Quote:
Originally Posted by plutonicpanda
Once again, your ideas have no grounding in reality. It is pure fantasy. Good luck convincing people to change their lifestyles and better luck putting policies in place to force them to do so.
|
This is a personal insult. You didn't disagree with my idea, that would require either a simple statement "I prefer"............ or a factual statement "quoting the study from the University of......I can show this assertion to be incorrect"
Calling someone's idea a 'fantasy' is nothing but a childish insult. It is unworthy of any intelligent poster.
I have, in fact, presented clear evidence that all my ideas have already been implemented at various scales elsewhere in the world. This factually precludes the possibility that they are fantasy.
You may not like those ideas. That's fine, that's your right. In the same was you may have a favourite colour. But that doesn't make your favourite 'right' based on the evidence.
You have not presented one shred of evidence that any of my ideas are unworkable in general, or in Houston in particular. Nor have you presented any evidence in favour of your own preference.
That is unacceptable in intelligent conversation and debate.
Quote:
I applaud Houston and their vision. This proposal will lead to a less congested freeway network, give people more options to travel, and reconnect neighborhoods around the core.
|
Again, you have failed to present any evidence to support your supposition.
Induced demand is a reality, established by study and empirical evidence. It is equally a reality that if you keep facilitating car travel and under investing in alternatives, car travel will maintain or grow its modal share, sprawl will continue, and in areas unserved or underserved by transit, the probably of the highway recongesting within a short period of time, is high.
If you believe the above is not the case with this proposal, it is incumbant on you to bring forth evidence. Not conjecture. Evidence.
Quote:
PS, it is hilarious you use Los Angeles of an example of what to do right. Have you seen LA's rail ridership? Bus ridership? Numbers dropping by the month? Extreme homeless problem? Human shit cleanup crews being needed due to amount of human feces around the city? Poverty? Income inequality? Congestion? Housing costs? Yeah, LA is a great model city.
|
Enough! I have not once, never, ever used the term 'model city'. This is your invention and contrivance.
I have offered examples of where things have been done in other cities.
This idea that one is somehow contrasting Houston to whatever 'Utopia' and saying emulate that City is absurd.
Other Cities are raised collectively as showing that city's that have different political leanings (Calgary is very much a conservative town), vs Toronto, which is not, both support investment in transit over highways.
That NYC with long-standing robust transit; and L.A. a City with historically very little, are both pursing a transit-first vision.
That this is the case because evidence supports that as the best model going forward for every large urban center.
You insist on conflating unrelated issues from property value to homelessness to crime in a discussion about land-use and planning.
That is city-vs-city style insults which ARE prohibited in this forum's code of conduct.
I have kept this discussion clean and policy-driven and have not insulted Houston or any other City, I feel no need to because the facts support my preferred option.
I would appreciate you taking the same high road; and bringing forth evidence-based suggestion, and not conflating that with unsupported preferences.