RedScare

That was the original 7 story building. The taller later addition is still there.

However, President Eisenhower was not aware of the urban highway segments. His model for the Interstate System had been Germany’s autobahn: the rural highway network he had seen during and after World War II. In the summer of 1959, rumor has it that he discovered the existence of urban highway segments when he passed construction of the Capital Beltway while being driven to the presidential retreat at Camp David. An alternative theory is that he discovered the truth when he talked with urban planners about the District of Columbia’s freeway network. Whichever way he found out, President Eisenhower asked his friend and adviser, retired General John Bragdon, to conduct a broad review of the Interstate program.

On April 6, 1960, the President met with Bragdon, Secretary of Commerce Frederick Mueller, Federal Highway Administrator Bertram Tallamy, and others, to review Bragdon’s preliminary findings, including his view that the Interstates should include only roads that carry intercity traffic around and into cities. Other urban Interstates should be eliminated. Mueller and Tallamy objected. The President responded that he now knew that the city officials and Members of Congress understood the urban highway segments were part of the program, even if they were contrary to his views. By then, he had heard of, but not seen, the Yellow Book (Mueller handed him a copy) and had been told that it was one of the prime reasons Congress passed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. Although the concept was against his wishes, he felt his hands were tied. The urban Interstates would remain part of the program.

This appears to be plagiarized text. Please give proper attribution to the author, including a link.

Thank you.

The reason for tearing out superfluous intra-city highways is simple, it's profitable to do so for city, citizen, and investor alike. The genesis arose with a simple understanding of a complex issue, downtown revitalization, which very few of the downtown efforts actually address: that land prices are too high and demand is too low. The equation is upside down and therefore, various forms of subsidy are required to make any deal work. It's simply too expensive for the city to keep up on every single parcel.

To return the development market to stable, healthy normalcy, we have to reverse the equation, increase demand (by removing a freeway) and drop the cost of land (by flooding the market with public right-of-way). Yes, it's another form of subsidy, semantics, but one in concert within the logical order cities were built and sustained over time, the public side provides the infrastructure (integration), the market responds with built space (accommodation).

When you were in school (assuming you've been to school), were you ever taught about the utter and blatant dishonesty of plagiarism? Do you even know what plagiarism is? I just googled your post as is did not sound like your style of writing. It is word for word as this blog post...

http://www.carfreeinbigd.com/2012/06/providence-195-tear-out-to-torn-out.html

I can understand not having the time or inclination to research these issues yourself. However, blatantly stealing the work product of others, as you have done at least a half dozen times over the last couple of days, is plagiarism, and dishonest. The preferred method is a small excerpt, followed by the link.

I know that you do not trust me, so I invite you to PM the editor or Subdude and ask what the forum thinks of plagiarists. Certainly, I ask that you give credit where it is due.

And will get every penny back with interest. Kind of odd how you left that little detail out.

This would be a terrible thing if they were Muslim.

I completely agree and the fact that the Cross-Bronx expressway was originally proposed in 1929 and that construction began on it in 1948 is a perfect example of the heinous effects of the Interstate Highway Act of 1956. The devastation of the construction of the Cross-Bronx expressway destroyed the idyllic neighborhoods that had been created by the railroads as seen in the below picture.

 

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/syscosteve/8123448479/

Will I get in trouble for chuckling at this smackdown?

Incorrect as we don't have the money to keep up with the maintenance of roads over time.

Incorrect, as we DO have the money to keep up with maintenance over time.

Further, functionally obsolete is not an unsafe bridge. It simply means it no longer handles the demands put on it, such as capacity, speed or weight. Basically, it is a good bridge that isn't big enough anymore.

No need to apologize at all. I enjoyed the terminology lesson. My first career prior to law school was in construction, and I have a lasting fascination with it. And, I must admit, as a longtime fan of the late William Safire's column on language, I was impressed with your use of the term nudnik.

Yes, it is.

Early on it is drummed into every spec writers head that the 4 C's of good specification writing dictate they must be clear, correct, complete, and concise. This has probably caused many people I work with to consider me a bit of a nudnik. I am, at least as it concerns my work. Otherwise I am really a free spirit.

I prefer construction pedant.    

But noooooooo...you see the addition gonna look too much like the original....you gotta go all-in you wanna still live here...getya one of those big boxes tacked on the  ass-end....yeah send the in-laws to the second story, the HAHC knows what's best for you and how much you need to spend.  I wanted to cry.

Heh heh. And to think some guy posted up in post #50 that the HAHC knows architecture.

The developer did pay for the work out of its own pocket.

I wonder why no one filed a lawsuit to stop this tragedy?

What is your point?  You chastize NIMBYs for being all emotion and then rant about the historic districts being somehow related to getting a midrise apartment complex.  But the apartment complex isn't in a historic district.  What in the world does one have to do with the other (except that the architecture would be better had the apartment been in a district)?

I never knew you had such a sense of humor! The HAHC is the antithesis of architecture. It is too funny that you satirically suggested that it would look better in an HD.    

Actually, there used to be a forum rule against posting entire copyrighted articles. I guess Vik doesn't have to follow those rules.

Some observers suggest that 2010 U.S. census data contradict these trends. Don't believe them.

This is the easy way around reality. Explaining it is much harder.

Good luck. Oh, and call me when the suburbs stop growing. Not decline, just stop growing.

Don't get too riled up, Mark. Other than causing time to be wasted by the City and various entities, the NIMBYs have not stopped much of anything. Way back when, they stomped their feet about Starbucks, and Starbucks went away. Now, there are 2 stand alone Starbucks in the Heights, and a couple more inside other stores. They delayed it, but did not stop it. They cried about feeder roads, Walmart, 380s, Kroger the condos over the ravine, and Alexan on Yale, but after small delays, all of them have or will be built.

Only the historic district was rammed through. It won't last. Neither will the trinket stores on 19th. Progress will not be stopped.

Anti-ordinance rhetoric always keeping it classy.

I've always considered taking photos of neighbors' homes in order to snitch them out to be the utmost in classy. 

This is the point I try to convey to people, particularly this board. American highways were never intended to carry “urban commuters”. They were intended as long-distance cross-country travel like European highways.

 

It does not matter what interstates were originally intended to be used for. Residents and communities found another beneficial use for them, and that was that. What you seem incapable of understanding is that the vast majority of people like and want those freeways. They like a comfortable trip from Houston to Dallas, and that interstate gives it to them. It matters not what your opinion is, because you have been outvoted by tens of millions of Americans. Trying to get freeways torn up is a fools errand.

Rail has its place. What you do not seem to understand is so do interstates and buses. You also do not understand the cost and limitations of rail. You attempt to cover up your ignorance of the high costs and limitations by feeding us conspiracy theories, but again, it doesn't matter how we got here...we are here. You cannot rebuild Houston like Chicago. Houston is here. The highways are here. You are tilting at windmills.

Call Houstonians and Dallasites stubborn if you like. What we probably more likely are is realists. 12.75 million of us. 

How many Dallas commuters were included in your transit survey?

And yes there is a tremendous bias in school funding when urban schools are compared to suburban.

Hmm, you are backwards on that. Inner city HISD gets the benefit of all of the downtown tax base, as well as much of the industrial base by the Ship Channel. Most suburban districts only have low value residential tax bases. This is why my HISD tax rate is so much lower than suburban ones.

The tremendous bias is in favor of HISD, not the burbs.

I suppose you are right. The more important question is why RUDH's facebook page only has 219 likes. Without Walmart as a rallying cry, it seems that no one gives a crap about RUDH at all.

The Houston of 2013 may be getting by without it... hey we're only 6 million people, no big deal.  But before long, we are going to be 7, 8 and 10 million people.  We have to get ahead of these issues and we have to do it now.  Waiting until it's far too late is just unacceptable. 

This is the most salient point out of all 6 pages. Putting aside those posters who think athletes care about rail, and those who think rail is a waste of money, and all of the other silly arguments for and against rail, the above point is the core of the issue. We have gotten by without rail so far, given the cities layout and density. But, it won't work forever. There are in fact people working on these issues. We will gain more rail in time, but it is likely to be rail that serves the suburbs, as that is where the problems will be. Inner loop traffic is not bad, and generally will not be fixed by rail. Suburban traffic is bad and only getting worse.

I was talking about the attractiveness of the city as a whole to free agents. While rail is probably not a direct reason of this, cities with huge rail systems are usually densely populated, and more interesting cities. New York, Chicago, Washington DC, and Philadelphia come to mind.

Do you realize that rail was built in those cities because they are very densely populated, not the other way around? You seem to believe rail caused the density. I recommend that you read up on the settlement patterns of American cities pre- and post-World War II. You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of why cities developed the way they did.

By the way, it is good to see that you retracted your statement about free agents. It was rather silly to think that pro athletes don't come here because of rail. They follow the benjamins, not rail.

Using Facebook to guage public interest is like using Wikipedia for research.

I know, right?   

Remember back on the Stop Walmart thread when s3mh was touting the number of likes on the facebook page as proof that everyone was against Walmart? That was too funny, and is why I quoted it here.   

This even happens on the top level. The Houston Rockets have had trouble for years attracting free agents because players just aren't enamored with Houston. Finally they got James Harden but that was via a trade.

This is categorically untrue, but before I actually call it out as an outright fabrication, I will give you the opportunity to post a link to proof of such. Keep in mind that it must be proof that free agents (the ones who buy ferraris and lamborghinis) refused to come to Houston because of our lack of rail transit, not because they like LA or Chicago or Miami better. Remember, your argument is that lack of rail ran them off.

You may begin...now.