mattyt36

Ohhhhhh Sammy please know I wear your blocking as a badge of honor. It's also invigorating each and every time you bring it up, as I just love to know how much I have "stuck" with you, especially considering the number of others on here who see the exact same thing in terms of your hollow rhetoric. I'll be presumptuous and ask on their behalf as well as mine, "Tell us--what exactly do we not understand?" Enlighten us. All that's been presented is: -You're against it because you fancy yourself an "urbanist" (OK, fine, I guess that's level 1 of an argument--it usually boils down to something like, "Man, I went to Philadelphia and they have a train to the airport!" Or "New Yorkers get around with a car, why can't we?" Or "Man, Europe has trains, and aren't they great"--all true of course, but maybe the next time you're in New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, DC, San Francisco, etc. take a drive around the suburbs and tell me how really different they are, at the end of the day, from Houston's) -Why don't we just build trains? (I'm certainly not against it, but please explain your theory of how this is practical given the current composition of State government, not to mention all of the local governments, who residents think that the City of Houston is Fallujah Lite thanks to the local media and Republican political candidates. Also, please cite a single example of a modern transit system that has been built in the U.S. that had material impacts on constraining suburban and exurban development--there isn't one because they don't exist!) -It's going to destroy neighborhoods (this is the 1960s anti-highway cosplay here--the argument is absurd in scale--we're not talking about ramming a highway through thousands of houses in Fells Point here) -It's going to disproportionately affect low income and minority residents (I guess so, but this is not a function of "evil government" going into a wholly intact minority/low income neighborhood and slashing and burning as they did with the first generation of highways--this is a function of where the existing right of way is and what land uses are like along the existing right of way) -It's only going to lead to more VMT (well, yeah, that's the point) -It's only going to lead to more congestion (well, I'd say regional population growth and continued suburban development is more of the culprit there--call me when the State of Texas allows for extra-jurisdictional development cordons) -It's going to increase emissions (not as much of an issue in the long-term as it has been in the past thanks to EVs) In any case, I believe the substance of your argument boiled down to the personal inconvenience of a long construction period. On 5/17/2022, I in fact stated that I totally "understood" such a position as reasonable: "Understanding" does not mean "agree with." What you have never--not once--addressed or substantively responded to (nor has @Texasota here, whose criticism is that one's "refusal to accept that other people actually disagree with [one] is a truly stunning level of narcissism" while also calling people "freeway fetishists"--man, irony is completely lost on some people, isn't it?--it's, shall we say, truly stunning, in fact) is this idea because you are personally opposed to the project that that somehow should automatically result in its cancellation, its redesign, reprogramming of funds to other projects, etc. The myopia is astounding. We somehow have to consider the opinions of the less than 5K people directly affected (many of whom have already moved!) while putting aside the opinions of literally millions of others who are also affected. You continue to insist to pick from a menu of options that do not exist. This is a political process. The fact of the matter is there is very little political opposition to the project. And what little there is is totally incoherent. If you disagree with how the State of Texas funds or designs highways, then maybe an effective political campaign would start there, not at the eleventh hour after an almost 20-year process. Trust me, I'd sign up if it was internally logical and not some circus of entirely misguided progressive protests (that, I still hold were probably being done on the dime of, and at the behest of, very moneyed political interests). I've said before this "freeway fetishist" lives in a household of 2, with 1 car, now 7 years old, with a whopping 32K miles on it. I'm sure Sammy drives circles around me every day on his never-ending quest to stand up for the "little man" himself. (Also, my pronouns are he/him, not they/their, but I'm happy to use that for you in the future Sammy, if you like. I know you have a tendency to project.)

Trust me, I have no illusions about people disagreeing with me. What's narcissistic is to think that because a small subset of people are opposed to freeways, that policy decisions should be made that way. In your words, "the refusal to accept that the VAST MAJORITY of people actually disagree with you is a truly stunning level of narcissism." Who died and made you king? You have said nothing of substance, other than that more concessions should've been made by TxDOT because . . . you disagree? Because that's essentially what you said. (Well, actually you didn't even manage to say that, so I am left to infer . . . as I said, you're the perfect encapsulation of the substance of the opposition. Good thing this tilting at windmills will cost only about $2 billion in the end . . . think of how all that money could've been used for transit.) C'mon, do a little self-awareness meditation, buddy. You're obviously in some strange self-reinforcing mind loop. (Maybe construct a 20-lane bypass up there and it'll provide you with some relief.)

An absolutely perfect encapsulation of the real "substance" of the opposition right there.

Gotta love truisms presented as insight. Didn't the County originate the complaint with FHWA? If the County now has an MoU with TxDOT, doesn't that almost guarantee they will withdraw their complaint, or the complaint will be settled outside of the project proceeding, assuming someone else doesn't make a (or assume the) complaint? If the County withdraws its complaint, surely that withdrawal will say the issues have been resolved to its satisfaction, surely complicating any future complaint along the same lines. I hope there's an honest postmortem to find out who (or what organization) was really instigating this--I highly doubt it was organic from the people actually directly affected. It seemed like 1950s/1960s era highway opposition cosplay. It's also worth noting that Mealer did not make this a campaign issue (at least not that I saw), and I actually think it would've been a great one to convince voters that she was attuned to more substantive issues than the constant fearmongering. But, as I recall at least at one point, Mattress Jesus was against the project, so maybe that's why. Google "Alexandra Mealer I45" or "Alexandra Mealer NHHIP" and you get nothing. Bizarre to me.

Found it, must’ve glossed over when I saw it was a repurposing of a Sam’s. (You’d think the HBJ article would’ve mentioned this.)

Well it’s not a reminder for me as I didn’t know 🙃 … do tell! Or is there a thread here that has it?

Indeed, much of that relocation language is straight from federal requirements that already exist. The added stuff (e.g., "personal relocation specialist") seems more for optics.

Well this happened, albeit in The Woodlands. Alexandria Real Estate Equities developing life sciences campus in The Woodlands - Houston Business Journal (bizjournals.com) Not as good as the road to the airport--Run Way!

Well, I am not in this industry but from what I have read Alexandria Real Estate Equities is the top tier developer that you want for projects like these, and a vote of confidence in the Houston biotech industry's long-term prospects (the only other markets they are in are Boston, SF, San Diego, DC, NYC, Seattle, and the Research Triangle). I'm just disappointed it is located in The Woodlands, but I suppose it's less of a site-location decision as redeveloping an existing facility.

It's in the article . . . Houston I-45 expansion project back on with new construction timeline (houstonchronicle.com) The FHWA told TxDOT to halt development of the project as it reviewed concerns raised by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee and others that the outreach to some minority communities was insufficient and violated civil rights laws by harming some Black and Latino neighborhoods. [. . .] As of now, the project, which remakes the entire downtown freeway system, remains listed to start work in 2024 on segments south of downtown where Interstate 69 and Texas 288 meet. Much of that, however, depends on what changes are needed and when the federal pause is formally lifted. "We are having productive conversations with FHWA and are making progress towards a resolution with them," TxDOT spokeswoman Raquelle Lewis said. "That said, until our agreement with them is signed we are not able to offer a timeframe."

That was my read as well. IMO the opposition was so misguided and half-baked on this, although I know people will disagree. It was just about stopping the project, with no feasible alternatives presented. Unlike the County, Turner advocated for the project in general with certain changes and steered clear of the ridiculous grandstanding (e.g., converting Lofts at the Ballpark to affordable housing), which is an approach that makes more sense. I still would love to know who funded and organized the opposition--my sense is it was not "grassroots" as was presented.

Well now I'm confused as Adrian Garcia was quoted in the Chronicle article, but the County is not a party to the MoU and is the entity taking legal action. I'd assume that lawsuit would need to be dropped for work to proceed. Is there a separate MoU with the County? edited--I guess this implies there is a separate County-TxDOT MoU: City of Houston, Harris County And TxDOT Announce New Memorandum of Understanding For The North Houston Highway Improvement Project (houstontx.gov)

Must've been a long press conference. Usually for these things I'd expect a canned press release ready to go coinciding with the press conference. The following seems to be the substance of the agreement: After spending months at loggerheads, but working on some consensus, the Texas Department of Transportation committed to a handful of concessions, such as increasing the money it will pay the Houston Housing Authority for relocation and development of affordable housing, and assurances to design the project as much within the current freeway footprint as possible. The project also connects trails for running and biking, adds air monitoring in certain areas, adds features aimed at encouraging transit use and commits to stormwater design changes sought by the Harris County Flood Control District. Within the agreement, TxDOT leaves open some of the design of segments north of the central business district and additional sound barriers if neighborhoods want them. TxDOT, in writing, also said it would increase funding for connecting local bike lanes and paths to nearby bayou trails.

If only that were a valid comparison (granted, I know that's never stopped you before). Sure would be nice to know the details!

I heard that this involved some announcement of an MoU between the City, County, and State to allow the NHHIP to proceed. Unfortunately, we don't have great news organizations that can write up a brief summary in an hour (or the Mayor's Office to issue a press release concurrently)--maybe they'll get to it by the end of the week. https://twitter.com/SylvesterTurner/status/1604891838074290177?s=20&t=hqhJJSIAAsBBZTY_IqeaIA

Just so we're all clear on what you mean by this . . . can you, er, tell us exactly what you what mean by this?

Cruise ship meets UFO

Thanks, I thought the adjacent building (former Battlestein's) was sold, not the actual hotel, so it wasn't owned by the hotel anymore. But, then again, maybe I dreamt it.

I could've sworn I read on here that the building (former Battlestein's) was sold by whoever owns the JW Marriott, but I can't seem to find the thread, so maybe I dreamt it.

Is it fair to characterize Whitmire as the traditional "consensus" candidate for 2023 and Hollins as more aligned with the Hidalgo/more "progressive" style of politics, sort of like Boykins and Lovell represented more "liberal" choices in the 2019 general election? I didn't realize Amanda Edwards launched her campaign back in March, and I assume she'd be in the latter bucket, too: Amanda Edwards for Houston Mayor

C'mon, buddy, if anything all of my observations point to the fact that we're probably pretty similar, with the likely exception of politics and that you seem a pretty black-and-white kind of guy (with all the attendant traits). A little more "type A," if you will (similar to our buddy editor)!!! In fact, I believe you at one time even intimated to me as much! Regardless, I shall always love your passion and high standards! Germane to this topic, how about we move the Dome to the Theater District or downtown where it should've been in the first place?! That's "man on the moon" kind of thinking right there!

Yet, we were talking about the Dome. The referendum was contemporaneous. Look, you may have way more faith in the electorate than I do. My best guess says no more than 25% know what the County Judge does, nevertheless the nuances of public finance and how revenue bonds get paid back. (And may I be the one to point out you're still talking about while in quite the tizzy?)

You have a really strange way of presenting things. x2 There was indeed plenty of wailing and gnashing going on, even at the County and the Sports Authority, which in the end helped keep them from defaulting. It's not like it was a foregone conclusion.

Just because people from out of town are paying shouldn't mean that you can just go and plop on more financial obligations on them--IMO that's not good policy, especially if you're trying to develop an inbound tourism and convention market. Our hotel tax rates are (or were, at one time) among the highest in the country. This is from 2014, but you get the point--as the subtitle says "Who'd have thought Honolulu would be cheaper than Houston?": Booking a Hotel? These Cities Have the Highest Hotel Taxes -- Consumer Reports (And also to remind you and everyone . . . the Sports Authority (like a lot of issuers) had a pretty rough time at it for a good while with all the variable rate debt post financial crisis.)

Indeed. Or else it would really be a strange thing to say in such a presentation. Again, I'm not complaining or questioning the wisdom of such support--I'm just wondering to what degree. Maybe it was peanuts, but the video highlights were presumably about things Central Houston, etc. did in 2022, and POST officially opened in 2021. This to me would imply some sort of operating subsidy/grant/tax abatement.