GovernorAggie

That's what I figured--and that's different from my point. The should be proposals for TIRZ that would work as "Special Station Areas" or something. Call it what you want, the "Blue Line TIRZ" or whatever.

Yeah, these transportation entities really aren't accountable to anyone. Especially if the politicians don't hold their feet to the fire. I think the Mayor White should have had his ear to the ground more, or at least his Director of Mobility or whatever that office was that he created. In the other thread, some people still maintain that there was some back-room conversation amongst people (DeLay, Culberson) that got Houston's app rejected. But now seeing this news makes me think that it is somewhere between METRO's arrogance and ineptitude. Especially given the tone of the FTA's responses--and FTA telling them last fall that they needed to re-submit the application. Why waste time plodding ahead when they gave you the virtual no back then. Unless METRO has been working on a back-up application, they have just wasted almost 6 months, and when that comes to federal funding, that could mean years. Then I look at places that applying for New Starts money last year--El Paso, Columbus, OH, Nashville. Some cities were "recommended" projects, some were "not recommended" and some were "exempt". I have to go back to the definitions but El Paso's light rail line was in the "exempt" category. When they publish the report on their website for this year, it will be interesting to see what the final category is for Houston. That's right, I said a light rail line in El Paso (even though this segment is only a mile-and-a-half). Turns out they already have the rail cars to use for the line too. I'm not impressed with METRO's work on this issue--especially given that the agency is what--20-25 years old? Charlotte's CATS is almost 7 years old, and they seem to have gotten it together. METRO stunk this one up this time, but I'm hopeful and confident that they'll get it together soon.

Its true that METRO took a lot of initiative, but if I remember correctly, they were planning on asking FTA for funding on the CURRENT rail line as a refund, as well as help on the future lines. They haven't even gotten that money, otherwise we would have heard about it. As far as the TIRZ goes, was the midtown stuff because of the rail line? I'm not familiar with that situation but someone else might. What I was talking about was making the TIRZ a part of the New Starts application.

Wow. That's my first impression. They mentioned other cities filing applications the way they did, but what was the status of their systems? Of their area's record with fixed-guideway transit? Wilson mentioned San Francisco, who's had transit for how long? METRO should have realized that Houston was just getting into the game. Since they built the Red Line on their own, this must have been their first New Starts application. They should know that if you are asking for money from the feds, you have to play by their rules--even if your idea is a better one. I can't think of too many times where almost a whole SYSTEM was a New Starts application. I mentioned Charlotte yesterday, but their application was for only the South Corridor line. I don't think they plan on applying for the other four in the way Houston just did. If they were thinking about it, I'm sure its out the window now. Once again, wow.

Also, I've heard that there is some unwritten rule that gives freight trains a lot of leeway and extra priviledges because of the railroad industry's role in the modernization of this country.

VelvetJ, I mentioned those ideas because it seems to me that METRO has been trying to answer the call of the congressmen here by trying to show how the rail lines would specifically reduce congestion, when the truth of the matter is that rail does NOT really reduce congestion. It just provides a 'viable' alternative to car travel. I mentioned Charlotte because the rail line that they won funding for parallels I-77, the busiest road in both Carolinas. I-77 is knocking on 200,000+ cars a day on a 6-lane freeway that is clogged a good chunk of the day (When some classmates and I went out into the city to do field work, there was so much traffic in the middle of the day that someone said "Don't these people have jobs?!"). What's worse is the state of North Carolina likely won't widen that part of I-77 until 2025-2030, when traffic will easily be over 250,000 cars a day. That rail line will not even make a scratch in the congestion on I-77, even with its best ridership forecasts. And the project has also ballooned from $371 million to $427 million. Funny thing is that this line is supposed to be one of five that were all approved by Charlotte voters in 1998 as part of a $1 billion rail/busway system paid for by a 1/2-cent sales tax (much like what funds METRO). The sales tax vote also established CATS--just like METRO, the local transit agency, which took over for the city's DOT. What impressed the Feds, however, is the amount of work that's been done concerning developing the land around the transit stations. I feel that Houston would be a hands-down winner with that extra ace. So I think the problem with METRO may just be too narrow of a focus, but I could be wrong. They may have looked at land use-type planning around the stations, but I don't know what extent they may have gone to. Just in case anyone was wondering, I was a planner for the government there, and I think that Charlotte and Houston have more in common than people would think. kjb434, I just applied for a planning job wiith METRO . If I got on, I would try my best to emphasize more collaboration with the planning department and even MUD districts and local improvement districts like Greenspoint and Uptown Houston.

I think that Houston can improve its application to FTA by making these more than just rail projects. The New Starts criteria involves the effects on the environment, land use, and, yes, mobility improvement. My suggestion is that METRO and the City get together and propose that every 1/2-mile radius of every planned rail station become a TIRZ district. That would show FTA that Houston is taking a more active approach to the full development of its transit lines. I know of four cities that got money--NYC, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, and Charlotte. As you all know, I'm most familiar with Charlotte, so I went to the Observer's site today and saw that Charlotte got $199 million from the Feds for its first rail line. Even before the Feds decision was made, they were so confident that they had already awarded train bids to Siemens and had already condemned and bought land for the rail and parking lots. The most important statement in the article was from Jenna Dorn, who heads FTA. She said (paraphrased) that Charlotte had become a national model for getting private development investment along its rail lines. In other words, they're doing all they can to make the rail line as feasible as possible (and this is despite the very poor ridership forecasts, IMO). Charlotte has zoning and used it for station area plans around each station. Since Houston doesn't have zoning, the TIRZ could work, and actually work better than a station area plan. And if the Planning Dept. (hopefully) picks back up the area planning initiatives of last year, then that could be another tool to make Houston's rail lines a no-brainer for getting help from the Feds.

Well I think that it is an idea to at least give more thought to here. Maybe not a "Southwest Airlines" line, but maybe the Southwest Airlines Blue Line or The Blue Line, sponsored by Southwest Airlines. Same thing for the stops. Texas Medical Center stop could be Medical Center/University, sponsored by BCBS of Texas. The biggest problem IMO is that those station and rail line names could become a mouthful.

A few months back in a transportation thread, I mentioned the idea of METRO selling naming rights to its transit lines and stations. Well look who beat Houston to that idea: From ESPN.com: ...The New York City subways are headed in that direction. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority recently approved a two-year deal that could lead to companies putting their corporate names on subway stations, lines, tunnels and bridges. And the link to the story: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/sportsbusin...tory?id=1984997 Now, I remember the reception to corporate naming of METRO's lines being a very cool one--not to attractive to have the Continental line running between downtown and IAH. But now, since New York is doing it, is it suddenly a cool thing to do? We all know how urbanists follow trends--with NYC being the biggie. Is it a good idea for METRO now?

I agree, and the existing activity centers that already exist (Uptown, Greenspoint, Westchase, etc.) will also see much more growth and demand as self-sufficient centers of business, residences, and commercial uses. However, the central part of Houston will remain preeminent due to the advantages of having options such as sports and entertainment.

so who are the best/worst builders in Houston?

kzseattle, I noticed the same thing on Yahoo and was presently surprised. Someone here mentioned the fighting tooth and nail over one foot of rail in Houston, but sings Austin's praises. Well, if I remember correctly, Austin is building one gimmick commuter line from Leander to downtown. But the line will move so slow that it may still end up being faster to get from Leander to downtown on 183 and 35. And I know that some feel like that will be good for TOD development, but the very nature of commuter rail is not the best for TODs. Austin has voted down rail systems. Houston has voted for rail systems. Twice (2003 and the monorail system). I for one don't mind it if Houston does things a litle bit "behind" other cities. It just allows Houston to learn from and improve upon those places mistakes. That way when Houston finally does do it (whatever "it" is) it will have a lasting effect. One thing I have learned about this place is that when Houston wants something done, Houston will make it happen. Everyone one can't say that about their city. Dallas? Well last I checked, Dallas has been doing quite a bit of comparing itself to Houston now. And Houston's rise is just in the beginning stages. Then you've got the Morning News up there running all of these apocalyptic stories about Dallas being at the "tipping point". Dallas ranked high in crime last year. Dallas has some serious racial problems. You can go on and on. The point is that Dallas has its own issues. In fact, you'd get argument from people in the Metroplex that Fort Worth is actually the more progressive city of the two. People talk about Austin's popularity, but the people who have been in Austin for 20 years or so will all tell you that they wish the word never got out about Austin. They feel like all the attention is ruining the place. That reminds me of a remark Terry Bradshaw made about Jacksonville in respnse to the beatdowns its been getting from the media. He said, "this is a cool city. Be glad that no one else knows about you." In other words, don't be so quick to want to be on everybody's radar. I for one love Houston for Houston. I've been to Chicago, and Chicago is great as Chicago. I grew up next to Atlanta, and Atlanta is an ok place to live--they gained a million people in 1990s and probably will this decade as well. Houston is like a huge city made up of several distinct areas of different sizes. Does Houston have some serious problems? Yes it does. But Houston has a ton of positives as well. You don't have to have everyone in NYC or SF or Chicago go on and on about how impressive Houston is. If we don't think Houston is great first, then it won't matter what others say. Charlotte has the same issues as Houston. Charlotte spends all its time talking about being the #2 banking center in the US and home to so many F500 companies (same amount as Dallas, btw), etc., etc. But they still feel that something is missing. Nevermind the fact that the area is growing by leaps and bounds--like Houston. Nevermind that they voted for an expansive rail system--like Houston. Nevermind that they seemed to be good enough to attract sports teams to replace those that left--like Houston. They feel overlooked even in their own state--like Houston. They spend their time wanting to be like other cities--like some people here in Houston. The old word is boosterism. I say let people discover Houston, just as people discover Charlotte. If they're blessed enough for a path in their life to lead them through here for whatever reason, then maybe they'll be smart enough to know how great this place is.

What I can't understand is all the complaing about the "type" of Houston's rail. At least rail exists here now. That's more than can be said for places like San Antonio and Orlando and Detroit. Rail will improve here because Houston is a visionary city--one that you should never say that something can't happen. Let's not forget that the founders made this city a port, even though it is really several miles inland.

Wow, those County Commissioners sure have a ton of power--amazing. Maybe I should change my name from GovernorAggie to HarrisCountyJudgeAggie, lol. This just goes back to the point that myself, MaxConcrete, 27 , and others have said to these organizations. Fight for the details--how the road will look, what kind of character will it take on, how it will fit into the neighborhood. Maybe along with trying to make sure that it is built as and stays a PARKway, maybe it could have bridge and wall treatments and designs that represent the area. The highway doesn't definitely have to cut the fabric of the area totally. Maybe it could be a "zipper" instead (I know, I know, bad metaphor). Either way, HCTRA is going to build this thing. Reading the articles make me think of the old Manifest Destiny lessons from U.S. History class. Pineda, I get the same notion that the County is really trying to fast-track the project. That tells me that things were looking more and more like there would have to be a new alignment, adding years to the project and possibly taking it into Montgomery County--giving them the toll dollars instead of Harris. Again, I'd suggest using the zeal that you guys have had for years in preventing the road to now use it for making sure that it fits well with your communities. From what I can tell, the County will build this thing without a whole lot of input sought (we've heard the accounts from people on the southwest side not even knowing the HCTRA was currently building the Fort Bend Tollway extension right near their neighborhoods). So I suggest that you pesture them until they at least give ear to your concerns and desires.

Well this just shows Houston adjusting and maintaining its Energy Capital staus. Houston WILL become the biodiesel/hydrogen energy/ethanol capital of the world.

So then, it seems to me that we got work to do around Reliant in time for possibly the 2009 Super Bowl and the 2011 Final Four. Some think that Indy will get a SB b/c of their new stadium but I am very skeptical. However, I think they've put on a few successful Final Fours, so it's possible. Speaking of the Final Four, San Antonio has quitely managed to get into the regular rotation of that event. I think Houston will as well. Houston is used to being in the "emerging" category, so "emerging" sports mecca is about right, and Houston is doing it the right way. But the thing is that we have to continue to improve and not get complacent, like Atlanta IMO. Atlanta was THE place to do anything during the '90s (outside of the traditional NY, LA, NO, SD, and Miami). Now I think some of the luster has worn off and Houston is quietly asserting itself in the leagues of the cities that attract large, global events. It's an exciting time to be in this area.

I personally like the idea of a Houston-oriented museum. Houston has a very interesting history, full of a lot of significant events both to the city as well as to the country. There could be displays comparing the "bigness" of Houston (landwise) to other cities, and maybe even a scaled, walk-through model of the city. There could maybe even be a "Houston in transition" type exhibit, with like-like cityscapes of old Houston. There could be an "experience" type exhibit of driving on the Gulf freeway in the 1940s, since it was the first of many that have shaped Houston today.

Hmmm, that TTC in the quote Pineda should be GP. I've made the change in my post.

Pineda, if they said something about analysis being done in a 1200' foot swath, what they really mean is that they studied a 1200' buffer of either side of each alignment proposed for the Grand Parkway. This is not because of some devious plan to have the ROW take up 1200'. This number mandated by the federal government as part of the environmental impact process. MaxConcrete, I agree totally with the idea of a wooded parkway, so that it actually is a PARKway. You mentioned I-45 near Conroe, and there are tons of segments of I-20 in Alabama, Georgia, and Mississippi (near Jackson) that are built like this and I'm sure that their ROWs aren't more than 400'. People would be surprised how much difference even a 50' forest in between the lanes would make in the highway's perception. I know, I know, some here would say, "well, that's until they widen it..." Well, you can build a 4-lane tollway with room for 2 more lanes in about 200' of ROW if you had to, especially with no feeders. If they have a 400' ROW, then they can definitely keep the wooded feel.

I say build the median

This advice may be unwanted, but here goes anyway-- I think the people who don't want the Grand Parkway, e.g. those in Spring and Alvin, whould have their organized groups focus on a list of priorities based on their goals and objectives. For example, 1st priority is no construction of the GP altogether. 2nd priority is to get all the mitigation you can if they decide to build it anyway, such as neighborhood sensitive treatments to the GP (decorations, planings, pedestrian and bike crossings, easements), maybe even try to convince them to make it below grade. A 3rd priority (and actually should go on during the entire protest) is how to maintain (what's left of) your neighborhood after the GP comes through there. I think strong neighborhood advocacy groups that really look out for the interests of the neighborhood and its well-being would prove vital to the upkeep of the area. I'm sure most of these people own property and homes in these areas, so there is emotional attachment--otherwise they wouldn't fight so passionately. My point is that if it looks like the GP will be built, don't give up on your neighborhood. You might have to fight a little bit more for it, but it's your home. GP might be a giant sour lemon to you, but hopefully some lemonade can still be made from it.

I don't think the people of Spring are against the Grand Parkway altogether, they just disagree with the current alignment options. I've seen suggestions to push the road further north into Montgomery County. Pineda, I think you misunderstood my comments regarding Alvin. My point was that people in Spring can't be expected to be as zealous about the southern part of GP through Alvin, just as people in Alvin or anywhere else can be expected to be so exciting about opposing "just" segment F-2. I know Alvin has its own website and coalition standing against GP. Speaking of that site, Alvin's people are against building GP for reasons e.g. traffic, pollution, crime, and ending their 'rural' lifestyle. But they would rather the money be spent on widening current roads? You get the same problems in either case. One four lane tollroad or 12 roads crisscrossing your area that are 4-6 lanes wide--either way there will be pluses and minuses.

Pineda, While I commend you and the other residents of Spring for your will to stand for your neighborhood, you have to understand that most people outside of Spring will not quite understand your perspective, simply because they don't live there. On the other hand, if more people see a benefit in something in *their* lives, then they will speak out about it. I said this before, but I highly doubt the folks in Spring feel as vigorously as the folks in Alvin do about the GP's alignments in their city. And you can't be expected to because you don't live in Alvin. Same principle applies in lots of cases; e.g. some people think that the US spends too much on defense, well, if you cut costs, you could also end up closing bases which are the economic lifebloods of several communities (like my hometown, which is still on life support after our base--which was the home of the Military Police School and the Chemical Weapons School--closed in 1999), but around the country, people think that the costs are cut. I also heard a man once say, "it's easy to be liberal or conservative in abstract, but you know how yoou are when you're confronted with an uncomfortable situation". Or how about the people who live in areas that become gentrified and have to leave. Most in a community will feel like that area is coming up and a positive for the city--but those who were forced out have a different tale to tell. Sorry about the babble but I hope you get my point--outside of you, adagio, and other Springers, most Greater Houston residents will feel like they know what's best for the community on a macro scale, including yours on a micro scale--and you will likely disagree. You're not the first group of people and likely won't be the last. So, do what you feel will help your community (thus your interests), but don't expect others to fully relate, just as you can't always fully relate to other people's struggles.

I agree with that development will come to NW Harris with or without Grand Parkway. I actually believe that beltways get TOO much credit in the sprawling of cities. Sometimes it's just raw (perceived) costs. Sure, one could argue that "a home may be cheaper on Mason than it is on Memorial but you'll make up the difference is gas", but there are just some costs that people seem to deal with regardless. Also, because of Houston's polycentric nature, development that far out is a matter of manifest destiny. I can't remember the guy's name, but I remember a person in the Chronicle saying that Houston should do all it can to have "super-communities" a la the Woodlands with 60,000 residents, jobs, and retail along the Grand Parkway. The more I think about it, the more I prefer it to no building the GP and people moving out there in any fashion, especially with the GP having very few exits and virtually no feeders. It won't be as dense as a rail station, but access points to the GP will be prime locations for the next master-planned communities. Remember, Austin had the attitude of not building freeways and hoping that the sprawl wouldn't come, but it came anyway. Now Austin will get those same freeways, except they are decades late and will have toll booths on them indefinitely. Phoenix is sprawling out of control to its north, with development occuring far north of its outerloop, which was finished not too long ago. Orlando is another big sprawler that is now trying to catch up with the development by placing overreaching tollway loops around its development. Ironically San Antonio, IMO, with a very good freeway network (with no substantial centerline mile additions in a long time), may be the least sprawled major Texas metro.