Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Slick Vik

The Boulevard Project

Recommended Posts

So I guess there is a significant reason why TXDOT is interested in if this will be a precursor to rail and that's because they will be building an elevated portion over 610 for these bus lanes! No wonder they were in such a tizzy. The other parts of the line you could engineer to have rail later on, but this bridge would have to be engineered for one or the other or for the bridge to later be converted to rail. Apparently from this article though they past one hurdle from a guy who wanted to review the project, but instead dropped it and it will now seek approval.

 

http://blog.chron.com/thehighwayman/2015/02/legal-opinion-delaying-uptown-bus-project-progress-pulled/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Wall-Bus-lane-project-will-ruin-our-Rodeo-Drive-6107583.php

 

 

There's an unjustifiable project afoot in the city that's somewhat of a solution in search of a problem. The alleged problem: congestion on Post Oak Boulevard near the Galleria. I'm not saying there is no traffic congestion in the area. Any weekday at rush hour proves that there is. But traffic issues in the Galleria are largely caused by commuters trying to enter or leave Loop 610 - the problem is not too many cars on Post Oak Boulevard.

The plan to build dedicated bus lanes up the middle of Post Oak seemingly would alleviate the problem by relieving commuters of their cars. Look more closely, though, and you'll see that the solution being developed by the city and Metro is not well-considered and needs to be scrapped.

The Uptown TIRZ (Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone) board estimates $200 million dollars will build dedicated bus lanes on Post Oak Boulevard. Plans show them running from the Northwest Mall at Hempstead Road and West Loop 610 to a Metro Park & Ride to be constructed on Westpark (presumably the site of Thompson Hanson nursery). It's being called the Guide Way. Various sources will fund the Guide Way. State transportation commissioners on Thursday approved the state's 10-year spending plan with $25 million for the bus lanes included and last month, the Houston City Council approved the TIRZ budget to acquire the necessary rights-of-way. But what's really known about objectives and details of the plan?

Ridership models developed by the Uptown TIRZ board project that the new bus route will carry 10,000 riders per day in 2018. This estimate is outrageously inflated, given that the more than 30-year-old Park & Ride system only carries 16,000 riders per day, most of whom are downtown-bound. This has been tried before. Since 1985, Metro has rolled out seven Park & Ride routes to the Galleria. Last month, they cancelled the sixth route (Kingsland to NW Transit to Uptown) due to low ridership. The sole surviving Park & Ride route to the Galleria (Kuykendahl to Greenway to Uptown) is classified as "poor-performing," carrying an average of only 220 people per day to both districts.

Major Galleria-area employer Apache, initially in favor of the project, now opposes it. The company surveyed its employees and asked how many would drive to the Northwest Mall and then board a bus to the Post Oak Central offices. Not one Apache employee was interested in doing so. Not one. Why has there never been a well-reasoned, comprehensive survey of Galleria employees as to their expected usage of such a project?

Parking in the Galleria is convenient, readily available and reasonably affordable. This is the complete opposite of the downtown area. Even in the parking-challenged downtown, over the past five years, Park & Ride participation rates are falling, from 38 percent to 28 percent. Metro's entire Park & Ride system consists of 29 lots. Despite a 30 year-plus operating history, 23 of its 29 lots operate at 55 percent or less of capacity.

What will this Guide Way project do to Post Oak, Houston's Rodeo Drive? I believe it will ruin it. Look what happened to the merchants on Main Street. Look what's happened to the Central Business District regarding crosstown traffic.

Why the rush to double down on a bad bet? The $37 million in the budget for eminent-domain "takings" will be woefully short, likely $100 million or more. Only one public meeting has been held by the city of Houston. When I directly asked the mayor's chief development officer, Andy Icken, who curiously was presenting the Uptown TIRZ's presentation, as to the size of the necessary takings, he responded, "It's not much, only 15,000 or 16,000 square feet." Preliminary estimates are over 160,000 square feet. That's 10 times larger. Project costs have been grossly understated.

Why the rush to get this project approved and an almost total lack of transparency? Why the failure to have open and honest town hall meetings?

Uptown, Metro and the city are talking about condemnation proceedings taking place before a final plan has been produced. This is par for the course. Another example of Metro's "Ready. Fire. Aim." approach: Recently, a long-known environmental hazard interrupted construction of the Harrisburg Line of light rail. Believe it or not, the meandering East Side Metro trains don't run the full length of the Harrisburg route. When did the poor planning method become an accepted standard?

I am convinced that people decide to work and (increasingly) live in the Galleria area due to the ease of access to retail, including restaurants and grocery stores. Completely dedicated bus lanes/guide ways make no sense to any student of public transportation unless they are of the BRT (bus rapid transit) variety. These lanes are definitely not, despite having been initially designated as such. BRT lanes are dedicated and do not stop for traffic.

Unfortunately, this project will cause long-term interruptions in east/west traffic flow on Richmond, West Alabama, Westheimer and San Felipe. This will cause congestion, which it was supposedly designed to cure.

When the mayor is finally acknowledging the decaying street infrastructure all over Houston by publicly recognizing the "pothole crisis," why would you want to tear up one of the few streets in Houston in good shape? It's an example of California-style bullet trains; i.e. projects certain to lose money, but beloved by politicians, pork-barreling interest groups and a handful of property owners masquerading as publicly spirited community servants.

I would argue that (collectively), they resemble booty-hungry pirates. Quite frankly, this will probably prove to be another example of "I told you so." But the damage will have been done. Merchants/restaurateurs will have been bankrupted and/or have moved, and our Rodeo Drive, perhaps Houston's best tourist attraction, will be no more.

 

Wall is a commercial real estate broker, specializing in tenant representation

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stopped reading this when he suggested that this was our "Rodeo Drive" (of course Rodeo pronounced in the other way not the Houston Rodeo way). The whole article is very cynical, and reeks of sweaty palms and fear of change. I got news for him....Post Oak sucks to drive on! Period!

 

"Rodeo Drive, perhaps Houston's best tourist attraction, will be no more." LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLLLLL

 

Nasa...nope. Our fabulous museum district......nope. Downtown.....nope. Buffalo Bayou.....nope. A congested, mismanaged, poorly planned, over indulgent, strip mall flanked road.....yes. yes this is our best attraction!  Douchebag.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stopped reading this when he suggested that this was our "Rodeo Drive" (of course Rodeo pronounced in the other way not the Houston Rodeo way). The whole article is very cynical, and reeks of sweaty palms and fear of change. I got news for him....Post Oak sucks to drive on! Period!

"Rodeo Drive, perhaps Houston's best tourist attraction, will be no more." LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLLLLL

Nasa...nope. Our fabulous museum district......nope. Downtown.....nope. Buffalo Bayou.....nope. A congested, mismanaged, poorly planned, over indulgent, strip mall flanked road.....yes. yes this is our best attraction! Douchebag.

These mo'fo's don't understand we have to get mass trans! He needs to get out more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I haven't read far back enough, but I gotta comment on the long quote.  First off, I agree that the Rodeo Drive reference was lame.  I don't have the time right now to make a detailed well-though-out critique of that post, but my reaction was this:  (1)  better-than-average writing skills and (2) weak logic skills.  After a while, it gets depressing to see people who obviously have some intelligence give into the urge to decide first, then cherry-pick (or make up) some facts and then apply non-sequiturs to make an argument.  

 

And ... to be clear ... I'm not a big fan of the dedicated bus line plan.  I am a fan of the dedicated, grade-separated rail concept.  However, I would be a more of a fan if it were well-designed, such that in the long run it would be useful.  That's a big caveat.  Between Metro's past incompetence and the strong effort by some politicians to make it fail at any cost, it's hard to be optimistic.

Edited by ArchFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really because Culberson put some language in a federal bill that said rail would never be built in that area. That would have to be reversed. And it's unclear that the elevated lanes will be built with LRT ready structural integrity but it seems like it won't have it.

 

No. He has a rider added to the budget every year that says federal money cannot be used on light rail in his district unless very specific conditions are met, which are fairly unattainable.

 

There is nothing stopping metro from building it, so long as it is funded locally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. He has a rider added to the budget every year that says federal money cannot be used on light rail in his district unless very specific conditions are met, which are fairly unattainable.

There is nothing stopping metro from building it, so long as it is funded locally.

It's so frustrating that Texas turns down so many federal $$$.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Opposition to the uptown bus lane. Opposition to more inner city light rail. Opposition to commuter rail. Opposition to memorial park enhancements. Opposition to the Dallas/Houston Train.  I know I’m forgetting some…  

 

Is Houston really this uptight? Geesh.

Edited by sdotwill84
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Opposition to the uptown bus lane. Opposition to more inner city light rail. Opposition to commuter rail. Opposition to memorial park enhancements. Opposition to the Dallas/Houston Train. I know I’m forgetting some…

Is Houston really this uptight? Geesh.

Backwards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows maybe they will be releasing their plans for a post oak subway next week?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

not holding my breath

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we would be better served by (some form of) rail along Post Oak, rather than buses.  In the Uptown/Galleria area, at least, that rail should be underground.

 

However ... to me, that is starting to seem less likely to happen in my lifetime.  And if it doesn't happen during that time, it may never, Houston will wither economically.   If we don't build the infrastructure needed to support continued population growth, it will come to a stop.   Businesses will no longer see Houston as a place to which to attract talent and create jobs.

 

In my childhood, civic leaders here touted Houston as the "can do" city.  Nowadays, a "can't do" attitude seems to have taken root in many peoples' minds.  So often, that attitude seems to be motivated by people's fear of losing what they've got (e.g., the Afton Oaks folks).  What those folks don't realize is that by doing nothing, they will still lose eventually.  (Unless perhaps they take their profits now and leave.)   Conversely, by preparing for the future, we are all more likely to have happier futures here.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im not sure its so much that the "can't do" mind set has taken over, but more so "oil money" lines the pockets of our politicians. unfortunately they only see these electric trains and CNG busses as taking away potential profits from the oil companies, and don't factor in all the positive benefits they would bring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they wanted to go futuristic they could make it a monorail - and make a deal with Exxon or Chevron or someone to have it powered by natural gas or gasoline.

Have there been many elevated rail projects in the past couple of years?  I feel like its been all light rail all the time 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elevated rail is pretty much all but phased out with the exception of high speed rail afaik. I've heard even Chicago doesn't build elevated rail anymore..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still say trench the post oak main lanes like an underground blvd, from 59 to 610. Put a 4 lane surface street above for local traffic between the intersections, and put mass transit along side that. There would be enough room left over to have very wide bike paths/sidewalks along side all of that. Expensive, but how else are you going to add capacity to post oak without trenching (or elevating) some lanes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cut and cap Post Oak sounds like the best idea I've heard in a while. Whether it's for bus, rail, express, all three...whatever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cut and cap Post Oak sounds like the best idea I've heard in a while. Whether it's for bus, rail, express, all three...whatever.

Several years ago I saw a rendering for a "subway" style light rail station (below ground). Sigh...if only.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One would think that putting a Post Oak line underground would satisfy a lot of people, including many who oppose the current bus proposal.  However, we all assume that that option would cost more ... but an important aspect to consider is the cost/benefit ratio both in the short and long terms.  

 

IronT, I seem to recall that awhile back, you posted an interesting article that analyzed the relative costs of burying transit lines vs. elevating them.  I recall being a bit surprised by some of the conclusions drawn.  In any case, I'm not ideologically opposed to either choice, as long as they were fair and cost-effective in the long term.

 

To me, it seems like we in Houston to often tend to go with options that are cheaper this year, but that don't work well and wind up costing more in the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One would think that putting a Post Oak line underground would satisfy a lot of people, including many who oppose the current bus proposal.  However, we all assume that that option would cost more ... but an important aspect to consider is the cost/benefit ratio both in the short and long terms.  

 

IronT, I seem to recall that awhile back, you posted an interesting article that analyzed the relative costs of burying transit lines vs. elevating them.  I recall being a bit surprised by some of the conclusions drawn.  In any case, I'm not ideologically opposed to either choice, as long as they were fair and cost-effective in the long term.

 

To me, it seems like we in Houston to often tend to go with options that are cheaper this year, but that don't work well and wind up costing more in the long run.

I don't remember posting such an article, it might've been someone else. In either case, I think a huge part of Houston resistance to light rail is placing them along streets, which not only really screws up traffic patterns and creates business resistance ("customers can't turn left into my business", etc.) but that the more it extends outside the core Main Street corridor, it starts getting into diminishing returns because it tends to have many stops and stops at lights just like cars do (making it, in effect, a really expensive BRT). Look at the "master plan" and tell me what a pain it would be to go from Uptown to Downtown.

On the other hand, we have resistance to any other kind because (usually) it's even more expensive, which threatens the whole "Houston being a relatively affordable place to live" status quo.

This is all complicated by a variety of other factors, including METRO's incompetence, the whole "tunnels will flood" fear (disproved for the most part, at least under normal circumstances), the "ridership is everything, therefore we must place it on road corridors like METRO thinks", and the lack of straight, continuous utility ROW/railroad ROW to place it along a la Dallas (Westpark notwithstanding).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article I mentioned -- insofar as my bad memory permits -- presented the idea that putting rail underground, while expensive, was not so much more costly than putting it above ground.  

 

In any case, I think that we are able to build infrastructure here below ground that can deal with the occasional flooding events we have.  Whether we do that is more a matter of whether we have the will to invest a sufficient amount of taxpayer money today in order to reap benefits in the future.  I am not arguing that we should just do that because I think so ... rather, I think that as a community we should consider where we are, where we are heading (or want to head) and how we should prepare for whatever future we want Houston to have.  In other words, it is better if our community thinks about this and achieves some sort of consensus -- rather than having the majority be an apathetic one that lets one or the other motivated group hold sway in elections.

 

In that regard, I don't think its sufficient to just go with the current flow, which is:  we can't build freeways anymore, so let's fill the hinterlands with toll-roads until we cover the continent.  

Edited by ArchFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article I mentioned -- insofar as my bad memory permits -- presented the idea that putting rail underground, while expensive, was not so much more costly than putting it above ground.

In any case, I think that we are able to build infrastructure here below ground that can deal with the occasional flooding events we have. Whether we do that is more a matter of whether we have the will to invest a sufficient amount of taxpayer money today in order to reap benefits in the future. I am not arguing that we should just do that because I think so ... rather, I think that as a community we should consider where we are, where we are heading (or want to head) and how we should prepare for whatever future we want Houston to have. In other words, it is better if our community thinks about this and achieves some sort of consensus -- rather than having the majority be an apathetic one that lets one or the other motivated group hold sway in elections.

In that regard, I don't think its sufficient to just go with the current flow, which is: we can't build freeways anymore, so let's fill the hinterlands with toll-roads until we cover the continent.

Underground is about triple of elevated cost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe there's also the issue of soil, which in Houston, is pretty much a swamp.

I think I've read that the soil isn't an issue. Besides, if the soil was that much of a problem, we shouldn't have supertalls downtown because of foundation issues.

As for elevated, besides the "ADA compliant stations" problem, I have a running theory that nobody really likes elevated structures for their aesthetic value. I'm pretty sure there's a great number of people who still think that, say, the Pierce Elevated is ugly and an eyesore but has a real purpose, and that same principle is used for why GO/OF was so against the HSR, or why Harrisburg wasn't fond of the original overpass idea. You could argue over how wide or how tall those structures are, but I think the core principle is still there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I've read that the soil isn't an issue. Besides, if the soil was that much of a problem, we shouldn't have supertalls downtown because of foundation issues.

As for elevated, besides the "ADA compliant stations" problem, I have a running theory that nobody really likes elevated structures for their aesthetic value. I'm pretty sure there's a great number of people who still think that, say, the Pierce Elevated is ugly and an eyesore but has a real purpose, and that same principle is used for why GO/OF was so against the HSR, or why Harrisburg wasn't fond of the original overpass idea. You could argue over how wide or how tall those structures are, but I think the core principle is still there.

Yeah I guess that all makes sense and you babe a very valid point.

I heard the "soil" issue from my father who has been practicing civil engineering here for over 30 years. But he's old so maybe one of us young whippersnappers can cook something up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im not sure its so much that the "can't do" mind set has taken over, but more so "oil money" lines the pockets of our politicians. unfortunately they only see these electric trains and CNG busses as taking away potential profits from the oil companies, and don't factor in all the positive benefits they would bring.

Which is just crazy. You look at the Canadian versions of Houston (Calgary and Edmonton), and they have no problems getting rail and the citizens there vote for expansions. I will never understand why the politicians are so anti rail in Houston. It is really frustrating and holding the city back. Nevermind that early 1980s plan (which would be great for Houston currently), if the 2000 light rail plan that was approved by voters did not reach so much opposition, the inner loop lines would all be complete right now. Instead, we get the half assed version and nothing better for the next decade at least.

And lets not forget either, part of the reason the rail runs in the streets without many grade separations is because Metro did not receive help from politicians who blocked funding. Could have been much better without so much corruption and delays.

Edited by Trae
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is just crazy. You look at the Canadian versions of Houston (Calgary and Edmonton), and they have no problems getting rail and the citizens there vote for expansions. I will never understand why the politicians are so anti rail in Houston. It is really frustrating and holding the city back. Nevermind that early 1980s plan (which would be great for Houston currently), if the 2000 light rail plan that was approved by voters did not reach so much opposition, the inner loop lines would all be complete right now. Instead, we get the half assed version and nothing better for the next decade at least.

And lets not forget either, part of the reason the rail runs in the streets without many grade separations is because Metro did not receive help from politicians who blocked funding. Could have been much better without so much corruption and delays.

 

Don't let Metro off the hook for their responsibility in this. They shouldn't have let it get to this point. 

 

They are a poorly run, corrupt institution that until the recent bus plan sat idly by while public transportation in Houston went to pot. Then the rail took over their focus and they fulfilled the prophecy of their detractors. 

 

What did they do from 1980 to 2000? I understand their hands were tied w/ the whole % of sales tax revenue going back to roads but seriously guys.... WTF?

 

If they could have pointed to successful bus lines that needed to be converted to rail and showed a track record of innovation and competence, then maybe we have a better and more robust system now.

 

They have been a sick man who refuses to die for a long time. It's to all our detriment but its true. They need to be scrapped. The leader of a new METRO needs to be elected and accountable. The status quo doesn't work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

METRO is a textbook example of how political officials do away with an agency by starving it of funds and turning its leadership into a clown show, and then saying "looky looky - this is a clown show!!!  Let's kill it!!!"  Another example, FEMA... a very effective agency before 2000, and which had been chaired for a few years by a guy who did horse shows when Katrina showed up.  More recently, it's back to being something that just isn't heard of much, because it's back to doing its job rather than being a parking place for gormless campaign donors.

 

METRO still has some powerful folks who have an investment in it not working (***cough cough Culberson cough***).  Plus, it's way easier to break something than to put it back together.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe there's also the issue of soil, which in Houston, is pretty much a swamp.

 

 

Yeah I guess that all makes sense and you babe a very valid point.

I heard the "soil" issue from my father who has been practicing civil engineering here for over 30 years. But he's old so maybe one of us young whippersnappers can cook something up

 

the soil quality is not really valid. there are subway systems in soil much worse than our own. Amsterdam is but one example, and probably the best example.

 

METRO is a textbook example of how political officials do away with an agency by starving it of funds and turning its leadership into a clown show, and then saying "looky looky - this is a clown show!!!  Let's kill it!!!"  Another example, FEMA... a very effective agency before 2000, and which had been chaired for a few years by a guy who did horse shows when Katrina showed up.  More recently, it's back to being something that just isn't heard of much, because it's back to doing its job rather than being a parking place for gormless campaign donors.

 

METRO still has some powerful folks who have an investment in it not working (***cough cough Culberson cough***).  Plus, it's way easier to break something than to put it back together.

 

Not to get too far afield, but just because the attention of the media is focused on other things doesn't mean fema is working.

 

http://www.npr.org/2015/03/16/392795828/fema-plans-to-reopen-all-sandy-claims-regain-trust-in-overhaul

 

if another katrina were to barrel through this year, it would be much the same comedy of errors we were able to witness last time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't let Metro off the hook for their responsibility in this. They shouldn't have let it get to this point. 

 

They are a poorly run, corrupt institution that until the recent bus plan sat idly by while public transportation in Houston went to pot. Then the rail took over their focus and they fulfilled the prophecy of their detractors. 

 

What did they do from 1980 to 2000? I understand their hands were tied w/ the whole % of sales tax revenue going back to roads but seriously guys.... WTF?

 

If they could have pointed to successful bus lines that needed to be converted to rail and showed a track record of innovation and competence, then maybe we have a better and more robust system now.

 

They have been a sick man who refuses to die for a long time. It's to all our detriment but its true. They need to be scrapped. The leader of a new METRO needs to be elected and accountable. The status quo doesn't work. 

 

Idk how you expect METRO to deal with the general mobility payments thing.  Those are absolutely essential dollars and no other major city in this country has anything like general mobility payments. 

 

METRO has proposed numerous comprehensive transit plans over the decades, METRO was extremely well run back in the 1980s with Alan Kiepper at the helm.  Of course when he tried to complete the system with a state of the art heavy rail system classic Houston politics/uninformed voters got in the way. 

 

When many powerful politicians are against you and you are starved of funding, it's very difficult to be successful. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idk how you expect METRO to deal with the general mobility payments thing.  Those are absolutely essential dollars and no other major city in this country has anything like general mobility payments. 

 

METRO has proposed numerous comprehensive transit plans over the decades, METRO was extremely well run back in the 1980s with Alan Kiepper at the helm.  Of course when he tried to complete the system with a state of the art heavy rail system classic Houston politics/uninformed voters got in the way. 

 

When many powerful politicians are against you and you are starved of funding, it's very difficult to be successful. 

 

Precisely.  

 

The "general mobility payments" are nothing more than a ruse with a nifty sounding name that has zilch to do with its actual effect, that was put in place to break a program that a certain now sainted mayor didn't like - a page right out of the playbook of another now sainted politician whose actual record barely resembles the hagiography.  I wouldn't have as big a problem with it if there were an actual, functioning program of repairing and upgrading roads that the busses currently beat the living daylights out of.  (as just one of many examples, Westheimer, anyone?)

 

The bigger problem is that the "general mobility payments" really function as an increase in the City of Houston tax rate without all the messiness that an acknowledged tax rate increase would have incurred at the time - and the city is now pretty accustomed to having that pool o' money.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh.My.God. The "Uptown is a masterpiece" one really got me.. If you want uptown to continue to be the "jewel" of Houston then we've got to do something about the traffic problems..

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What sane person when they drive down Post Oak thinks they are in paradise??? Its a bland 6 lane road that sucks to drive down and isn't particularly unique either. Sure its cool to pass Transco and see all the buildings being built, but other than that....nothing much else. Its definitely not a paradise.

 

BRT is definitely a tough pill to swallow as far as this corridor is concerned, but its at least a start! The plan can certain continue to be tweeked, but just by reading the stuff on this website just paints these people as being willfully ignorant as best and greedy jerks at worst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll join them in opposing BRT on Post Oak if they support my subway idea for Post Oak.

 

I'll be waiting over here.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll join them in opposing BRT on Post Oak if they support my subway idea for Post Oak.

 

I'll be waiting over here.

 

I'll oppose BRT if they support Lightrail :P

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hahaha. yeah, glad we would all prefer to see rail over BRT. maybe now that Culberson is open to rail they can build the Uptown line as LRT.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hahaha. yeah, glad we would all prefer to see rail over BRT. maybe now that Culberson is open to rail they can build the Uptown line as LRT.

 

I think thats what will happen now if you read the Chron this morning.

 

http://www.chron.com/news/transportation/article/Metro-Culberson-announce-agreement-on-transit-6270486.php

 

I imagine they will put the University and Post Oak Lines on separate referendums.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

a Harvard-trained, world-renowned authority on distribution channels and manufacturer/distributor relationships 

 

What knowledge does that give them to do a study on a public transit proposal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rail certainly helps with ped xing.

 

for whatever reason, I feel more comfortable crossing a road that has rail on it than one that doesn't. I assume BRT would be just as well at doing this.

 

Anyway, I know I called Eisenhower myopic in another thread, but wow, these business owners are far more myopic if they can't see how this will benefit them in the long term. Especially someone like Gallery Furniture who can easily weather the construction phase of this project to reap the rewards he will see 4 or 5 years from completion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do these people keep comparing this to park and ride? Do people actually believe this is the thing?

And calling post oak Houston's rodeo drive? That's laughable, highland village is so much closer to what rodeo drive is than the strip mall that is post oak.

Edited by samagon
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's obvious the opposition live in a bubble. That's why their penthouse condos are in the densest suburban setting in the city. They can't fathom waiting two seconds for a bus or a light rail to pass them by while people who ride public transportation cause them a 2 minute delay to turn left in their Benz.

Once again the upper crust is making an argument against mass transit. The big bad government is trying to inflict other people's lives onto their's. Take as old as time.

I do see the concern about traffic. Avoiding the loop at rush hour at all costs myself, and the lack of grid that Downtown has, going underground would make total sense for light rail down Post Oak. But flat out attacking mass transit and rallying the troops to oppose it is not the answer. At least Metro is attempting to address our city's greatest problem, instead of sitting back and thinking the solution will sort it's self out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the mass transit line (BRT or light rail) was supposed to go to the NW Transit Center, I suggest a compromise: a parallel road that has vehicular traffic lanes, connecting to Post Oak Blvd., thus taking congestion off 610. Everyone wins!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...