Jump to content

ADCS

Full Member
  • Content Count

    506
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

374 Excellent

About ADCS

  • Rank

  • Birthday 04/22/1985

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Temple Terrace

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. See, here's a place where it would be useful to work with CoH (since they control how the streets are managed) rather than try to torpedo the project altogether. Not only do current plans have Leeland as two way across the highway, it wouldn't be too difficult to restripe it downtown for two-way traffic altogether, as a complete street with biking and parking facilities. I think there are many in planning who would be amenable to that kind of suggestion, instead of just digging in your heels.
  2. I don't know why people are crying for investors' potential losses when the worst case scenario is the state getting a fully-built piece of high-capital infrastructure for pennies on the dollar. Certainly those investors are not crying for you when their gains come at your expense, and there's no public good left behind as a result.
  3. Really? You don't see how it's too broad of a statement? Look, I'm in favor of rail development, even where it's not (yet) appropriate, because the underlying infrastructure is what drives the overlying development. However, once the development is there, it has to be accounted for. 45 must be rebuilt, because if it is not, people will unnecessarily die from what is already a very dangerous route. This plan, while not perfect, does significantly reduce the impact on the surface around downtown. That's the part I'm invested in, because it's the next step in Houston becoming the kind of city I would like it to be. That's not to say that there aren't big issues regarding the rest of the route. But those need to be considered separately, and the argument should not be to kill the project altogether. Also, this is wrong. If they don't spend the money on 45, the money simply won't get spent in Houston. They're about to start work on sinking 35 in Central Austin. Don't you think they'd love to have a nicer version of the plans, including a fully-covered tunnel, something they could possibly get with the money from the 45 plan? And TxDOT money will not get to METRO, no matter how much of a "good idea" it is. There are too many in the Lege who are ideologically opposed to metropolitan transit services getting more state cash than they already do. And you know as well as I do that race has nothing to do with how/where the Pierce is being handled. It's all money and development potential there. The racial argument makes you sound disingenuous.
  4. The agenda is he doesn't like freeways, period. His analysis will never get around or past that agenda. I agree we need more and better public transportation, but that doesn't mean this particular project shouldn't be done. The lack of particularity and nuance is the most glaring weakness in his position.
  5. It's perfectly valid to attack his credibility as someone using this issue to grind a particular political axe, rather than someone closely tied to and invested in the community and the people who the project will impact.
  6. Jeff Speck. Didn't he say he was never coming back to Houston?
  7. You'd think that he's got enough clout where if that were the concern, he'd just get that section done as quick as possible, as soon as possible, rather than opposing the project altogether.
  8. Nah, those serve a public good. But semis that don't serve an origin/destination route should be banned ITL, IMO. Would significantly improve I-10 traffic.
  9. They should consider not buying vehicles that do not fit the demands of a major city then. Personal responsibility and all.
  10. That's only because it impacted Memorial Park, which annoyed the billionaire wife crowd.
  11. I don't understand people's focus on retaining the PE when most substantive opposition relates to other parts of the project, specifically north of Downtown where freeway design is much more conventional.
  12. I use the scooters at least once a week in Austin, though I prefer the ebikes.
  13. They might as well say "transit is for the poors, and we don't want them here" It's this sort of attitude (and, to be fair, METRO's accommodation of it) that leads to a consistently substandard system.
  14. ADCS

    Metro Next - 2040 Vision

    They didn’t want anything more disruptive than the existing rail corridor. I think you will see less opposition to what’s essentially a streetcar to the Theater District. It’s a QOL and property value enhancer. Businesses will complain but hardly any of them last longer than 5 years on Washington.
×
×
  • Create New...