METRORail Green Line

[astros148]

lets all be honest that Central Station is a joke. Theres NO signs pointing people to go a certain way and you really have to know where you're going to catch the other train. They shouldve made elevated tracks with some sort of hub with retail or SOMETHING. the way its set up right now where you have to walk a couple blocks is a joke. They should've put the money they invested in the purple/green lines and made a extension to IAH or getting the university line going.

 

I mean the lines dont even go through East downtown for residents to hop on them, they go to the stadium then skip most of E downtown. so whats the point of it going through east downtown if its not accessible to the residents that live there?

Edited June 18, 2015 by astros148

[102IAHexpress]

I referenced downtown because that's the only one that I know of a development list that shows on a map the locations.

You completely don't answer the question about why the tax abatement developments chose locations near the light rail as opposed to the other just as available parking lots in downtown?

So while yes, the tax abatement did draw development that may not have otherwise come to downtown, but it's more about the where within that zone that they chose to build.

While I can't reference a map for midtown, museum, or any other area on the red line route, you can see the same tale being played out. Development is favoring proximity to the light rail. And there isn't a tax break drawing those developments.

As far as how long it took, it depends on what kind of relative timescale you compare it against. 30 years? Yeah, 10 years is a long time compared. 100 years? Now it's not so long comparatively. 200 years? Even less. How long do you think this light rail will be there? They'll outlast our time on this earth I'm thinking, so if it took 10 years for it to start gaining traction, who cares?

But in this world of needing immediate results, you're right the light rail is a disaster.

Which is why, only a month after the doors opened you're willing to call the new ones disasters. Let's revisit in 10 years then we'll have a better idea.

 

1) 1111 Travis - The business that was there before moved. New office tower instead. (either the rail was the cause of the move or the rail caused a new development) I'll guess which one you will pick

2) 609 Main - On the rail true. I have to give you that one.

3) Lelland Federal Building. Not anywhere near the rail

4) 500 Crawford - Not near the rail

5) Block 334 - i'll give you that one but still car based.

6) Market square-  Nope. huge parking garage faces the park

7) Old Texaco Building - Sat vacant many years near the rail. No takers for office space. But I thought the rail was a spur for development? But wait, City tax breaks, now being developed into residential. No credit to rail.

8) Hampton Inn - Convention Center related not rail related.

9) Holiday Inn Old Savoy Hotel - Sat vacant for many years. Rail no help at all. City offers tax breaks in 2014, now we have development. No credit to the rail.

10) Springhill Suites - Similar to number one above. Either the rail was the cause of the failure of the previous tenant or the rail caused a new development, I'll guess which one you pick.

11) Marriott - Convention Center related, not rail related.

12) 12 Alley Theatre - Not near the rail.

13) Public Garage - 1900 space public garage on the rail. (that should tell you all you need to know about "development" on the rail line)

14) light rail line

15) Parking Garage

16) Allen's Landing Building

17) 6 Houston Center - On the rail but how can the rail take credit? this is a new development linked to Bysell Tower, 2 Houston Center, Fullbright Tower, 4 Houston Center etc...

18) 800 Bell - Previous Tenant Left (previous tenant was exxon mobile, largest company in the world, they could have redeveloped etc, bought more property expanded along the rail, but instead moved to the woodlands)

19) Capital Tower. Either the rail was the cause of the move of the previous tenant or the rail caused a new development, I'll guess which one you will pick.

20) Chevron Tower - Not near the rail

21) Five Allen center - Nowhere near the rail

22) One Market Square - near the park, huge garage.

23) Old State National Bank building. I have seen so many businesses fail/move in that building, that I have to blame the rail.

24) Planned Residential - huge garage, near the park but I can give you that one too.

25) Planned Residential - not near the rail

26) Planned Residential - Not on the rail, probably spurred because of the baseball park and because of Toyota center near by, disvoery green and tax breaks. In the HBJ article the developer remains silent about the rail and instead touts the proximity of Toyota Center and discovery green, basically ignoring the rail. No surprise, it's a luxery tower.

27) Planned Residential - Not near the rail.

28) Planned Residential - Yes on the rail. but 12 Story parking garage. In front of discovery green. tax breaks.

29) Planned Residential - yes on the rail. tax breaks...

30) Planned Residential - not near the rail.

31) Skyhouse Main. I'll give you this one.

32) Convention Center Hotel - Convention center related not rail related

33) Hilton Garden Inn - Not near the rail.

34) Hotel Alessandra - I think previously I gave credit to the rail, but I'm taking it back. Either the rail caused the previous tenant to fail or the rail spurred the new development. I'll guess which one you will pick.

35) Planned HSPVA - I'll give you that one.

36) Texas Herritage Center? Right next to the convention center, discovery green, etc..

37) GRB enhancments - Obviously nothing to do with the rail.

38) parking garage. nuff said.

 

After the reviewing the development more more I'm actually less impressed with the rail. Yes there has been some development near or even on the rail, but to claim that the rail is the reason for the growth is silly. Like I said some development, but actually very little in 10 + years.

[BigFootsSocks]

I don't think anyone has said rail is the reason for growth, just that it's an added benefit to having a modern 21st century form of transportation at the heart of our growing city.

[BigFootsSocks]

But to say that the rail is not a catalyst of future growth is nonsense. Many of the new projects proclaim their proximity to the new and current lines, but that does not have to mean they are specifically "on the line"

[102IAHexpress]

I don't think anyone has said rail is the reason for growth, just that it's an added benefit to having a modern 21st century form of transportation at the heart of our growing city.

 

21st century technology?

 

Street cars/trams are late 19th century/early 20th century technologies. Street cars where on main street in downtown Houston over a hundred years ago. They didn't really work out.

[BigFootsSocks]

Not 21st tech, but a 21st century means of transportation, especially for a city that is so dependent on cars and building more roads to little success.

Be careful bringing up the street car issue, we won't be able to stop some of our slick members here...

Honestly at this point we're just arguing semantics. I understand your distaste at the lines, and that's fine and should be spoken about to find ways of remedying those potential issues, but we're just now arguing about the system itself, and if we want to argue that there should be a new thread for it.

[samagon]

 

 

After the reviewing the development more more I'm actually less impressed with the rail. Yes there has been some development near or even on the rail, but to claim that the rail is the reason for the growth is silly. Like I said some development, but actually very little in 10 + years.

 

Every time someone has a valid point your only response is to dodge it. Every time someone asks you a question you dodge it. This is not discussion. You don't want to actually have a discussion, you just want to argue. 

 

I enjoy engaging in discussion because there is always something to be learned. There is nothing to be learned from arguing, other than the person who is forcing the argument doesn't want to have a discussion.

 

If you want to have a discussion, then let's discuss, here's a question. I asked it two pages ago and you've thus far dodged it. Just answer the question.

 

With the understanding that the only reason that the residential development is occurring in downtown at such a high rate is because of the tax abatement, why is it that 65% of this tax abatement caused residential construction is within 2 blocks of the light rail?

 

I would prefer if you could provide an answer that includes a source, but hey, since you are thus far more interested in logical fallacies, I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

If you want to try for double jeopardy, here's another question:

 

It's pretty well accepted that if you are 1/4 mile away from a transit stop that this is an acceptable distance to be away and still get use out of the mode of transit. Here's a few places that back that claim up: 

http://www.humantransit.org/2011/04/basics-walking-distance-to-transit.html

http://publictransport.about.com/od/Transit_Planning/a/Walking-Distance-To-Transit.htm

 

Most of this data is here: http://tcqsm.org/of course, it's been made easier to read, but be my guest to read it all.

 

Seeing as I have provided sources backing my statement that 2 city blocks is an acceptable distance from the rail, can you site sources that back you consistently discrediting being within 2 blocks of rail as not being close enough to the rail, and in fact, to get use from the rail, that you have to be on the same street as the rail line?

[102IAHexpress]

Every time someone has a valid point your only response is to dodge it. Every time someone asks you a question you dodge it. This is not discussion. You don't want to actually have a discussion, you just want to argue. 

 

I enjoy engaging in discussion because there is always something to be learned. There is nothing to be learned from arguing, other than the person who is forcing the argument doesn't want to have a discussion.

 

If you want to have a discussion, then let's discuss, here's a question. I asked it two pages ago and you've thus far dodged it. Just answer the question.

 

With the understanding that the only reason that the residential development is occurring in downtown at such a high rate is because of the tax abatement, why is it that 65% of this tax abatement caused residential construction is within 2 blocks of the light rail?

 

I would prefer if you could provide an answer that includes a source, but hey, since you are thus far more interested in logical fallacies, I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

If you want to try for double jeopardy, here's another question:

 

It's pretty well accepted that if you are 1/4 mile away from a transit stop that this is an acceptable distance to be away and still get use out of the mode of transit. Here's a few places that back that claim up: 

http://www.humantransit.org/2011/04/basics-walking-distance-to-transit.html

http://publictransport.about.com/od/Transit_Planning/a/Walking-Distance-To-Transit.htm

 

Most of this data is here: http://tcqsm.org/of course, it's been made easier to read, but be my guest to read it all.

 

Seeing as I have provided sources backing my statement that 2 city blocks is an acceptable distance from the rail, can you site sources that back you consistently discrediting being within 2 blocks of rail as not being close enough to the rail, and in fact, to get use from the rail, that you have to be on the same street as the rail line?

 

Huh? I'm answering everyone's questions.

I made the claim that it will be a disaster. Some people disagreed.

Bigfoots said "I Clearly pointed out the development it has spurred"

 

We got side tracked when others put words in my mouth and I proved them all incorrect.

 

Eventually, I went back and answered, Hey I'm not sure about all this development you speak of. can you list some developments?

 

Everyone was like haha this guy is smoking something there is sooooo much development because of the rail.

 

Someone maybe you I don't remember posted a link to the development map with a ton of developments. There were a lot of developments indeed. Not sure how many were actually atrritubutal to the light rail.

 

I looked at it more closely today and responded to EVERY single development on that map.

 

I'm one of the few people on here answering questions. Yall just don't like the answers I give because it doesn't further your position. Or in fact refutes it, like the claim someone else made that it has spurred a ton of developments. Yall also like to dish it out, but don't like to take it either. But whatever.

 

As far as your specific question. I don't know why 65% (not sure if that's accurate but that's fine) are within two blocks of the rail. But my best guess is because it's main street. Main street is still a street. It's not rail only. And there's a lot of businesses along Main street that were there long before the light rail. Maybe the developers of those new properties want to be close to some of those existing businesses. But if they are so enamored by the light rail they could have as easily built on the line itself, facing the light rail but as I pointed out line by line there are actually very few actually on the line itself and the ones there have huge parking garages. Why? Because like I also answered a couple of pages back. The tenants of those new developments wont use the light rail. They will drive their S class Mercedes into their nice garages.

 

And I'm okay with that. Light rail does NOT have spur development. That's where we get into trouble. I just want it to move people who will actually use it. That's why in my very first post of this tread, I said hey it would have made a lot of sense to extend it to the CoH courts...Why? because the people who go those courts also use Metro...

[BigFootsSocks]

Regarding your last paragraph, the issue I had with that conclusion was that, while it's unfortunate that the line doesn't go a few extra feet to those courts, it really doesn't conclude that the entire new system is a failure, simply because it has and will continue to move people from the East End to downtown, opening up amazing potential for re-development in a neglected area of this city.

I think the issue people have here is that your initial claim, while very valid, does not equate to an entire failure of the project.

[mollusk]

I'm not going to go through the development list building by building (since I'm at work and kinda want to make a living), but I can speak to the effect of rail on Capitol Tower's predecessor.

 

Rail had no effect on the Houston Club building's occupancy (more accurately, the lack thereof) whatsoever.  Zero.  Zip.  Nada.  That place had a dismal occupancy rate ever since Texas Commerce Bank's backroom operations (for which it was built) decamped to 601 Travis in the early 80s.  It was a dark, dingy dump with very little natural light managing to leak in.  It hung around as long as it did because the Houston Club had a lease with a rate that was locked in when Eisenhower was president and a parking garage that apparently had an even sweeter deal.  Rail might have killed it, but only in the sense that having that nice carrot to dangle made it economically more viable to finally put it out of its misery and put an actual Class A building in its place.

[samagon]

Huh? I'm answering everyone's questions.

I made the claim that it will be a disaster. Some people disagreed.

Bigfoots said "I Clearly pointed out the development it has spurred"

 

We got side tracked when others put words in my mouth and I proved them all incorrect.

 

Eventually, I went back and answered, Hey I'm not sure about all this development you speak of. can you list some developments?

 

Everyone was like haha this guy is smoking something there is sooooo much development because of the rail.

 

Someone maybe you I don't remember posted a link to the development map with a ton of developments. There were a lot of developments indeed. Not sure how many were actually atrritubutal to the light rail.

 

I looked at it more closely today and responded to EVERY single development on that map.

 

I'm one of the few people on here answering questions. Yall just don't like the answers I give because it doesn't further your position. Or in fact refutes it, like the claim someone else made that it has spurred a ton of developments. Yall also like to dish it out, but don't like to take it either. But whatever.

 

As far as your specific question. I don't know why 65% (not sure if that's accurate but that's fine) are within two blocks of the rail. But my best guess is because it's main street. Main street is still a street. It's not rail only. And there's a lot of businesses along Main street that were there long before the light rail. Maybe the developers of those new properties want to be close to some of those existing businesses. But if they are so enamored by the light rail they could have as easily built on the line itself, facing the light rail but as I pointed out line by line there are actually very few actually on the line itself and the ones there have huge parking garages. Why? Because like I also answered a couple of pages back. The tenants of those new developments wont use the light rail. They will drive their S class Mercedes into their nice garages.

 

And I'm okay with that. Light rail does NOT have spur development. That's where we get into trouble. I just want it to move people who will actually use it. That's why in my very first post of this tread, I said hey it would have made a lot of sense to extend it to the CoH courts...Why? because the people who go those courts also use Metro...

 

Up until now, you had not directly answered the questions I posed. You deflected. You also only answered one of my questions. I have to assume you have reviewed the sources I cited and decided it's true that .2 miles (the distance of 2 city blocks in downtown Houston) is an acceptable distance.

 

There are more reasons from a car centric standpoint to not build on main than there are for building on main. can you cite some references of why it would be a good idea to build on main if cars are the main purpose? 

 

If what you were saying were true, and building for car ingress/egress were the point, I'd say that building on La Branch, San Jacinto, Louisiana or Smith would be better, from a car centric point of view. The lights on these streets are timed so you can get mostly green the whole way through downtown and midtown (source: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1cjzQaxDzUkJ:www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Traffic-light-timing-keeps-congestion-in-sync-4551668.php+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us).There are some residential locations being built in proximity to those streets, but not as many as there is in proximity to the light rail.

 

Your answer isn't without merit though, and is worth deeper investigation.

 

Since I've been throwing out predictions, here's another one. The densest parts of Houston will eventually be along the light rail lines. Currently, we're talking about gulfton, and some other areas outside the loop, and some areas inside the loop which are not near the light rail lines. So I'm saying that's going to shift in the next 10-15 years. And that is what matters for the Houston tax base is density, and property values. Since the probability of Houston increasing tax base via annexation is pretty well dead, the only way to do it now is to get more dense. Higher population means more taxes. More taxes mean more money to spend on parks, police, fire, etc. So it's an important aspect to consider.

[102IAHexpress]

I don't disagree about the 2 blocks thing. But how does that further your point? Yes if I'm within two blocks of a piece of transportation I may use it. But there are other factors too. Like the pleasantness of those two blocks (homeless people, heat, rain, construction, etc..) So If I'm in a shinny high rise and I have the option of walking two blocks to the light rail (two blocks from a stop/station not two blocks from the tracks) or taking my s class Mercedes (because hey I can afford the rents in those new developments) the two blocks doesn't matter. It could be right in front of my front door and I still wouldn't use it. But if I own no car at all or if I'm in a wheel chair, then heck yeah, I will be very likely to walk within two blocks of the transpiration point.

 

[samagon]

I don't disagree about the 2 blocks thing. But how does that further your point? Yes if I'm within two blocks of a piece of transportation I may use it. But there are other factors too. Like the pleasantness of those two blocks (homeless people, heat, rain, construction, etc..) So If I'm in a shinny high rise and I have the option of walking two blocks to the light rail (two blocks from a stop/station not two blocks from the tracks) or taking my s class Mercedes (because hey I can afford the rents in those new developments) the two blocks doesn't matter. It could be right in front of my front door and I still wouldn't use it. But if I own no car at all or if I'm in a wheel chair, then heck yeah, I will be very likely to walk within two blocks of the transpiration point.

You're not posting facts, you're posting your opinion and protecting that opinion on others. Start bringing facts to the table. When you do that, I'll come back. This is a pointless topic to continue.

You could maybe start by posting a list of all the businesses on main street that closed as a direct result of light rail, since that's one of your main arguments you continue to use. And I will expect you to have proof of the light rail causing those closures, just as you don't trust what's right in front of your eyes, assume I'm not going to either.

Edited June 18, 2015 by samagon

[BigFootsSocks]

Let's agree to disagree and start a new thread plz

[102IAHexpress]

You just don't like the facts. Then your response is always "this topic is pointless to continue". Seriously? Grow up dude. The facts don't support your opinions.

 

I live in a residential high rise in downtown, on the light rail, and have done so for years. It's filled with tenants. tenants with cars. We all live less than two blocks from the rail station, so according to you we should be very likely to ride the light rail right? But in reality None of my neighbors use the light rail. none. I've never seen them on it. Perhaps you don't like that fact, but it's a fact. I can promise you my neighbors care much more about parking and guest parking than they do about the rail.

 

In fact yesterday, I saw one of my handicapped neighbors walking from his office tower on dallas street towards his apartment in Rice Lofts. I even thought to myself, wow even he doesn't ride the light rail.

 

 

Google Houston business closed by light rail. It was all over the newspaper, tv etc. in 2000 to 2004 I'm not going to list all of them. The light rail construction killed many businesses, that's a fact. Very few survived. Metro was so concerned about the possibility of business failures during the construction of the green/purple lines they set up a Business Assistance Fund which compensated affected businesses up to $25,000. fact.

[BigFootsSocks]

>speaking for everyone in the inner core based on a handful sample size

Lol

[BigFootsSocks]

Also that's more of an observation than a fact but I digress

[samagon]

You just don't like the facts. Then your response is always "this topic is pointless to continue". Seriously? Grow up dude. The facts don't support your opinions.

Google Houston business closed by light rail. It was all over the newspaper, tv etc. in 2000 to 2004 I'm not going to list all of them. The light rail construction killed many businesses, that's a fact. Very few survived. Metro was so concerned about the possibility of business failures during the construction of the green/purple lines they set up a Business Assistance Fund which compensated affected businesses up to $25,000. fact.

Post some facts rather than opinion. Back up those facts with sources. The burden of proof is on you. I'd like to say this was an enjoyable discussion, or that I was made aware of some new facts about light rail, but I can't. All you've done is post anecdotal evidence, talking points from radio talk shows my mom listens to, and vague references to what you say are facts, you'll excuse me if I'm not taking your word for it.

[KinkaidAlum]

Woo-hoo, an S-Class. 

 

No wonder you don't ride the rail. That car is fine. 

[102IAHexpress]

That's all yall got?

 

weak.

 

Throw something harder.

[102IAHexpress]

You really need a source to tell you well to do people in fancy condominiums don't ride public transportation?

 

Really? Seriously? I have to prove that to you?

 

 

[Naviguessor]

Please just quite. Please.

Quit.

[mollusk]

if I'm in a wheel chair, then heck yeah, I will be very likely to walk within two blocks of the transpiration point.

 

Can't quite put my finger on why, but somehow I seriously doubt that.

[102IAHexpress]

Please just quite. Please.

Quit.

 

I think you meant quit? Please just quit.

 

Perhaps another Kindkaid alum?

 

Better luck next time.

[BigFootsSocks]

I think you meant quit? Please just quit.

Perhaps another Kindkaid alum?

Better luck next time.

Oh you fckin GOT'EM. He totally misspelled that word, what a pleb right?

[samagon]

Please just quite. Please.

Quit.

 

It's obvious that there's no point in continuing. 

 

It's like the slick vic anti-hero of light rail. 

[samagon]

Can't quite put my finger on why, but somehow I seriously doubt that.

 

TIL, light rail has healing powers! And this guy says it's a disaster, sounds more like the miracle train to me!

[KinkaidAlum]

So, maybe your point is that people who rent but drive an S-Class for appearances sake would never be caught dead on public transportation? 

 

If so, you need a therapist, a life coach, and a financial manager more than you do a train so I totally get it. 

[cspwal]

If we're going on small sample sizes, everyone I know who lives in my high rise 1 block from the light rail rides it at every opportunity.

[cloud713]

So, maybe your point is that people who rent but drive an S-Class for appearances sake would never be caught dead on public transportation?

If so, you need a therapist, a life coach, and a financial manager more than you do a train so I totally get it.

L.O.freaking.L.