I attended last night as well, and most of your assessments were right on. I also noticed that the majority of comments were NIMBY-ish in nature, which is surprising given the reported acceptance in the Dallas meeting. I did agree with the civil engineers' concern about the adaptability of Shinkansen technology to FRA regulations. In particular, if tracks are shared with either the BNSF or UP lines at any point, the use of the technology will be impossible, as FRA weight requirements will not be met with the technology as it exists. Several comments were made about adapting the project to have a commuter component. While I'm firmly in support of commuter rail, I did think that the forum was inappropriate for the discussion of those projects, since TCR wouldn't be involved at all, nor ought it to be given the requirements of a high-speed corridor. However, the FRA representative did indicate that connectivity would be a large consideration when it came to route recommendations; I'd imagine routes would be less favored if they removed the possibility of future commuter rail along the same corridor. I was somewhat perplexed at the strong opposition that many Rice Military residents had presented, given that they already live near an operating rail line whose equipment is much noisier than that being proposed here. Further concerns about takings seem unwarranted given the high property value of the area; any option that involved purchasing or expropriation would likely not be cost-effective. However, given the above, it seems that a downtown station is much less likely than a Northwest Mall location. Political opposition from an affluent area, along with last-mile cost considerations, make it much more difficult to get to downtown Houston. This is in particular contrast to Dallas, where the line would run through lower-income areas within the urbanized zone.