Jump to content

Highway 59 - 610 Interchange Partial Rebuild


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, samagon said:

59SB to 610SB is going to be closed starting this weekend, and should be expected to stay closed until the project is completed in 2 years.

 

 

At which point they'll start reconstructing the whole interchange again...😛

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2022 at 10:04 PM, august948 said:

At which point they'll start reconstructing the whole interchange again...😛

I'm still amazed that the Gulf Freeway is still under construction. Can't beat that. Gulf Freeway is the Heavyweight champion of the world in never-ending freeway construction.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Luminare said:

I'm still amazed that the Gulf Freeway is still under construction. Can't beat that. Gulf Freeway is the Heavyweight champion of the world in never-ending freeway construction.

I don't know...seems like I35 has been under construction between Waco and San Antonio since my days at Baylor in the mid 80's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2022 at 8:29 PM, Luminare said:

I'm still amazed that the Gulf Freeway is still under construction. Can't beat that. Gulf Freeway is the Heavyweight champion of the world in never-ending freeway construction.

I used to think people were exaggerating, but they were right. There was a brief period in the late 90s and early 00s when it wasn't under construction. Before that, the construction was upgrading the 50s era divided highway between Houston and Galveston to a full freeway from the 60s to the 80s. When that ended, there was widening from Downtown to the Beltway from the 80s to the 90s. Then they started it all over again with the NASA bypass in the mid 00s as the first stage of the ongoing widening from the Beltway to Galveston. When they finish that, the Gulf Freeway will be torn up near Downtown for the NHHIP. They really do get to one end and start tearing up the other end!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/3/2022 at 8:55 PM, JLWM8609 said:

I used to think people were exaggerating, but they were right. There was a brief period in the late 90s and early 00s when it wasn't under construction. Before that, the construction was upgrading the 50s era divided highway between Houston and Galveston to a full freeway from the 60s to the 80s. When that ended, there was widening from Downtown to the Beltway from the 80s to the 90s. Then they started it all over again with the NASA bypass in the mid 00s as the first stage of the ongoing widening from the Beltway to Galveston. When they finish that, the Gulf Freeway will be torn up near Downtown for the NHHIP. They really do get to one end and start tearing up the other end!

A lot of highway construction is just a jobs project.  The last thing that politicians want is thousands of often-unionized construction workers with nothing to do.  The construction and related companies feed the politicians money, and the politicians feed the construction companies things to work on.

Imagine what the state of passenger rail would be today if railroads suckled at the government teat to this degree?  After all, a lack of government contracts is what killed passenger rail in America.  (For those of you too young to remember, just days after the government announced it would move mail haulage from trains to trucks, AT&SF announced the closure of 33 of its 39 passenger routes.)

I'm not saying that Amtrak doesn't benefit from government largess.  But the magnitude is simply not comparable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, editor said:

A lot of highway construction is just a jobs project.  The last thing that politicians want is thousands of often-unionized construction workers with nothing to do.  The construction and related companies feed the politicians money, and the politicians feed the construction companies things to work on.

Well, that's a bit cynical and simplistic to say the least.  How many construction workers in Texas are unionized?  (I honestly don't know, but my guess is not many.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, editor said:

A lot of highway construction is just a jobs project.  The last thing that politicians want is thousands of often-unionized construction workers with nothing to do.  The construction and related companies feed the politicians money, and the politicians feed the construction companies things to work on.

Imagine what the state of passenger rail would be today if railroads suckled at the government teat to this degree?  After all, a lack of government contracts is what killed passenger rail in America.  (For those of you too young to remember, just days after the government announced it would move mail haulage from trains to trucks, AT&SF announced the closure of 33 of its 39 passenger routes.)

I'm not saying that Amtrak doesn't benefit from government largess.  But the magnitude is simply not comparable.

That’s a creative reading of history.  In reality, passengers choosing to drive or fly rather than take trains is what killed passenger service in America.  Suckling on the teat of the  postal contracts kept it alive a little longer it otherwise would have survived.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

That’s a creative reading of history.  In reality, passengers choosing to drive or fly rather than take trains is what killed passenger service in America.  Suckling on the teat of the  postal contracts kept it alive a little longer it otherwise would have survived.

Not creative at all.  It was all completely documented in the media at the time, and in books since then.  The railroads explicitly stated the reason.  It's not like people had to piece things together to come to a conclusion, they were honest about it.

Looking into history, mail contracts are also helped make long-distance stage coaches possible, and the settling of the American west before the railroads.

We allow politicians to funnel our tax money into freeways in the name of commerce, but expect railroads to pay for their own tracks and land.  Then we wonder why railroads struggle.  There's a cognitive disconnect there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, editor said:

Not creative at all.  It was all completely documented in the media at the time, and in books since then.  The railroads explicitly stated the reason.  It's not like people had to piece things together to come to a conclusion, they were honest about it.

It was?  Well if it was "completely documented in the media at the time and in books since then," I'm sure alternative points of views have also been "completely documented."  What do they say?

What is the cost per mile of heavy rail versus freeway?  What is the comparative operating cost?  If one assumes a long-distance national road network is also needed (recall the National Defense Highway System), how much increased federal spending are we talking here?  How would such requirements not result in much reduced access for many communities across the country?

What private sector transportation industry gets continuous substantial federal government subsidy?  How much subsidy (versus user fees paid via gas taxes) does the federal government pay today to maintain the best interstate highway system in the world?

What is the public benefit of railroads versus public roadways vis-a-vis the relative level of investment?

Edited by mattyt36
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, editor said:

Not creative at all.  It was all completely documented in the media at the time, and in books since then.  The railroads explicitly stated the reason.  It's not like people had to piece things together to come to a conclusion, they were honest about it.

I mean, let's also not forget the power of the marketing engine. 

everyone needs a car, even before they needed a car, they were convinced by marketing departments that they needed a car.

at this point, on average, it costs just under $10,000 to own and operate a car in a year. https://www.aaa.com/autorepair/articles/average-annual-cost-of-new-vehicle-ownership

it's not like that number goes down, ever. it just keeps inching higher and higher.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, samagon said:

I mean, let's also not forget the power of the marketing engine. 

everyone needs a car, even before they needed a car, they were convinced by marketing departments that they needed a car.

at this point, on average, it costs just under $10,000 to own and operate a car in a year. https://www.aaa.com/autorepair/articles/average-annual-cost-of-new-vehicle-ownership

it's not like that number goes down, ever. it just keeps inching higher and higher.

What a bunch of brainwashed idiots, eh?  That's certainly not indicative of any legitimate demand.  If only they listened to the self-appointed experts who obviously know what's better for them.  🙄

Edited by mattyt36
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/6/2022 at 9:30 AM, mattyt36 said:

It was?  Well if it was "completely documented in the media at the time and in books since then," I'm sure alternative points of views have also been "completely documented."  What do they say?

What is the cost per mile of heavy rail versus freeway?  What is the comparative operating cost?  If one assumes a long-distance national road network is also needed (recall the National Defense Highway System), how much increased federal spending are we talking here?  How would such requirements not result in much reduced access for many communities across the country?

What private sector transportation industry gets continuous substantial federal government subsidy?  How much subsidy (versus user fees paid via gas taxes) does the federal government pay today to maintain the best interstate highway system in the world?

What is the public benefit of railroads versus public roadways vis-a-vis the relative level of investment?

Your questions are neither new, nor unique.  These were all answered decades ago.  And asking a bunch of questions in a long screed doesn't make you right.  It just demonstrates that you lack knowledge of the topic.

The answers to all of you questions can be found here and here.

I'm not going to do your homework for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, editor said:

Your questions are neither new, nor unique.  These were all answered decades ago.  And asking a bunch of questions in a long screed doesn't make you right.  It just demonstrates that you lack knowledge of the topic.

The answers to all of you questions can be found here and here.

I'm not going to do your homework for you.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

WHOA BOY.

Another person on a discussion forum who . . . doesn't . . . like . . . to . . . discuss . . . and he's the guy who started it all!  Well, the irony is not lost on me.

(❤️ Long live HAIF . . . thank you Ed!)

14 hours ago, editor said:

Your questions are neither new, nor unique.  These were all answered decades ago. 

Very Joel Osteen.

Quote

And asking a bunch of questions in a long screed doesn't make you right. 

Don't think you're the one to lecture me in rhetorical techniques, buddy.  

(I feel obligated to say, "And refusing to even ATTEMPT to answer logical questions doesn't make you right, either," but that's for another day . . . what a dumb thing to say, BTW, surely must have felt better at the time.)

Your argument as presented is:

"Oh those highways, all about the unions and the politicians, they all suck at that government teat"

"BTW, stage coaches"

And, finally, "What I say is true is because of a link to the Houston Public Library and usa.gov."  

Quick check of the card catalog says there are books in there that don't agree with your take.

So, instead of being so emotional, why not engage on the points?

As someone important once wrote, "HAIF is better than that"

Edited by mattyt36
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Quick check of the card catalog says there are books in there that don't agree with your take

You'll forgive me if I choose not to believe that you checked the card catalog.  I say this because the card catalog was taken out years ago.

Quote

Very Joel Osteen

If you say so.  I have no idea what that means.

Quote

Don't think you're the one to lecture me in rhetorical techniques, buddy

Too late.  Then again, I'm not the sort of person who employs emojis as part of my rhetoric.

Quote

So, instead of being so emotional, why not engage on the points?

Because it's off-topic. This thread is about the 610/59 construction.  I'm not interested in taking it any further astray.  If you'd like to start a new thread about it, that's a better idea. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, editor said:

You'll forgive me if I choose not to believe that you checked the card catalog.  I say this because the card catalog was taken out years ago.

If you say so.  I have no idea what that means.

Too late.  Then again, I'm not the sort of person who employs emojis as part of my rhetoric.

Because it's off-topic. This thread is about the 610/59 construction.  I'm not interested in taking it any further astray.  If you'd like to start a new thread about it, that's a better idea. 

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

As my grandmother would say, you're a real hoot and a holler!  Very special, indeed.

8 hours ago, editor said:

You'll forgive me if I choose not to believe that you checked the card catalog.  I say this because the card catalog was taken out years ago.

I'll forgive you for not knowing how to search the HPL card catalog (apologies for my antiquated terms there, Ed . . . it's called a "metaphor").  Since you enlightened me with a very "on-topic" link that gave me great information on how to get a replacement social security card should I ever lose mine, let me do you one better:

Catalog - HPL (sirsi.net)

(I mean, wow . . . amirite?)

8 hours ago, editor said:

Too late.  Then again, I'm not the sort of person who employs emojis as part of my rhetoric.

"You'll forgive me if" I ask the following question: "You have rhetoric?"  Cuz I haven't seen it.  I mean I guess one could describe it as "passive-aggressive," "condescending," "arrogant" . . . but most importantly of all . . . absolutely empty.

You make a sweeping generalization, someone points it out, and you say, "This has all been discussed and the answer is as I say.  And, oh and by the way, let me educate you . . . there are books in the Houston Public Library, but I won't tell you which one explains it all."

I mean, surely you must realize how infantile that is.

But . . . ya . . . just . . . can't . . . engage on the points that you made.  An "I was being simplistic, but I think what I said was the primary theme that got us to where we were today" would be entirely understandable and defensible.  Instead . . . yeah.  Anyway, I certainly can say I see you--and pretty clearly--buddy. 

So, maybe I would ascribe the adjective "prideful" to your rhetoric as well.

8 hours ago, editor said:

Because it's off-topic. This thread is about the 610/59 construction.  I'm not interested in taking it any further astray.  If you'd like to start a new thread about it, that's a better idea. 

It's quite obvious that you do have an interest in taking it further astray.  Why, well, you responded . . . quelle surprise.  Just fish for an ounce of humility and meditate on that for a minute.  And after you meditate on that, you can meditate on the fact that this all started with the comment:

On 5/5/2022 at 5:03 PM, editor said:

A lot of highway construction is just a jobs project.  The last thing that politicians want is thousands of often-unionized construction workers with nothing to do.  The construction and related companies feed the politicians money, and the politicians feed the construction companies things to work on.

Is that particularly "on topic" vis-a-vis the 59-610 interchange construction?  How about your extraordinarily "on-topic" link to usa.gov?  I mean--if anyone has gotten us "off-the-rails" (warning: METAPHOR!), it's you, Ed.

(And, if you want to start a new topic, I'm sure you've got a button or two to do that as a Moderator even more easily than I do.  The added plus is that you--as Moderator--gets to curate what posts go into that thread, which I'm quite confident has to be appealing to your personality.  Sadly, I think this post will end in another outcome altogether because, between the two of us, only one of us can say "Because I said so" as if it's any real justification . . . in fact there's a whole thread to prove that's exactly how you think.)

Edited by mattyt36
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, mattyt36 said:

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

As my grandmother would say, you're a real hoot and a holler!  Very special, indeed.

I'll forgive you for not knowing how to search the HPL card catalog (apologies for my antiquated terms there, Ed . . . it's called a "metaphor").  Since you enlightened me with a very "on-topic" link that gave me great information on how to get a replacement social security card should I ever lose mine, let me do you one better:

Catalog - HPL (sirsi.net)

(I mean, wow . . . amirite?)

"You'll forgive me if" I ask the following question: "You have rhetoric?"  Cuz I haven't seen it.  I mean I guess one could describe it as "passive-aggressive," "condescending," "arrogant" . . . but most importantly of all . . . absolutely empty.

You make a sweeping generalization, someone points it out, and you say, "This has all been discussed and the answer is as I say.  And, oh and by the way, let me educate you . . . there are books in the Houston Public Library, but I won't tell you which one explains it all."

I mean, surely you must realize how infantile that is.

But . . . ya . . . just . . . can't . . . engage on the points that you made.  An "I was being simplistic, but I think what I said was the primary theme that got us to where we were today" would be entirely understandable and defensible.  Instead . . . yeah.  Anyway, I certainly can say I see you--and pretty clearly--buddy. 

So, maybe I would ascribe the adjective "prideful" to your rhetoric as well.

It's quite obvious that you do have an interest in taking it further astray.  Why, well, you responded . . . quelle surprise.  Just fish for an ounce of humility and meditate on that for a minute.  And after you meditate on that, you can meditate on the fact that this all started with the comment:

Is that particularly "on topic" vis-a-vis the 59-610 interchange construction?  How about your extraordinarily "on-topic" link to usa.gov?  I mean--if anyone has gotten us "off-the-rails" (warning: METAPHOR!), it's you, Ed.

(And, if you want to start a new topic, I'm sure you've got a button or two to do that as a Moderator even more easily than I do.  The added plus is that you--as Moderator--gets to curate what posts go into that thread, which I'm quite confident has to be appealing to your personality.  Sadly, I think this post will end in another outcome altogether because, between the two of us, only one of us can say "Because I said so" as if it's any real justification . . . in fact there's a whole thread to prove that's exactly how you think.)

As the kids say: tl;dr.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2022 at 8:44 AM, samagon said:

59SB to 610SB is going to be closed starting this weekend, and should be expected to stay closed until the project is completed in 2 years.

 

 

2 years for this ramp and the two 610 bridge spans that go over 59...

They know exactly how much this will affect traffic, that this will cause accidents and probably cost a few lives directly or indirectly, and we all know they can build this in a fraction of that time. I wonder if they'll still be working on the 610 SB to 59 SB ramp when they're finished here.

It's just unbelievable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...