime rates. But
with 100% certainty, locking the door will be a small chore every day and will
ruin some number of minutes of my life. Whether it was ultimately worth it
would largely be determined by the value I place on certainty.

Speaking of values, they're subjective. Let's say the school-bus-sized
meteorite is confirmed to be coming right for my house, with 100% probability.
But let's also say that I don't care whatsoever about the house. So I will
still not do anything to mitigate. That's how I feel about a nuclear attack.
The chance of a nuclear attack is (some number), but the chance of a nuclear
attack happening, and my giving a shit about anything whatsoever afterward, is
near zero. "Will I survive?" My answer is somewhere between "Who cares" and "I
hope not." So obviously I'm not willing to undertake mitigations or live in
Houston. But I will wear a mask during the pandemic for example because it's
cheap and easy, temporary, and it works to reduce a risk that is pretty high.

------
ryanmarsh
The assertion that Houston’s layout is the result of Cold War nuke risk
mitigation is a new one on me. The beltway opened in 1988.

I grew up here and I’ve read many articles trying to explain why Houston is
the way that it is. The truth is incredibly human and boring and wouldn’t sell
display ads. Thus, the logical arguments that follow articles like this are
complete nonsense.

If you want to know why Houston is the way that it is, fly down here and I’ll
drive you around and show you. You’ll be completely underwhelmed, but the
tacos will more than make up for the trip.

~~~
selimthegrim
May come by soon looking for jobs; any taco leads?

~~~
ryanmarsh
Tacos A Go Go, Original Ninfas location, El Rey, Velvet Taco, Torchy’s,
Balderas, any food truck, hell just google “great tacos in Houston”.

------
jupp0r
So a city of 30k people requires less infrastructure than a city of 6M people?
Where are the examples of major metropolitan areas without big freeway
intersections?

~~~
jankassens
Just looking around Tokio on satellite view: there are a few highways, but
nothing compared to the many-layered intersections you see in US cities like
Los Angeles or San Diego.

~~~
bonestamp2
Tokyo is amazing in many ways, but especially infrastructure. I was
embarrassed when I went there for I felt like the countries I grew up in were
lazy by comparison. The most popular type of vehicle on the road there (in my
observation) was a concrete truck.

The subway system is unbelievable. They don't try to build huge line
extensions every few years or decades the way we do, they are constantly
expanding and improving it all the time. It's absolutely amazing what they
have built there, and at the same time remained incredibly polite and
gracious.

------
syoc
The source. Plenty of other pictures and examples.

[https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/861832/Living_with_beauty_BBBBC_report.pdf)

~~~
hadrien01
Images and content about the interchange and the city center on pages 14 and
15

------
larrydag
I live in Texas. This assertion is true of most cities in Texas also. Houston
is the largest population center in Texas with 6M+ in the city. Also Houston
is a busy center for interstate and international commerce especially for
trucking.

~~~
dhd415
The Dallas-Ft Worth metro area is more populous than the Houston metro area by
about 500k people.

~~~
larrydag
Yes that is true when you combine those 2 cities. Also known for their large
interstate highway interchanges. In fact one of the newest is in North Dallas
aptly named the "High Five" interchange.

------
stergios
Did anyone notice how little green space Siena has? The Houston interchange
appears to have 100x the amount of green space as the entire city of Siena!
Quite ironic!

How was a city allowed to develop with almost no green space?

~~~
romanoderoma
> How was a city allowed to develop with almost no green space?

Siena, like other Tuscan hill towns, was first settled in the time of the
Etruscans (c. 900–400 BC)

Siena was built on a hill surrounded by some of the greenest valleys in
Tuscany, the most notable one being the Chianti valley, home of the popular
wine.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chianti](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chianti)

Trivia: the movie "The Gladiator" was shot in Pienza, in Val D'orcia, in Siena
province.

This is a shot of the famous Cypress trees road.

[http://www.clickalps.com/stock/blocks/image.php?id=81499](http://www.clickalps.com/stock/blocks/image.php?id=81499)

------
komali2
Ex houstonian here, university of houston and everything.

Decently fun city, interesting history, cool people.

The road and traffic situation is nightmarish. I slowly came to this
realization in college when I went abroad a couple of times. I found out that
didn't have to be How Things Are.

The university of houston has a problem where students aren't attending
classes because parking isn't available. Stories of trying to find a parking
space for 40 minutes abound. There's lines of cars offering an air conditioned
ride to parking spaces outside of classrooms, in return for their parking
spot.

If you miss an exit near the i45/i10 merge, you've added 20 minutes to your
drive, minimum, as the next local exit will be a good five miles away, and
then after that the next on ramp for your give freeway could well be on the
other side of downtown.

For some reason they built a light rail that criss crosses main street. For a
great form of entertainment, search youtube for "Houston light rail accident."
They're rarely really bad, more just stupid looking, some giant pick-up truck
failing to see the train and getting booped.

There's no zoning (kinda) so the industrial zones are mixed right in with
residential, budding up against UH. So about 1/10 of the time I bicycled to
school, I would be blocked by a mile long train that decided to simply park
and block every road crossing I could take to the university. I made a habit
of throwing my bike between the nonmoving cars and clambering over until my
dad sent me a video of someone getting cut in half doing that.

Growing up in the suburbs you'd have balls of steel to bicycle to a friend's
house. Pickup trucks make a sport of fucking with bicyclists. Better to just
wait for your parents to get home from work so they can drive you.

Lord forbid you have a friend in the woodlands or something. Thought it was
obnoxious to visit your friends in San Jose when you live in the bay area? The
woodlands is like a trip to Sacramento, but only because of traffic and a 610
loop as wide as a continent.

Public transit, lol. That's for poor people. I remember hosting a luncheon for
our engineers (was a recruiter) and this old fart was talking about his 50
minute one way commute. It was a point of pride for these o&g engineers for
some reason to measure their commutes. Then this engineer we brought in from
mexico was like "oh, I live in that same neighborhood, why not take the bus?
It gets on the HOV and gets me here in 30m." Old fart was flabbergasted. He
didn't even know there was a bus. I don't blame him, they pick up at these
huge ride share parking lots and it's not easy to figure out their schedule,
or even how to pay.

Anyway Houston traffic sucks and my conspiracy theory is it's because Shell
and Chevron have downtown offices and the CEOs sit at the top of the tower
where they can see a clogged i45, i10, 610, and 59, and cackle maniacally at
the hordes of people trying to justify their 1 hour one way commutes to
eachother and the choking fog of smog clouding around the city.

~~~
criddell
How did you manage to ride a bicycle in Houston without getting sweaty and
gross?

~~~
komali2
I didn't, lol. I was just always sweaty and gross.

------
Aardwolf
You can find as big highway interchanges in Italy too, e.g.:

[https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8177773,12.3911127,17z](https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8177773,12.3911127,17z)

And you can most likely find small cities with 30K people in the US too
(though I had trouble finding one of this size near Houston when scrolling
through Google maps because the cities there look less dense and don't appear
to have a discernible center at least from the look of the grid pattern of the
streets).

~~~
bmitc
Your link only shows a simple cloverleaf design, typically used at the
intersection of only two highways or as an exit from a highway. Those are
everywhere in U.S. cities, in certain regions as not everyone uses the
cloverleaf. They are not super common in Texas though, which uses different
designs. But either way, it is not close to the same size and complexity as
the exchange, of which Houston has many, in the original post.

------
mcguire
Out of curiosity, how much traffic does the SS674 and SS223 see per day? That
interchange appears to be the eastern connection between I10 and the 610 loop
around central Houston. I10 is one of the major arteries between the east and
west coasts.

[https://goo.gl/maps/CyoAESVtEQFRa4zb7](https://goo.gl/maps/CyoAESVtEQFRa4zb7)

------
inamberclad
Which interchange?

And this city (Houston) has so many problems I don't know where to start...
Highways are one of them because nothing is dense, but its a brutally self
reinforcing problem in a city that refuses to invest in any other kind of
infrastructure.

------
pansa2
> _is the same size_

What size, exactly? Is it a really big interchange, or a really small city?

------
helen___keller
Most of these threads tend to devolve into attacking assumptions about how
people want to live (high density vs low density, parking vs no parking, cars
for every trip vs walking/transit most trips)

I'll list out what I view as the two dominant views towards the development of
a metropolitan region (I loosely define metropolitan region as a city and all
the places around that city which can plausibly commute to a job inside the
city. Or in other words, all land housing the people you may see every day).
Let me know if you think I've got the two sides nailed down correctly.

The urban mindset to developing a metropolitan region:

* Cars are a luxury (and often a nuisance) and should not be required for essential, everyday travel.

* The region expands both outwards (by adding high speed transit to surrounding neighborhoods), and upwards (replacing existing development with higher density development)

* Key transportation infrastructure: public transit (bus, tram, train, subway), in addition to feet and bikes

* (some amount of) Density is a key pattern: Having enough people per square mile to bring workers and customers, sustaining local businesses, as well as maintainable a taxable base large enough to pay for transit and other infrastructure

* Multi use zoning is king: local storefronts and restaurants are considered beneficial for quality of life. Sufficiently dense streets thrive off the mixture of people and business.

* "porous" neighborhoods (e.g. grid street layout) are a pattern: porous neighborhoods are more efficient on a mile-per-mile basis, helping to enable low-speed travel (read: foot & bike). This increases the amount of business-capable space within a neighborhood, which is beneficial to the local economy and quality of life of residents

* Suburban mindset seen as harmful: suburban mindset seeks to expand outwards. This adds people who consume local infrastructure (e.g. driving on local roads, creating noise and pollution) but who might not live in city jurisdiction (i.e. can't be taxes in a straightforward manner), and aren't interested in contributing to the well-being of the city. Suburban mindset seeks to limit legal expansion of density, mandate parking minimums, cut urban spending for necessary infrastructure like transit, reduce quality of life by widening roads, building highways, and increasing speed limits, and continue an outward suburban expansion that will just accentuate existing problems with traffic and with car noises

The suburban mindset to developing a metropolitan region:

* Cars are _the_ key mode of travel for the vast majority of destinations, and as such are a necessity

* The region expands outwards by purchasing and developing surrounding farmland, and connecting this land to the city with high speed roads. This keeps land absurdly cheap.

* Key transportation infrastructure: roads (with sufficiently high speeds and capacity), parking lots

* Density is a key antipattern: More people per square mile brings congestion and noise, consume available parking, but offer little communal benefits as residents generally don't need to work or shop locally (no need to sustain local businesses)

* Single use zoning is king: businesses want to locate on large roads with lots of traffic, people want to locate on small subdivisions with little traffic. Zoning enforces this to maintain everybody's quality of life.

* "porous" neighborhoods are an antipattern: stores are not on local streets, so any porous neighborhoods mostly bring in through-traffic (which gives noise and pollution but no economic benefit). Thus a tiered freeway/highway/boulevard -> neighborhood -> subdivision pattern to residential space, in place of a city grid

* Mandatory parking minimums useful, as parking is a valuable public good

* Urban mindset seen as harmful: urban mindset seeks to build higher density housing in centralized places that already have bad traffic during rush hour, which will just make it worse. Urban mindset seeks to make more use of urban space with less parking, which offers a worse quality of life to suburbanites who wish to drive into the city. Urban mindset seeks to limit legal restrictions on density, which threatens to see multifamilies or apartment buildings in quiet neighborhoods that currently have low traffic and low noise (but won't when population density goes up). Urban mindset looks to spend on public transit, which is not useful at all to all the many people who live in the suburbs (but suburbanites may face state taxes or consumption taxes to fund transit, as well as increases in traffic due to construction)

~~~
quantumwannabe
Thank you for this comment. Your comment is the only one on this page that
gives a fair look at both sides and is a breath of fresh air compared to all
the negativity in the rest of the comments. I wish that everyone could live in
an area that matches their preferences without someone else trying to destroy
everything they love about their home because it doesn't fit a preconceived
notion about what a proper city should be.

------
postingawayonhn
Now compare Manhattan.

~~~
apocalyptic0n3
DFW Airport alone has 80% of the total land area that Manhattan does, which is
always an interesting little bit of trivia.

~~~
csours
Well, no one was using the land at the time[0]. Everything has grown to touch
DFW airport - I lived literally across the street from it in Euless.

Also, a lot of the land there is used by businesses like UPS, Fed-Ex, etc.

0\. I'm sure someone was, but not very many people.

~~~
apocalyptic0n3
I'm not saying it's a waste of space or anything. Just that's it's interesting
how large it is in comparison to Manhattan. It's about as useful a comparison
as the one made in the article, frankly.

------
mc32
Ok? And?

It’s interesting trivia but it doesn’t mean much. A well packed slum could fit
10x that amount in that land. Or you could have a vineyard or you could have a
train station.

It’s an arbitrary comparison.

Land gets used in many different ways that make sense for the local people.
Some seem “better” but that requires certain “assumptions “. Is arid desert
“wasted”?

~~~
save_ferris
The article goes on to discuss the issue of sprawl and how cities like Houston
are building themselves into a corner by constantly expanding infrastructure
like this. The ironic part of this comparison is that Siena is a much older
community than Houston, which, like most of America, embraced a sprawl
mentality in the 50’s as a Cold War risk mitigation strategy.

Climate change is arguably a more pressing threat to Houston than
thermonuclear war, but the city doesn’t have many other options than to
continue sprawling.

~~~
criddell
There are lots of options for Houston to evolve. The city is mostly how the
electorate wants it.

------
person_of_color
I'll never get the US fascination with highways and ugly interchanges.

------
volkadav
fair, but try driving 85mph through the italian city in a giant cadillac with
cow horns on the front bumper while blaring your favorite tunes and drinking
something from a drive-through liquor store. ;)

~~~
mmm_grayons
You mean swangas aren't well-suited to european streets?

------
totalZero
I disagree with the notion that space is better used if it exhibits greater
density of population.

I don't believe it is very easy to drive in Siena, Italy. I also don't believe
it is very easy to live under a highway interchange. To each space its own.

~~~
naringas
I bet it's also not necessary to drive in Siena, Italy

~~~
totalZero
And yet it's necessary to drive in Houston.

Imagine judging Siena based on the ease of driving. That would be equally as
arbitrary as judging Houston by its space allocation to roadway interchanges.

------
simonebrunozzi
I think that 30,000 is an exaggeration, and if so, I just don't like when
people sensationalize figures and bend facts to their liking.

The problem would lie in this report [0], which is cited by the article and by
the person tweeting about it.

Happy to be proven wrong; but I know the area quite well (I grew up in Italy),
and I immediately thought that the satellite picture of Siena depicted in the
article, and in the tweet, does not contain 30,000 people.

The entire "Comune" of Siena (roughly equivalent to a "County" in the UK or
US) is ~53,000 people [1].

However, I would be surprised if the part of Siena depicted in the article,
the city center, houses 30,000 people.

See for yourself. Here's Assisi, roughly with a similar density as Siena,
which has ~4,500 people living in the city center [2].

Here's Siena [3]. Just by approximation, I'd say that Siena's city center is
in the range of maybe 15k? Not more than that.

Also, it would be unfair to consider the fact that Siena's city center is also
house for students, which live in different conditions than normal people. In
that sense, even Harvard's dormitories have a high density, compared to any
road structure in Texas.

Anyway, just trying to make you reflect on the numbers - I hope my
calculations are correct; or at least, the reasoning behind it should be good
enough. As said, happy to be proven wrong.

[0]:
[https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/861832/Living_with_beauty_BBBBC_report.pdf)

[1]: [https://www.comune.siena.it/Il-
Comune/Servizi/Statistica/Pop...](https://www.comune.siena.it/Il-
Comune/Servizi/Statistica/Popolazione/POPOLAZIONE-RESIDENTE-ANNO-2018)

[2]:
[https://www.google.com/maps/place/53100+Siena,+Province+of+S...](https://www.google.com/maps/place/53100+Siena,+Province+of+Siena,+Italy/@43.0713817,12.6070871,2650m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x132a2cbf34bf5313:0x5d731212f12343e3!8m2!3d43.318809!4d11.3307574)

[3]:
[https://www.google.com/maps/place/53100+Siena,+Province+of+S...](https://www.google.com/maps/place/53100+Siena,+Province+of+Siena,+Italy/@43.321355,11.3236881,2642m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x132a2cbf34bf5313:0x5d731212f12343e3!8m2!3d43.318809!4d11.3307574)

------
LatteLazy
Siena pop 30k

Huston pop 2.3mil

------
abstractbarista
Now let's compare the GDP each supports.

------
kaesar14
What an incredible waste of space, fuel, and human time. Driving is the bane
of American prosperity.

~~~
sp332
And yet not only is Houston quite rich (on average anyway), but it
consistently ranks #2 for happiness among major metro areas in Harris
Happiness polls. [http://www.city-data.com/blog/646-satisfaction-life-
happines...](http://www.city-data.com/blog/646-satisfaction-life-happiness-
u-s/)

~~~
kaesar14
And? Can't aspire to a better future where we don't sit in traffic for hours
to get across the city, choking our skies with car smog and carbon dioxide
that'll ruin the environment for future generations? Our design philosophy
around cities are the biggest mistake made of 20th century American politics,
and I'll die on that hill.

~~~
refurb
Don’t live there if you don’t like it?

~~~
kaesar14
We all live in an interconnected world. The choices made around the country to
prioritize cars have led to negative externalities for all of us.

~~~
refurb
The world is fully of negative externalities caused by others. That alone is
not a good enough reason to force them to change their behavior.

Sure, incentivize a dense urban area if that’s what you want. But you should
realize a lot of people want a suburban environment.

------
jp555
GDP:

Houston, Texas = ~$500B/yr

Siena, Tuscany = ~$11B/yr

~~~
kaesar14
Is that the GDP of this highway interchange?

~~~
mixedCase
While I don't think this direct comparison is valid (at least let's also have
the per capita numbers, which I believe is around 60% higher in Houston if
Google snippets are to be believed) one could argue that a portion of that GDP
is enabled by road infrastructure such as this interchange.

~~~
kaesar14
America is the richest country on earth. It's such a kneejerk reaction of our
countrymen to defend our insane way of life by bringing up GDP numbers instead
of stuff like life expectancy, quality of life, access to equitable
transportation. America being rich is known fact already.

Edit: From your own happiness survey link - "The U.S. GNI per capita income is
actually higher than in most of the countries ahead of the U.S. in the global
ranking of happiness. There are about 130 countries that showed up as less
happy than the U.S. in 2013. Despite our outstanding technological and
economic progress over the past half-century, we are without significant
achievements in life satisfaction and the subjective happiness of our
population. In contrast, uncertainties and anxieties are high, social and
economic inequalities have widened considerably and social trust is in
decline. There is an impression that the U.S. has not been very effective at
turning its great business capacities, human resources, productivity and
natural wealth to the best aim: increased happiness."

Don't give a damn about GDP.

~~~
refurb
_Don 't give a damn about GDP._

Really? Because it's GDP that funds all those government services and social
programs.

I'm always confused when people don't give a damn about economics (i.e. during
the Covid shutdown debate) when without economics you wouldn't have a
functioning society.

~~~
romanoderoma
Is US society working according to their very high GDP though?

Estonia GDP is measured in billions and yet their infant mortality rate is
half than US despite their trillions of dollars of GDP

~~~
refurb
Be careful with your cherry picked stats. Countries don't measure infant
mortality the same way.

Not to mention Estonia's lower infant mortality doesn't actually disprove my
comment.

~~~
romanoderoma
It actually does

I cherry picked infant mortality rate because I didn't want to pick the most
embarrassing US stats, like life expectancy (lowest in the west despite the
highest healthcare spending per capita) and homicide rate (4 times the
Nigeria, 6 times China, 10 times Europe)

The fact that even little Estonia can handle infant mortality rate better than
a superpower like USA it's kinda revealing

I'm also quite sure that if I picked China and its almost double infant
mortality rate you wouldn't have though I was cherry picking

US is good at making money, but it's not a good indicator that they know how
to spend them the right way

> _The numbers in the U.S. are partly driven by gun deaths. From 2001 to 2010,
> 15-to-19-year-olds were 82 times more likely to die from gun violence in the
> U.S. than in other wealthy countries. Thakrar also attributes the higher
> U.S. child and infant mortality rates to a lack of preventative care._

Thakrar is _Ashish Thakrar, medical resident at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and
Health System._

~~~
refurb
I'll repeat myself. The definition of infant mortality is not the same across
all countries. For example, if a baby is born at less than 1 lb or before 21
weeks, it's a stillbirth and _not_ counted as infant mortality in many
countries (I have no idea about Estonia). In the US, is _is counted_.

Regardless, let's get back to my original comment.

GDP _is important_. It's what pays for government services, you may not agree
that the US does enough, but _that doesn 't change the fact GDP pays for it_.

~~~
romanoderoma
OECDs countries use the same stats everywhere

USA ranks 34th on 36 countries

> GDP is important. It's what pays for government services

It depends on what you buy with it and how much of it goes back to society in
the form of government services for the public

For rich countries in the G20 it shouldn't matter as much as how you
redistribute it

I'll repeat myself, despite the highest GDP in the World USA can't even pay
for the citizens' right to not be shot in the streets

What is it good for then?

~~~
refurb
_OECDs countries use the same stats everywhere_

No they don't. They collect the same stats, but they aren't necessarily
comparable.

~~~
romanoderoma
even if it was true, it's still the 34th position over 36 countries

The richest country in the World is 34th

I think you have a problem there, no matter how much you try to find excuses
for it

> _Metodology Membership in the OECD was used as a proxy for similar nations
> to the U.S. The group was narrowed to OECD members with 50 years of high-
> quality data, minus the U.S. It includes: Australia, Austria, Belgium,
> Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan,
> the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the
> United Kingdom._

~~~
kaesar14
Most Americans cannot deal with knowing our government and society is a
trainwreck that exists to print cash

