METRORail University Line

[TheNiche]

...a LITTLE zoning.

No such thing. It would be analogous to saying that somebody is a LITTLE pregnant.

All or nothing. That's what federal law requires.

By the way, I'd welcome somebody (like CVS) that charged people for the right to park in a space, but don't much care for the idea of the City forcing that arrangement. If retail tenants' customers can't reasonably access the retail establishment because parking spaces are mostly used by commuters, then retail development in downtown and midtown could be adversely impacted.

On the other hand, I'd support a public parking garage at Wheeler Station, right where the Red and University lines will meet. A P&R would be really useful there.

[musicman]

The city requires a certain amount of parking spaces per sq/ft. So you see, the owner does not have complete control of the parking situation. I'm sure when CVS builds their predictable pile of crap on Main there will be parking galore for their customers but not for us lowly transit nuts-unless the city chooses to step in with some new parking regs. We can only hope.

The property owner will determine who parks there. The City has no control over this matter.

[ricco67]

No such thing. It would be analogous to saying that somebody is a LITTLE pregnant.

On the other hand, I'd support a public parking garage at Wheeler Station, right where the Red and University lines will meet. A P&R would be really useful there.

You take things too literally, but I guess that's what I get for trying to use sarcasm on here.

As far as a Public P&R for Wheeler station, for all practical purposes, there already is one. Sears was kind enough to look the other way when it comes to the use of the parking lot at Wheeler/San Jacinto/Fannin. They probably figure they can get business from people who need to buy a pair of socks or something on the way home after work.

[nmainguy]

The property owner will determine who parks there.

Who said they don't?

The City has no control over this matter.

In addition to the city's requirements for spaces per sq/ft, every parking space is required to be within 120' of a tree. The number of trees required is the amount of parking spaces divided by 10.

Shrubs are required for new parking lots and 75% of them must be planted along the perimeter of the parking lot. So once again, you can see why the owner does not have complete control of his/her parking lot.

[musicman]

The initial post was......It also makes me wonder if the city can enact some rules regarding parking in businesses to prevent vehicles being towed. You know the parking at the CVS would be quite attractive to those commuters.

I said that the owner has complete conrol of who can park there.

the ordinances you reference only determine how much parking should be provided NOT who can park there.

[nmainguy]

I said that the owner has complete conrol of who can park there.

the ordinances you reference only determine how much parking should be provided NOT who can park there.

Actually you said:

The owner of the property determines the parking situation.

As you can see by only a few of the regulations I cited as required by the city, the owner does not determine the situation any more than he can plop down his building anywhere he wants; anymore than he can build as tall as he wants if there are regulations regarding building height. He may decide where to put the parking lot (within the required minimums) but he has little to say as to the amount of spaces, shrubs, trees, floor drains-the list goes on and on.

Now the owner can plant more trees and shrubs than required and have more parking spaces than required if he so chooses but he must abide by the minimum.

Neither I nor anyone else here has said anything about requiring property owners to letting just anyone park there. There have been suggestions about new city regulations that might be of benefit to owners and drivers alike but you seem to be the only one with this particular monkey on your back.

[musicman]

Neither I nor anyone else here has said anything about requiring property owners to letting just anyone park there. There have been suggestions about new city regulations that might be of benefit to owners and drivers alike but you seem to be the only one with this particular monkey on your back.

The post started because Ricco67 said "It also makes me wonder if the city can enact some rules regarding parking in businesses to prevent vehicles being towed. You know the parking at the CVS would be quite attractive to those commuters. "

So someone DID suggest the that the City intervene to allow vehicles to park on private property. I responded that the owner of the property will determine the parking situation, i.e. who can park there.

No monkey on my back....I am interpreting English not misinterpreting it.

[AftonAg]

Just a small digression, but do you think AftonAg's wife ever wins an argument with him, or do you think he will ALWAYS have an answer for anything she puts on the table.

Actually that is part of the reason I post here - With a wife and three kids ol' dad doesn't win very often. I used to umpire baseball games for the same reason - It made it possible for me to win 1/2 the arguments I enter into in a year. By the way I never lost an argument on a baseball field as an umpire, and in eight years and over 1,000 games I only ejected one coach. Sorry to digress, but the post did beg for an answer.

[tamtagon]

Hopefully, Culberson will realize he is not the umpire for METRO expansion.

[Pumapayam]

Richmond Rail seriously needs to update the site!

Here is an edited update I found:

Although no consensus has emerged on the route of the University line on either side of Metro's Main Street Red Line, planners are focusing on Elgin, Alabama and Wheeler for the eastern segment.

The three run parallel, with Elgin about half a mile from Wheeler and Alabama halfway between them. If Elgin or Alabama were chosen, the tracks would connect to Richmond, which is the continuation of Wheeler, at the Red Line's Wheeler station.

Whether the route from that point west to the Galleria area should run on Richmond, Westpark, a combination of the two or somewhere else, has been hotly disputed for months.

The University line is still early in the planning process compared to the nearby Southeast Bus Rapid Transit line, whose Draft Environmental Impact Statement, required for federal funding, was recently released for public comment. Metro's board may vote on that route at its Sept. 21 meeting.

The University line Draft Environmental Impact Statement is expected to be released in December or January.

[AftonAg]

The post started because Ricco67 said "It also makes me wonder if the city can enact some rules regarding parking in businesses to prevent vehicles being towed. You know the parking at the CVS would be quite attractive to those commuters. "

So someone DID suggest the that the City intervene to allow vehicles to park on private property. I responded that the owner of the property will determine the parking situation, i.e. who can park there.

No monkey on my back....I am interpreting English not misinterpreting it.

You have echoed one of my previous posts Musicman. Someone - I think it was Ricco, suggested at one time that the Windsor Plaza parking lot on Richmond would make a great P&R lot for those using the rail if it were placed on Richmond. I posted that I had very serious doubts that the owners would allow their parking lot to be used for rail users that might or might not patronize the stores of their tenants. I know several business owners in Windsor Plaza and none of them would be happy about such an arrangement. While the City can specify the number of spaces required per store (based on the store size of course), and they can also require the owner to landscape and provide speed bumps, signage, etc. It is still private property and as such I don't believe they have any right to tell the property owner that they must also provide free parking spaces for users of METRO, not without some kind of cost to the city.

Hopefully, Culberson will realize he is not the umpire for METRO expansion.

Actually he fully realizes he isn't the umpire - he further up the chain, he hold the Federal purse strings. The majority of my neighbors, and I, and apparently the majority of his constituents apparently are very happy about that, as you might imagine. The Pro-railers also tend to forget that the Honorable Mr. Culberson did get over 12 million dollars for the CoH for the engineering of the Main Street line. Despite Mr. Delay, another fact that is buried by the pro-rail folks.

[nmainguy]

Hopefully, Culberson will realize he is not the umpire for METRO expansion.

There's an excellent chance Culberson's influence will be greatly reduced after Nov. 11th. Wouldn't that be refreshing: not to have some right-wing-nut holding an entire METRO line hostage just because he and a very small minority of myopic homeowners are all pouty over losing the referendum.

Addition pouts are forecast for Nov. 8th.

[nmainguy]

I think I've mentioned before that Richmond and Westheimer will be getting overpasses at the UP tracks.

Does anyone know if TXDOT, the city and METRO are teaming up to build them or is it just wishful thinking on my part?

In any event-as you can see from the preliminaries http://www.houstonrailplan.com/images/proj...nal/rich_gs.jpg

http://www.houstonrailplan.com/images/proj...stheimer_gs.jpg

these bridges will actually elevate traffic noise that will waft over AO not to mention how fast some will be tempted to travel on Richmond as there are currently no stop signs or traffic signals between Weslyan and the loop.

Things are looking dire for the poor put-upons of AO-LRT or not.

Here's a rundown on the estimated costs: http://www.houstonrailplan.com/projects/terminal.htm

[AftonAg]

There's an excellent chance Culberson's influence will be greatly reduced after Nov. 11th. Wouldn't that be refreshing: not to have some right-wing-nut holding an entire METRO line hostage just because he and a very small minority of myopic homeowners are all pouty over losing the referendum.

Addition pouts are forecast for Nov. 8th.

52% to 48% - nuff said. So you finally decided to take your owl feathers off - welcome back!

[AftonAg]

I think I've mentioned before that Richmond and Westheimer will be getting overpasses at the UP tracks.

Does anyone know if TXDOT, the city and METRO are teaming up to build them or is it just wishful thinking on my part?

In any event-as you can see from the preliminaries http://www.houstonrailplan.com/images/proj...nal/rich_gs.jpg

http://www.houstonrailplan.com/images/proj...stheimer_gs.jpg

these bridges will actually elevate traffic noise that will waft over AO not to mention how fast some will be tempted to travel on Richmond as there are currently no stop signs or traffic signals between Weslyan and the loop.

I can't imagine that people will drive any faster on Richmond because of a bridge over the RR tracks. Jeez O Pete the average speed is already around 50 for the speeders - according to one of our security guards that is an HPD officer. As for the noise "wafting" over AO I guess we will just have to turn the sound up on our Plasma TV's. Besides as we are so frequently characterized as being an older crowd most of us have lost a good deal of our hearing already. WHAT????? Did You Say Something?

Things are looking dire for the poor put-upons of AO-LRT or not.

Here's a rundown on the estimated costs: http://www.houstonrailplan.com/projects/terminal.htm

[Overseas]

I know this is getting a bit off topic, and implementation of the Houston Rail Plan may not be likely, but does anyone else think spending $175+ million to build bridges over a railway line might not be the best use of money? We could probably buy and remove the thing for that kind of money, freeing up traffic while sparing the neighborhoods the blight of 6 lane overpasses. Hell, we could even put in a bike way and link up into Memorial Park for that kind of cash.

[AftonAg]

I know this is getting a bit off topic, and implementation of the Houston Rail Plan may not be likely, but does anyone else think spending $175+ million to build bridges over a railway line might not be the best use of money? We could probably buy and remove the thing for that kind of money, freeing up traffic while sparing the neighborhoods the blight of 6 lane overpasses. Hell, we could even put in a bike way and link up into Memorial Park for that kind of cash.

I agree that the money could be better spent, but I doubt that it could be bought and removed for that. The line is used a lot and I am not sure a viable alternative route exists if it were removed.

[Houston19514]

I know this is getting a bit off topic, and implementation of the Houston Rail Plan may not be likely, but does anyone else think spending $175+ million to build bridges over a railway line might not be the best use of money? We could probably buy and remove the thing for that kind of money, freeing up traffic while sparing the neighborhoods the blight of 6 lane overpasses. Hell, we could even put in a bike way and link up into Memorial Park for that kind of cash.

That does seem expensive, but just to clarify, that spending estimate is for building bridges over Terminal Subdivision railway line at seven locations: Bellaire, Houston, Richmond, San Felipe, Shepherd-Durham, TC Jester, and Westheimer.

[ricco67]

I know this is getting a bit off topic, and implementation of the Houston Rail Plan may not be likely, but does anyone else think spending $175+ million to build bridges over a railway line might not be the best use of money? We could probably buy and remove the thing for that kind of money, freeing up traffic while sparing the neighborhoods the blight of 6 lane overpasses. Hell, we could even put in a bike way and link up into Memorial Park for that kind of cash.

As some people have already stated, that line can't just be easily moved without a MAJOR rerouting. To purchase that lin from the railroad would be very prohibitive as far as costs goes because of the increase of fuel /time and labor to move to another route.

I'm not sure a flyover would do well on San Filipe due to the narrow space. If an overpass was constructed on Westheimer and Richmond, that might actually take quite a bit of traffic off of San Filipe much to the cheers of the people that live in that area.

[CDeb]

52% to 48% - nuff said. So you finally decided to take your owl feathers off - welcome back!

I've got to hand it to ya', I've never seen someone brag so much over a losing score.

[musicman]

You have echoed one of my previous posts Musicman. Someone - I think it was Ricco, suggested at one time that the Windsor Plaza parking lot on Richmond would make a great P&R lot for those using the rail if it were placed on Richmond. I posted that I had very serious doubts that the owners would allow their parking lot to be used for rail users that might or might not patronize the stores of their tenants. I know several business owners in Windsor Plaza and none of them would be happy about such an arrangement. While the City can specify the number of spaces required per store (based on the store size of course), and they can also require the owner to landscape and provide speed bumps, signage, etc. It is still private property and as such I don't believe they have any right to tell the property owner that they must also provide free parking spaces for users of METRO, not without some kind of cost to the city.

Speaking of this, I was just eating lunch at 888 by Gulfgate and the wreckers were out in force towing vehicles from Gulfgate's parking lots. They were eating at Brisket House AKA Pappas BBQ but parking in empty spaces at the edge of Gulfgate . Guess Ed Wulfe isn't as nice as many think he is.

[ricco67]

That's funny, I was there during lunch too! LOL. I gues we were seated next to eachother.

There is massive towing going on over the starbucks strip center at Montrose/hawthorne because people park there when they go to the chinese embassey.

[RedScare]

I've got to hand it to ya', I've never seen someone brag so much over a losing score.

Well....he did go to A&M.

[AftonAg]

Well....he did go to A&M.

I wasn't bragging - I was pointing out that 48% is hardly a small minority. Of course an inch is as good as a mile to the winner, victory is victory and even the ugliest win is better than a "pretty" loss.

Welcome to Page 37 - courtesy of AFTONAG!

Speaking of this, I was just eating lunch at 888 by Gulfgate and the wreckers were out in force towing vehicles from Gulfgate's parking lots. They were eating at Brisket House AKA Pappas BBQ but parking in empty spaces at the edge of Gulfgate . Guess Ed Wulfe isn't as nice as many think he is.

I rest my case on the parking on private property issue.

[MiDTOWNeR]

I know this is getting a bit off topic, and implementation of the Houston Rail Plan may not be likely, but does anyone else think spending $175+ million to build bridges over a railway line might not be the best use of money? We could probably buy and remove the thing for that kind of money, freeing up traffic while sparing the neighborhoods the blight of 6 lane overpasses. Hell, we could even put in a bike way and link up into Memorial Park for that kind of cash.

Certainly when faced with the problems of the world today, it would be quite easy to find another way to spend $175+ million.

The fact that the railroad and these two high traffic streets let alone countless others in this town still intersect is appalling. More projects such as this to minimize the railroads impact on daily life in H-town only adds to the overall quality of life here.

[AftonAg]

Certainly when faced with the problems of the world today, it would be quite easy to find another way to spend $175+ million.

The fact that the railroad and these two high traffic streets let alone countless others in this town still intersect is appalling. More projects such as this to minimize the railroads impact on daily life in H-town only adds to the overall quality of life here.

I really don't see the railroad tracks as that big of a problem, they are like a speed bump with a penalty. I would rather see the money spent elsewhere. They do slow traffic down on Richmond, but unfortunately it is only for a very very short stretch.

[nmainguy]

I really don't see the railroad tracks as that big of a problem, they are like a speed bump with a penalty. I would rather see the money spent elsewhere. They do slow traffic down on Richmond, but unfortunately it is only for a very very short stretch.

WOW! That's amazing! You have no trouble with a freight train rumbling past AO but a quiet electric train that takes no property on Richmond is akin to Hell on Earth!

Bizarre-but then again, you are the one who suggested this:

...and one of Houston's newest business segments - the bicycle taxi will certainly benefit from hauling people back and forth from Richmond to the metro station.

RICKSHAWS RULE!!!

[CDeb]

Well....he did go to A&M.

Well, my alma mater didn't do so hot against the Aggies this past weekend....

[IHB2]

Well, my alma mater didn't do so hot against the Aggies this past weekend....

you went to a Division III school? b/c it seems like that's all the Ags scheduled before they have to play a conference game.

[Overseas]

Certainly when faced with the problems of the world today, it would be quite easy to find another way to spend $175+ million.

The fact that the railroad and these two high traffic streets let alone countless others in this town still intersect is appalling. More projects such as this to minimize the railroads impact on daily life in H-town only adds to the overall quality of life here.

I agree we should minimize the impact of freight trains on traffic and on residential areas. I was just thinking if we were going to be spending that kind of money and winding up with a series of freeway-style overpasses, with all the related noise/blight problems on the surrounding area, perhaps we should be thinking of some other solution. While traffic would improve, exchanging occasional train noise for traffic noise doesn't seem much of an improvement.

And personally, I'd be a lot more concerned about a 6 lane bridge in my neighborhood than a tram.