The Boulevard Project

[TheNiche]

Why wait 20 years?

To piss off trolls, that's why.

[Pumapayam]

I call B.S. on this.

If and when the University Line gets built, Uptown Line by association going to become rail.

I agree, it will be a ROW purchase, but I don't expect the BRT version to last long.

I think they are lowering our expectations, again, and will revert back to a rail line for another press release like they did a few years ago.

[shasta]

Actually...think about that.You don't have the money to build a rail line for the next 20 years. So, you partner with the Uptown District to purchase and set aside the ROW for rail, put buses on it to build traffic, and in 20 years hopefully it can be replaced with rail.

That's considered smart planning in some places. Apparently, not on HAIF.

Red Scare,

The voters already approved the framework for 5 additional rail lines, including the University and Uptown Lines in what................ 2003?

The Uptown Management District needs to focus on their previous commitments BEFORE they propose adding additionakl costs for a plan that doesn't accomplish what the voters approved.

If it is addition too...fine but it looks like they are preparing the pro-transit detarctors or a soft landing.

[TheNiche]

The voters already approved the framework for 5 additional rail lines, including the University and Uptown Lines in what................ 2003?

The Uptown Management District needs to focus on their previous commitments BEFORE they propose adding additionakl costs for a plan that doesn't accomplish what the voters approved.

If it is addition too...fine but it looks like they are preparing the pro-transit detarctors or a soft landing.

The concept of voter approval doesn't have any relation to the concept of a commitment from METRO or a mandate of METRO. You should go read the text of the 2003 referendum.

[samagon]

Actually...think about that.You don't have the money to build a rail line for the next 20 years. So, you partner with the Uptown District to purchase and set aside the ROW for rail, put buses on it to build traffic, and in 20 years hopefully it can be replaced with rail.

That's considered smart planning in some places. Apparently, not on HAIF.

spend what you can when you have it, I get that, and applaud them for at least doing some of the work, it's much the same as the light rail itself, and I am sorry for being a hypocrite in that regard (change out buses and light rail and put in subway somewhere and I've been on the other side of that argument myself).

Not that it really affects me too much, I go to the Galleria maybe once a year to check out the Swatch store offering in person (I hate watch shopping online, and like to replace my Swatches fairly regularly), anyway, yeah, glad they're doing what they can with what they have to improve mobility for public transit, it just seems one step above getting some used Jeepneys from the Philippines for the corridor.

Edited October 31, 2012 by samagon

[RedScare]

anyway, yeah, glad they're doing what they can with what they have to improve mobility for public transit, it just seems one step above getting some used Jeepneys from the Philippines for the corridor.

Well, you had an intelligent post going there, and then you just went full retard.

Never go full retard.

[samagon]

Well, you had an intelligent post going there, and then you just went full retard.

Never go full retard.

I should compartmentalize my posts into serious and full derp sections. That was full derp.

[RedScare]

Eh, it's Hallowe'en. If you can't go derp on Hallowe'en, when can you?

[Slick Vik]

To piss off trolls, that's why.

Wonderful insight.

[Trae]

Actually...think about that.You don't have the money to build a rail line for the next 20 years. So, you partner with the Uptown District to purchase and set aside the ROW for rail, put buses on it to build traffic, and in 20 years hopefully it can be replaced with rail.

That's considered smart planning in some places. Apparently, not on HAIF.

Ah yes, let's wait twenty years and have prices for rail skyrocket even more and then complain about the prices when the time comes. If they don't build the rail now, its not going to happen (changing from brt to rail).

[TheNiche]

Ah yes, let's wait twenty years and have prices for rail skyrocket even more and then complain about the prices when the time comes. If they don't build the rail now, its not going to happen (changing from brt to rail).

The "skyrocketing" costs you cite are primarily related to land acquisition, which certainly is important. One of the reasons that Dallas was able to afford so much fixed-guideway transit is that they purchased intact rights of way from railroad companies decades in advance of actually needing to use it. Houston's experience will be more costly because we are trying to develop light rail along the highest-profile and most expensive frontage in the entire city. And yeah, it's going to be expensive, and yeah that would be subject to inflation if they didn't do it now.

But they're doing it now, so quit whining.

As for materials costs, that's mostly having to do with construction of Asian infrastructure, financed by distorted patterns of international trade and a weak dollar. The most important thing we could do to address light rail and other infrastructure costs (aside from ROW acquisition) would be to get the State Department to hold China's feet to the fire on its WTO agreements, and to kick it out of the WTO if necessary. (Of course...if you think that Obama is totally ineffectual loser and you've got no confidence in his ability to do anything except to further devalue the dollar and cause economic malaise, well then yeah we need to build up our infrastructure as quickly as possible, while there's still some purchasing power left.)

Other factors contributing to inflation are more evenly-distributed, meaning that prices increase, but so do sales, sales taxes, and revenue to transit agencies.

[IHB2]

Bill King's LRT obituary in today's Chron. Be sure to read Crossley's comment below the article

http://www.chron.com/opinion/king/article/King-Metro-vote-means-end-of-light-rail-project-4017617.php

Edited November 9, 2012 by IHB2

[RedScare]

Ah, the former mayor of Kemah, still trying to make himself relevant.

[mfastx]

Wow what an uninformed article, lol.

Glad he's happy that Houston's transit will not improve. He must have had a bad experience with rail when he was younger.

That's just blind hatred, with no regard for rational thinking at all.

Edited November 9, 2012 by mfastx

[TheNiche]

Wow what an uninformed article, lol.

Glad he's happy that Houston's transit will not improve. He must have had a bad experience with rail when he was younger.

That's just blind hatred, with no regard for rational thinking at all.

Dude, look in the mirror. Pot meet kettle. Bad and unenlightened articles do not merit similar but opposing responses.

[mfastx]

Dude, look in the mirror. Pot meet kettle. Bad and unenlightened articles do not merit similar but opposing responses.

At least I attempt to back up my claims with actual numbers and statsitics. Don't let you personal disagreements with me distort things. I know significantly more about transit than Bill King, that much is obvious.

[TheNiche]

At least I attempt to back up my claims with actual numbers and statsitics. Don't let you personal disagreements with me distort things. I know significantly more about transit than Bill King, that much is obvious.

I've written a number of articles, newsletters, white papers, and data-intensive full-length studies in my day, and ump-teen-thousand posts on HAIF. When I write with the intent of accomplishing something, I write with an audience in mind.

In the business realm, they may be executives or analysts. In the political realm, they're typically city councilmembers, a department head, or someone in a similar capacity. If I'm boiling down my points into an executive summary, businesspeople like bullet points with a conclusion that validates their preconceived notions. Politicians like vapid, imprecise, and defensible drivel with a conclusion that validates their preconceived notions. The marketing folks and the media just want sensational bloviation that grabs attention. The Chronicle is in the entertainment business. They want people to read articles, get a rise, comment about them, link to them, and drive traffic to their site.

Bill King's op-ed surely was not very informative. I won't dispute that. But then, neither are Crossley's articles when he gets published. Neither of them would be figures in the press if they came off like analytical know-it-all pricks. Having said that, I've met each of them on a variety of occasions. They aren't as oblivious as they come across as in print.

Edited November 9, 2012 by TheNiche

[mfastx]

I've written a number of articles, newsletters, white papers, and data-intensive full-length studies in my day, and ump-teen-thousand posts on HAIF. When I write with the intent of accomplishing something, I write with an audience in mind.

In the business realm, they may be executives or analysts. In the political realm, they're typically city councilmembers, a department head, or someone in a similar capacity. If I'm boiling down my points into an executive summary, businesspeople like bullet points with a conclusion that validates their preconceived notions. Politicians like vapid, imprecise, and defensible drivel with a conclusion that validates their preconceived notions. The marketing folks and the media just want sensational bloviation that grabs attention. The Chronicle is in the entertainment business. They want people to read articles, get a rise, comment about them, link to them, and drive traffic to their site.

Bill King's op-ed surely was not very informative. I won't dispute that. But then, neither are Crossley's articles when he gets published. Neither of them would be figures in the press if they came off like analytical know-it-all pricks. Having said that, I've met each of them on a variety of occasions. They aren't as oblivious as they come across as in print.

You are a great writer, and you make excellent points in your posts. I do not pretend to be a good writer at all, I am simply wish to communicate my opinions on a message board.

And I completely understand your point about writing. As a business student, I've learned a great deal about business writing in general. And I'm sure that Mr. King is a very smart man in some respects. I just think he should do some more research about public transit before jumping to his conclusions.

By the way, I am usually dissapointed in Crossley's articles. They are too vague in describing the benefits of rail and are sometimes inaccurate. But I guess that type of writing works better.

[Houston19514]

You are a great writer, and you make excellent points in your posts. I do not pretend to be a good writer at all, I am simply wish to communicate my opinions on a message board.

And I completely understand your point about writing. As a business student, I've learned a great deal about business writing in general. And I'm sure that Mr. King is a very smart man in some respects. I just think he should do some more research about public transit before jumping to his conclusions.

By the way, I am usually dissapointed in Crossley's articles. They are too vague in describing the benefits of rail and are sometimes inaccurate. But I guess that type of writing works better.

Do more research? You are too kind to Mr. King. He should do some research. He doesn't even have the ridership numbers correct. (Metro rail averaged 32,000 per day in December 2011, not 25,000 as he stated.)

[IHB2]

Do more research? You are too kind to Mr. King. He should do some research. He doesn't even have the ridership numbers correct. (Metro rail averaged 32,000 per day in December 2011, not 25,000 as he stated.)

and yet....he won

at least in the short term. and as mentioned numerous times on HAIF - delay is the death for controversial multi-billion $$$ projects like the 2003 Solutions LRT component

Bill King is unlikely ever to have to comment on the piss-poor routing of the University Line b/c it ain't gonna get built while he's still physically able to write for the Chron ;-)

[mfastx]

at least in the short term. and as mentioned numerous times on HAIF - delay is the death for controversial multi-billion $$$ projects like the 2003 Solutions LRT component

Bill King is unlikely ever to have to comment on the piss-poor routing of the University Line b/c it ain't gonna get built while he's still physically able to write for the Chron ;-)

What's your take on this, IHB2?

Do you think the University/Uptown lines not getting built is a "win" for Houston? What can Houston do now to improve transit with no funds to make capital improvements?

[IHB2]

What's your take on this, IHB2?

Do you think the University/Uptown lines not getting built is a "win" for Houston? What can Houston do now to improve transit with no funds to make capital improvements?

I did not miss any METRO meeting on these 2 lines from 2005-2010. They were and are essential to a rational LRT grid, but they were and are both so poorly designed that they will destroy mobility in 2 of the busiest areas inside and near the loop.

it's too bad politics caused the poor design, but had there been no opposition who knows how much more tax$$$ would have been wasted by the leadership of "old" METRO.

given the economic crash and its effect on both local and federal revenues, it's probably a good thing that METRO was not in the middle of trying to construct 5 lines at once when the bottom dropped out.

and one shudders to think that without the crash and the METRO mismanagement it exposed, we might still have that arrogant crook Frank Wilson and his enabler David Wolff spending tax $$$ for nothing - nothing is what we ended up with for the $$$ spent and it's all on them.

[mfastx]

I did not miss any METRO meeting on these 2 lines from 2005-2010. They were and are essential to a rational LRT grid, but they were and are both so poorly designed that they will destroy mobility in 2 of the busiest areas inside and near the loop.

Agree with your other points, but do you really think it would destroy mobility? The one problem area I see is the 59-610 interchange area, but it couldn't be worse than when actual freight trains ran through there, could it? A LRT passes by in about 20 seconds, a standard red light lasts longer than that. I'm not really buying the "destroyed mobility" argument.

And this is of course assuming that light rail would disrupt the light cycle. Perhaps on high traffic intersections light rail wouldn't disrupt the cycle and wait their turn? That's how they do it in Boston and it works fine.

I guess it doesn't matter since the line probably won't ever get built, but I think Houston would be better off with the University Line, than without it.

Edited November 11, 2012 by mfastx

[IHB2]

do you really think it would destroy mobility? The one problem area I see is the 59-610 interchange area, but it couldn't be worse than when actual freight trains ran through there, could it?

leaving aside the fact that the tracks inside the West Loop were ripped up decades ago, and that even when they were still there in the early 60s there was a) no I610 loop at all, a total Houston Metropolitan area population of a shade over 1 million, Sugarland had a population of about 3500, Katy even less, and Alief was still farmland, and 3)there were maybe 8 trains a day on the track that remained west of Post Oak...

the 2 LRT lines meeting at 59/610 were planned to run 21 hrs per day M-F, at max 6 minute headways, minimum at rush hours 3 minutes.

have you ever driven through the 59&610 feeder rds/59 HOV entry&exit/Westpark Toll Rd & Westpark St merge/Post Oak clusterf***? your response would indicate no you haven't.

[mfastx]

leaving aside the fact that the tracks inside the West Loop were ripped up decades ago, and that even when they were still there in the early 60s there was a) no I610 loop at all, a total Houston Metropolitan area population of a shade over 1 million, Sugarland had a population of about 3500, Katy even less, and Alief was still farmland, and 3)there were maybe 8 trains a day on the track that remained west of Post Oak...

the 2 LRT lines meeting at 59/610 were planned to run 21 hrs per day M-F, at max 6 minute headways, minimum at rush hours 3 minutes.

have you ever driven through the 59&610 feeder rds/59 HOV entry&exit/Westpark Toll Rd & Westpark St merge/Post Oak clusterf***? your response would indicate no you haven't.

I do not remember when the tracks were ripped up, my impression was that it was during the 80s or 90s, but perhaps you're right. But anyway, yes indeed I have driven that route many times and while I think it would be a problem if LRT had priority, I don't think it would make a difference if the LRT did not disrupt signal timings and waited it's turn, much like they do at the Fannin/Cambridge intersection in the TMC. Things could have been done to limit the impact.

[SkylineView]

Stepping in here may be suicide... but I live near the 59/610 interchange and drive under it several times a day. The way the route is plotted, and the way the 610 frontage Rd / Westpark-to-Post Oak underpass is constructed already has the right of way dropped into it. Post Oak is being redone for BRT (whatever), and assuming that happens, there won't be a capacity drop traffic. However, I have to agree with Mfastx that traffic will be a complete c.f. with trains trundling through all of the intersections (I think there are 10 now) and screwing up the traffic. Where I disagree, is that I think the Post Oak - Westheimer, and Post Oak - San Felipe interchanges will be more impacted than the 610 frontage southbound westpark drive east / westbound legs.

Also, could we get some g.d. no u-turn signs on Post Oak? I'm fuc*ing sick of people stacked up sitting in the left lane making u-turns because they took the Westheimer shortcut to Hidalgo and wanted to turn right, in front of the Hilton Americas, and (my personal favorite) because they wanted to get to the dessert gallery / verizon from n.b. P.O. Just go 70 feet further and there's a turning lane you can park your fat ass in.

[mfastx]

Stepping in here may be suicide... but I live near the 59/610 interchange and drive under it several times a day. The way the route is plotted, and the way the 610 frontage Rd / Westpark-to-Post Oak underpass is constructed already has the right of way dropped into it. Post Oak is being redone for BRT (whatever), and assuming that happens, there won't be a capacity drop traffic. However, I have to agree with Mfastx that traffic will be a complete c.f. with trains trundling through all of the intersections (I think there are 10 now) and screwing up the traffic. Where I disagree, is that I think the Post Oak - Westheimer, and Post Oak - San Felipe interchanges will be more impacted than the 610 frontage southbound westpark drive east / westbound legs.

Any type of major construction, whether it be light rail or BRT, is going to completely create a CF in that area. It's a high traffic area, and in big cities, construction happens. People just have to deal with it. Depending on how it's done, both BRT and LRT are capable of screwing up traffic in the area even more. Many BRT lines have signal priority just like LRT lines. I think the solution is to allow for signal priority for the comparatively lower traffic intersections, and not allowing signal priority for higher traffic intersections (Westpark/610 feeder roads/Post Oak).

[IHB2]

how can the Univ Line LRT run 3 minute headways during rush hrs w/o signal priority?

[mfastx]

how can the Univ Line LRT run 3 minute headways during rush hrs w/o signal priority?

You mean 6 minute headways? I've never heard of a 3 minute headway proposal.

Anyway, the Green Line in Boston doesn't have signal priority along Commonwealth Avenue, and it's still effective.

[IHB2]

You mean 6 minute headways? I've never heard of a 3 minute headway proposal.

I've already said I attended every public METRO meeting re the Univ Line from 2005-2010. You can access my public testimony from several of those meetings if you don't believe me.

I meant 3 minute headways.

What you've "never heard of" regarding METRO's LRT plans and actions since the Solutions vote in 2003 would fill a thick book.