Jump to content

Metro moving toward $3B bond vote for 20-year transit plan


BeerNut

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Toopicky said:

 

Note the an earlier comment  that stated that a lot of extra money was spent on the Post Oak corridor besides that of Metro so that it will appeal to the area's potential ridership .... that type of money will not be available. Add in the fact that half of it will be non-stop on elevated express lanes without stops and you will get a different experience than what is being proposed

 

I said once installed it won't be upgraded (i.e. to something better than BRT to LRT as some have suggested). Once transportation infrastructure is in place it tends to remain in place for a substantial amount of time, otherwise the people who pushed it look foolish. The "40 years" is an estimate....

 

No doubt the uptown brt will be the top end of what eventually gets built here.  I think your "estimate" is on the high side, though.  Was that just hyperbole or based on something relevant? 

 

I'm still curious where you rode brt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 187
  • Created
  • Last Reply
40 minutes ago, Toopicky said:

 

In Asia and in Europe when I was living/working there so I got the full, everyday experience

 

Where specifically?  I have no basis for comparison on what we're about to get as far as brt goes and want to take a remote look at what you're talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, august948 said:

 

I don't know what you have against trees and buffalo bayou, but that won't be necessary.  We already have the freeway routes.  Those routes are already fairly well concreted in with the feeder roads, adjacent parking and other infrastructure so we'll be adding about .00000000000001% to the existing concrete surface of the city.  For that we'd get maximum mobility for the residents of the greater Houston area.  You could drive to a P&R in Katy and take an express bus (or maybe eventually trains running in the middle of the HOV) to major points in the city, and then switch over to a local bus/light rail/bikeshare/uber/whatever for the final mile.

 

I haven't ridden brt yet.   I'll drive to the galleria to try it out when they get it done.

 

Where did you ride the brt that s*cked so bad it hadn't been upgraded in 40 years?

 

lol what about on 59 in the montose area? Lets say you're gonna say there is space for 1 more lane in each direction, ok after that 1 lane, what are we gonna do? You were also saying in another post that we should expand more highways like i10 that expand from one highway to the next, 610 in the galleria area is literally bounded by memorial park on one portion, and feeder roads in other sections DIRECTLY next to building (no adjacent parking). So, what should we do there? Just remove the feeders all together and expand the highway? The whole "just expand the highway" thought process is so stone aged. i10 is literally "the world's largest freeway" and its STILL one of the most congested highways in Texas. Like how much more proof do we need. This is literally the 4th largest city in America with a metro population of ~7,000,000 and you want everyone to take the freeway? Do you realize all the headache that even comes with expanding the highways i610/i59 feeder is taking 6 years, they already cut down portions of 59 to 3 lanes. In 6 years it will still be the same amount of lanes north/south bound, just an extra lane going from one highway to another :). oooooo no my favorite case is 290. Its been 10 years of nightmare traffic and under construction to "expand the highway" and guess what, traffic hasn't change. :) you know why :) the population has increased :) so it's almost as if traffic was the same before traffic. One would have thought we'd learned our lesion from i10, 290, or even the new mess in 610, but no let's put all the highways under construction and expand them :). It would literally take 60+ years for your idea to happen and all for +1-2 lanes? And no LRT/ BRT isn't the same, you can take ANOTHER road and that street construction. No one is telling you guys to ride the proposed LRT/ BRT, its not always about you. Lets consider a rail from uptown to downtown, lets say 500+ people ride that rail a day, lets say even say 100+ (for those who think no one will ride it), thats 100 cars OFF of the freeway! And when the population increases even more, more people along those rails will consider it using it to avoid the highways. Lastly, have you guys compared traffic along the rail in midtown to traffic along the west side of town like Richmond/ Westheimer/ Hillcroft/ Kirby/ etc (we can go all day), I work in the midtown area and its NOTHING compared to the west side! I can literally right a book of all the reasons we need to expand rail, but you guys are so sold on the idea of HIGHWAY HIGHWAY HIGHWAY; we've tried it and its not working, consider being open minded (I know its SOOOO HARD) and look at other options

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, bobruss said:

Republicans and Bob Lanier, have been responsible for transportation failure in Harris County.

Delay, Culberson and now the Rep. party saying vote no. Yet there only solutions are build more 25 -30 lane freeways just like I-10, which is now just about as crowded as it was before reconstruction. Metro even asked For room before construction and Culberson said hell no.

 

I-10 may be as crowded as it was before, but it carries about twice as many cars, so that's a bad comparison.

 

18 hours ago, X.R. said:

 

Lanier's Wiki page had this as one of this core philosophies: "That his administration had to improve the city’s infrastructure, particularly the inner city, and bring it to the level of the more affluent suburbs."

 

I was too young to remember him at all. But that is funny. Downtown musta been real rough in the early to mid 90s. 

Downtown was sort of cool then because it was easy to drive or walk around and see things. Main was one of my favorite streets to drive, with some great buildings, variety of sights, and ease of getting from one end to the other.

 

Midtown was pretty much a ghost area. I think the 1990 census said that about 1000 people lived there. That's practically deserted. Development there was stifled for a long time due to sewer capacity issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, august948 said:

I haven't ridden brt yet.   I'll drive to the galleria to try it out when they get it done.

 

Where did you ride the brt that s*cked so bad it hadn't been upgraded in 40 years?

 

If you want to try it out, San Antonio (Primo) and Austin (Capital Metro line) have BRT. Austin's BRT sucks because its out of sync with other buses, because it is so "rapid" the timing is off with other buses. Also, it doesn't link up to other popular bus stations, so its almost like an isolated rail line. As a people mover, its great, but as a piece of their public transit, it kinda sucks. Once you take it in Austin (its true BRT, with ability to change lights) you understand why its likened to rail. The traffic it used to cause at like 2pm when the driver changed a light was greeeeat (not really). This coming from a person who used to take it cause I worked in the Austin downtown metro area.

 

At least Houston is doing it right(?) because that BRT will take to you a bus station where you can easily catch other buses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ross said:

 

I-10 may be as crowded as it was before, but it carries about twice as many cars, so that's a bad comparison.

 

I mean, yeah, it's great that people have the option to live out in different cities and even counties so they don't have to help fund our rotting infrastructure through property tax. it's been a real win for Houston.

 

I suppose you support people who don't live in COH paying a congestion charge to drive on city streets?

 

Quote

 

Midtown was pretty much a ghost area. I think the 1990 census said that about 1000 people lived there. That's practically deserted. Development there was stifled for a long time due to sewer capacity issues.

 

and development there has practically soared since the red line has been fully established.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Amlaham said:

 

lol what about on 59 in the montose area? Lets say you're gonna say there is space for 1 more lane in each direction, ok after that 1 lane, what are we gonna do? You were also saying in another post that we should expand more highways like i10 that expand from one highway to the next, 610 in the galleria area is literally bounded by memorial park on one portion, and feeder roads in other sections DIRECTLY next to building (no adjacent parking). So, what should we do there? Just remove the feeders all together and expand the highway? The whole "just expand the highway" thought process is so stone aged. i10 is literally "the world's largest freeway" and its STILL one of the most congested highways in Texas. Like how much more proof do we need. This is literally the 4th largest city in America with a metro population of ~7,000,000 and you want everyone to take the freeway? Do you realize all the headache that even comes with expanding the highways i610/i59 feeder is taking 6 years, they already cut down portions of 59 to 3 lanes. In 6 years it will still be the same amount of lanes north/south bound, just an extra lane going from one highway to another :). oooooo no my favorite case is 290. Its been 10 years of nightmare traffic and under construction to "expand the highway" and guess what, traffic hasn't change. :) you know why :) the population has increased :) so it's almost as if traffic was the same before traffic. One would have thought we'd learned our lesion from i10, 290, or even the new mess in 610, but no let's put all the highways under construction and expand them :). It would literally take 60+ years for your idea to happen and all for +1-2 lanes? And no LRT/ BRT isn't the same, you can take ANOTHER road and that street construction. No one is telling you guys to ride the proposed LRT/ BRT, its not always about you. Lets consider a rail from uptown to downtown, lets say 500+ people ride that rail a day, lets say even say 100+ (for those who think no one will ride it), thats 100 cars OFF of the freeway! And when the population increases even more, more people along those rails will consider it using it to avoid the highways. Lastly, have you guys compared traffic along the rail in midtown to traffic along the west side of town like Richmond/ Westheimer/ Hillcroft/ Kirby/ etc (we can go all day), I work in the midtown area and its NOTHING compared to the west side! I can literally right a book of all the reasons we need to expand rail, but you guys are so sold on the idea of HIGHWAY HIGHWAY HIGHWAY; we've tried it and its not working, consider being open minded (I know its SOOOO HARD) and look at other options

 

 

Not a problem....

 

20131216__roaddeck1.jpg?w=600

 

I know you may not like to hear this but we're going to need a "all of the above" solution as long as the metro area continues to rapidly rise in population.  You'll note in my post that I included brt and lrt in the possible solution and didn't say anything about not having brt or rail elsewhere as well.  What we need is a  whole region solution that's realistic.  People are not going to all sell their suburban homes and move into mid-town highrises and shouldn't be unduly punished for not adapting to someone else's lifestyle.  Our hov system is completely disconnected.  You can ride it for a while and then get dumped back into the mainlanes.  It would be much more efficient from a public transport standpoint to have hov that can move people anywhere in the city and then connect to local bus/brt/lrt to take them to their final destination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, samagon said:

 

I mean, yeah, it's great that people have the option to live out in different cities and even counties so they don't have to help fund our rotting infrastructure through property tax. it's been a real win for Houston.

 

I suppose you support people who don't live in COH paying a congestion charge to drive on city streets?

 

 

and development there has practically soared since the red line has been fully established.

 

 

Well, another solution would be to make is so difficult to commute in the city that employers just move out to the surrounding cities.  If we're going to do that, we should go all the way and gut the inner loop of large employers and level most of downtown so we can turn it into parkland and/or entertainment centers.  Then people would only need to come into the city for fun and not for work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, august948 said:

 

Well, another solution would be to make is so difficult to commute in the city that employers just move out to the surrounding cities.  If we're going to do that, we should go all the way and gut the inner loop of large employers and level most of downtown so we can turn it into parkland and/or entertainment centers.  Then people would only need to come into the city for fun and not for work.

I suppose moving people to the suburbs so they don't contribute to infrastructure upkeep is step one there.

 

Exxon is at the lead of the curve here.

 

so I'm glad to hear we're on track with your plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, samagon said:

I suppose moving people to the suburbs so they don't contribute to infrastructure upkeep is step one there.

 

Exxon is at the lead of the curve here.

 

so I'm glad to hear we're on track with your plan.

 

Not my plan...just pointing out that if you make it hard to commute people aren't all just going to sell their houses and move to mid-town (and would you want that anyway?)

 

You have a point in terms of who pays for the infrastructure, but I was of the understanding that freeways are mostly paid for by the federal government and/or the state of Texas.  Either way, residents outside the city would be contributing to it (as would residents of other states if we could ever get back our share of the federal tax dollars we send out of state).  Seems like the current solution is to build as toll roads anyway so that would be a way for non-COH residents to pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, august948 said:

 

Not my plan...just pointing out that if you make it hard to commute people aren't all just going to sell their houses and move to mid-town (and would you want that anyway?)

 

You have a point in terms of who pays for the infrastructure, but I was of the understanding that freeways are mostly paid for by the federal government and/or the state of Texas.  Either way, residents outside the city would be contributing to it (as would residents of other states if we could ever get back our share of the federal tax dollars we send out of state).  Seems like the current solution is to build as toll roads anyway so that would be a way for non-COH residents to pay.

 

Ross was saying that the expansion of the freeway was a success. but for who? for COH and infrastructure that is not an interstate highway, it is not a success.

 

that is to say, city streets that have potholes, etc all these things that people who live out katy help create through use, but don't help to maintain. How exactly does Ross see that as a success?

 

this bond to expand and make METRO service better will help to make local connectivity better, so it actually will help make the city more enticing as a living solution. allowing them to entice people to live here, and ultimately, keep jobs here. 

 

I am curious, why would you think having more people living in Midtown would be a bad thing? as tax rates can't change, the only way to get more revenue into the city for maintenance and projects to make the city better is by increased property values, so yeah, density is the only answer we really have to keep our city solvent.

 

So yeah, as a resident of the city, and someone who wants to see the city prosper, I personally would be happy to see more people living in midtown, in the east end, and other areas that have the infrastructure in place right now to handle increased density.

 

not to mention, I'd love to see more money going to HISD to make that system better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, august948 said:

 

Not a problem....

 

20131216__roaddeck1.jpg?w=600

 

I know you may not like to hear this but we're going to need a "all of the above" solution as long as the metro area continues to rapidly rise in population.  You'll note in my post that I included brt and lrt in the possible solution and didn't say anything about not having brt or rail elsewhere as well.  What we need is a  whole region solution that's realistic.  People are not going to all sell their suburban homes and move into mid-town highrises and shouldn't be unduly punished for not adapting to someone else's lifestyle.  Our hov system is completely disconnected.  You can ride it for a while and then get dumped back into the mainlanes.  It would be much more efficient from a public transport standpoint to have hov that can move people anywhere in the city and then connect to local bus/brt/lrt to take them to their final destination.

Thats a nice BRIDGE, are you saying we should stack the highways?! lollllllll ok now what happens when they get off the highway 😭 should we stack up the feeders and local roads too when theres an INSANE amount of cars coming off a stacked highway? What do you mean "unduly punished for not adapting to someone else's lifestyle?" We literally have the world's largest highway going out to suburbs. Your statement makes it VERY clear that you're being selfish and worried about OUTIDE of Houston. You're so worried about the suburbs, and getting from Katy to Downtown Houston with less traffic (ignoring all the heaches that would come with building a DOUBLE HIGHWAY LMAO). Also Katy's population for example ~18,000 people, vs 2.3 million in Houston but yeah 😪 those poor people, they shouldn't have to sacrifice living 30 miles outside of the city AND deal with traffic, OMG THEE AGONY. I think you're forgetting something bud, Metro is in charge of PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION NOT HIGHWAYS. Also metro isn't in charge Sugar Land, Katy, Pearland, I mean the list goes on. It's literally public transportion for the CITY and you're worried about your suburban life being affected by not expanding the already obnoxious highways that literally rip through the middle OUR city. Have you thought about the people living near the Highways in Houston? You think its okay to have the highway EVEN CLOSER to our homes just to accommodate for people who aren't even in OUR city? Worried about traffic reaching out "into the suburbs" maybe try reaching out to YOUR suburb/ city/ town and establish their own bonds or whatever. Now I know im coming off anti-Hwy, but thats not true, the highway systems that we have is perfect for our city size, HOWEVER, it now time to show parts of transportation! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Amlaham said:

Thats a nice BRIDGE, are you saying we should stack the highways?! lollllllll ok now what happens when they get off the highway 😭 should we stack up the feeders and local roads too when theres an INSANE amount of cars coming off a stacked highway? What do you mean "unduly punished for not adapting to someone else's lifestyle?" We literally have the world's largest highway going out to suburbs. Your statement makes it VERY clear that you're being selfish and worried about OUTIDE of Houston. You're so worried about the suburbs, and getting from Katy to Downtown Houston with less traffic (ignoring all the heaches that would come with building a DOUBLE HIGHWAY LMAO). Also Katy's population for example ~18,000 people, vs 2.3 million in Houston but yeah 😪 those poor people, they shouldn't have to sacrifice living 30 miles outside of the city AND deal with traffic, OMG THEE AGONY. I think you're forgetting something bud, Metro is in charge of PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION NOT HIGHWAYS. Also metro isn't in charge Sugar Land, Katy, Pearland, I mean the list goes on. It's literally public transportion for the CITY and you're worried about your suburban life being affected by not expanding the already obnoxious highways that literally rip through the middle OUR city. Have you thought about the people living near the Highways in Houston? You think its okay to have the highway EVEN CLOSER to our homes just to accommodate for people who aren't even in OUR city? Worried about traffic reaching out "into the suburbs" maybe try reaching out to YOUR suburb/ city/ town and establish their own bonds or whatever. Now I know im coming off anti-Hwy, but thats not true, the highway systems that we have is perfect for our city size, HOWEVER, it now time to show parts of transportation! 

 

Informational note -- there are 300,000+ folks in the Katy ISD boundaries. That 18K number you cite is for the City of Katy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, samagon said:

 

Ross was saying that the expansion of the freeway was a success. but for who? for COH and infrastructure that is not an interstate highway, it is not a success.

 

that is to say, city streets that have potholes, etc all these things that people who live out katy help create through use, but don't help to maintain. How exactly does Ross see that as a success?

 

this bond to expand and make METRO service better will help to make local connectivity better, so it actually will help make the city more enticing as a living solution. allowing them to entice people to live here, and ultimately, keep jobs here. 

 

I am curious, why would you think having more people living in Midtown would be a bad thing? as tax rates can't change, the only way to get more revenue into the city for maintenance and projects to make the city better is by increased property values, so yeah, density is the only answer we really have to keep our city solvent.

 

So yeah, as a resident of the city, and someone who wants to see the city prosper, I personally would be happy to see more people living in midtown, in the east end, and other areas that have the infrastructure in place right now to handle increased density.

 

not to mention, I'd love to see more money going to HISD to make that system better.

 

You'll have to ask Ross to defend Ross's posts.  Also being a resident of the city, I'm planning to vote yes for the metro bond particularly since it's finally expanding service in a serious way beyond the loop.  My point here is that we need an "all of the above" solution that includes freeway expansion and particularly hov connectivity also.  I'd even put the hov connectivity first if full katy-freeway expansion isn't feasible.

 

More people are already going to be living in midtown, so no worries there.  But would you want everyone to move inside the loop?  If not, then you have to look at the bigger picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Amlaham said:

Thats a nice BRIDGE, are you saying we should stack the highways?! lollllllll ok now what happens when they get off the highway 😭 should we stack up the feeders and local roads too when theres an INSANE amount of cars coming off a stacked highway? What do you mean "unduly punished for not adapting to someone else's lifestyle?" We literally have the world's largest highway going out to suburbs. Your statement makes it VERY clear that you're being selfish and worried about OUTIDE of Houston. You're so worried about the suburbs, and getting from Katy to Downtown Houston with less traffic (ignoring all the heaches that would come with building a DOUBLE HIGHWAY LMAO). Also Katy's population for example ~18,000 people, vs 2.3 million in Houston but yeah 😪 those poor people, they shouldn't have to sacrifice living 30 miles outside of the city AND deal with traffic, OMG THEE AGONY. I think you're forgetting something bud, Metro is in charge of PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION NOT HIGHWAYS. Also metro isn't in charge Sugar Land, Katy, Pearland, I mean the list goes on. It's literally public transportion for the CITY and you're worried about your suburban life being affected by not expanding the already obnoxious highways that literally rip through the middle OUR city. Have you thought about the people living near the Highways in Houston? You think its okay to have the highway EVEN CLOSER to our homes just to accommodate for people who aren't even in OUR city? Worried about traffic reaching out "into the suburbs" maybe try reaching out to YOUR suburb/ city/ town and establish their own bonds or whatever. Now I know im coming off anti-Hwy, but thats not true, the highway systems that we have is perfect for our city size, HOWEVER, it now time to show parts of transportation! 

 

I'm saying that is a possible solution in places were there isn't enough real estate for lateral expansion.  And, yes, we'll have to work out the on ramps and off ramps as best we can. 

 

It seems that perhaps you've never been outside the loop.  The vast majority of the ~7 million or so residents of the metro area live outside the loop.  And that's not going to change.  The biggest transportation problem we have isn't getting around inside the loop.  It's getting people into the city on weekday mornings and getting them out on weekday afternoons. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Toopicky said:

 

It looks like the San Francisco Bay Bridge ..... easy to do when you don't have any exits except at the end.

 

 

It is.  The point is that if we have the technology to do this over water, we can also do this on dry land where it is needed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, august948 said:

 

I'm saying that is a possible solution in places were there isn't enough real estate for lateral expansion.  And, yes, we'll have to work out the on ramps and off ramps as best we can. 

 

It seems that perhaps you've never been outside the loop.  The vast majority of the ~7 million or so residents of the metro area live outside the loop.  And that's not going to change.  The biggest transportation problem we have isn't getting around inside the loop.  It's getting people into the city on weekday mornings and getting them out on weekday afternoons

 

 

I'm fully on board, the thing of it is, our elected officials that represent us need to start singing a different tune. wider freeways and more lanes is not the solution.

 

I don't think you believe bigger freeways is the answer, I'm just saying that there are better options in general, we just have to take steps to get our elected officials to understand that. voting the bad eggs out of office is a step in the right direction.

 

if sprawl is the answer, then people that travel in and out daily using the services they don't pay for, there needs to be a mechanism in place for them to contribute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, samagon said:

 

I'm fully on board, the thing of it is, our elected officials that represent us need to start singing a different tune. wider freeways and more lanes is not the solution.

 

I don't think you believe bigger freeways is the answer, I'm just saying that there are better options in general, we just have to take steps to get our elected officials to understand that. voting the bad eggs out of office is a step in the right direction.

 

if sprawl is the answer, then people that travel in and out daily using the services they don't pay for, there needs to be a mechanism in place for them to contribute.

 

Wider (or let's say higher capacity) freeways with more lanes, particularly hov lanes, is a big part of the solution.  But not just if you throw them up willy-nilly without thinking through the bottlenecks and connections with other freeways.  The ideal is to get everyone where they need to go in the minimum amount of time.  Due to the distributed nature of residences and employers a fixed guideway system isn't going to get you there by itself.  That's fine for dense areas with high traffic between fixed locations but doesn't work as well in the distributed environment we live in.  We really should get network engineers involved in this because we're dealing with a packet switching situation.

 

Totally agree on voting bad eggs out of office.  The problem is not everyone agrees on who the bad eggs are and sometimes the good eggs go bad.  But, that's an entirely different discussion.

 

Sprawl is the reality.  How we get an integrated system with everyone contributing to the solution is the problem we need to solve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Article in today's WSJ regarding the latest Census data showing that Millennials continue to leave big cities. Anyways, the featured comment in the comment section was from a Houston woman who recently left NYC. 

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/millennials-continue-to-leave-big-cities-11569470460

 

Quote

I left NYC and moved to Houston. From one big town to another big town, but in this big town public schools are great in the neighborhood I chose to live, I don't pay city nor state taxes, house prices are 1/3 the price of NYC (rent too), and finally my commute is excellent, 15/20 minutes BY CAR and not cramped like a sardine in an old railcar. 
.
I COULDN'T BE HAPPIER! 

 

 

I think some of you truly don't understand how -excellent- the commutes are in Houston compared to other big cities. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, samagon said:

 

I mean, yeah, it's great that people have the option to live out in different cities and even counties so they don't have to help fund our rotting infrastructure through property tax. it's been a real win for Houston.

 

I suppose you support people who don't live in COH paying a congestion charge to drive on city streets?

 

 

and development there has practically soared since the red line has been fully established.

 

 

There's no provision in State law to allow congestion charges except on variable rate tollways. Houston can't just implement random charges on its own. Houston collects a ton of sales taxes in the suburbs through the limited purpose annexations, which helps pay for roadwork. The State also pays to maintain some of the roads.

 

Where would you suggest all those people in the Western suburbs live?

 

Midtown was doing just fine with growth before the rail construction screwed things up for 2+ years. We lived in Midtown during the rail construction, and suffered through the negative impacts the entire time. Rail stopped all MIdtown development for some time, along with putting a number of Downtown businesses out of business, and making it hard to cross from West to East. Rail isn't the panacea you think it is.

 

8 hours ago, samagon said:

I suppose moving people to the suburbs so they don't contribute to infrastructure upkeep is step one there.

 

Exxon is at the lead of the curve here.

 

so I'm glad to hear we're on track with your plan.

 

Nice to kbnow you approve of companies moving to areas that help reduce traffic in town.

 

8 hours ago, samagon said:

 

Ross was saying that the expansion of the freeway was a success. but for who? for COH and infrastructure that is not an interstate highway, it is not a success.

 

that is to say, city streets that have potholes, etc all these things that people who live out katy help create through use, but don't help to maintain. How exactly does Ross see that as a success?

 

this bond to expand and make METRO service better will help to make local connectivity better, so it actually will help make the city more enticing as a living solution. allowing them to entice people to live here, and ultimately, keep jobs here. 

 

I am curious, why would you think having more people living in Midtown would be a bad thing? as tax rates can't change, the only way to get more revenue into the city for maintenance and projects to make the city better is by increased property values, so yeah, density is the only answer we really have to keep our city solvent.

 

So yeah, as a resident of the city, and someone who wants to see the city prosper, I personally would be happy to see more people living in midtown, in the east end, and other areas that have the infrastructure in place right now to handle increased density.

 

not to mention, I'd love to see more money going to HISD to make that system better.

 

The streets aren't that bad, and the folks from the suburbs don't contribute much to wear and tear, since most of them are going to Downtown, the Galleria area, etc, adn aren't driving around much on surface streets.

 

Regardless of rail, buses, retail, and such, very few of the people who live in the suburbs are going to move into town. They don't want to live in dense areas, they want single family homes with yards, garages, space for a pool, space for a dog, and the perception of better schools.

 

The City can't do anything to help HISD directly. HISD has been forced to give money to the State through recapture the past few years, and hasn't received a dime of State money during that period. HISD can use more money, but that requires action from the Legislature, and isn't going to happen soon. I have a kid in HISD, and am very familiar with what's going on.

 

City tax rates actually can change. They've been going down to keep property tax revenues below the cap. All that increased property values do is change the distribution of taxes across properties, the total amount stays close to the same as the previous year. If total property values go up by 10%, the tax rate has to drop to keep revenue to no more than about 104% of the prior year.

 

The Katy Freeway expansion was a success in that almost twice as many people are carried than before the expansion, allowing all of those people to get into town for work in a reasonable amount of time. Given the political impossibility of putting rail in to Katy, it's as good a solution as any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

16 hours ago, Ross said:

Nice to kbnow you approve of companies moving to areas that help reduce traffic in town.

 

not at all. that's a lot of tax dollars the city won't see for all sorts of services.

 

16 hours ago, Ross said:

 

The streets aren't that bad, and the folks from the suburbs don't contribute much to wear and tear, since most of them are going to Downtown, the Galleria area, etc, adn aren't driving around much on surface streets.

 

streets are the most visible way they contribute to use. potholes aren't the only way they contribute negatively. sit in traffic on Eldridge? wish it could be wider? too bad most of the people driving on it aren't paying taxes to use it. not to mention the more hidden ways they stress a system in which they have limited monetary contribution. police, fire, ems. they use these services even if none of us see them being 'used'.

 

16 hours ago, Ross said:

Regardless of rail, buses, retail, and such, very few of the people who live in the suburbs are going to move into town. They don't want to live in dense areas, they want single family homes with yards, garages, space for a pool, space for a dog, and the perception of better schools.

 

source?

 

16 hours ago, Ross said:

The City can't do anything to help HISD directly. HISD has been forced to give money to the State through recapture the past few years, and hasn't received a dime of State money during that period. HISD can use more money, but that requires action from the Legislature, and isn't going to happen soon. I have a kid in HISD, and am very familiar with what's going on.

 

City tax rates actually can change. They've been going down to keep property tax revenues below the cap. All that increased property values do is change the distribution of taxes across properties, the total amount stays close to the same as the previous year. If total property values go up by 10%, the tax rate has to drop to keep revenue to no more than about 104% of the prior year.

 

The Katy Freeway expansion was a success in that almost twice as many people are carried than before the expansion, allowing all of those people to get into town for work in a reasonable amount of time. Given the political impossibility of putting rail in to Katy, it's as good a solution as any.

 

and double the pollution for all of us to breath. 

 

as far as political impossibility, it is only politically impossible because people like yourself say exactly what you say, that you can't make a difference so why even try.

 

I suspect you don't actually think rail is a good idea at all, otherwise you wouldn't say a wider freeway is a good solution.

 

anyway, if you truly do believe that public transit is good, then go vote for it. if politicians see an overwhelmingly positive response to public transit funding, they'll get the hint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, samagon said:

 

 

 

not at all. that's a lot of tax dollars the city won't see for all sorts of services.

 

 

streets are the most visible way they contribute to use. potholes aren't the only way they contribute negatively. sit in traffic on Eldridge? wish it could be wider? too bad most of the people driving on it aren't paying taxes to use it. not to mention the more hidden ways they stress a system in which they have limited monetary contribution. police, fire, ems. they use these services even if none of us see them being 'used'.

 

 

source?

 

 

and double the pollution for all of us to breath. 

 

as far as political impossibility, it is only politically impossible because people like yourself say exactly what you say, that you can't make a difference so why even try.

 

I suspect you don't actually think rail is a good idea at all, otherwise you wouldn't say a wider freeway is a good solution.

 

anyway, if you truly do believe that public transit is good, then go vote for it. if politicians see an overwhelmingly positive response to public transit funding, they'll get the hint.

 

My goodness, I could swear I pay Harris County taxes even though I receive very few services in an unincorporated part of the county. Jog on with your critique of commuters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, samagon said:

 

 

 

not at all. that's a lot of tax dollars the city won't see for all sorts of services.

 

 

streets are the most visible way they contribute to use. potholes aren't the only way they contribute negatively. sit in traffic on Eldridge? wish it could be wider? too bad most of the people driving on it aren't paying taxes to use it. not to mention the more hidden ways they stress a system in which they have limited monetary contribution. police, fire, ems. they use these services even if none of us see them being 'used'.

 

 

 

Eldridge is probably not the best example.  The busiest part (between Westheimer and I10 is fully inside the COH as are the subdivisions on both sides, some of the traffic is going to be from local residents (like me) who pay taxes to COH and the rest are going to be mostly working at the energy corridor employers who are also paying taxes to COH.  That said, the big employers could be paying more but that's a problem with how appraisals are done in Texas.

 

1 hour ago, samagon said:

source?

 

 

I don't know that you would need a specific source on this.  People vote with their feet and wallets and the result is out there for everyone to see.

 

1 hour ago, samagon said:

and double the pollution for all of us to breath. 

 

Electric cars are coming.

 

1 hour ago, samagon said:

as far as political impossibility, it is only politically impossible because people like yourself say exactly what you say, that you can't make a difference so why even try.

 

I suspect you don't actually think rail is a good idea at all, otherwise you wouldn't say a wider freeway is a good solution.

 

anyway, if you truly do believe that public transit is good, then go vote for it. if politicians see an overwhelmingly positive response to public transit funding, they'll get the hint.

 

It shouldn't be an either/or but a both solution.  Higher capacity freeways/hov lanes AND public transit options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2019 at 2:53 PM, august948 said:

Eldridge is probably not the best example.  The busiest part (between Westheimer and I10 is fully inside the COH as are the subdivisions on both sides, some of the traffic is going to be from local residents (like me) who pay taxes to COH and the rest are going to be mostly working at the energy corridor employers who are also paying taxes to COH.  That said, the big employers could be paying more but that's a problem with how appraisals are done in Texas.

 

perhaps, I don't live on that side of town anymore (ironically, because traffic was horrible).

 

Quote

I don't know that you would need a specific source on this.  People vote with their feet and wallets and the result is out there for everyone to see.

 

I do. I know many people who chose to live in Katy. Density had nothing to do with the choice. Ironically, most of them wished they were closer to things.

 

While this is hardly a scientific study, that's a bold claim considering everything I know from talking to people says something completely different.

 

Quote

Electric cars are coming.

 

Sure they are, but have you looked at projections on when they are going to be 50% of the cars on the road?

 

2040. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/15/business/electric-car-outlook-bloomberg/index.html

 

most of us will be retirement age. perhaps we'll be retired with COPD thanks to all the extra cars the katy freeway can hold.

 

Quote

It shouldn't be an either/or but a both solution.  Higher capacity freeways/hov lanes AND public transit options.

 

 

I am going to look for an article I found a while back, but it linked to a study that had stated that if you reduced the number of vehicles on a road by 10% that traffic naturally reduces by about 40%. basically, taking a few cars off the road makes a huge difference.

 

What I'm suggesting is, if you build a better public transit system, you don't need higher capacity than we have. I just need to find the source.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...