Houston’s $7 billion solution to gridlock is more highways

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by The North One

It's about bad urban planning and good urban planning. This project is objectively bad.

Cool? I mean I don't really care, if Houston wants mega highways by all means do it. But I'm not going to act like its a good solution to the transportation needs of a major city.

If you knew anything about Houston (especially its Congress-critter representatives), you'd know some of the most vehemently anti-rail buffoons were from there. Thankfully, people like Culberson are now long-gone, but their legacies of banning of federal funding for Houston rail projects will linger into the future, unfortunately.......

The fact of the matter is that downtown Houston's freeway loop is woefully outdated and downright horrible infrastructure. Something's got to change, and at least this project will remove part of that horrible elevated stretch. Rail is a great thing (and I-10 should have damned well had rail from Downtown through to Katy, but see Culberson for the political reason why it wasn't), but Houston's almost too far gone at this point for resolving congestion any other way but more freeways.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by dubu

ok. cars are still cars, breaking down (unless you have a real nice car), gas engines are very non efficient (you can make them pollute less but its still not good because so many people drive). having more room on a train is way better, you can also have double decker trains.

Okay and if you want to change your argument that is fine.

It isn't the freeway causing carbon emissions, it is the engines of the car. Furthermore stop and go traffic caused by freeways doesn't help emissions either. So let's focus on both things at once, that is possible.

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by dubu

I know right? people are not thinking hard about these things.

Clearly some are and some aren't. I have thought about it and you have something to make me think again please share. So far LA21st is unable to provide anything other than non statements. You seem reasonable... let's have a healthy debate! As I said, I think the issues with carbon and fine particulate emissions can be dealt with along with the other negative effects of freeways.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by mhays

You responded to my post. I read it that way. If you don't like it, learn how to post.

When you're quoting someone, it's a good idea for your response to somehow relate to what you're quoting.

I'll use this quote just for effect here:

THIS ENTIRE THREAD HAS BECOME AN INSIDIOUS SHITHOLE! These ridiculous insults and attacks MUST STOP NOW!

Clean up your acts or this thread will be closed. Thank you.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by The North One

Many cities have been removing highways or have plans to remove them. Few are doubling down on mega highway expansion projects the way Houston and Dallas are.

They might be removing a short spur into downtown, or perhaps some small section of a road with little traffic. Cities are not removing major highways with upwards of 100k traffic counts.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[JManc]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

Freeways are the devil - spawn of a development pattern that actually makes places poorer over time. Not a single cent should be spent on widening them. Houston is going to reckon with climate change sooner or later - and it's going to force the sea change in planning.

Houston could look like something out of blade runner and it's vulnerability to climate change won't change. It's built on silt and clay and slowly sliding into the Gulf of Mexico and beholden to severe weather. Overdevelopment has certainly exacerbated seasonal flooding but climate change will take out a lot more than just Houston...

[dubu]

Originally Posted by plutonicpanda

Okay and if you want to change your argument that is fine.

It isn't the freeway causing carbon emissions, it is the engines of the car. Furthermore stop and go traffic caused by freeways doesn't help emissions either. So let's focus on both things at once, that is possible.

to be able to stick a motor in your car that is way better then a gas motor would be a game changer. but if we were that advanced would we even need to be driving around at the same time everyday?

[mhays]

Originally Posted by glowrock

I'll use this quote just for effect here:

THIS ENTIRE THREAD HAS BECOME AN INSIDIOUS SHITHOLE! These ridiculous insults and attacks MUST STOP NOW!

Clean up your acts or this thread will be closed. Thank you.

Aaron (Glowrock)

See, this is a much better job of adding context before an out-of-context response.

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by dubu

to be able to stick a motor in your car that is way better then a gas motor would be a game changer. but if we were that advanced would we even need to be driving around at the same time everyday?

I agree with the job hours. I've long thought there could also be ways of reducing congestion without expansion that haven't been done.

Change job hours to let employees pick their own hours and off peak job hours where feasible. Encourage companies to allow more telecommuting. Things of that nature.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by dubu

to be able to stick a motor in your car that is way better then a gas motor would be a game changer. but if we were that advanced would we even need to be driving around at the same time everyday?

Are you talking about electric cars? If so, that's a process that will probably mature in another 20 or so years. When most ICE cars around today are worn out and taken Off the roads.

From what i hear, it's not so much cars as it is buildings that are the biggest polluters and energy hogs.

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by TexasPlaya

Houston has focused more on improving bus service and BRT over rail. I think what DFW is doing will take decades to really see how it plays out but the Houston metro moves significantly more people with mass transit than DFW today.

I think cities need to tailor their mass transit to their particular development and rail isn’t a one size fits all solution.

Yeah I really don't know too much about Houston's Metro service but I am glad to know they are pushing healthy numbers. I did read about the BRT and I think a new rail line to the airport. Glad to see they are making improvments o that end!

I agree about the rail. Especially streetcars I think bus service can do just a good job as rail in some cases especially if the rail runs at grade much of its route.

[JManc]

The BRT routes were supposed to be LRT but.. politics. See Glowrock's post. But i think if the BRT routes (currently u/c) are successful, they could be replaced with track at a later time.

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by LA21st

They must not think they can not compete otherwise. And yes, it is begging. It's a problem because it doesn't seem sustainable.

If you think Texas is begging than you have that right but I would disagree.

Sure, the low taxes, relaxed regulatory environment and Central Time Zone are nice. But none of those factors tops the list of reasons Toyota decided to plant its North American headquarters in Plano, bringing in more than 3,000 jobs, mostly from California.

The main driver of Toyota’s move from Torrance, California, was housing costs, according to Albert Niemi Jr., dean of the Cox School of Business at Southern Methodist University, who has inside knowledge about the move. Niemi shared the anecdote at an SMU Cox Economic Outlook Panel on Friday morning.

- https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/b...ving-from.html

Texas pays incentives but so does every other state and city. Oklahoma does it. NC does it. Utah does it. California does it. LA area cities were willing to pay millions for Amazon.

Apart from having the highest levels of poverty, horrid traffic congestion(from having some of the least freeway lane miles per person), out of control homeless problem, rodent infestation, diseases from the middle ages reappearing... I can on and on LOL, the affordability issue that has plagued California can't be understated.

I just read an article on Curbed that touted new ways of affording a house and what was the magic number to affordability? 440k!!!! AND YOU STILL DON'T OWN IT LOLOLOL. 440k would buy you a pretty nice house in Texas. Hell, in many states, 440k gets you a mansion. Texas could probably stop "begging" like every single state in the US including California does(I guess depending on your mysterious definitions) and still land enough of the seemingly monthly relocations from California alone to the state to keep healthy growth rates.

[LA21st]

Many Californians' who left for COL are always on social media saying they hate Texas and wished they never left. COL isn't everything.
. Getting priced out of a state is not the same thing as wanting to move somewhere else. If California was as affordable, this state would have 60 million people .
I'm sure I can buy a bigger house in Texas, but it's still Texas. So...

Rodent infestation/plagues lmao. Keep bringing up issues nobody in California thinks about. And Texas pays way more in incentives than Calfornia does for corporate relocations. Amazon is your example? The company every city wanted and offered incentives for? Good try.

You obviously like Texas more, and that's fine. I don't see anything appealing about it, at all.

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Many Californians' who left for COL are always on social media saying they hate Texas and wished they never left. COL isn't everything.
. Getting priced out of a state is not the same thing as wanting to move somewhere else. If California was as affordable, this state would have 60 million people .
I'm sure I can buy a bigger house in Texas, but it's still Texas. So...

Rodent infestation/plagues lmao. Keep bringing up issues nobody in California thinks about. And Texas pays way more in incentives than Calfornia does for corporate relocations. Amazon is your example? The company every city wanted and offered incentives for? Good try.

You obviously like Texas more, and that's fine. I don't see anything appealing about it, at all.

I do have a friend who moved from California to Texas who doesn't like it but that isn't because of Texas itself. People love to bitch of about stupid shit and blame their own problems on other things. Some people may simply like California more.

I much prefer California over Texas due to the Pacific Ocean, diversity, geography, and Las Vegas being nearby as many other attractions. I just gravitate towards the west as I think it is the most beautiful part of the country and I love living here.

As for the rodent infestations not being an issue on peoples minds, what a ridiculous argument. So because most people don't know how serious the issue is it means there is no issue at all? please.... with that logic many real issues we face today wouldn't be issues at all.

If you want to dwell into who pays for more for incentives I won't get into that game. You are moving the goalposts. You made a claim Texas is begging for development, which with many terms you use that are vague in a sense you provide no further insight on to your definitions of such terms. So be a bit more specific. I don't know the exact numbers of incentives and all I know I do not like incentives and I think they should be banned federally. That said you were acting as if Texas is some outlier in the incentives game and that is simply not true or at least to the notion of that being their only hope to attract businesses. You sir, obviously just have a disdain for Texas, and want to do or say anything you can to put the state down. The facts are cities in Texas are likely to be some of the largest in the U.S. one day and are directly competing with NYC and LA. Like it or not Texas growth is nothing short of phenomenal and denying or twisting facts won't change that.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by plutonicpanda

I do have a friend who moved from California to Texas who doesn't like it but that isn't because of Texas itself. People love to bitch of about stupid shit and blame their own problems on other things. Some people may simply like California more.

I much prefer California over Texas due to the Pacific Ocean, diversity, geography, and Las Vegas being nearby as many other attractions. I just gravitate towards the west as I think it is the most beautiful part of the country and I love living here.

As for the rodent infestations not being an issue on peoples minds, what a ridiculous argument. So because most people don't know how serious the issue is it means there is no issue at all? please.... with that logic many real issues we face today wouldn't be issues at all.

Or maybe they just don't like living in Texas. I know it's hard for Texans to accept this, but it's true. Not everyone is a fan of the place. Not everyone is a fan of California, obviously.A bigger house doesn't solve your problems and I've seen NYers make the same comments after moving south for the same reasons. It's not everything.


Why would rodent infestations be on the typical resident's mind? Unless your life is being hampered by it, I'd assume most people have better things to think about. Are you referencing those articles by Fox News about a few blocks in downtown LA (in a industrial area) a few months ago? The pictures were gross, but 99.9 % of LA does not go to that area.

Theres articles about flesh eating bacteria in Florida recently, along with mosquitos that carry a severe brain disease. It's been reported in NY state too. Should those residents be afraid of those things, all the time, because of a couple articles/cases?

[uaarkson]

Originally Posted by glowrock

If you knew anything about Houston (especially its Congress-critter representatives), you'd know some of the most vehemently anti-rail buffoons were from there. Thankfully, people like Culberson are now long-gone, but their legacies of banning of federal funding for Houston rail projects will linger into the future, unfortunately.......

The fact of the matter is that downtown Houston's freeway loop is woefully outdated and downright horrible infrastructure. Something's got to change, and at least this project will remove part of that horrible elevated stretch. Rail is a great thing (and I-10 should have damned well had rail from Downtown through to Katy, but see Culberson for the political reason why it wasn't), but Houston's almost too far gone at this point for resolving congestion any other way but more freeways.

Aaron (Glowrock)

Nah, they should tear it all down or bury it. Cars be damned.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by plutonicpanda

I do have a friend who moved from California to Texas who doesn't like it but that isn't because of Texas itself. People love to bitch of about stupid shit and blame their own problems on other things. Some people may simply like California more.

I much prefer California over Texas due to the Pacific Ocean, diversity, geography, and Las Vegas being nearby as many other attractions. I just gravitate towards the west as I think it is the most beautiful part of the country and I love living here.

As for the rodent infestations not being an issue on peoples minds, what a ridiculous argument. So because most people don't know how serious the issue is it means there is no issue at all? please.... with that logic many real issues we face today wouldn't be issues at all.

If you want to dwell into who pays for more for incentives I won't get into that game. You are moving the goalposts. You made a claim Texas is begging for development, which with many terms you use that are vague in a sense you provide no further insight on to your definitions of such terms. So be a bit more specific. I don't know the exact numbers of incentives and all I know I do not like incentives and I think they should be banned federally. That said you were acting as if Texas is some outlier in the incentives game and that is simply not true or at least to the notion of that being their only hope to attract businesses. You sir, obviously just have a disdain for Texas, and want to do or say anything you can to put the state down. The facts are cities in Texas are likely to be some of the largest in the U.S. one day and are directly competing with NYC and LA. Like it or not Texas growth is nothing short of phenomenal and denying or twisting facts won't change that.

Coming from the guy who had no problem mentioning LA's problems. Incentives are there for a reason, buddy. And California is ranked in bottom 5 of business incentives along with Washington, Virgina, Maryland, and Nevada.
With the execption of Nevada those are 3 states with strong economies. Two are helped by the Federal Government.

Anyway, there's plenty of articles that say incentives are dumb, a waste of money and unstainable. So good for Texas, I guess.

[matt777]

Originally Posted by TexasPlaya

Houston has focused more on improving bus service and BRT over rail. I think what DFW is doing will take decades to really see how it plays out but the Houston metro moves significantly more people with mass transit than DFW today.

I think cities need to tailor their mass transit to their particular development and rail isn’t a one size fits all solution.

Houston transit doesn't move "significantly" more, it's about 10% or less more. Do not forget that DART is not the only DFW transity authority. There is Trinity Metro, MATA, and Denton County Transit Authority that you have to add together. In reality, the two metros move about the same amount of people by public transit and have similar population sizes.

Both metros could drastically increase public transit usage in the coming decades. Houston has bet the farm on bus service, and invested in it. DFW has ignored bus service growth and focused on rail, with many lines having just recently opened or coming soon (Cotton Belt Line, D2 line, new streetcar lines). So DFW has set up itself for long term growth around rail stations, but is also planning a complete revamp of the bus system which could be great or be a failure.

When it comes to downtown highways, I would love to see some graphics on this planned Houston project because it doesn't sound too palatable. I would rather support a complete removal of certain segments of Downtown highways. Dallas covered most of Woodall Rogers freeway downtown, with Klyde Warren Park, but the most promising project is the potential complete removal of the I-345 connector highway which separates Downtown from Deep Ellum.

It would be nice to see this Houston freeway project present several options and scenarios, with some of them being complete removals of some of the highways.

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by plutonicpanda

I do have a friend who moved from California to Texas who doesn't like it but that isn't because of Texas itself. People love to bitch of about stupid shit and blame their own problems on other things. Some people may simply like California more.

I much prefer California over Texas due to the Pacific Ocean, diversity, geography, and Las Vegas being nearby as many other attractions. I just gravitate towards the west as I think it is the most beautiful part of the country and I love living here.

As for the rodent infestations not being an issue on peoples minds, what a ridiculous argument. So because most people don't know how serious the issue is it means there is no issue at all? please.... with that logic many real issues we face today wouldn't be issues at all.

If you want to dwell into who pays for more for incentives I won't get into that game. You are moving the goalposts. You made a claim Texas is begging for development, which with many terms you use that are vague in a sense you provide no further insight on to your definitions of such terms. So be a bit more specific. I don't know the exact numbers of incentives and all I know I do not like incentives and I think they should be banned federally. That said you were acting as if Texas is some outlier in the incentives game and that is simply not true or at least to the notion of that being their only hope to attract businesses. You sir, obviously just have a disdain for Texas, and want to do or say anything you can to put the state down. The facts are cities in Texas are likely to be some of the largest in the U.S. one day and are directly competing with NYC and LA. Like it or not Texas growth is nothing short of phenomenal and denying or twisting facts won't change that.

Diversity?

Texas
White:45%
Black:12%
Hispanic:38%
Asian:4%

California
White:38%
Black:7%
Hispanic:39%
Asian:15%

They're are pretty much the same with minor differences.

However, yeah, I love the scenery out west(which Texas has too) and LV.