METRORail University Line

[Double L]

Well if Afton Oaks is the issue, then why don't we just put the rail down Richmond and then after it's gone through Greenway Plaza you can run it down Westpark.

[nmainguy]

Well if Afton Oaks is the issue, then why don't we just put the rail down Richmond and then after it's gone through Greenway Plaza you can run it down Westpark.

I'm not convinced it's good public policy to respond to what many see as blackmail. If AO wants to take it to court, that is their right. I'm not sure a judge would set aside only a portion of a referendum a majority of area citizens voted for no matter what the margin of victory.

[CDeb]

That's why I said we need to adapt. LRT is going to be on the ground somewhere and it's not going away for the forseeable future. People just need to be aware of the realities of it and adapt.

I definitely think there's a complacency issue. Roads built today are many times safer than roads built a generation ago. Roads are much more forgiving now. So now we have a whole generation of drivers who have never experienced a time when you really needed to pay attention out there or there was a decent chance you were going to take the eternal celestial dirt nap.

[sevfiv]

nmain.....unfortunately, the majority of Houston drivers have NEVER experienced driving near the light rail. And when they do, it gets ugly. some of the Fannin/Blodgett driving is the most amazing i've ever seen. scares me to just look at them! cars (and i do mean more than one) going the wrong way during 1 light cycle. the area definitely requires some attention, even when you're familiar with it.

i agree - alot of folks have a difficult time figuring out how to share the road (even if it is delineated - and it is a track, for goodness sake).

at wheeler and main northbound, i have seen multiple times cars stuck inside train barriers when they go down, and also driving on the tracks...

but even if the rail does require more cognizance of when and where you drive, it is still a train, with the same train rules as any other track -

don't stop on tracks, don't stop after a barrier, don't drive in front of an oncoming train, don't make illegal left turns in front of a train, blah blah blah.

it's not that terribly complicated

[musicman]

at wheeler and main northbound, i have seen multiple times cars stuck inside train barriers when they go down, and also driving on the tracks...

but even if the rail does require more cognizance of when and where you drive, it is still a train, with the same train rules as any other track -

don't stop on tracks, don't stop after a barrier, don't drive in front of an oncoming train, don't make illegal left turns in front of a train, blah blah blah.

it's not that terribly complicated

yeah i know the wheeler/main intersection all too well myself. definitely requires your attention esp when heading northbound on main.

The design is different than your average train crossing which is where i think the confusion results. but familiarity with the area helps. We just have a large number of drivers who've probalby never been through the intersection since he train has been in operation. And you know..all it takes is one driver to be a problem.

[N Judah]

Is that thinly-veiled contempt? Whether or not it is, you are correct; there are worse offenders. But if I am guilty of anything at all, it would be the overcomplication/overthinking of the issue.

I think you are just guilty of not knowing if you are a normative or a positive economist.

[TheNiche]

I think you are just guilty of not knowing if you are a normative or a positive economist.

This is true. Anybody attmepting to apply economic theory to the real world who claims to be entirely positivist lacks perspective. Anybody who claims to be entirely normative lacks credibility.

[nmainguy]

I think you are just guilty of not knowing if you are a normative or a positive economist.

I agree. Now if you and Mr. Confused could take it to another thread and leave this thread for the topic at hand we won't be subjected to another long-winded, redundant recitation of economic theory.

[TheNiche]

I agree. Now if you and Mr. Confused could take it to another thread and leave this thread for the topic at hand we won't be subjected to another long-winded, redundant recitation of economic theory.

A discussion of a costly publicly-funded project without "long-winded, redundant recitation of economic theory" may as well not be a discussion at all. How else would we decide whether the project is worth it or whether it is inadequately designed?

[TheNiche]

I guess that's your opinion.

At any rate, the only ones that worry me are the ones who couch prescriptive policies in normative terms. I've found that there are a lot of "free market" types who will make this mistake.

Yep. It is my opinion. But I'm not alone in holding it.

I've met those kinds of folks (and dated one recently) that believe in free markets almost as a religion. I know them well. They are precisely the reason that I'm not a card-carrying Libertarian.

EDIT: Note that the quoted text has been deleted from the forum.

[TheNiche]

Yeah, most of those people head west, or at least to states that give more in federal money than they take. The Houston Way is to disingenuously promote a flawed concept of a "free market" while suckling at the government teat as a means of subsidizing their particular lifestyle choices. Not a bad way to go, as long as nobody asks any smart questions. I think it's why most people move here (whether they are aware of it or not).

Someone mentioned on here a few months back that the light rail line might actually be over-designed. A lot of cities don't even bother with the barriers and will let the cars even drive in the LRT lane. It bet it actually saves some money, too.

Nah, the big destination is New Hampshire. It is called the Free State Project. They're trying to put enough Libertarians in residence there to be able to turn the state into a free market paradise. I'm doubtful that it'd work out too well because 1) they still wouldn't be able to escape federal influences, and 2) to be effective, the state leglislature would have to restrict municipalities from enforcing un-free policies upon its citizens, but that the state would have to pass any kind of restrictions means that it'd have to engage in un-free big-government policies, itself.

Just so you're aware, though, Texas is a net contributor to the federal government and Houston is far from getting its fair share of pork, dollar for dollar. That isn't to say that subsidies (to rich and poor) and pork projects don't exist, though...clearly they do. And we tend to promote our "business-friendly regulatory climate," which is true relative to most other areas, but I've never seen official documents promoting our supposedly free markets.

EDIT: Note that the quoted text has been deleted from the forum.

[N Judah]

I agree. Now if you and Mr. Confused could take it to another thread and leave this thread for the topic at hand we won't be subjected to another long-winded, redundant recitation of economic theory.

Heh, sorry about that. I somehow skipped right over your post earlier. So I went ahead and got rid of a couple of my off topic posts.

Anyway, so if Nick Lampson is put on the appropriations committee, will that have any effect on when we can get our BRT/LRT systems put in? Also, when will we know if he is on the appropriations committee?

[nmainguy]

Heh, sorry about that. I somehow skipped right over your post earlier. So I went ahead and got rid of a couple of my off topic posts.

No problem.

Anyway, so if Nick Lampson is put on the appropriations committee, will that have any effect on when we can get our BRT/LRT systems put in? Also, when will we know if he is on the appropriations committee?

I'm not sure when committee assignments are finalized but you can bet there is some heavy lobbying going on. Lampson realizes METRO's service area covers far more than Culberson's district so hopefully he'll take the long view and vote for funding METRO's LRT/BRT lines instead of against the will of the majority.

[tierwestah]

I hope that the AOers get a run for their money! They're a joke if they think they can be an anchor for Houston!

[kjb434]

I still don't see what the AOers are worried about. METRO has no plans for a station near their neighborhood. The nearest ones would be east of Wesleyan and west of the Loop. Outside of the large, quiet bus like device on tracks passing through, and the initial construction, there isn't a downside. METRO has bent over backwards to ensure that as many if not all the median trees will be saved.

The Richmond when built will absolutely repeat the success of the Red Line. There is too many job, population, and destination centers on this line for there not to be ridership.

METRO is also trying to placate the opposition by saying they're studying the Westpark alignment (and they are), but having it down Richmond has way too many positives that will qualify it for Federal funding.

[sevfiv]

I still don't see what the AOers are worried about.

construction - oh, and losing all those buses

[Highway6]

Interesting information from Christof's blog this morning on the election results.

Compared to 2004, Culberson lost ground (% of votes) in 8 of the 10 precints along the Richmond corridor inside the Loop.

In the greenway plaza area Culberson got about half the votes. Between Main and Shepherd, he got about 18% of the votes, and in the 3 precints west of Weslayn, he got from 50-75% of the votes.

Overall, Culberson got 41% of the votes along the Richmond corridor.

The people have spoken...

See Christof's entire blog - Intermodality

*EDIT - Kuffner has even more precint data available on his blog.

Off The Kuff

[C2H]

Wow, it looks like Culberson's losing ground.

Where you at AftonAg?

[JJxvi]

Wow, it looks like Culberson's losing ground.

Where you at AftonAg?

Republicans as an entire group lost ground though, nationwide. I dont think you can pinpoint rail as the reason his votes went down on Richmond. I think its likely that Culberson lost votes in precinct throughout his district (He got 65% in 2004 and 60% this time) due to general Republican backlash that you see all across the country. The most you can say is that it clearly wasnt a big win for Culberson and anti-rail in the corridor.

[C2H]

Republicans as an entire group lost ground though, nationwide. I dont think you can pinpoint rail as the reason his votes went down on Richmond. I think its likely that Culberson lost votes in precinct throughout his district (He got 65% in 2004 and 60% this time) due to general Republican backlash that you see all across the country. The most you can say is that it clearly wasnt a big win for Culberson and anti-rail in the corridor.

I wasn't at all saying that Rail was the reason Culberson is losing his stance. I was just poking fun, just like when AftonAg kind of gloated when Culberson announced his opposition.

[Houston19514]

The drop in his support may not be laid totally on his opposition to rail. But there was clearly no groundswell of support for him in the rail-affected neighborhoods, as one might have expected there to be if one believed Culberson and AftonAg when they told us of the overwhelming numbers in the affecte neighborhoods supposedly opposed to rail on Richmond. Same goes for Martha Wong's rather large loss.

[JJxvi]

The drop in his support may not be laid totally on his opposition to rail. But there was clearly no groundswell of support for him in the rail-affected neighborhoods, as one might have expected there to be if one believed Culberson and AftonAg when they told us of the overwhelming numbers in the affecte neighborhoods supposedly opposed to rail on Richmond. Same goes for Martha Wong's rather large loss.

Right. I do think these are positive signs, I'm just pointing out that the methodology is not as completely sound as it looks when you look at the data on the first glance.

[nmainguy]

The drop in his support may not be laid totally on his opposition to rail. But there was clearly no groundswell of support for him in the rail-affected neighborhoods, as one might have expected there to be if one believed Culberson and AftonAg when they told us of the overwhelming numbers in the affecte neighborhoods supposedly opposed to rail on Richmond. Same goes for Martha Wong's rather large loss.

On August 1, 2006 Culberson distributed a letter which stated in part:

"My office has received well over 2,000 letters, emails, phone calls and petition signatures expressing an opinion on this important issue, and over 90% of THOSE are opposed to building rail on Richmond"

That day I did the math and posted it here. I will repeat it in light of the new numbers Christof has published:

Population Dist 2000 census: 651,620

90% of the 2000 letters Culberson received=1800

1800 is .27% of Culberson's constituents.

Now who knows how many of the .27 are his constituents...maybe all? Probably not-it's just to illustrate how numbers can be manipulated in an attempt to sway voters.

But letters, emails, phone calls and petition signatures don't vote.

The majority of those along the Richmond segment that DO vote, sure the hell didn't vote for Culberson.

Digest it any way you see fit...and don't shoot the messenger!

[Highway6]

For those interested...

David Crossley, from the Gulf Coast Institute, will be speaking about

Houston's next Regional Transportation Plan (RTP 2030) tonight at CTC's Outreach meeting.

What: CTC Outreach meeting featuring David Crossley

When: Tues Nov 21, 2006 from 7:00 - 8:30 pm

Where: 3015 Richmond at Eastside in the Upper Kirby Room

[ricco67]

For those interested...

David Crossley, from the Gulf Coast Institute, will be speaking about

Houston's next Regional Transportation Plan (RTP 2030) tonight at CTC's Outreach meeting.

What: CTC Outreach meeting featuring David Crossley

When: Tues Nov 21, 2006 from 7:00 - 8:30 pm

Where: 3015 Richmond at Eastside in the Upper Kirby Room

couldn't tell us in advance, eh?

[Highway6]

couldn't tell us in advance, eh?

They just sent out an email about it yesterday afternoon... Sorry...

[IHB2]

link to today's Chron Rad Sallee article on the rail issue and the Wong-Cohen race

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metrop...an/4373963.html

[nmainguy]

link to today's Chron Rad Sallee article on the rail issue and the Wong-Cohen race

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metrop...an/4373963.html

http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/ cleans up Sallee's standard sloppy work.

[Houston19514]

http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/ cleans up Sallee's standard sloppy work.

Glad to see someone on the case. That article was so slopppy it's a little hard to believe he wasn't being intentionally dishonest. For starters, there was nothing in the article supporting the thesis stated in the headline. And it went downhill from there.

[kuff]

Glad to see someone on the case. That article was so slopppy it's a little hard to believe he wasn't being intentionally dishonest. For starters, there was nothing in the article supporting the thesis stated in the headline. And it went downhill from there.

Thanks. FYI, here's the direct link, plus some related material:

http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/008421.html#008421

http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/008343.html#008343

http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/008428.html#008428

Charles