Jump to content

mattyt36

Full Member
  • Content Count

    422
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

515 Excellent

About mattyt36

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

2737 profile views
  1. It seems like there are more similar units being built outside of downtown without incentives, so I'm not sure I'd assign any of the "blame" to the tax incentives. I think this has to do with the fact that the Inner Loop area, particularly close in (Heights, Midtown, Montrose, etc.), really didn't have many large multifamily developments to begin with . . . and that dates back to the sewage development moratorium from the 1970s. So I think it is fair to say a lot of this development is "catch up," the problem being the price point for new developments, and the fact that there aren't a lo
  2. I thought those people called it the "toy train"
  3. No different, really, than someone calling 59 south of downtown "59," the "Southwest Freeway," or (ick) "69" like the New People.
  4. I moved back 7 years ago after being away for 15+ . . . I remember asking myself a lot of times during the first few months, "Remind me again why in the hell am I doing this?" Took about a year . . . it's both a good and bad thing that city is not how you remember. You just need to rediscover it. And I really don't think there's any better place to live in the U.S. (It's ironically a similar process/experience to many people who move here for the first time.) That said, I agree that customer service here (especially with personal and small business contractors) is indeed like bein
  5. Thanks for the argument in good faith! Isn't the federal share from the federal gas tax? Doesn't FHWA have a trust fund too? Regardless, the general point stands, though. This does not represent $1,000 in real additional tax outlays per Houston resident (under the existing system, at least, which I acknowledge you believe is broken). Fair enough. But if one really thinks about what this idea means politically, well, I don't think it's practical (this is why I think of much of this being an illusion). It is a defensible viewpoint, however. Appreciate the transparency.
  6. Congrats on calculating a ratio. That's not how this works. Fill up your tank, pay into the trust fund. From an economic perspective, we'll continue to pay this gas tax without regard to whether the project proceeds. The real difference is what we get . . . it all may end up going to North Texas or Austin. Well that's a revealing value judgment! No different than any other city. Anyone who thinks Chicago, New York, Boston, San Francisco, Washington, DC, etc., doesn't have similar patterns is blind. Fun fact: The NYC subway drove sprawl, just like it did in London and countle
  7. Oh, the irony. At its heart, a "straw man" is not a real argument, but something just put on the table because it relies on people's "gut feel" that it is true, good, or bad. (1) "I'm opposed to this because of the pollution." (Who is for pollution?) (2) "I'm opposed to this because of all the relocated poor people." ("These days, who can possibly be against poor people?") (3) "I'm opposed to this because I don't think we should make it easier for people to get from Conroe to Galveston." ("Yeah, why should we care about these people?") (4) "I'm opposed to this because an HGA
  8. Another straw man. The billions are going to spent somewhere and mostly on highways (that's how the trust fund works). It can either be here or somewhere else. Again, I'm not sure what interest those of us who live inside the loop have in making it more difficult for people to get to work in the City. Any idea that there is going to be a population shift into the City of any meaningful magnitude to affect the natural demand patterns in effect for 40+ years is inane--it's simply not an option for many people. So, instead, businesses will just move out. But if that's what people w
  9. Whaddya know? It's almost as if this project isn't being designed for that.
  10. Well I'm going to drive from Conroe to Galveston this weekend. I must be missing out on something.
  11. Well, regardless of what "official" comment period it is, it hasn't been linked to the future of the NHHIP until now and that is because of USDOT. So I'm not sure the glib "nothing to see here" attitude is justified.
  12. I have to tip my hat to you and your ability to go down new rhetorical rabbit holes without actually engaging with any substantive arguments. You didn't provide proof of anything. You reported out a vote count. There's a perfectly logical explanation for how those people voted, which has been presented to you. But you want to introduce another straw man (and bring up this Conroe to Galveston straw "king" yet again). And local versus regional? Give me a break. It's just as local to the other board members as it is to the City of Houston and Harris County.
  13. Well I put my money where my mouth was and answered my own question. "How many residential units will be displaced in total"? See page 5-2: Single family residential: 160 Multi-family residential: 433 Public and low-income housing: 486 Total: 1,079 (on page 5-3, of the 1,079 displaced, 76 are owner-occupied units) Also shown in this table . . . other displacements: Business: 344 Place of worship: 5 School: 2 Parking business: 11 Other: 11 The argument that this is about preventing displacement is simply nonsensical. Yes, I real
  14. Great question and one I keep asking myself. Historically for things like this, there has to be an organization advocating for it. Usually someone like GHP would take that role, but my understanding is the GHP-City relationship is strained as a result of pressure from Mayor Turner over wanting them to take a public stance on the proposed state voting rights bill. So that may be part of the reason why we haven't heard from them. Or maybe the GHP isn't enthusiastically for it, either. I honestly don't know. Up until Oscar's (deleted) post in which he essentially said the writing is on
×
×
  • Create New...