Why congestion after freeway expansion is a good thing

Why congestio

n after freeway expansion is a good thing, entrepreneurship hotspot, people want space, market urbanism, those savages in HTX, and more

Before getting to this week's items, a commentary on this silly article in the Chronicle, "Adding lanes doesn't reduce congestion. So what is TxDOT doing?"  What always gets lost in these kinds of stories about congestion growing back to previous levels after a freeway expansion is the additional number of people being moved every day, even if they're at the same speeds as before.  More cars and people are being moved, and that's a good investment. Do people honestly believe Houston would have been better off if we had frozen our freeway network 20 or 40 years ago?  Think of it this way: we want government to invest in infrastructure that gets a high utilization (as opposed to roads to nowhere). If they built a new airport runway and it filled up with flights, people would sing the praises of such a great investment, yet if we invest in additional freeway capacity and it fills up, it was wasted money? How does that make sense? It means the government built mobility infrastructure exactly where people needed it - where there was unmet demand - and isn't that exactly what we want them to do as taxpayers? (I made a similar comment on this story criticizing the widening of I10)

The more I think about it, the more the airport analogy really exposes the absurdity of the "induced demand" anti-freeway expansion argument.  Applying the same argument to airports would say every city only needs a single runway, because new runways just enable more flights and "induces demand" for more flying! So absurd!

Moving on to this week's items:

• Study: Houston among best cities for small businesses: "Houston is No. 10 in the country for economic opportunity, or the chance that a current business will remain open and a new business will prosper"
• The Economist labels Houston an entrepreneurship hotspot.
• Next time you hear "we can close roads and it won't affect traffic - people will just adapt," hit them with this: After Harvey, a flood of cars and trucks ties up traffic  
• Will hot housing markets in Texas ever cool down? The state’s winning streak may be a fundamental shift, not a temporary boom. Hat tip to Hugh.
• Good excerpt from Bloomberg's special feature on cities that reflects what I've been saying since this blog started. Hat tip to Oscar.

"Cities will sprawl—it’s pointless to try to stop the phenomenon. To the dismay of many environmentalists and urbanists, most people dislike tight quarters. They use rising incomes to buy themselves more space."

Some great stuff recently from The Market Urbanism Report:

• The disconnect between liberal aspirations and liberal housing policy is killing coastal U.S. cities
• How Suburban Parking Requirements Hold Back Downtown, which includes this caveat:

"Note: I don’t mean to pick on Houston. In fact, I really like Houston, which is why I talk about it. Plus, they have great urbanists there who are working hard on these issues and might actually ease up on citywide parking requirements!"

• The great urban myth: cities can't build their way to affordable housing. Excerpt:

"He begins with the obvious case study of Houston. While not completely unregulated, Houston has lighter regulations than other major U.S. metros, and builds much more housing than any of them. Although Houston receives many of the stereotypical scapegoats thought to increase housing prices ― millionaires, immigrants, corporate relocations, and luxury condos ― median home prices in Harris County remain $141,000."

• Does adding expensive housing help the little guy? According to our analysis, it helps not only the little guy but every other income group.
• Texas toll roads: a big step towards open markets for transportation
• Housing and transportation costs have become a growing American burden. Clearly shows the rise of the car (and the plane) in the 20th century. And I think the author is downplaying the huge benefits of all that freedom of mobility. But what I don't think it shows is how much the car has become a luxury status symbol. I'm stunned how many high-end models there are now, and it's a bit of a misnomer to call that a "cost of transportation" when a used Honda Civic or Toyota Prius would get you the same places for a whole lot less money per mile (especially depreciation). To call all these luxury SUVs, trucks, sports cars, and sedans a "cost of transportation" is like calling a Brooks Brothers suit or Chanel dress a "cost of clothing".

Finally, leaving you with a bit of humor from Reason ;-D

Houston's Anarchic Zoning Laws are an Affront to Sim City

They just build whatever they want, wherever they want, like a bunch of savages.

That's us - savages! ;-D