august948

In terms of skyline one of the things I wish we had are some rises where you could see it in the distance.  We were back in Atlanta a couple of weeks ago and I'm always awed by the skyline, particularly at night, when viewed from one of the many hills on the north side of town.

You are right on the look and feel, but this is how I look at it:  The EC is suburban in nature, Uptown is semi-urban in nature and TMC/Downtown are urban in nature.  For the foreseeable future I think they will remain this way and that's ok.  It's nice to have that kind of diversity in the same city and even within 20 to 30 minutes driving time of each other.  I'd rather have them be distinctly different styles than have it all one way or the other.

Are you asserting by the equation "(R x V) = hisd squandered dollars" that all money collected by hisd via property taxes is squandered?

Hisd spends more and accomplishes what than almost all Texas school districts?

Did you just get your first ever property tax bill?

 

Administrator's refuse to adopt the disciplines of  physiology and sociology  disciplines necessary for efficient classroom instruction. 

How does physiology relate to efficient classroom instruction?

 

Administrators CREATE inefficiency  by  REFUSING to adopt multi-disciplinary approach necessary for effective and efficient  classroom environment

What, exactly, is the multi-disciplinary approach you are advocating?

Look, I wasn't attacking people for working or living nearby to the EC.  I'm just saying that if its 14 or 10 million (whatever it is) sq ft. that size would have added to an existing area closer in quite well.

 

As a "district" its very raw.  The buildings are largely uninspired - architecturally they're weak - and the distance between the western and eastern most points is considerable.  As a commercial real estate zone its no doubt quite strong, but its just got a long way to go to be anything greater than the sum of its parts.  That's all.

 

And when I speak of density I'm not saying it needs to be like Midtown NYC!  Just saying that it might have been nice to have a more cohesive feel to the "district."  Again, its large, but far from in charge.  Uptown, TMC and Downtown will always be much greater than this linear stretch of tilt-walls, and spec 14 floor buildings designed in revit.

District in the case is more of a governmental/development term.  The EC district works to improve the local infrastructure and beautification.  The Westchase district is much the same.  They've put up signage and beautified the area somewhat.  I think they are also behind some of the sidewalk improvements in the area.  They pushed Metro to get a circulator route in the area.  I don't think they have any influence whatsoever on the architecture of the area.

The EC may be bigger, but it will not have the number of residential highrises, nor will it ever likely have the same density of hotels as Uptown.

 

Also, the EC has the must mundane and boring skyline (if it really counts as one) in town - heck, even Greenspoint is more interesting!  Uptown is far more interesting, and while perhaps square footage of office spaces are smaller the architecture is of a much higher quality (Randall Davis and the Mercer notwithstanding).

 

I'm really never clear why people love the EC so much?  If anything its existence has greatly dimenished the density of Westchase, Memorial City and the inner Beltway I-10 frontage areas.

Most likely it's because most people aren't looking for high-quality or unusual architecture or are particularly concerned about it's skyline.  It's existence means that the many people who work there don't have to drive all the way downtown to work and thus can live in surrounding communities with lower prices than inside the loop and a shorter commute.  Besides, the EC straddles Terry Hershey park and is a generally pleasant area.  Given that EC, Westchase, Memorial City and the inner Beltway areas are all pretty much suburban in style and density (as is almost all of Houston), I don't think removing the EC would make a significant impact in density, even if it were possible.

but Houston has a little more height.

 

Of it course. Houston has more and bigger throughout the city. Its the true Texas skyscraper city.  It ranks higher on the Raime ratings at number #4 but Dallas is nipping at Los Angeles' heels at #6 which Im proud of.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Raime/Skyline_rankings

 

Of course these change a lot. There's developments all over the country. Im just glad Texas has such great cities.

Though Dallas is the third most populous*cough*..... I consider Houston and Dallas to be the New York and Chicago of Texas.

Or maybe New York and Chicago are the Houston and Dallas of whatever they call that area north of Texas. 

That's nice.  It reminds me of a current commercial featuring some vapid hipster driving a car that's battling it out with his self absorption to see if Darwin's gonna win or not - just as in years past, there were those who apparently thought that buying a Volvo would somehow guarantee their vehicular immortality.

 

One should still drive at the prevailing speed of traffic, one still ought to stay out of other people's blind spots, and one should still turn one's punkin' haid and actually look before changing lanes.

Well said.

If you find yourself nervous while driving, just stay in the same lane and work your way over to an exit as you feel comfortable.  Houston is pretty easy to navigate so you can always find your way from wherever you land and, who knows, you might stumble across something interesting.

The whole point of this rail line is a non-stop service between the major cities. It would totally defeat the purpose to stop at every average size town along the way. 

And yet that's how the Shinkasen works in Japan.  They run both non-stops and puddle-jumpers.  Railroads have been doing this sort of thing since the 19th century.  It's really not that hard for them to talk and chew gum at the same time.

If you're concerned about hurricanes, I'd ask around to find out how each community, especially south of town, fared during hurricane Ike.  Also ask about the evacuations, if you really want to hear some tales.  If you want to be off the coast a little more and closer to fishing west of Houston, Sugar Land and vicinity might be worth a look.  It's got some freeway and tollway connectivity and is not too far from some of the more interesting parts of town.  Plus I believe they have commuter bus service of some sort to TMC, where you could catch a train downtown.

The car I rented this past weekend in calgary had an indicator on the side mirror that went on when someone was in your blind spot

Say what?  Calgary has a light rail system and you didn't opt to ride it instead?  What about the carbon footprint you're leaving (in addition to that of the flight)?

Maybe a future Dallas--SA line would skew the T to the East instead of West as the original Texas T-Bone plan laid out. Hang a right at US 79 as you head up 35. Make the "CS area" stop the junction instead of Temple.

 

Why run it through the middle of the countryside you ask? Because it's flat. Because it is the middle of the countryside--land is cheap. Because there will be fewer constituents to fight for either rerouting or demanding a local stop that doesn't make financial sense. 

 

An interesting idea.  As for running it through the middle of the countryside, the land is flat all along the eastern side of I35 as well.  As I understand it, the intention is to use existing right of ways anyway so there won't be much land purchasing involved.  Looking at the Osaka to Tokyo Shinkansen route, there are 17 stops including the end points.  Some of those are the size of Waco or smaller.  One is around 40k in pop.  It was routed along a populated corridor with a mixture of small and large towns and small cities.  That's more true of the I35 corridor than it is of the I45 corridor.  As for constituents demanding stops, etc. I suspect that is already happening and is naturally going to be part of a project like this.  Already politicians at the TTC and in DFW are involved.

It was a guess, but since we know each mile will cost 6-7 that sounds about right. They're not focused on other routes right now, just Dallas to Houston. It's a moot point for not only that but because there's no reason to stop in a small town like Waco. What does it have besides your personal preference?

It doesn't have anything to do with my personal preferences,  If this thing is successful, and it looks promising at any rate, they will end up building a line from DFW to San Antonio.  That line will go through Waco.  Whether they put in a stop now or a stop later is no big deal.  It's all about where the rail line itself is going to run.  Why run it through the middle of the countryside where there truly are only small towns like Mexia and Corsicana when for a few extra miles of track you can get a 90 mile head start on a DFW to San Antonio line?

http://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/24292-metro-transit-center-in-tmc/

The energy corridor might be a bit too stretched out for that.  Westchase, though has some possibilities.

It might be my imagination, but it looks like the curbs in the crossover are newer than those of Allen Parkway, plus the gates are in pretty good shape.  That indicates to me that they are there for some ongoing purpose and not just decaying leftovers from a road rebuild.  Probably something like Ross mentions above.

If that happens...I will kill myself >.>

 

Abandon shopping malls will be one of the bigger design/urban planning challenges my generation and the generation before will have to face in the coming decade or two. They present so many opportunities, but at the same time so many problems because of the shear scale of the land you are given. Especially since the immediate area is also vastly underdeveloped you get into a situation as to what exactly do you put there!? Mid-rise development doesn't really make much since because there is nothing else around it to support it....unless you decide to build a new town from scratch (which could be an option...a very interesting one I might add!). We don't need another entertainment venue as we have way to many. Theme park is out of the question because there are like two going up right now and not to mention it would be a real headache for this area. You can't build small residential as the value of those homes would plummet afterwards as a good portion of this area is still in decay and nobody builds those kinds of developments this deep into town anymore. Commercial campus?? Maybe if it was the right investor with a big brand. What I'm scared of is that it might be turned into distribution centers -.- since that is the main business of the immediate area. 

A large piece of land, mostly paved over, near the intersection of 3 freeways, central location in the metro area.  Sounds like the best use may well be for a distribution center.  Dead malls are usually in areas that are in decay so it's not really going to be that much of a challenge to figure out what to do with them.  Since the mall is an invention of the automobile age, they are frequently on or near highways and/or intersections of highways.  Those that are in decaying areas can go the distribution center route and those that are still in nice areas can be redeveloped into mixed use or indoor/outdoor retail (a la Memorial City Mall and Town & Country, now City Centre).

A few extra miles is definitely not justified when each mile of track will cost 6-7 million dollars. This would more than likely be a hundred million dollar detour that won't be justified by the very few tickets that it would sell. Waco is too small of a town.

I don't know where you got the 100 million figure from but, if we just go with that, 100M/6.5M (average of your per mile estimate) buys us just over 15 miles of extra track.  If they gain a 90 mile head start on a line from DFW to San Antonio by going through Waco that puts them ahead 75 miles or 487 million dollars.  Half a billion dollars can buy a lot of justification.

It's a moot point, though, as they have indicated the corridor will run up 45.

That's a lot of money to spend on a detour that almost certainly won't pay itself off. I doubt Waco has a high enough population to justify a separate rail station unlike CS which has a booming biomedical field that needs to work closely with the Texas Medical Center.

If you look at a map, as the crow flies it's really not much of a detour if the train is already in CS.  Certainly a few extra miles would easily be justified by the 90 mile head start you could get on a line from DFW to San Antonio.  However, reading the report from the Star-Telegram, looks like the intended corridor is I45 so I have to wonder how far east of CS the line is actually going to run.

Nah. Waco makes even less sense than CS. This isn't just about school pride or w/e.

The most of the demographic there can't afford a HSR ticket for a casual weekend getaway/day trip. The small percentage of rich people and the 15,000 Baylor students would be all that would use that stop I feel.

I don't really care about school pride that much, but it'd be cool to have a hsr destination I might actually use. 

You may be right on the demographics, though it might get a lot of play on weekends from Dallas students going home, but if you just head straight north to Dallas from CS you're just running through farm and ranch land.  By shifting over a bit to Waco we get a 90 mile head start on an eventual Dallas, Austin, San Antonio line.  That might be significant as a line to Waco is almost a third of the total distance between Dallas and SA.

College Station is a better choice than Waco, because Waco's growth patterns aren't growing much, and while College Station-Bryan is a bustling 200k area with a massive university, a growing biomedical industry, and a lot of potential.

 

What this will mean is it will probably sprout some very upscale bedroom communities for those going to Houston.

Actually, I was suggesting it go through both CS and Waco.  Not sure if that's even feasible but it might save me some driving at least once a year.

There's a higher potential for revenue I'm CS than there is for Waco, which has Baylor and Dr.Pepper and that's about it...granted one of those is very important to the state of Texas and the rest of the established world, and the other is Baylor...

Ouch.

if Dallas gets a downtown stop and Houstons stop ends up outside of the loop im going to shit a brick.

I think I'll jump for joy.  It'd be a closer ride for me to get to a Galleria area station than having to go downtown or to the airports to catch a flight.  Of course, I do my best to avoid Dallas so it might be a moot point.

ugh. no college station stop please. and if they must stop there, make at least half the trips direct Houston to Dallas, and alternate which ones stop there. i like to spend as little time in college station as possible.

I wouldn't worry about it.  Most likely there'll be plenty of not-stops to Dallas and a few that will stop in CS.  I think I heard somewhere that they may try to run departures every 30 mins.  That leaves plenty of room for non-stops as well as CS-stops.

Would it help if they shifted the alignment to go Houston, CS, Waco, Dallas?

I've heard that the vote is scheduled for 4:53am on Thursday, Jan 1.  A 30 second window will be allowed for votes to be cast.  Voting to be done in person at McMurdo Station, Antarctica.

Crime happens all over.  Latest case I've heard about was the guy found dead by a jogger in the Heights yesterday.