ADCS

Shame they couldn't fast-track this while all the restaurants/bars were closed and restricted. Houston remains friendly to small business, the rest of us be damned

This parochialism is why Houston continues to self-sabotage. Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia all do fine with several major research universities nearby.

The better comparison is the no-build on 95 north through DC. The Beltway is a beast, but the only real choke point is the Woodrow Wilson Bridge. I also don't think replacement of the Ship Channel bridge is all that much of an issue. It's nearing the end of its service life already, and will almost certainly be replaced within the next 25 years.

Think it would be pretty cool if the Astros/Dynamo would chip in to the cap fund in exchange for putting baseball and soccer fields on there.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Jeff Speck. Didn't he say he was never coming back to Houston?

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.

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.

They should consider not buying vehicles that do not fit the demands of a major city then. Personal responsibility and all.

No, they like being philanthropic.

That's only because it impacted Memorial Park, which annoyed the billionaire wife crowd.

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.

I use the scooters at least once a week in Austin, though I prefer the ebikes.

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.

Center St is a logical relief route for Washington

Maintain existing facilities after the 45 rebuild, but don't prioritize further expansion. Redirect resources toward comprehensive public transit whose primary purpose isn't just welfare for the poor. I don't see companies moving away from NYC and SF because of the difficulties commuting from Dutchess County or Vallejo

I wasn't talking about oil.

The best location would be in one of the parcels off of N San Jacinto opened up by the relocation of I-10 and I-45. That area is never going to redevelop due to the jail locations there, and already has good access to transit.

It isn't "forcing additional expenses"; it's ending subsidies whose costs outweigh the benefits.

See, I'd agree in most scenarios, but not when it comes to big public works projects. You can get people on board with that, and because it's usually a mass collective effort, it doesn't take all that much from any one person. However, where do these projects almost always get hung up? When it's encroaching on some honcho's territory, or demanding a benefit to a small, well-connected group at the expense of a large group of politically weaker people. It's not malevolence so much as acquisitiveness and or defensiveness I'm talking about.

Houston has had inordinate wealth and ambitious people for over 120 years now. Lush subtropical forests have been popular for ~200 years now. City beautification efforts have been popular since the turn of the last century. Which is to say... if this were an easy process, there’s no reason to think it would not have been done already. So a reasonable assumption is that this is not an easy process. If something seems obvious, and hasn’t been done, your first assumption should never be that people were lazy or stupid. There’s either a good reason, or a predictable one (like corruption or greed).