MaxConcrete

Westbury, Sharpstown, Lee, and Bellaire were generally peers in terms of student body makeup and overall socio-economic status as of the early 1980s, with virtually no gangster element at any school. Sure, Bellaire was academically better and had more money, and Lee did have some money, but the gaps between these schools were not large. It was around 1983-1984 when Sharpstown started a steep decline as the apartments zoned to the school became low income. Sharpstown's district took in some of the Fondren Southwest area, and those apartments introduced many bad elements to the school. Of course, we all know what happened to Sharpstown, Westbury, and Lee. Only Bellaire remains desirable. -Sharpstown High School class of '85

As you are probably aware, a 50-foot-wide corridor was set aside along the Westpark corridor for future transit use. It appears that the corridor will be used for light rail from near Cummins to the Hillcroft transit center at the Southwest Freeway. West of the Hillcroft transit center, there are no plans to use the corridor, as far as I know. The Westpark corridor is not a candidate for commuter rail, as far as I know, so any extension would be light rail. So, to answer the question, there never were any actual plans for rail on the corridor west of the Hillcroft transit center. The right-of-way set-aside ensures that rail is an option for the future. But due to the outrageous cost of light rail, it is only feasible for short distances (less than 10 miles) and I think farthest it will ever extend west is to Beltway 8. But you never know. In 30 or 50 years, extending transit to Katy or even Fulshear may be feasible. That's why the right-of-way is preserved. Also, TxDOT has nothing to do with the Westpark Tollway. It is a project of the Harris County Toll Road Authority and the Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority.

The San Luis Pass bridge appears to have survived with no visible damage. The bridge was open, but tolls were not being collected. The sand dunes on the west end of Galveston Island were a victim, however. There was a wide strip of dunes which were crossed by numerous boardwalks. Now, there is just about nothing left of the dunes - only a flat, sandy area remains.

You are correct, that section of highway is County Road 257, not FM 3005. I will need to correct the web page. I'm not surprised the preliminary estimate of reconstruction is $100 million. FEMA likes to blow money, so it will probably be funded.

http://houstonfreeways.com/modern/2008-10-..._destroyed.html I took these photos Sunday of FM 3005 between Surfside and San Luis Pass. I was surprised at the extent of the damage. As I mention on the web page, it will be neither easy nor cheap to replace the highway. Many miles need to be moved inland, which will probably require environmental studies. In other places new bridges or landfill will be needed. I think the best move will be to buy out the property on the route and abandon the alignment.

No, not easily in a properly-formatted pdf document. However, the document does print nicely from IE or Firefox (in fact, formatting is somewhat better in Firefox). I sent the Firefox output to a PDF http://www.houstonfreeways.com/images/Hous...trospective.pdf

The Houston Freeways book recently observed the 5th anniversary of its publication and I posted the 5-year retrospective report, looking back on what has happened in the last 5 years. http://houstonfreeways.com/5_year_retrospective.html web site home page: http://houstonfreeways.com/default.aspx It was an great 5-year period for the freeways, with construction achievements to rival the period of most intense original freeway construction, 1957-1962. Sadly, the construction program has collapsed with almost no new contract awards in the last two years, and in about 6 months I think we will have only one large project in the entire region, I-45 in Conroe. If I missed anything or anyone has some better info on the upcoming projects, please post.

I don't think it would be viable for the Hempstead tollway. The reason is due to the nearby 290 freeway which will still pick up most of the traffic in the corridor, and the tollway will only get heavy revenue-generating traffic during rush hour. It will be a situation like the Hardy Toll road, which has historically been financially marginal since most traffic takes I-45. Since finances will be tight, expensive designs will not be feasible. Westpark could be more viable since it has less direct competition for traffic and gets more off-peak revenue. (I realize the Katy Freeway offers an alternative for some, but it is quite far away.) I could possibly envision a structure above the light-rail set-aside, leaving space for trains below, but I still think that would likely be financially prohibitive. I recently received a report that Traffic Engineers has a large contract to do a Westpark study.

It appears that HCTRA is moving forward with plans to build the Hempstead tollway. The following item appeared on the agenda for the last commissioners court meeting Recommendation for authorization to negotiate with: a. Cobb Fendley & Associates to coordinate subsurface utility engineering in Precincts 3 and 4 as part of the Hempstead General Engineering Consultant Team. e. JNS Consulting Engineers, Inc., and RODS Surveying for right of way mapping and PBS&J and Survcon for land surveying services as part of the Hempstead General Engineering Consultant Team for the Hempstead tollway facility from Huffmeister Road to IH-610 in Precincts 3 and 4. So it looks like engineering work will be underway soon. My concern about the Hempstead tollway is that it will not be wide enough with only two lanes each way and no room to expand, just like the Westpark Tollway. If the present TxDOT funding situation persists, it could be a very long time before the 290 freeway is rebuilt and expanded. However, I do expect the reconstruction work at the 290/Loop 610 interchange to proceed more quickly since that will tie into the toll road.

I remember the Christmas light display at Colonial House - it was quite impressive. It must have been as late as 1983, since that the first year I had a driver's license.

Yes, I remember that project. It was mostly in the late 1980s, although the final phase (which I think was the section near Katy) could have persisted into the early 1990s. Prior to the construction, the freeway from Katy westward was in a typical rural configuration with two lanes each way and a median. I remember that the pavement condition was poor before the reconstruction. I also remember the original truss bridge at the Brazos River on the westbound lanes. It probably dated back to the 1930s and the original US 90. I can't say exactly when it was replaced, but I'm thinking it was also in the late 1980s.

TxDOT initially awarded the tunnel removal contract to a firm which planned to cut the tunnel into sections and transport them to an artificial reef area in the Gulf. The firm could not deliver on the contract; I think it was because of insurance issues, and in the Houston Freeways book I refer to "complications". TxDOT put the project out to bid again. The second time Williams Brothers won, and the tunnel removal was at the discretion of the contractor. The tunnel was sliced up and the material was recycled at the tunnel site. The person who claimed the reef never happened was correct. You can download the "Bridges and Tunnels" chapter and read the history of the tunnel at http://houstonfreeways.com/ebook.aspx

In my research for the Houston Freeways book I found very little information on the history of that section. I was able to establish that the frontage roads from SH 225 to Fairmont Parkway were built by Harris County and completed in 1971. For your specific question of when construction started, I don't know. Your question suggests that a northbound frontage road existed in 1966, which would be a little surprising but certainly possible. It is also possible that the frontage roads were built as numerous projects over a period of several years, so the project was in various states of completion during those years. For the full history of Beltway 8, you can download the book chapter here http://houstonfreeways.com/ebook.aspx A little bit more information: Harris County launched improvements to Beltway 8 southeast, Fairmont Parkway, and Red Bluff Road after voter approval of a bond issue in 1966. These routes were all envisioned as future freeways, and the projected need for the freeways was mainly due to the placement of the NASA facility. Harris County bought the right-of-way and built the frontage roads, but that was all Harris County was able to do during that period. By the early 1970s Harris county came to the conclusion that it could not afford to build freeways, and then got out of the frontage road and freeway-building business. Of course, Harris County then turned to toll roads, and the Beltway 8 main toll lanes were opened in 1996. Both Fairmont Parkway and Red Bluff road may ultimately get tolled main lanes.

A 50-foot-wide corridor was set aside along the entire toll road length for future rail/transit. That is the main reason why the toll road is so narrow. If rail were to be built, the toll road would be unaffected. If HCTRA could have purchased the entire corridor, we would probably have a wider tollway, or at least a tollway which could be widened. So it is accurate to say that the traffic congestion on the tollway partially results from the transit set-aside. Metro (transit authority) appears to have no plans for using the transit strip west of the Hillcroft transit center anytime soon. And by anytime soon, we're talking the next 30 years. But that could change, of course.

This was on the agenda for last Tuesday's meeting of Harris County Commissioner's cour "Recommendation for authorization to negotiate with H2B, Inc., for a geophysical investigation of pavement cracks on the Westpark Tollway." I haven't seen the cracks myself, but it's obvious that the tollway was built on the cheap and I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of corner-cutting is the culprit.

There are plans in the works to expand it to 8 lanes (4 each way) from US 59 to SH 288. I don't know what the timing will be. It is not imminent, but I'm guessing that work could start in 2-4 years.

It faced north. To be precise, due north. You can see it if you reference the Southwest Freeway chapter in the book Houston Freeways, which you can download at http://houstonfreeways.com/ebook.aspx The resolution of the image on the 150ppi file is barely enough to verify that it faces north. I pulled up the original image from my disk files, which is higher resolution, and verified that the screen faced north.

You can go to the FBCTRA web page and read the board meeting minutes. It looks like an extension to FM 1463 is being planned for the near-term (it is mentioned in the minutes of the most recent meeting, as well as previous meetings.) http://www.fbctra.com/1-2-2%20minutes.htm

I think the Fort Bend Chamber of Commerce building on Commerce Green is a relocated rail depot. I can't find any photos or info on the Chamber web site, however. Perhaps someone could verify/refute my suspicion.

I remember going in the evening with my parents (as a 9-year-old). My main memory is a huge line waiting to get in. As for the exhibit in the train, I can't remember any specifics. But I do remember waiting in that line!

The article has a factual error in the first sentence (Houston is the fourth-largest city, not the fourth largest metropolitan area.) Nevertheless, the rest of the content seems to be correct. It is interesting that the project web site is online four years before construction is scheduled to begin. Usually only a planning or public input web site is available so far in advance.

The proposed TTC-69 is still in the route determination phase. Most likely TTC-69 will not have a major impact on the Houston area. If it is ever built (and that's a big if), it will either use existing routes through Houston or possibly the planned Grand Parkway, or it will have a very distant bypass around Houston. Since the impact in Houston will be minimal, no one seems to be getting too excited or upset. Of course, there are plenty of upset people elsewhere where the impact will be greater. I think we first need to see what happens with TTC-35. If it doesn't move foward, most likely TTC-69 is dead also.

The plan shows the Montrose option as an elevated structure along the north side of the freeway from Montrose to Kirby. An elevated structure is basically a poison pill for that option, since I'm sure that the neighborhood on the north side of the freeway won't buy into that. I assumed that the old railroad right-of-way on the south side of the freeway would be used, but apparently not. The report does not explain why other good options were eliminated. For example, the Richmond-Greenbriar-Westpark option. It has the third highest federal funding ratio, ridership within 2400 of the Cummins option, and the lowest construction cost. Based on the final 3, it seems that the Cummins option is clearly the best.

Like many people you have a fixation on trains, but trains are not a cost-effective solution in a city like Houston. The low density and sprawl of Houston makes buses and HOV lanes a much better solution in terms of cost-effectiveness and actually getting people out of their cars. Our HOV lane system is one of the best and carries a lot of trips every day (I don't have recent data but it is at least 120,000 trips per day). Just look at any number of similar cities that have invested in rail: Atlanta, Los Angeles, and Dallas. Rail has not solved their transportation problems and (especially in the case of Dallas) have not stopped the relative decline of their downtowns. The fact is, Houston is much better off than other cities because we invest in low-cost solutions that WORK, not light rail that costs at least $40 million per mile and has a neglible effect on transportation.

Cost is always an issue, and obviously HCTRA built Westpark on the cheap. Another issue at BW8/Westpark is the high-voltage right-of-way. There are at least two tower guideways, and my suspicion is that the wires would need to be raised to accommodate elevated ramps. Perhaps you could go one level above the Westpark tollway main lanes, but not two levels up. Of course, raising/relocating the high voltage wires would have been costly and this further ensured the project would be done to minimum standards.