tierwestah Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 Sorry if this has been talked about before, i just didn't have time to look but has Sugarland's population reached 100k yet? I may be moving out there if this job works out and i'm growing more interested in Sugarland. I drove through there likse the Town Center, First Colony Mall, etc and it was nice. It's sort of like The Woodlands except I think The Woodlands may be a tad better because of the mock riverwalk and Market Street. But if i get this job, it's definitely a place i wouldn't mind moving to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memebag Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 "Sugar Land" has a space in it. The current population is 99,999. That space is just for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tierwestah Posted June 10, 2008 Author Share Posted June 10, 2008 "Sugar Land" has a space in it. The current population is 99,999. That space is just for you.I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or serious. Is that really Sugarland's population and if so, where'd you find that info? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memebag Posted June 10, 2008 Share Posted June 10, 2008 I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or serious. Is that really Sugarland's population and if so, where'd you find that info?I'm being silly. Sugar Land's population is currently undetermined. The city limit sign I just passed said 76,000 and change. Some web sites put it over 80,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 I'm being silly. Sugar Land's population is currently undetermined. The city limit sign I just passed said 76,000 and change. Some web sites put it over 80,000.US Census estimate as of July 1, 2006: 79,943. It's been growing in the neighborhood of 2,500 per year. So let's call it 85,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 With the lands that Sugar Land can annex, it would put it above 100K right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxmulder Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 The traffic lights are horrible in sugar land...I wasted half my lunch going to Missouri city thought 59 and 6... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolBuddy06 Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 The traffic lights are horrible in sugar land...I wasted half my lunch going to Missouri city thought 59 and 6...Traffic is my only reason for not shopping in 1st Colony Mall often. I can stand moderate traffic but Hwy 6, especially around 59 is just too silly to me. Signal lights around the area could be better but instead of the city working on that and easing people's lives, they put in cameras. It's funny the way they reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memebag Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 The traffic lights are horrible in sugar land...I wasted half my lunch going to Missouri city thought 59 and 6...Traffic is my only reason for not shopping in 1st Colony Mall often. I can stand moderate traffic but Hwy 6, especially around 59 is just too silly to me. Signal lights around the area could be better but instead of the city working on that and easing people's lives, they put in cameras. It's funny the way they reason.Tips for making lunch in Sugar Land around 59 and 6 more ejoyable:1. Take a longer lunch.2. Install a good sound system in your car.3. Bring along someone from work to torment.4. Take a trip to Montrose or the Galleria at lunch time and see what bad traffic is really like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Try lunchables. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxmulder Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Traffic is my only reason for not shopping in 1st Colony Mall often. I can stand moderate traffic but Hwy 6, especially around 59 is just too silly to me. Signal lights around the area could be better but instead of the city working on that and easing people's lives, they put in cameras. It's funny the way they reason. I see why they put UP the cameras people knew they took too damn long and refused to stop... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolBuddy06 Posted June 12, 2008 Share Posted June 12, 2008 I see why they put UP the cameras people knew they took too damn long and refused to stop... ...right, but those cameras will be gone soon when their maintenance cost surpasses the fund they generate. I've never seen them catch anyone, even at the period when they were just put in. I used Hwy 6 a lot then because my newborn daughter's doctor is in Kelsey-Seybold. I changed to the Pearland location just because of traffic - one patronage lost. At least I've seen the ones on Westpark and Westheimer flashed before (not on my behind though). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 ...right, but those cameras will be gone soon when their maintenance cost surpasses the fund they generate. I've never seen them catch anyone, even at the period when they were just put in. I used Hwy 6 a lot then because my newborn daughter's doctor is in Kelsey-Seybold. I changed to the Pearland location just because of traffic - one patronage lost. At least I've seen the ones on Westpark and Westheimer flashed before (not on my behind though).Just the other day I saw the flash go off when a car ran the light at Highway 6 and U.S. 59. And, if I'm not mistaken, maintenance is the responsibility of the company that installed the cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banking214 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Just the other day I saw the flash go off when a car ran the light at Highway 6 and U.S. 59. And, if I'm not mistaken, maintenance is the responsibility of the company that installed the cameras.I could be wrong, but I thought it was supposed to flash. I have seen it do so before, but only on overcast days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I could be wrong, but I thought it was supposed to flash. I have seen it do so before, but only on overcast days.I think they always flash, you just might not see it in broad daylight.The point I was trying to make, in response to a previous post, is that the red light cameras ARE working, and that I don't think the city pays for maintenance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolBuddy06 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Just the other day I saw the flash go off when a car ran the light at Highway 6 and U.S. 59. And, if I'm not mistaken, maintenance is the responsibility of the company that installed the cameras.They don't maintain them for free, do they? And the city can only break even when maintenance costs is lower than fines paid by violators. Dallas and some other cities are considering taking some cameras off just because people hardly run lights at those intersections anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 I'm not certain, but I think the company that installs the cameras gets a cut of some of the ticket revenue. If that's true, then, yes, they're free.But I could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.