IronTiger

Seems like the "neighborhoods" of 200 students all basically working in what amounts to a cubicle farm really seems like it could limit specialized elective classes or the slight variations in where everyone should be in terms of math and social studies (or whatever). I'd be willing to bet that said "cubicle farms" could remodel back into regular classrooms if the project is a disaster.

For Midtown/Downtown to become anything like Manhattan in density, it basically means that almost every single building that's not explicitly a high rise or a building with irreplaceable historic value would have to be torn down. The stadiums in the downtown area preclude that anyway, though--there probably is a point when it's simply uneconomical to have a big stadium downtown with its need for excessive parking, but we're not at that point yet.

Oh yeah, that was the thing I remember, that the Hempstead Tollway project did account for a "high speed transit" corridor. In fact, I also remember that they condemned more ROW for the 290/610 project than they needed for that very thing (and a judge made them pay back the difference).

The Hempstead Toll Road was planned at the same time of the Northwest Freeway widening. I think there's even the appropriate connections built into the HOT lanes to allow for a connection (at least the last plans I saw, but we know those change sometimes, like the original plan to make a five-stack at Grand Parkway and Northwest Freeway). It involved ROW takeover, like it would alter the intersection where Mangum, Hempstead, and 18th all intersect with each other. I also see according to that rendering there's no overpasses or anything, it's all elevated. I seem to remember in this thread that TCR would build overpasses/underpasses for their tracks as well as the freight traffic. Guess not, but I didn't expect much out of TCR anyway, and I still suspect that this is all some sort of plan to manipulate taxpayers somehow for a profit as the economics from the last study haven't really changed in terms of how many people they need to do daily to turn a profit. (I expect that I'll receive notifications for replies telling me how wrong I am)

Single track or freight traffic has nothing to do with it, a properly maintained freight track owned by a major company (UP, BNSF) can go up to 60 mph. Problem is, I don't know who owns the tracks around Galveston, which is probably Class 3 (since it's no longer a main line at that point), which is capped at 40 mph. The good news for passenger trains is that they're allowed to go faster so in theory (if it is Class 3), the legal maximum is 60 mph for passenger. However, the rail being capped at 35 (not 40) sounds like it would apply to ALL trains, which would throttle passenger rail.

Well, I don't know about right of way. It's like railroad crossings, roads cross for free 99% of the time, but when a train comes, it gets to go. However, I don't know if that's the case here. Do trains wait, or does it go down for trains? These days, I go to Galveston every three years on average, which is not enough to determine if trains wait or not. However, the 35 mph speed limit also suggests the former.

I said 300 feet, and I think I did come up under 300 feet, and that was an estimate. (Yes, I do know 10 feet could make a significant difference in ship width, but the HAIF is not the best place to consult on that). Either way, the fact that the bridge favors ships by default as opposed to rail is telling.

It's the railroad bridge that parallels the causeway. The drawbridge on the rail side is up by default because of heavy ship traffic, and trains come less frequently (it is probably one of the few areas where trains don't get right of way). The reason for that is probably whatever authority is in charge of the Houston Ship Channel demands it, and they definitely have more money/political influence than whatever authority tries to do a Galveston/Houston line. The result would be that commuter trains would need to come to a full and complete stop as the bridge is lowered for them (or longer, if there's a ship coming through). The road bridges are high enough that ships pass under them, but the rail isn't.

which would be hard since the suspension part was only changed out five years ago, and even if there WAS damage, they're not going to replace the entire 2-mile span of causeway. If a terrorist wired up the entire causeway to be destroyed by a detonated explosion (a lot of work for something that would cause minimal to no loss of human life), then it would probably be replaced with a similar structure (trains don't like going up and down hills) or abandoned entirely.

I'm saying that the actual Houston/Galveston traffic between the two isn't at all worth investing in rail. It's not like The Woodlands, where there's solid traffic on I-45 AND an auxiliary toll road out to the area. In all my trips to Galveston or parts nearby, I-45 is bad (which may or may not relate to construction) but by Texas City it's not bad at all. If road traffic was an issue then when they rebuilt the two Galveston I-45 spans (one of which partially dated back to the 1930s) they would've been much wider. The spans remained at three lanes in each direction with a very long merging lane from the entrance of Harborside Drive (TX 275)/Teichman Road and Tiki Island (and vice versa), presumably with the intent to add a fourth lane if necessary. The other reason why the bridge was rebuilt was in favor of ships. The old bridge and railroad bridge were declared a "hazard" as of 2001. The old bridge had a width of 125 feet and the rail 120 feet. The rebuilt bridge had a clearance of 300 feet, with the rebuilt rail bridge also having 300 feet. From the fact that the default bridge position is "raised", there's a clear ship bias in Galveston. The railroad in Galveston basically functions as a long rail spur, with storage, a few ports, and a few minor others (like the railroad museum). The rails east of 28th Street are also hardly used (if ever), especially since it goes through a highly tourist area. The only reason people still talk about rail to Galveston is that the infrastructure exists, but when inconvenient facts start revealing themselves (unless an entirely new bridge was built, the commuter rail will have to stop at the Causeway, which is probably why the 35 mph cap exists). And when you're talking about a new bridge, any cost-savings on the existing infrastructure vanish (even if UP was totally cool with the passenger trains being on it, which is doubtful). Since I-45 traffic on the bridge is already comparatively light, the question of how much of that traffic is originating from anywhere close to downtown Houston and not the entire region (including as far as Dallas and Louisiana).

The only way that would work (especially without some sort of guard to keep people off the tracks) is if the train went at a slow pace. What you're describing is kind of like what New Orleans does (actual U.S. example instead of, what is that, Italy?) but the trolley pokes along at an average speed of 6.1 mph (source: Washington Post), and even buses move faster than that. Either way, I still didn't get an answer to my question.

It can't go through the median because that's designated as parkland. Dedicating one lane as rail might work but I have yet to see an example in Houston where METRO hasn't taken up more than one road lane (in a given direction) or required permanent additional right of way.

I still really doubt that rail to Galveston has a positive cost/benefit ratio, and "I-45 being congested" is mostly in the parts under construction closer to Beltway 8. The bridge to the island isn't that congested, otherwise the bridge rebuild from about 2004 to 2009 would've been wider, and the reason why TxDOT is footing the bill for this by now is because there's no authority that will connect Galveston to Harris due to the county line differences.

Well, which is it? That rail to Houston would provide "tremendous economic growth" (presumably that only rail could really satiate), or that the old train was just before its time? It can't be played both ways.

According to the records I have 6806 Highway 6 was #15 which closed in 2005, and probably opened (just on style of numbering) in 1980.

There's no need to shuffle around freight spurs especially if they're being used to some extent. For Hobby, just having a dedicated shuttle line (possibly elevated) would be more efficient, and likewise for IAH (maybe hook in with their own shuttle rail?). There would also be the issue of the drawbridge between Galveston and the mainline, and building a dedicated new bridge for the line would add tremendously to the cost especially if you going to argue the "existing infrastructure" part.

If rail to Galveston was as much of an economic boon as you think it is, then it would've grown Galveston dramatically in the early 1990s and taking out the service would be unthinkable. The success of Midtown and it happening right around the time rail was built helped create/perpetuate the myth of "instant economy just add rail" but the reality is that same sort of growth has been happening all over the Inner Loop rail or not.

The other problem, and I think this has been mentioned, is that even if rail was able to go on the same track of freight (which would dramatically lower infrastructure costs), freight traffic is capped to about 35 mph, which would really screw up any time savings over road. The amount of people that live in Galveston (or would like to live in Galveston, and I don't think Galveston has especially cheap housing) and work in downtown Houston (or parts around it) is going to be a small minority, and putting the station in downtown Houston would render it fairly useless for tourism purposes as well. If you wanted a viable commuter corridor in Houston, do The Woodlands as both have major industries located there, the Hardy Toll Road rail corridor is faster, and it can even hook up to the airport. While the Hardy Toll Road is not rail nor an equivalent, it does prove that people are willing to pay to avoid I-45 North to downtown, and it comes with another advantage that Galveston/Houston would have to deal with...the train would not get stopped at the drawbridge as a ship passes under it (and based on observations of aerial imagery, it looks like having the drawbridge "up" is the default position).

I seem to recall an article where someone had wanted to put in rail at the new baseball stadium ("baseball fans arriving by rail") but realistically, there was no way that could work. The block where Union Station was, directly south of it had been the platforms for the trains but even by the 1980s where the rails were had become a parking lot (the rails may have been intact, but they weren't functioning). To have rail at Minute Maid, it would have to run along Texas Avenue (with all necessary signage required for an active rail) AND the tracks connecting it would have to be kept open. There was a crossing directly through Bastrop and Rusk, that would've had to have been maintained as an active crossing (with signals on all four sides), and seven more crossings before hooking into the mainline at Sampson Street. With the railroad still at Bastrop and Rusk that means that the BBVA Compass Stadium wouldn't happen at that location, and that has benefitted EaDo greatly. So then either the rail gets abandoned (again) or BBVA Compass Stadium moves, or Houston Dynamo leaves. But the train from Houston to Galveston just doesn't seem anymore than a novelty. It's not a major commuter center, and even if you were going to classes at UTMB, the only reason you would take a train is for purposes related to housing, and it sure isn't going to be cheaper to live in Houston to commute, and commuting from Galveston to Houston for work makes just as little sense. The thing is that the Interurban was that roads really did render it obsolete back in the mid-1930s (just like many other interurbans across Texas) and nostalgia isn't a compelling reason for keeping something high-maintenance like that on taxpayer dollars (that's why the revival line died...and notice that I'm trying to compare rail to rail, like the Houston METRO or eastern seaboard cities).

But...I had already started my own version hosted on my own site (linked in my quote) that has a lot more information. I'm missing 5, 9, 16, 44-46, and the exact address for 55. I don't know where I read that 55 was in fact Humble, probably a newspaper or yellow pages, but that begs the question of why I don't have the address. Chronologically it fits, all the numbering of Randalls is subsequent up until they were bought by Safeway. (Look at the numbering, notice how they start accelerating in the 1980s starting with #11 in 1980 and going up to #48 by the end of the decade, then dries up by 1994, so much so that they skip 1995, and only open about five more before being sold to Safeway). http://www.carbon-izer.com/retail/albertsons/randalls.html

That sounds like it might be a liability. Then again, I've heard stories of all sorts of strange restaurants with concepts that wouldn't fly today (and dubious back then).

The Chron archives tell me that the Greenspoint renovation happened in 1988 (April to October). @hydeaway is almost certainly the person who wrote the DeadMalls.com article, and 1988 was when the trees and fountains disappeared and the floors were replaced with "almost glow in the dark multicolored tiles" rather than the dark brick-like tiles it used to have. It was Federated that opened the mall in the 1970s and built the two expansions that would add Joske's and Montgomery Ward to the mall, but it was Prudential Insurance Co. (or rather a pension fund that Prudential ran) that was the one to run Greenspoint into the ground, with the decline happening under their reign and a single 1988 renovation that somehow made the mall worse. In terms of the cafe, at about 4:35 of this video you can see the skylights of the center court with a kiosk (Houston Visitor's Center) protruding into the court, with a white wall above it. However, according to the aerial photograph of said center court, you should be able to see the skylight from any corner, as they go all the way to the end, if you look at the center court from above on Google Earth (it is on the side opposite where they peak outward). Since I have no idea what the café area looked like since I was born after 1988 (1991, thank you) I have come to the rudimentary conclusion that based on the video, the aerial photos, and the old photo, that the café (which I still don't know the name of) was on the side closest to Sears and Joske's, and the 1988 renovation tore down the stairs and walled up what was left, explaining why you can't see the other end of where the two skylight sides meet.

I was aware that the department stores all had (originally) upper levels, much like the situation at Memorial City Mall (except for Target). The "upper level café" is new information to me, though, and I don't think I've ever seen a set of stairs in the center courts. I'm going to guess that it was removed in the renovation in the late 1980s or early 1990s, and the space walled up. Without a floorplan or being there it's a little hard to tell, but this walled up area near the skylights sure looks suspicious... EDIT: It is not the same court, but the correct court with the fountains and correct columns still seem to lack a staircase...

I found this in a Texas Monthly ad from 1982 while I was looking for something else: https://books.google.com/books?id=CC4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA88&lpg=PA88&dq=magnamart+san+antonio&source=bl&ots=jlX0dLkUwF&sig=zj7TJP5TB_oKHjQE3WqOJEpB2ic&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiR_bKS7t_XAhVB8IMKHU6eDRIQ6AEIMzAC#v=onepage&q&f=false (The name and logo of Greenspoint were located under it, so it is Greenspoint). The presence of the stairs is intriguing, I thought Greenspoint was only one level.

I assume Burger King gets demo'd for the direct connector ramps? Well. I need to see the Gulf/Ace Hardware too soon as that seems to be on the hit list as well. Where are the site plans for this?