HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #201  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 1:39 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Light View Post
Your view of the less fortunate is profoundly offensive and immoral.

If you wanted to have fewer folks down on their luck, maybe you should see to housing them, giving them healthcare and other supports.

You might also consider pushing for good transit, at closer to market pricing which would naturally shift the on-board demographic w/o the need to make yourself seem indifferent to the plight of your fellow human beings.
Save the moral posturing. Feeling for a group of people is different than wanting to be around their anti-social behavior. I feel for people who grow up in the projects next to my apartment, but if they try to rob me I will do what I have to to punish them. Understanding there is a systemic problem or whatever doesn't mean each individual gets a pass.

It's not Jmacs or anyone else responsibility to help people. You are referring to the government doing these things, if they are not, don't blame individuals.
     
     
  #202  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 1:51 AM
Cory Cory is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,271
Northern Light is just a predictable and irrational ideologue with little understanding of nuance. In other words, don't waste your time.
__________________
NYC - LONDON - TOKYO - PARIS - LA - OAKLAND
     
     
  #203  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 2:15 AM
RCDC's Avatar
RCDC RCDC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: DC, an eruptive vent of wealth
Posts: 405
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAYNYC View Post
I lived there, and agree 100%. Houston - and Texas in general (Austin aside) - is a place people love to hate. Generally it's because of their own ignorance, or refusing to become properly informed, or because they view the city (and state) as an economic threat to their own.
Maybe because it's the center of the petrochemical industry, an incessant lobbying group that does everything they can to stall progress and adoption of other means of energy and transportation. Anyway, congrats on moving to NYC.
     
     
  #204  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 2:19 AM
RCDC's Avatar
RCDC RCDC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: DC, an eruptive vent of wealth
Posts: 405
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerSpotter View Post
Pictures by John Stephen on flickr

waking up on katy freeway by John Stephen Chandler, on Flickr

I-10 freeway as sun goes down by John Stephen Chandler, on Flickr
Thanks for the pics.
     
     
  #205  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 12:49 PM
glowrock's Avatar
glowrock glowrock is offline
Becoming Chicago-fied!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago (West Avondale)
Posts: 19,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Light View Post
I will bring up comparisons between Houston and other cities around the world .

This is SSP, a CANADIAN forum, based in British Columbia, discussing cities and their development around the world.

The idea that your city is immune from comparison is completely bizarre.

My remarks have been polite and on point.

I would appreciate if yours were the same.

****

Your view of the less fortunate is profoundly offensive and immoral.

If you wanted to have fewer folks down on their luck, maybe you should see to housing them, giving them healthcare and other supports.

You might also consider pushing for good transit, at closer to market pricing which would naturally shift the on-board demographic w/o the need to make yourself seem indifferent to the plight of your fellow human beings.
You, Northern Light, are behaving like a boorish jerk. The THREAD is about Houston, a Houston project. It is NOT about Ontario. Nothing wrong with a quick comparison, but wow, your holier-than-thou attitude is just nauseating. Cut the crap, please.

Thank you.

Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"My first day in Chicago, September 4, 1983. I set foot in this city, and just walking down the street, it was like roots, like the motherland. I knew I belonged here." -- Oprah Winfrey
     
     
  #206  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 12:59 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by glowrock View Post
You, Northern Light, are behaving like a boorish jerk. The THREAD is about Houston, a Houston project. It is NOT about Ontario. Nothing wrong with a quick comparison, but wow, your holier-than-thou attitude is just nauseating. Cut the crap, please.

Thank you.

Aaron (Glowrock)
There is nothing holier-than-thou in my attitude.

A poster referred to the homeless as an 'infestation'. If you don't think that's disgusting; I have nothing to say to you that I can or would repeat in a public forum.

Outside of that, I have referenced many other cities, and done so solely in response to 'this can't be done'; in order to establish that 'it can'.

That's it.

I have been on this forum for a full decade; I have a track record of responsible, polite, evidence-based posting.
     
     
  #207  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 1:38 PM
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,929
Thread title:
Houston’s $7 billion solution to gridlock is more highways

That's why we're talking about a light rail line somewhere in Ontario Canada!
     
     
  #208  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 2:49 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
Thread title:
Houston’s $7 billion solution to gridlock is more highways

That's why we're talking about a light rail line somewhere in Ontario Canada!
Enough! The thread is about what is best for HOUSTON; which you can only ascertain by looking at best practices around the world.

You obsession with myopia makes you unsuited to discussions on virtually any subject as you would like an echo chamber.

This isn't one.

Further, the examples offered, from many cities, not just one in Ontario is that people everywhere, including Houston, will respond to good transit, rather than mediocre, given the right mix of incentives and disincentives.

That's the public policy discussion at hand for Houston!

I would like something better for Houston that what is proposed. It is possible, that is what I have demonstrated, in response to claims it is not.
     
     
  #209  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 2:52 PM
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Light View Post
Enough! The thread is about what is best for HOUSTON; which you can only ascertain by looking at best practices around the world.

You obsession with myopia makes you unsuited to discussions on virtually any subject as you would like an echo chamber.

This isn't one.
Let's talk about New York's 2nd Avenue Subway in a thread about road projects in Houston, Texas -- at least we're in the same country.

Makes sense.
     
     
  #210  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 3:01 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
Let's talk about New York's 2nd Avenue Subway in a thread about road projects in Houston, Texas -- at least we're in the same country.

Makes sense.
The reason for the Kitchener, Ontario comparison was that it is not New York.

It is a sprawly, suburban community, with fairly low densities, with access to major highways, a confusing and less than ideal local road system (which can't be called a grid) and which had an extremely high modal share for cars until a few years ago.

It has achieved substantial change (its still rather car-centric) but has moved the needle markedly by first upgrading its bus service substantially, then introducing commuter rail to Toronto, making minor but consistent improvements for pedestrians and cyclists and now it has LRT.

In other words, its much more comparable to Houston, than New York is.

Except that its much smaller.
     
     
  #211  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 3:17 PM
JAYNYC JAYNYC is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Light View Post
'Kitchener, Ontario is' comparable to Houston
^ How to lose all credibility (while sounding like a complete buffoon).
     
     
  #212  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 3:32 PM
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Light View Post
The reason for the Kitchener, Ontario comparison was that it is not New York.

It is a sprawly, suburban community, with fairly low densities, with access to major highways, a confusing and less than ideal local road system (which can't be called a grid) and which had an extremely high modal share for cars until a few years ago.

It has achieved substantial change (its still rather car-centric) but has moved the needle markedly by first upgrading its bus service substantially, then introducing commuter rail to Toronto, making minor but consistent improvements for pedestrians and cyclists and now it has LRT.

In other words, its much more comparable to Houston, than New York is.

Except that its much smaller.
Kitchener, a Canadian city of 233,222 is comparable to an American city of 2,325,502 in a metro of 7 million?

The only difference is that Kitchener is 3% the size of Greater Houston -- that's all.

Also the climate is just a tad different too, let alone the government, it being in a totally different country and all.
     
     
  #213  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 4:57 PM
benp benp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
Kitchener, a Canadian city of 233,222 is comparable to an American city of 2,325,502 in a metro of 7 million?

The only difference is that Kitchener is 3% the size of Greater Houston -- that's all.

Also the climate is just a tad different too, let alone the government, it being in a totally different country and all.
Kitchener is also part of the extended Greater Toronto Area of about 6 million people, and it's daily GO service to Toronto supports 18k riders daily (versus 30.5k for the entire Houston P&R system).

Maybe a better comparison is to compare Kitchener to Katy? If anything, it makes Houston look worse overall from a transit standpoint.
     
     
  #214  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 5:07 PM
plutonicpanda plutonicpanda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by DePaul Bunyan View Post
That's fine for some white collar/cubicle corporate jobs but the bulk of us have generally fixed hours for clients/customers/patients.
Of course and that is why I said this

Quote:
Originally Posted by plutonicpanda View Post
Change job hours to let employees pick their own hours and off peak job hours where feasible.
     
     
  #215  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 5:16 PM
plutonicpanda plutonicpanda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Light View Post
No, its not!

Its about a policy proposal for Houston to expand its freeway system, resulting n greater urban sprawl, greater poverty, and more pollution.

The presumption implicit in the proposal is that Houston's modal share for transit cannot be materially improved.

You have argued in favour of that position.
Just because you see something in a certain light doesn't mean that is the way it is. This is why I have stated over and over you live in a fantasy land. Your views of reality are skewed as you seem to think in one direction and can't fathom a possibility where you're wrong. This makes arguing with you a complete waste of time. If you don't agree with someone that doesn't mean they support something they don't only because you say they do. I am specifically referring to where you say this:

"Its about a policy proposal for Houston to expand its freeway system, resulting n greater urban sprawl, greater poverty, and more pollution."

I support this freeway, for greater access to sprawl yes, but not poverty and certainly not more pollution. If you're views of the freeways are that of causing these things and that won't change then a) it doesn't mean others support that while supporting freeways and b) you should come up with an alternative other than whining about freeways and, again, claiming those that support them want to see more pollution and poverty.

If you wish to get people to see things your way, putting words in their mouths won't help. I'd certainly be open to having a convo with about expanding transit for Houston and reducing the city's reliance on cars but you will loose me(and I bet many others) at anything that forces people to change their lifestyle and telling me what I do and don't support.

As stated I am in support of many things to reduce congestion other than lane additions. More mobility and less congestion leads to more prosperity and that leads to more innovation which will inevitably lead to advancements in engine and car technologies reducing emissions. Not widening freeways will cause even congestion putting off more emissions and cause people to sit in traffic longer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trae View Post
Yeah the Katy Freeway was a wreck during all daylight hours, 7 days a week before its expansion. Even during construction, they were saying it'll still be bad during rush hour but will at least flow during other times of the day. This has remained true 10+ years after its completion and all the growth that's happened in the west side of the metro. The Katy Freeway is an example of a freeway expansion done right, outside of a few things hear and there (rail should have been there instead of the tollway, more combined exits, etc.).

A lot of the Downtown freeway loop currently exists. There's removal and in the one place it'll expand greatly, there will be greenspace placed on top. The areas of Downtown and Midtown that are growing the most will now be connected. The elevated portions of 69 will be eliminated and connect the east side and other areas. Overall there will be better street improvements, more lighting, wider sidewalks, etc.
Glad to see some REAL insight from someone who lives there!
     
     
  #216  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 5:33 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAYNYC View Post
^ How to lose all credibility (while sounding like a complete buffoon).
You purposefully misquote me; and misrepresent what I said in so doing.

If lying is your way to succeed in arguments, you lost before you fingers hit the key board or your mouth opened.

I specifically said the comparison in respect of transit was more apt than was one with NYC.

Which is and remains true, because the built-form of Kitchener and area is more similar to Houston, as is population density, than NYC.

In so far as the community is smaller that makes the example that much more worthwhile, because Houston has substantially larger employment nodes, and substantially more money.

If you wish to critique my arguments.

1) Don't make it personal. I didn't insult you except after you opened fire on me.

2) Don't lie, make your argument better by supporting it with evidence and facts.
     
     
  #217  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 5:38 PM
JAYNYC JAYNYC is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Light View Post
You purposefully misquote me; and misrepresent what I said in so doing.

If lying is your way to succeed in arguments, you lost before you fingers hit the key board or your mouth opened.

I specifically said the comparison in respect of transit was more apt than was one with NYC.

Which is and remains true, because the built-form of Kitchener and area is more similar to Houston, as is population density, than NYC.

In so far as the community is smaller that makes the example that much more worthwhile, because Houston has substantially larger employment nodes, and substantially more money.

If you wish to critique my arguments.

1) Don't make it personal. I didn't insult you except after you opened fire on me.

2) Don't lie, make your argument better by supporting it with evidence and facts.
1) Did you or did you not imply that Kitchener, Ontario is comparable to Houston, Texas?

2) If you say you didn't, why am I not the only one to believe you did (Sun Belt being another)?
     
     
  #218  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 5:39 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 28,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by benp View Post
Kitchener is also part of the extended Greater Toronto Area of about 6 million people, and it's daily GO service to Toronto supports 18k riders daily (versus 30.5k for the entire Houston P&R system).

Maybe a better comparison is to compare Kitchener to Katy? If anything, it makes Houston look worse overall from a transit standpoint.
Kitchener is closer to comparison to Galveston rather than Katy. Both are their own cities. Katy is a huge bedroom community with a mall. Galveston still sucks transport wise but it has its own identity with its own employment base like the Waterloo region in Ontario. There is a track connecting Galveston and Houston which could be used for future commuter rail but owned by one of the oil and gas companies and they will sit on it indefinitely.
     
     
  #219  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 5:46 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by plutonicpanda View Post
Just because you see something in a certain light doesn't mean that is the way it is.
This most certainly applies to your arguments, which as yet, remain unsupported by a single citation of a single study or report or even an apt example.

Quote:
This is why I have stated over and over you live in a fantasy land.
This is an ad hominem attack. You don't offer any evidence of any kind to dispute my assertions for which there are real-world proofs which I have offered up.

You simply attack me. I have not spent my time attacking you or any other poster and I don't wish to.

I have had enough of your endless insults, don't respond to any of my posts, if you can't post politely.

Flame Wars are against the code of conduct.

Either argue substance which means tell me specifically what you think I've said is wrong, and then support that conclusion with evidence, or stay quiet.

Quote:
Its about a policy proposal for Houston to expand its freeway system, resulting n greater urban sprawl, greater poverty, and more pollution."
Yes, I said that. There is zero argument that expanding highways does not facilitate ongoing sprawl.

There is zero argument that sprawl is not cost-inefficient for government, resulting in either higher taxes or lower service levels or some combination of these, which will invariably hit those with the least income the hardest.

Sprawl also means those without a car are at the greatest disadvantage not only in employment, but in access to shopping, healthcare or simply sending their child to a good school.

Greater density makes the above easier (not easy).

There is no argument that increasing the total number of vehicles on the road does not result in greater pollution.

****

Quote:
I support this freeway, for greater access to sprawl yes, but not poverty and certainly not more pollution. If you're views of the freeways are that of causing these things and that won't change then a) it doesn't mean others support that while supporting freeways and b) you should come up with an alternative other than whining about freeways and, again, claiming those that support them want to see more pollution and poverty.
Can you please go back and find where I said "Proponents of highway expansion clearly want to cause more pollution or poverty"?

Because I don't remember saying that, if I did, I will apologize for misspeaking.

But I believe I said that's what the highway expansion program will cause, not that that is what motivated anyone.

Quote:
I'd certainly be open to having a convo with about expanding transit for Houston and reducing the city's reliance on cars but you will loose me(and I bet many others) at anything that forces people to change their lifestyle and telling me what I do and don't support.
Outside of compelling people to move out of the way of floods; I don't believe I proposed 'forcing' anyone to do anything. Its my understanding that Houston has already been doing this to some degree, I simply proposed a larger scale, and a prioritization system based on cost-efficiency for the taxpayer.

The rest is about incentives and disincentives (higher taxes if you cost the rest of us more money); (lower taxes if you don't) and prioritizing better transit service. There is no plot to micromanage everyone's life or tell them where to move. If you want 3 acres in the burbs you can have it. I'm just saying you should expect to pay the cost of it, not freeload on other taxpayers.
     
     
  #220  
Old Posted Aug 12, 2019, 5:47 PM
mhays mhays is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,977
We should have a club for people glowrock thinks are "holier than thou," etc. Very sensitive and emotional guy who throws these accusations around an awful lot.

As for the arguments for more freeways...definitely the sort of thinking that made Houston so extremely car-dependent, and will apparently keep that going.
__________________
"Everyday" as one word means "ordinary."
You probably mean "every day."
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:48 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.