METRORail University Line

[feufoma]

I've marked up phrases in your response that reveal your underlying elitism and disregard for the local culture. I may be in the minority on this opinion, but in my mind, this attitude is no more or less backward than that of racist thugs or cocooned religious fundamentalists.

In your middle paragraph, I'm not going to argue with you because I don't necessarily disagree. It is a non-issue.

The last paragraph, however, indicates how little thought you've put into your rhetorically-loaded post. You've effectively claimed that we're already stuck in unimaginable traffic...but if we're stuck in it, surely we can imagine it. In all honesty, the traffic could be much much worse. Seriously, I think that there will be a time when high-capacity fixed-guideway transit becomes a real and necessary option, but I doubt that we're living in those times just yet. Why build now to solve problems of the future? And far more importantly, I am just about certain that the way that we've implemented LRT is a failure; that is my biggest gripe. After that, my next biggest gripe is the way that the political process became so rhetorically convoluted by various competing interests. "World Class City," my left asscheek.

I've lived in Houston since 1995 and have generally enjoyed living here. There are some big pros (cost of living; convenience; performing and visual arts; climate for most of the year, etc.). There are some big negatives (pollution; illegal immigration; asthetic disadvantages compared to other cities; hot and long summers; glacially slow progress/ lack of forward thinkers; educational offerings are arguably limited for a city of its size, etc.). But, you take the bad with the good.

I travel a lot and have been fortunate enough to experience many other cities and locales. The bottom line: in my opinion Houston has been falling behind other similarly-situated cities for quite some time. I certainly don't think expressing my opinion about the city in which I live makes me elitist simply because that opinion doesn't gibe with other Houstonian's views. Moreover, I'm not disregarding the local "culture" (I'll take this term to actually mean "socio-economic, political, and environmental conditions"). I'm just fed up with it.

Fortunately, both myself and my fiance live close to where we work. Traffic really isn't a personal issue. In fact, "my" Houston is a very small place. However, those who live some distance from where they work (e.g., Katy to downtown Houston; Clear Lake to TMC; Sugarland to Uptown) deal with some horrible traffic. Sure, it's not as bad as some locations. But it's still bad. And if the population projections prove to be correct the local area is going to gain around 2 million people in the next couple of decades. I would venture to say that many, if not most, are going to choose to live in the suburbs and outside of the Loop. We need some alternate means of transporting those people to various business/ entertainment centers around this sprawling behemoth of a city. Period. That system needs to connect to a inner Loop tram system like the one that is supposedly being developed. Period. Let's get it done so that by the time the metro population is around 7 million we'll have an adequate public transit system.

I agree with you that the local political process and competing interests of various groups (e.g., highway contractors and oil companies) here is a complete joke. Frankly, those interests are keeping Houston from maximizing its potential.

[tamtagon]

This is Houston - not Dallas, and quite frankly Scarlett I don't give a damn how they did it in Dallas.

A thorough understanding of the successes and failures of DART light rail implementation and usage would be invaluable to the light rail initiative in Houston.

[tamtagon]

I travel a lot and have been fortunate enough to experience many other cities and locales. The bottom line: in my opinion Houston has been falling behind other similarly-situated cities for quite some time.

I agree that, overall, the revival of 'urban culture' in Houston has lagged behind similar suburban population centers like Atlanta and Dallas. However, one remarkable characteristic of Houston culture is the ability to effect a rapid redirection of itself.

[feufoma]

I agree that, overall, the revival of 'urban culture' in Houston has lagged behind similar suburban population centers like Atlanta and Dallas. However, one remarkable characteristic of Houston culture is the ability to effect a rapid redirection of itself.

I agree that "Houston" in the past has been able to make some significant strides in remediating its problems. However, that takes leadership that can effectively guide parties with competing interests into reaching consensus. Obviously, to date, Mayor White has done a better overall job than Lee Brown. But I sense a "stagnation" in his administration. (Naturally, he's got to work with a very deficient city council.)

For instance, instead of paying lip service to further development "in the Loop" why doesn't the city focus on things that can insure this continued development? E.g., tax incentives to "real" (i.e, non-nightclub/ bar) businesses to locate downtown and spur residential development. It's frustrating to see that downtown is effectively where it was immediately prior to the light rail construction. I live just outside of downtown and when I venture there I am appalled at the meager street life that exists now more than two years since completion of the Main Street/ Red Line. Furthermore, the projected development further down the line has simply not materialized. I realize that land speculation plays a huge part in this (leading to completion of less desirous development by companies with the means to acquire the land or pay the high leases: e.g., the ubiquitous CVS and Walgreens). What is the city doing to remedy this???

My apologies for the rant. I'm just really frustrated with the VERY SLOW and piece meal development in Houston as compared to its peers. There's SO MUCH potential here and it's being squandered.

[tamtagon]

However, that takes leadership that can effectively guide parties with competing interests into reaching consensus.

...

There's SO MUCH potential here and it's being squandered.

Regarding the slow progress of local passenger rail service in Houston, all signs indicate the problem rest squarely with malicious micromanagement from the region's most powerful political leaders.

Houston's potential is not being squandered, it just hasnt reached the kinetic threshold yet.

[The Great Hizzy!]

Houston is doomed. It has not set aside a so-called "cool" section of the city nearest the tall buildings where self-appointed, self-elected and self-promoted nueva urbanistas can dance and doodle their way through their 20s and 30s, on foot, and in full view of the nearest urban outfitters or Virgin Megastore.

Awesome. Yet not.

Poor Houston. Will they ever catch on lest they perish? Poor, poor city by the bayou.

Meanwhile... there's the other extreme: a choo-choo, quietly operated and taking up limited space, is allegedly going to cause the end of the world, driving down property values, bastardizing the acres of out-of-place McMansions assaulting their less glamorous neighbors. This, as opposed to a six-lane thoroughfare filled with traffic, lunatic drivers and buses that are louder and smellier than their on-track counterparts. Keep the choo-choo away. Keep the riff-raff away. Protect my driveway and my tax dollars. Waaaaahhhhh!!!

Gotta love social biases. Gotta love the internet. Keep 'em coming.

[Houston19514]

I am appalled at the meager street life that exists now more than two years since completion of the Main Street/ Red Line.

On that subject, how is the street life in downtown Dallas and downtown Atlanta?

[VelvetJ]

However, one remarkable characteristic of Houston culture is the ability to effect a rapid redirection of itself.

Yes, but one unremarkable characteristic of Houston culture is even recognizing it needs a redirection in some areas at all. Houston actually building something is not the problem as much as it's slow to even get the idea, and it can be frustrating because this has not always been the case in this city.

[TheNiche]

I've lived in Houston since 1995 and have generally enjoyed living here. There are some big pros (cost of living; convenience; performing and visual arts; climate for most of the year, etc.). There are some big negatives (pollution; illegal immigration; asthetic disadvantages compared to other cities; hot and long summers; glacially slow progress/ lack of forward thinkers; educational offerings are arguably limited for a city of its size, etc.). But, you take the bad with the good.

I travel a lot and have been fortunate enough to experience many other cities and locales. The bottom line: in my opinion Houston has been falling behind other similarly-situated cities for quite some time. I certainly don't think expressing my opinion about the city in which I live makes me elitist simply because that opinion doesn't gibe with other Houstonian's views. Moreover, I'm not disregarding the local "culture" (I'll take this term to actually mean "socio-economic, political, and environmental conditions"). I'm just fed up with it.

In the first two paragraphs of your response, I have again added emphasis where I'm detecting a pervasive elitist mindset. You loathe the lack of "forward thinkers", using a term that is clearly normative. You are so absolutely certain of your correctness on this issue that you lace it with this assinine "forward thinker" rhetoric. If you have ideas, lay them out on the table...if they are truely superior in substance, they will not need a catchy descriptor; they will speak for themselves. But much more importantly, you must recognize that people throughout the ages have falsely proclaimed themselves "forward thinkers". 'Enlightened' European imperialists of the 18th through 20th centuries make for some excellent examples, especially in Africa. If you like, I can provide a number of anecdotes.

"Falling behind", similarly, is normative and conveys implicitly that you are the all-knowing self-appointed master-philosopher of urbanity. You know what is RIGHT and have no need to explain or justify yourself to those lowly uneducated neighbors of yours who know not what brutal torture they subject themselves to. ...poor fools...

If you're "fed up with it", then move. Cities have different characters because they are shaped by the people that live within them. Would you expect that Mexico City would not reflect Mexican culture or that San Francisco wouldn't reflect the attitudes of the prevailing culture in that area? How is Houston any different in that it should not reflect the culture of the majority of its residents, but instead, the culture of outsiders that are so pretentious as to claim cultural superiority?

By the way, it is perhaps not your stance on particular issues that makes you elitist, so much as it is your incredible air of superiority and outright presumptuousness. I don't expect for you to like a particular culture...I don't care for many aspects of the culture of McAllen, where I lived for 10 years...but that's why I moved. I sure as hell didn't go around telling everybody down there how "backward" and "po dunk" they were, or that they needed to change to suit me. The best ballot I could ever cast was to hitch up to a U-Haul trailer and high-tail it to Houston. We all make our choices...don't insult me by telling me how to make mine, thank you.

Fortunately, both myself and my fiance live close to where we work. Traffic really isn't a personal issue. In fact, "my" Houston is a very small place. However, those who live some distance from where they work (e.g., Katy to downtown Houston; Clear Lake to TMC; Sugarland to Uptown) deal with some horrible traffic. Sure, it's not as bad as some locations. But it's still bad. And if the population projections prove to be correct the local area is going to gain around 2 million people in the next couple of decades. I would venture to say that many, if not most, are going to choose to live in the suburbs and outside of the Loop. We need some alternate means of transporting those people to various business/ entertainment centers around this sprawling behemoth of a city. Period. That system needs to connect to a inner Loop tram system like the one that is supposedly being developed. Period. Let's get it done so that by the time the metro population is around 7 million we'll have an adequate public transit system.

I agree with you that the local political process and competing interests of various groups (e.g., highway contractors and oil companies) here is a complete joke. Frankly, those interests are keeping Houston from maximizing its potential.

Fortune probably has less to do with it than did your choice. I'm presently driving about 45 miles per day, live near the TMC, and work way out past the Beltway off of the Katy Freeway. Why are you presuming to tell me what "horrible traffic" is? Especially as my commute has actually improved over the past several years with the completion of Westpark and the West Loop projects? I expect for it to continue to improve as the Katy Freeway project is wrapped up. I agree with you that we WILL need more fixed-guideway high-capacity systems in place in the future, but in the mean time, we seem to be doing a pretty good job at building our way out of congestion. It isn't like the rights-of-way for future LRT are disappearing or anything. There really isn't all that much of a rush to build the system; we aren't on the verge of some transportation meltdown and won't even be close to it for years, possibly decades. So why are we building it now (and in a form that isn't so conducive to congestion relief or rapid transit) instead of saving our money and making the investment at a later date?

With your last paragraph, you just missed my point completely. See below.

Houston is doomed. It has not set aside a so-called "cool" section of the city nearest the tall buildings where self-appointed, self-elected and self-promoted nueva urbanistas can dance and doodle their way through their 20s and 30s, on foot, and in full view of the nearest urban outfitters or Virgin Megastore.

Awesome. Yet not.

Poor Houston. Will they ever catch on lest they perish? Poor, poor city by the bayou.

Meanwhile... there's the other extreme: a choo-choo, quietly operated and taking up limited space, is allegedly going to cause the end of the world, driving down property values, bastardizing the acres of out-of-place McMansions assaulting their less glamorous neighbors. This, as opposed to a six-lane thoroughfare filled with traffic, lunatic drivers and buses that are louder and smellier than their on-track counterparts. Keep the choo-choo away. Keep the riff-raff away. Protect my driveway and my tax dollars. Waaaaahhhhh!!!

Gotta love social biases. Gotta love the internet. Keep 'em coming.

Bingo. This is what I'm talking about when I refer to rhetorically-loaded political processes. Oil companies and contractors, as feufoma suggests? Sure, possibly behind the scenes...but I'm much more annoyed at the whiny folks that crowd the spotlight, so desperate to defend their position that they willfully throw out a bunch of logical fallacies and outright BS for the media to frenzy upon. The folks that do this so utterly confuse and distort the crux of the issue as to eliminate any of the merits of a democratic process.

How so? I'm quite certain that you've probably made the point in a previous post. If you have, can you link me to it?

I'm not arguing with you, I just want to read your opinion because I generally enjoy your posts and respect your thought-out opinions.

Things were pretty well summed up post #1355...but then this has been a long thread. I'm sure that I've made the argument in various forms elsewhere in this thread and in the forum.

http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...103&st=1350

[nmainguy]

I agree that "Houston" in the past has been able to make some significant strides in remediating its problems. However, that takes leadership that can effectively guide parties with competing interests into reaching consensus. Obviously, to date, Mayor White has done a better overall job than Lee Brown. But I sense a "stagnation" in his administration. (Naturally, he's got to work with a very deficient city council.)

For instance, instead of paying lip service to further development "in the Loop" why doesn't the city focus on things that can insure this continued development? E.g., tax incentives to "real" (i.e, non-nightclub/ bar) businesses to locate downtown and spur residential development. It's frustrating to see that downtown is effectively where it was immediately prior to the light rail construction. I live just outside of downtown and when I venture there I am appalled at the meager street life that exists now more than two years since completion of the Main Street/ Red Line. Furthermore, the projected development further down the line has simply not materialized. I realize that land speculation plays a huge part in this (leading to completion of less desirous development by companies with the means to acquire the land or pay the high leases: e.g., the ubiquitous CVS and Walgreens). What is the city doing to remedy this???

My apologies for the rant. I'm just really frustrated with the VERY SLOW and piece meal development in Houston as compared to its peers. There's SO MUCH potential here and it's being squandered.

Here's the topic's title: University Line On Richmond, Shortsighted opposition growing

Stay on topic or start another thread.

[TheNiche]

For instance, instead of paying lip service to further development "in the Loop" why doesn't the city focus on things that can insure this continued development? E.g., tax incentives to "real" (i.e, non-nightclub/ bar) businesses to locate downtown and spur residential development. It's frustrating to see that downtown is effectively where it was immediately prior to the light rail construction. I live just outside of downtown and when I venture there I am appalled at the meager street life that exists now more than two years since completion of the Main Street/ Red Line. Furthermore, the projected development further down the line has simply not materialized. I realize that land speculation plays a huge part in this (leading to completion of less desirous development by companies with the means to acquire the land or pay the high leases.

You need to bear in mind several things. Houston's urban renewal has actually been very vigorous, but it has also been spread throughout a very large area. The Heights, Montrose, Rice Military, Midtown, 4th Ward, East End, and the TMC have all garnered many tens of thousands of new housing units over the past several years.

Is that a bad thing? I'd say no. If a builder puts up a set of townhomes in the Heights that sell out quickly even though there was plenty of competition from similar housing products in all those other neighborhoods, that is an indication that somebody specifically wanted to live in the Heights as opposed to one of the other areas. Who are you to tell that person that they have to live in Midtown if they want that kind of home, just because you want a neighborhood that looks nice, even though the consumer that you're impacting will now have to drive three times as far to get to their job on the North Loop?

Moreover, by not having forced development into a specific neighborhood, land value appreciation is shared by many people over a very broad area. This is good for the city's home owners, but it also prevents land prices from going through the roof for some arbitrarily-selected neighborhood that would've been targeted as the place where all the new development is supposed to go. If that occured, then a lot of the new construction would become infeasible because the higher land prices would've translated to higher prices for the consumers of new construction.

Tax incentives that specifically target particular neighborhoods also have questionable effects. If you give owners in a particular neighborhood some tax benefit that other neighborhoods lack, then land prices just go up in the targeted neighborhood, negating the effect and distorting the market.

: e.g., the ubiquitous CVS and Walgreens). What is the city doing to remedy this???

CVS and Walgreens are not bad things to have in urban neighborhoods. Many of them offer 24-hour retail services that compete with and suppliment grocery stores. If not for CVS, where else would you go to buy contraceptives at 1:00AM? Unfortunately, they are far from ubiquitous. I can only think of two that are (or will be) along the Red Line. And one is in a downtown setting, if I'm not mistaken. The other will likely be at Main and Elgin, serving Midtown's consumer base.

[C2H]

I agree with you that we WILL need more fixed-guideway high-capacity systems in place in the future, but in the mean time, we seem to be doing a pretty good job at building our way out of congestion. It isn't like the rights-of-way for future LRT are disappearing or anything. There really isn't all that much of a rush to build the system; we aren't on the verge of some transportation meltdown and won't even be close to it for years, possibly decades. So why are we building it now (and in a form that isn't so conducive to congestion relief or rapid transit) instead of saving our money and making the investment at a later date?

No disrespect, but i completely disagree. It's thinking like this that makes Houston appear to be progressively behind most cities.

Why wait until the city gets to the point where traffic is 10Xs worse than it is now to start implementing better transportation alternatives? I don't see any advantages. If i had over a billion dollars, i'd build the damn thing myself.

While it doesn't do any good griping about things we can't change, i understand feufoma and VelvetJ. Houston started out with alot of momentum in the 20th century, but has done a rather poor job at maintaining its high status by continuing to sprawl forever, neglecting many neighborhoods, and will continue to do so if it WAITS on implementing mass transit. While Houston sits back and "waits", other cities will continue to surpass Houston like we're seeing in Dallas, Atlanta, Denver and possibly Austin!

BTW I just talked to my friend who lives in Phoenix, AZ. He said that they're building their light rail right now. If Houston is not careful and something doesn't get done fast, Phoenix too will surpass Houston.

[TheNiche]

No disrespect, but i completely disagree. It's thinking like this that makes Houston appear to be progressively behind most cities.

Why wait until the city gets to the point where traffic is 10Xs worse than it is now to start implementing better transportation alternatives? I don't see any advantages. If i had over a billion dollars, i'd build the damn thing myself.

While it doesn't do any good griping about things we can't change, i understand feufoma and VelvetJ. Houston started out with alot of momentum in the 20th century, but has done a rather poor job at maintaining its high status by continuing to sprawl forever, neglecting many neighborhoods, and will continue to do so if it WAITS on implementing mass transit. While Houston sits back and "waits", other cities will continue to surpass Houston like we're seeing in Dallas, Atlanta, Denver and possibly Austin!

BTW I just talked to my friend who lives in Phoenix, AZ. He said that they're building their light rail right now. If Houston is not careful and something doesn't get done fast, Phoenix too will surpass Houston.

Again with this "behind" notion... We are what we are. Specifically, we are what our population makes us. If most of our population doesn't much care for expensive French cheeses and most of the population of France doesn't care much for Wolf brand chili, then you'll probably find that selections at respective grocery stores will reflect the preferences of each region's residents. It would be forgivable if a Houstonian in France missed his Wolf brand chili, but it would not be forgivable if that Houstonian started expounding upon the backwardness of the French just because their tastes differ. Differences are good things; it is up to you as an individual to make your choices...you've got plenty of them.

You claim for some reason that "Houston started out with a lot of momentum in the 20th century", but it doesn't seem to support your argument. We had OUTWARD momentum. Even at the turn of the century Houstonians viewed the wards as little more than outwardly-expanding suburbs. Eastwood, founded in 1911 two miles from downtown, was a far-flung suburb at the time.

Traffic being 10x worse is damned-near inconceivable. And it certainly won't just sneak up on us overnight. In fact, about the most disruptive thing that could possibly happen would be that the City of New Orleans relocates here in the midst of an oil boom...but that already happened and my commutes are still bearable. These kinds of things occur very very slowly and in an entirely predictable way. In the context of increasing levels of congestion, a several-year wait to implement fixed-guideway high-capacity mass transit is inconsequential...especially if ROWs are already available and preserved.

[C2H]

Again with this "behind" notion... We are what we are. Specifically, we are what our population makes us. If most of our population doesn't much care for expensive French cheeses and most of the population of France doesn't care much for Wolf brand chili, then you'll probably find that selections at respective grocery stores will reflect the preferences of each region's residents. It would be forgivable if a Houstonian in France missed his Wolf brand chili, but it would not be forgivable if that Houstonian started expounding upon the backwardness of the French just because their tastes differ. Differences are good things; it is up to you as an individual to make your choices...you've got plenty of them.

I'm trying my best to understand what you're trying to say. The examples you give are clearly subjective but doesn't hold water in a case by case scenario. The City of Houston is a very diverse city. While the older generations here prefer things stay the same, there are more young professionals in their 20s and 30s moving into this city who prefer getting around the city without a car. Different strokes for different folks. Your Wolf Chili example suggests that all people in Houston think the same way and they don't.

You claim for some reason that "Houston started out with a lot of momentum in the 20th century", but it doesn't seem to support your argument.

To answer your question, that statement was not directed at development patterns. It was directed at the overall scope of the city and how innovative it once was. The Architecture/ 8th wonder of the world and the Ship Channel are a couple of examples.

We had OUTWARD momentum. Even at the turn of the century Houstonians viewed the wards as little more than outwardly-expanding suburbs. Eastwood, founded in 1911 two miles from downtown, was a far-flung suburb at the time.

Even if the Wards were once considered to be suburbs at the time, it doesn't of course represent what you see now, so that's not an even comparison. Matter of a fact, it wasn't so different from how the older cities had developed in their earlier times. There was no limit on the sprawl in Houston. That's why development in Houston has become to resemble what i like to call "donut development". The good news is, developers are starting to realize how vital it is in "filling the hole in the donut". Part of filling the hole, is recognizing how important it is to implement better transit, establishing developments where people can enjoy and walk the city, and making it easier where residents of the city can interact.

Traffic being 10x worse is damned-near inconceivable.

Now you strike me as someone who's intelligent enough to know when people are speaking sarcastically. Clearly, you should know that statement shouldn't be taken in such a literal sense.

All in all Niche, I'm glad that you have a high opinion of the place where you live. I'd never try to suggest otherwise, but please don't act like there's not areas Houston can improve in. That's the mistake Houston has been making for a loooong time. We can't be Amsterdam, we can't be Dallas or Atlanta, but we can damn sure be a better and more progressive Houston!

[MiDTOWNeR]

In the first two paragraphs of your response, I have again added emphasis where I'm detecting a pervasive elitist mindset.

"Elitist"? Only because they are negative toward Houston. Houston is not perfect and getting defensive because someone points it out is pretty "elitist" dont you think?

[KinkaidAlum]

Ah yes, the call someone a "liberal" or an "elitist" or an "intellectual" and hope that it sticks routine.

A thread wouldn't be a thread without it.

Quite frankly, I'd rather be called those three things than their opposites!

Now, back on topic. BUILD THE DAMN RAIL ALREADY. The people have spoken and it's time to tell the loud-mouthed, dim-witted naysayers to shove it and get out of the way.

[MiDTOWNeR]

Now, back on topic. BUILD THE DAMN RAIL ALREADY. The people have spoken and it's time to tell the loud-mouthed, dim-witted naysayers to shove it and get out of the way.

HERE HERE!!!!!! AMEN!!!

[TheNiche]

I'm trying my best to understand what you're trying to say. The examples you give are clearly subjective but doesn't hold water in a case by case scenario. The City of Houston is a very diverse city. While the older generations here prefer things stay the same, there are more young professionals in their 20s and 30s moving into this city who prefer getting around the city without a car. Different strokes for different folks. Your Wolf Chili example suggests that all people in Houston think the same way and they don't.

The examples made some key assumptions and worked from there in order to provide a basic conceptual structure. I'm not saying that there won't be French folks that have an insatiable appetite for Wolf brand chili or that there aren't cheese connosuiers in Houston. What I'm emphasizing is that the relative populations of people that consume either product are likely to be vastly different, and that as such, one should not expect that everything that can be found in Houston will be found in France, vice versa. Perhaps Houston only has a limited selection of expensive French cheeses, and then only if you know where to look...and perhaps you may only be able to find typical bean-less Wolf brand chili in France, and then only in Paris; this would be a major drawback if I were to live in France because I personally prefer the lean chili. But just because my local grocer doesn't and won't carry it doesn't mean that they're an inferior culture.

Feufoma had been complaining about more than just LRT. He's complaining about the lack of a vibrant urban environment...and LRT clearly doesn't do much to stimulate it. The key, really, is that CONSUMERS want it. If there is a want, that want will be fulfilled by market forces. But if retail and housing substitutes in a lower-cost suburban format will do the trick for consumers, that's what they'll get. If you are among those that aren't served by this environment and it annoys you enough, then move to a place that has it. You have a choice.

To answer your question, that statement was not directed at development patterns. It was directed at the overall scope of the city and how innovative it once was. The Architecture/ 8th wonder of the world and the Ship Channel are a couple of examples.

Your perceptions of the 'city' as being innovative are somewhat skewed. The Astrodome is a monument to our aversion to sweat. The ship channel was built up as it was as a result of transportation efficiencies, low land costs, access to feedstock, and a lax regulatory environment. Its development has only been slowed as a result of governmental regulation. In any case, neither of these reflect some spiritual energy eminating from the whole of the 'city'. If anything, you should've cited downtown's highrises. Their form, though awe-inspiring, is economically unjustifiable...and despite the dynamism that they represent, the urbanistas even disapprove of them because of their 'not being built at human scale' or some such BS.

Even if the Wards were once considered to be suburbs at the time, it doesn't of course represent what you see now, so that's not an even comparison. Matter of a fact, it wasn't so different from how the older cities had developed in their earlier times. There was no limit on the sprawl in Houston. That's why development in Houston has become to resemble what i like to call "donut development". The good news is, developers are starting to realize how vital it is in "filling the hole in the donut". Part of filling the hole, is recognizing how important it is to implement better transit, establishing developments where people can enjoy and walk the city, and making it easier where residents of the city can interact.

I'd argue that you cannot judge the development patterns of yesteryear by today's values. All must be judged within the context of the era in which it was created. Just as we in the present live for today, they lived for their own times and not for ours.

The developers aren't just "starting to realize" this matter of the donut; Lanier was the first to address it as an issue worth consideration. Development picked up in Brown's administration and has continued to accelerate ever since. This is nothing new, but it is a slow process because we're talking about a whole lot of land and a consumption market that still prefers suburban living, 8 times per every one new inner loopie. Incidentally, many parts of the donut already have excellent transportation infrastructure capable of handling enormous traffic loads. If anything, the bus-replacement strategy of LRT that has been utilized by METRO has created about as much congestion as it has cured...and you can see empirically that there have been limited results toward the envisioned ends.

As for interacting residents, I honestly prefer this method--typing on an online forum--to meeting people in some sort of streetscape. There are lots of advantages to this format.

Now you strike me as someone who's intelligent enough to know when people are speaking sarcastically. Clearly, you should know that statement shouldn't be taken in such a literal sense.

Yes, and I was being counterfacetious. Couldn't you tell?

All in all Niche, I'm glad that you have a high opinion of the place where you live. I'd never try to suggest otherwise, but please don't act like there's not areas Houston can improve in. That's the mistake Houston has been making for a loooong time. We can't be Amsterdam, we can't be Dallas or Atlanta, but we can damn sure be a better and more progressive Houston!

You're right that we can improve in some areas...but LRT is an EXPENSIVE improvement. As a society, we've only got so many resources with which to make this a better city, so my concern is with making the best investments possible. And if the implementation of the Red Line is a reliable indicator of what can be expected of METRO, then I'd rather see the Parks Department, Public Works, or HPD get those resources. It isn't as though there are a shortage of worthy projects that can have immediate impacts. A well-designed LRT system will have its place--only that place is at least a decade away (probably more IMO).

Progressive doesn't mean stupid. To me (and probably only to me), it means making justifiable decisions based upon reasonable expectations and being responsible stewards of the public wealth.

"Elitist"? Only because they are negative toward Houston. Houston is not perfect and getting defensive because someone points it out is pretty "elitist" dont you think?

Seriously...did you even read my post?

[TheNiche]

Ah yes, the call someone a "liberal" or an "elitist" or an "intellectual" and hope that it sticks routine.

A thread wouldn't be a thread without it.

Quite frankly, I'd rather be called those three things than their opposites!

Now, back on topic. BUILD THE DAMN RAIL ALREADY. The people have spoken and it's time to tell the loud-mouthed, dim-witted naysayers to shove it and get out of the way.

Uh huh...seems like neither you nor AftonAg realize that you're each more a liability to your respective causes than you are an asset. Just as a basic bit of advice, if you're going to make disparaging comments about somebody, at least explain where you're coming from instead of using the ol' "it's time to tell the loud-mouthed, dim-witted naysayers to shove it and get out of the way" routine. I could easily retort by saying the following:

"You are naysaying my effort to naysay. With that in mind, SHOVE IT AND GET OUT OF MY WAY!"

There, did that mean anything? Did it accomplish anything? Have I furthered my political agenda...or have I shown everybody on the fence just how little I care about the quality of the decisions that I make that may affect them?

[FoUTASportscaster]

You're right that we can improve in some areas...but LRT is an EXPENSIVE improvement. As a society, we've only got so many resources with which to make this a better city, so my concern is with making the best investments possible. And if the implementation of the Red Line is a reliable indicator of what can be expected of METRO, then I'd rather see the Parks Department, Public Works, or HPD get those resources. It isn't as though there are a shortage of worthy projects that can have immediate impacts. A well-designed LRT system will have its place--only that place is at least a decade away (probably more IMO).

At this point, everything is going to be expensive. BRT routes aren't cheap. New buses aren't cheap. The longer you wait, the larger the price tag will be eventually, making it harder to implement in the long run.

The last thing I'll say on the topic is alternatives. Houston has very little. There are several books such as Suburban Nation that makes point after point that you can not build you way out of congestion. Examples include new freeway construction and existing expansion. There are examples of freeway and auto corridors destrction by natual or man-made causes and the traffic doesn't reroute to other auto routes. The majority seeks other avenues, of which some are in auto friendly areas like Houston. And at the same time, economic vitality isn't lost. Once a new route or expanded route happens, the increase isn't linear, but exponential. Meanwhile, transit rarely shoots the exponential ridership, mainly because for every mile of transit, there is many more times of freeway. If transit was built at the same rate as freeway, you'd see similar numbers. Another reason. more people can use a rail line than one freeway lane of traffic. The dimensions of a track and a lane are similar, meaning land use is better for transit.

Houston wants to revitalize their core to a pedestrian-friendly, dense urban environment. The single best way to do that is TOD, transit oriented development. It is happening in every city with transit. Portland is a great example of that. Areas around their stations hit near 20,000 people per square mile.

Places that have rail do not say the things you say about rail. Bottomline the are efficient at moving people and guiding development, both can save money, the latter can bring in more money due to the dense development that it spurs.

[musicman]

No disrespect, but i completely disagree. It's thinking like this that makes Houston appear to be progressively behind most cities.

Why wait until the city gets to the point where traffic is 10Xs worse than it is now to start implementing better transportation alternatives? I don't see any advantages. If i had over a billion dollars, i'd build the damn thing myself.

While it doesn't do any good griping about things we can't change, i understand feufoma and VelvetJ. Houston started out with alot of momentum in the 20th century, but has done a rather poor job at maintaining its high status by continuing to sprawl forever, neglecting many neighborhoods, and will continue to do so if it WAITS on implementing mass transit. While Houston sits back and "waits", other cities will continue to surpass Houston like we're seeing in Dallas, Atlanta, Denver and possibly Austin!

BTW I just talked to my friend who lives in Phoenix, AZ. He said that they're building their light rail right now. If Houston is not careful and something doesn't get done fast, Phoenix too will surpass Houston.

I have to completely disagree with you. Light rail has done nothing to alleviate our congestion problems and IMO has actually created some congestion due to number of roads that are now closed. Houston has attempted to stay ahead over the curve by maintaining an active road program.

You're saying Dallas, Atlanta, Denver, Austin are surpassing Houston? According to SustainLane we seem to have less congestion than Dallas ,Austin and Denver, with Atlanta being one notch lower than Houston. And when it comes to public transportation we seem to be ahead of Dallas, Austin and Denver as well. Dallas and Austin have suffered congestionwise because they didn't maintain active programs to maintain their freeways.

[ricco67]

I'd like to know how you think the traffic situation was made worse by the Light rail on Main (do we HAVE a thread for the Red Line? I couldn't find one.). I have driven the mainstreet corridor for years before and after the light rail was on there and I have seen a substantial improvement within a few weeks after the light rail was completed and even more after the bus routes were readjusted.

The closing of the cross streets I believe help traffic flow in some areas so you don't have some doofus trying to dash across main as people done before rail.

There is two points in traffic along the corridor that gets on my nerves and that I've talked about previously, but I'll allow you to clarify your position first.

[musicman]

While the older generations here prefer things stay the same, there are more young professionals in their 20s and 30s moving into this city who prefer getting around the city without a car.

The BUS service still exists, doesn't it? So are you implying that young professionals will ONLY ride rail?

The good news is, developers are starting to realize how vital it is in "filling the hole in the donut". Part of filling the hole, is recognizing how important it is to implement better transit, establishing developments where people can enjoy and walk the city, and making it easier where residents of the city can interact.

There are numerous places were you can walk and enjoy yourself. I'm not sure about you but Houstonians seem to be interacting just fine. I have many GREAT friends that I met while "interacting." And all this happened BEFORE light rail.

All in all Niche, I'm glad that you have a high opinion of the place where you live. I'd never try to suggest otherwise, but please don't act like there's not areas Houston can improve in. That's the mistake Houston has been making for a loooong time.

Every place mentioned can stand some improvement.

[feufoma]

Uh huh...seems like neither you nor AftonAg realize that you're each more a liability to your respective causes than you are an asset. Just as a basic bit of advice, if you're going to make disparaging comments about somebody, at least explain where you're coming from instead of using the ol' "it's time to tell the loud-mouthed, dim-witted naysayers to shove it and get out of the way" routine. I could easily retort by saying the following:

"You are naysaying my effort to naysay. With that in mind, SHOVE IT AND GET OUT OF MY WAY!"

There, did that mean anything? Did it accomplish anything? Have I furthered my political agenda...or have I shown everybody on the fence just how little I care about the quality of the decisions that I make that may affect them?

I'm not particularly offended by being called "elitist." I've been called worse. If you think that my having a negative opinion about the place in which I live qualifies me as being "elitist" then so be it. Moreover, I don't believe that I'm making normative statements. Yes, people have choices and those choices largely influence a multitude of things (in this context housing, retail, and transportation). I recognize that fact. Just because my choices differ from those of another person and I hope for certain outcomes doesn't denigrate the desires of others. I want better transportation options in Houston that includes LRT, commuter rail linking the primary suburbs to the central city and high speed rail to IAH from downtown. You might not. Pointing out what I believe are Houston's shortcomings doesn't make me elitist just because you and others disagree with my opinions. Frankly, most of your postings border on being didactic.

[musicman]

I'd like to know how you think the traffic situation was made worse by the Light rail on Main (do we HAVE a thread for the Red Line? I couldn't find one.). I have driven the mainstreet corridor for years before and after the light rail was on there and I have seen a substantial improvement within a few weeks after the light rail was completed and even more after the bus routes were readjusted.

The closing of the cross streets I believe help traffic flow in some areas so you don't have some doofus trying to dash across main as people done before rail.

There is two points in traffic along the corridor that gets on my nerves and that I've talked about previously, but I'll allow you to clarify your position first.

Less routes mean more traffic through existing routes. I HATED to drive down Elgin because of the number of lights. I used Rosalie or Anita because there was less traffic and no lights. Yes there are stop signs but I could still beat the Elgin traffic.

I was just on Main at 735 this morning headed towards downtown. The light at Grey only let 2 cars through before cycling back to red. Then i hit pierce and again only two cars went through. 2 car at a time? A few years back i made a similar complaint to city council about the Richmond/Main intersection. There only 1 car would make it through during rush hour. METRO officials asked to meet me at the location and when I showed the engineers what i was talking about they were shocked to say the least. they told me that it is rare that this happens. we stood out there for 30 mins and only 1 or 2 cars max ever made it through. I haven't driven down there during rush hr recently but i've been told the problem was corrected.

The closing of the streets ONLY helps the light rail, NOT drivers.

For me, there is a definite design inadequacy because it is mixing/interacting with vehicular traffic.

[nmainguy]

I'm not particularly offended by being called "elitist." I've been called worse. If you think that my having a negative opinion about the place in which I live qualifies me as being "elitist" then so be it. Moreover, I don't believe that I'm making normative statements. Yes, people have choices and those choices largely influence a multitude of things (in this context housing, retail, and transportation). I recognize that fact. Just because my choices differ from those of another person and I hope for certain outcomes doesn't denigrate the desires of others. I want better transportation options in Houston that includes LRT, commuter rail linking the primary suburbs to the central city and high speed rail to IAH from downtown. You might not. Pointing out what I believe are Houston's shortcomings doesn't make me elitist just because you and others disagree with my opinions. Frankly, most of your postings border on being didactic.

Yes, you may sound elitist to some (I don't take constructive criticism as elitist, however) and niche is many times didactic. Here's what I did a while back (I'll speak in niche-talk): I did a cost/benefit analysis and determined niche repeats himself and too frequently strays off topic that it costs more time than it's worth which is of little benefit to me. You're bordering on being added to my ignore list as well.

TRY to keep it on topic-everyone.

[musicman]

TRY to keep it on topic-everyone.

Thank you Kofi Annan

[C2H]

If anything, you should've cited downtown's highrises

i mentioned architecture, which included downtown highrises

I have to completely disagree with you. Light rail has done nothing to alleviate our congestion problems and IMO has actually created some congestion due to number of roads that are now closed. Houston has attempted to stay ahead over the curve by maintaining an active road program.

Well that's part of having a voice, people will disagree and you're entitled to do so. I wouldn't expect YOU to agree with me anyway, seeing that most of your posts indicate that rail is not something you stand for.

Light rail has done nothing to alleviate our congestion problems

Hopefully you don't expect one measley 7.5 starter line going in one direction be the answer to traffic congestion in a city that sprawls almost 600 sq mi. If Houston plans LRT to effectively hit the most congested areas such as Richmond/Uptown areas, it will help improve those areas and cut down on congestion.

You're saying Dallas, Atlanta, Denver, Austin are surpassing Houston? We seem to have less congestion than Dallas ,Austin and Denver, with Atlanta being one notch lower than Houston. And when it comes to we seem to be ahead of Dallas, Austin and Denver as well. Dallas and Austin have suffered congestionwise because they didn't maintain active programs to maintain their freeways.

I wasn't necessarily saying that Dallas, ATL, and Denver surpassed Houston in traffic congestion, I was talking in terms of the number of transportation options. Austin seems to be currently adopting a more aggressive plan for a more expansive rail system that Houston right now. Also your website fails to point out that Houston's city limits are twice as big as the other cities mentioned, so those facts of who has the worse traffic congestion tend to get skewed.

I just want the best for Houston. Houston has been the king when it comes to freeway expansion and sprawl, but the demands of today point that people want to have more options other than having to drive to enjoy city amentities.

The BUS service still exists, doesn't it? So are you implying that young professionals will ONLY ride rail?

No i'm not implying that only young professionals will ride rail. I smiply meant that older generations who live in Houston are scared of change. Also Buses contribute to overcrowding the freeways. BRT and LRT have their own dedicated lane. NUFF SAID.

[ricco67]

Less routes mean more traffic through existing routes. I HATED to drive down Elgin because of the number of lights. I used Rosalie or Anita because there was less traffic and no lights. Yes there are stop signs but I could still beat the Elgin traffic.

I was just on Main at 735 this morning headed towards downtown. The light at Grey only let 2 cars through before cycling back to red. Then i hit pierce and again only two cars went through. 2 car at a time? A few years back i made a similar complaint to city council about the Richmond/Main intersection. There only 1 car would make it through during rush hour. METRO officials asked to meet me at the location and when I showed the engineers what i was talking about they were shocked to say the least. they told me that it is rare that this happens. we stood out there for 30 mins and only 1 or 2 cars max ever made it through. I haven't driven down there during rush hr recently but i've been told the problem was corrected.

The closing of the streets ONLY helps the light rail, NOT drivers.

For me, there is a definite design inadequacy because it is mixing/interacting with vehicular traffic.

I drive the routes that you mentioned, and I agree with you on most of them. The Wheeler/Main intersection you speak does warrent some serious engineering, and when the U-Line is put in, I'd like to suggest that Richmond/wheeler from the spur to 59 be closed off to traffic.

You going straight down Main on downtown is just a mistake in picking a route to be honest with you. I don't go down that road at all unless I have to go to 2016 main, and EVEN at that point, I'd rather go down fannin or Milam.

When I first started driving many moons ago, I was VERY aware of the Anita and Rosalie streets. They were a hazard to traffic due to the fact that some people simply didn't have the wherewithal to use those streets effectively and have had witnessed quite a few accidents because of it.

To this day, I use Stuart, Anita, and Tuam because I had to..and barely am able to get across safely at times.

[TheNiche]

At this point, everything is going to be expensive. BRT routes aren't cheap. New buses aren't cheap. The longer you wait, the larger the price tag will be eventually, making it harder to implement in the long run.

Sure, if you don't adjust your cost estimates for inflation. Otherwise, your point seems baseless. Please clarify as to how the real cost of implementing LRT rises every year at a rate faster than the discount rate of the public investment (3% to 4%, most likely).

The last thing I'll say on the topic is alternatives. Houston has very little. There are several books such as Suburban Nation that makes point after point that you can not build you way out of congestion.

Evidently they're wrong. Read Houston Freeways, written by our own MaxConcrete. The histories that he provides indicate that we can indeed continually expand the size of our freeway system to adapt to increasing demand. Specific examples include the Southwest and Eastex Freeways, the West Loop, and soon enough, the Katy Freeway. Are there limits to the level of expansion? Yes. Have we reached or surpassed them? Hell no. We have decades to spare.

Examples include new freeway construction and existing expansion. There are examples of freeway and auto corridors destrction by natual or man-made causes and the traffic doesn't reroute to other auto routes. The majority seeks other avenues, of which some are in auto friendly areas like Houston. And at the same time, economic vitality isn't lost. Once a new route or expanded route happens, the increase isn't linear, but exponential. Meanwhile, transit rarely shoots the exponential ridership, mainly because for every mile of transit, there is many more times of freeway. If transit was built at the same rate as freeway, you'd see similar numbers. Another reason. more people can use a rail line than one freeway lane of traffic. The dimensions of a track and a lane are similar, meaning land use is better for transit.

I don't follow your reasoning. Please provide evidence.

Houston wants to revitalize their core to a pedestrian-friendly, dense urban environment. The single best way to do that is TOD, transit oriented development. It is happening in every city with transit. Portland is a great example of that. Areas around their stations hit near 20,000 people per square mile.

We aren't Portland. We won't ever be Portland. And there is no single formula to implementing TOD. Every city is different. The way that we've implemented the Red Line is not conducive to TOD because it is not effective at saving those peoples' time who could afford to pay TOD premiums for housing.

Places that have rail do not say the things you say about rail.

"Places" don't say anything at all. They are not a sentient life form. On the other hand, Houston has LRT and its residents still seem divided about the issue. Oh, and another thing: very few people say what I say about LRT...or anything else for that matter. Since when is that a valid argument against my assertions?

Bottomline the are efficient at moving people and guiding development, both can save money, the latter can bring in more money due to the dense development that it spurs.

Only if implemented correctly. IMO ours isn't. Empirical evidence thus far seems to support my conclusions.

I'm not particularly offended by being called "elitist."

My intent was not to offend, but to describe.

I've been called worse. If you think that my having a negative opinion about the place in which I live qualifies me as being "elitist" then so be it.

Go back and read my post regarding your elitism. If you read it carefully, you'll notice that I didn't oppose your conclusions so much as I oppose your labeling of Houston (the place), and by extension its creators (the people and culture) as "backward" and "po dunk".

Moreover, I don't believe that I'm making normative statements.

You certainly aren't making objective statements.

Frankly, most of your postings border on being didactic.

I suppose. But if people actually read through my posts and take the time to process them, asking questions or challenging me where they disagree, I'd think that my approach is more productive than just throwing a bunch of carelessly-constructed statements out there haphazardly, hoping that a few will stick.

And it sure as hell is more interesting from my perspective than jumping on a bandwagon and repeating the party line of the day. You may not realize this, but I don't post on this forum for your benefit so much as for my own. That some people are able to effectively challenge me makes for an intellectually stimulating excercise.

I wasn't necessarily saying that Dallas, ATL, and Denver surpassed Houston in traffic congestion, I was talking in terms of the number of transportation options. Austin seems to be currently adopting a more aggressive plan for a more expansive rail system that Houston right now.

Various transportation options should not be built for the sake of creating options. They should be built because they save peoples' time. And that's really all there is to it as a bottom line outcome.

Now, I suppose that we could implement Buffalo Bayou water taxis from the turning basin to Riverway, and sure, it'd be cool to have the option. But they'd be relatively slow, wouldn't serve a large population, and would also be fairly expensive. Should we implement the option then, if only for the sake of having it? NO...of course not.

I just want the best for Houston. Houston has been the king when it comes to freeway expansion and sprawl, but the demands of today point that people want to have more options other than having to drive to enjoy city amentities.

Well that's reasonable enough. We can provide options where they make sense. But if we implement the options poorly, then there is a suboptimality. And that's where people like myself and musicman step up and point out the inadequacy.

Also Buses contribute to overcrowding the freeways. BRT and LRT have their own dedicated lane. NUFF SAID.

Busses on freeways run on HOV lanes, contributing very very little to freeway congestion. In fact, relative to their cost, the P&R program undoubtedly produces the most bang for the buck of any of METRO's programs. BRT and LRT consume at least two or three lanes of traffic, most of the time permanently, and cost a hell of a lot more in order to move people less efficiently than your 'bus overcrowding a freeway' example.