Toll Road Planned Through Heights

[jghall00]

I don't have my mind made up on the proposed Heights toll road.  I don't know the neighborhood or the proposed right of way in question well enough to know whether it would be feasible. Obviously a lot of research and discussion would have to be done before building something like this.  And we're talking years, probably decades from now before anything would be ready for use.

I just don't see how we can solve our transportaion problems though in a climate of rampant NIMBYism.  Nobody wants a rail line, a tollway, or a  widened freeway in their neighborhood.  If a few people had their way, we would still be debating the desperately needed rebuilding of the Katy Freeway instead of starting construction.

Roads don't always ruin neighborhoods.  610 South sure hasn't hurt property values in Bellaire.  The new Westpark Tollway was built on an existing transportation corridor and  it blows right past several affluent areas including Royal Oaks without much harm that I can see.

And no, we don't want a freeway down Memorial Drive. At least not the part outside Loop 610.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Since roads don't always ruin neighborhoods, why not build a freeway down Memorial outside 610?

610 South doesn't run through Bellaire, and I bet the houses adjacent to the feeder road would be worth more if 610 wasn't there.

The issue regarding the Katy Freeway wasn't just whether or not it needed rebuilding, but the shape it would take on when completed. The Katy Corridor Coalition had a progressive design that attempted to minimize the impact on surrounding communites. TxDOT gave us more of the sprawling rearward looking stuff we've seen for the past 50 years. The main lanes WILL be congested again, not if, but when.

I drove back into town from Missouri yesterday, and I told my wife when we got back into Texas...you can tell when you're in Texas because of the sprawling development along the freeway. From McKinney to Dallas, there was nothing but sprawling freeway development. TxDOT KNOWS that feeder roads are bad for throughways, yet they persist in building them. What's that layman's definition of insanity? Doing the same thing and expecting a different result?

[Montrose1100]

tomv...I think you mistake 'rampant NIMBYism' for what is truly a call for common sense development.

Regarding the Westpark tollway - it's usage is minimal, and the project is so far behind at the beltway8 exchange, that it's a laughable effort at best.  A rail line would have been MUCH more sensible. 

Regardint the Katy Freeway, I'm not sure that the appropriate plans were truly debated in a forum that represented the thought  of mass Houston.  Most reasonable people would agree that improvement is a must...but would also agree that simply choosing the 'build build build' model isn't always appropriate either. 

I live along Elgin...and my "backyard" (all three feet of it from my home) virtually borders that road.  I would  WELCOME a rail line to go up Elgin to the Galleria.  The rampant NIMBYism that you refer to is not actually NIMBYism...it's a call for sensible development.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But the Westpark tollroad was built privatly, not by the city...

[ricco67]

The westpark lane of Lightrail is actually an ideal location. It will be from The Westpark P&R, with a stop near Chimney Rock (The City's Densest area) to downtown. and will basically be an express to downtown.

The question is how to have it provide a connection to Greenway Plaza and whether the route will take up part of SouthWest freeway to Wheeler station or follow Richmond to the station.

Ricco

[jghall00]

The westpark lane of Lightrail is actually an ideal location.  It will be from The Westpark P&R, with a stop near Chimney Rock (The City's Densest area) to downtown. and will basically be an express to downtown. 

The question is how to have it provide a connection to Greenway Plaza  and whether the route will take up part of SouthWest freeway to Wheeler station or follow Richmond to the station.

Ricco

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I disagree. It's on the wrong side of 59 to service Chimney Rock effectively. The people on the south side of Chimney Rock are not commuting to jobs downtown, they're day laborers and low wage immigrants. An oversimplification yes, but it's largely true. People in Houston have an aversion to walking, no one is going to walk from anything on the North side of 59 to catch the train on the south side, and there's barely anything on the north side anyway. I live adjacent to the Westpark corridor. A rail line there might boost my property value, but it'd be stupid to put a rail where there aren't any people, and there aren't any destinations. Most of the corridor is fairly barren, which is why the tollroad was able to go in without too much opposition.

The city's current development paradigm is one of sprawling development that is effectively connected by only the automobile. We're trying to to change that to a development paradigm that would enable convenient connections by various means, including foot, bike, rail, etc. In order to do this, we need to have the rail connect places people want to go, the end result being that the land along the transit corridor is too valuable for single use, sprawling development.

Light rail is way too expensive to have it traverse large distances without frequent stops or passengers. We need to have a train that stops frequently, and is full for as much of the day as possible. Building a line up the westpark corrider will result in a rail system that is heavily utilized during rush hour, and underutilized any other time. This is the problem we face with the freeway system.

If you want the fastest travel time from A to B, use the car, it's great for that. Light rail is not about providing the quickest transit time, it's about convenience and choice.

[ricco67]

I beg to differ, *I* live on the South side of Westpark and *I* am not a day laborer. Care to take your foot out of your mouth on that one, rephrase that statement, OR should I start a new career as a Day Laborer to fit in that bit of blanket statement??

There are a number of apartments SOUTH of West park between Chimney Rock and South West Freeway, and HAS the Densest concentration of people in the city.

P&R Hillcroft would eliminate a number of commuters on the Southwest freeway as well as provide the people in those apartment complexes with an additional option of going to downtown instead of riding the bus to 2 or more transfers going to downtown.

Ricco

[Guest danax]

Light rail is way too expensive to have it traverse large distances without frequent stops or passengers.  We need to have a train that stops frequently, and is full for as much of the day as possible.  Building a line up the westpark corrider will result in a rail system that is heavily utilized during rush hour, and underutilized any other time.  This is the problem we face with the freeway system.

If you want the fastest travel time from A to B, use the car, it's great for that.  Light rail is not about providing the quickest transit time, it's about convenience and choice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To add to the drift of topic, there is a cheaper way than light-rail that might be good to transport commuters. It's a Houston based company too, called Aerobus. Aerobus webpage I'm not advocating it necessarily but it is an interesting option.

[jghall00]

I beg to differ, *I* live on the South side of Westpark and *I* am not a day laborer.  Care to take your foot out of your mouth on that one, rephrase that statement,  OR should I start a new career as a Day Laborer  to fit in that bit of blanket statement??

There are a number of apartments SOUTH of West park between Chimney Rock and South West Freeway, and HAS the Densest concentration of people in the city.

P&R Hillcroft would eliminate a number of commuters on the Southwest freeway as well as provide the people in those apartment complexes with an additional option of going to downtown instead of riding the bus to 2 or more transfers going to downtown.

Ricco

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Before everyone starts jumping down my throat on this one, some statistics. First, the area in question South of 59 near Chimney Rock is well defined by a single zip code:

http://www.ci.houston.tx.us/zipcodes/zipcode.jpg

Some census data regarding that area from the US Census bureau:

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFF...lang=en&_sse=on

Or punch in 77081 yourself:

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFFacts?_sse=on

The question isn't whether or not people will utilize a rail line in that area, it's whether enough people will utilize it to justify the investment there vs other areas of Houston. Don't forget, our transit funds are very limited.

Doesn't Metro number 17 run straight into downtown from there anyway? That's my bus to catch downtown, and I'm pretty sure it runs right through that area. That's a single bus to downtown.

[ricco67]

I believe you're right as far as that goes, however, if I remember correctly, it goes along westpark and then hops on 59 where it joins the rest of the traffic.

There is also some word of *IF* no station is put at Chimney Rock, they would run trolleys in the area that would connect to the station at hillcroft.

As far as jumping down your throat, you didn't throw statistics, you said the following:

I disagree. It's on the wrong side of 59 to service Chimney Rock effectively. The people on the south side of Chimney Rock are not commuting to jobs downtown, they're day laborers and low wage immigrants.  An oversimplification yes, but it's largely true.

Yes, a slight simplification, I would suspect.

in the 77081 zip code, there are approx 5k people PER SQ MI in that area. And a considerable amount of them are transit riders.

Ricco

[jm1fd]

Some have already discovered that van pools and HOV lanes and Park & Ride allow greater - not less - freedom.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Greater freedom? DO share how...I'm not seeing that one.

[Heights2Bastrop]

When I was a small kid the streetcar tracks were still visible along Heights Blvd. I used to play on the tracks and watched the trains operate along Nicholson. I would love to see METRO construct commuter rail lines along these same routes.

[Guest danax]

Toll roads have their place, but when they are trying to be retrofit more than a century after a neighborhood has been built and while it is currently intact, unified and full of a sense of community...that retrofit just doesn't fit. This gives us notice that the Toll Road Authority, as it is currently staffed, is dangerous and needs to be watched closely.

[VelvetJ]

But as I was talking about earlier in the topic, do you think all those people will trade their cars in for a ride on a train?

Glen

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe not all but a significant amount, yes.

Let's face a few things. As a whole, when are Houston's freeways their most congested.....during rush hour. Where are most of these people going during rush hour......to their places of employment and back home. In between those times of rush hour and on weekends, our gigantic freeways can sometimes look relatively empty for the amount of people that live in this city. So, IMO one of the biggest keys to easing Houston's congestion at it's worst is to get people out of their cars, or basically reducing the amounts of automobiles on the roads. How do we do that? Create a attractive, convenient, comfortable, fast, smooth, and cost friendly alternative to the automobile. Rail is a very good option for that. And for those that say there is no difference between riding a bus and riding a train, is fooling themselves. If rail already existed for residents of Katy or Sugarland but they also had the option of riding the bus, I'm willing to bet most would use the train. We have to ask ourselves WHY most would use the train instead of the bus.

Now understand what I am NOT saying. Do I think Houstonians as a whole will begin to sell their cars, no of course not. Am I saying those that have the rail option for commuting won't ever drive to work again, of course not. Houston is too sprawled for, as a whole, it's residents to "get rid of their cars". Also, there are times when people have to run errands or have alternate plans after work and taking a train would be too inconvenient. But, let's be honest here, most people on our highways during rush hour are going directly to work and directly home. And if there are errands to be run like grocery shopping, or dry cleaning, kids at the daycare, etc., more times than not, they do those things at locations that are relatively close to their homes. The point is most days, commuters are going directly to work and back home, so most days rail would be the best option to the automobile.

Also, the face of the city would change and if given a resonable option there are tons of people that would choose to live along or near the rail line, also reducing congestion. If Houstionians had the option of riding a train that they could use to go shopping, to the movies, to restaurants and to work, there are tons that would choose to do so. Look at what is happening in Dallas, particularly in Plano.

Although it is not completely built out, imagine a train letting passengers off in the heart of the Sugarland Town Square. Those people that currently live in those apartments would be in WALKING distance of a train to work, a mall, a ice skating rink, a AMC 24 movie theater, a gym (the new Houstonian Lite Club), a TON of restaurants, a great relaxing foutain next door at city hall, and a hotel for visiting family members . The only thing that would be missing would be a grocery store, but there is one a mile away via car. If a train existed there, they wouldn't be able to keep up with the demand for highrise living in that area. Imagine pockets of scenes like this all over Houston. Imagine walking out of your apartment at Sugarland Town Square and catching a train that takes you to Downtown, where you would change trains and get on another that takes you to the heart of the Strand in Galveston. It's possible. But it has to be an option.

Again, people will always drive in Houston, but with the price of gas (which we all know is not going to get any cheaper), our horrible air quality, our flooding situation that literally gets worse and worse every year, and our frustrations with congestion, Houston needs as many alternates as we can get. IMO, in cities the size of Houston, the automobile should be a OPTION not a requirement.

[Subdude]

Houston Chronicle editorial against the proposal:

Nov. 29, 2004, 12:42AM

DON'T PAVE PARADISE

Handing over precious green space in the Heights to toll road authority is a bad idea.

Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle

Freight trains once rumbled along the old Missouri-Kansas-Texas railroad line through otherwise sedentary Heights neighborhoods just northwest of downtown, rattling picturesque Victorian homes and sending lonesome wails into the night. Now the tracks are gone, and the typical sounds along the route are the chatter of an occasional pair of hikers, the barks of walked dogs, and the shrieks of blue jays in overhanging oaks. Although the vacant gravel pathway is unimproved, it's already, by default, becoming a recreational resource for the adjoining neighborhoods.

That's why the action of Harris County Commissioners Court last summer to allow the county toll road authority to negotiate with the state to purchase the rail line right of way as a possible toll route is belatedly stirring community protests. The Heights is already bounded on the south and north by the concrete rivers of Interstate 10 and the North 610 Loop. Yet it is still one of the few inner-city areas where one can sit on a quiet night in a backyard or on a front porch without hearing the muffled hum of freeway traffic. Just when longtime residents had almost forgotten those pre-dawn, insomnia inducing locomotive horns, another and more disruptive threat is on the horizon.

The idea of building a toll road spur just north of the burgeoning residential and entertainment zone along White Oak appalls area residents and shopkeepers. Heights resident Mike Branda told the Chronicle's Tom Manning that such a project "would isolate and destroy the blocks near that toll road and turn it into a no man's land. ... The interstate system has already chopped off part of the Heights and this would splinter it."

The purpose of a new toll road would be to provide suburban commuters quicker access in and out of downtown by adding lanes to Highway 290 that could then divert traffic through a spur in the Heights. Does it really make sense to damage the quality of life in inner-city areas where residents have chosen to raise their families so someone who lives in the suburbs can shave a few minutes off their drive-time? What is the purpose of the city's new mass transit strategy if not to reduce the volume of cars coming into the city?

This is the toll road version of folk singer Joni Mitchell's famous lyric: "They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."

District H Councilman Adrian Garcia says such a toll road would "wreak havoc" in the area. He also believes citizen groups should have been consulted before the county approved negotiations to take over the rail line.

Harris County Toll Road Authority spokeswoman Patricia Friese claims the hubbub over the possible use of the former rail line as a toll road is "premature." Yet she also admits that if her agency gets the property, it would likely build the road. "The worst-case scenario," comments Friese, "is that you'll have a toll road instead of a rail line."

That ignores the reality that the rail line is long gone. The city shouldn't sit back and allow a worst-case scenario to unfold in the Heights.

The administration of Mayor Bill White is working hard to create green space and a major park downtown. In the same spirit, it should get the city into the bidding for the rail line. Why not create a best-case scenario and build a much-needed hike-and-bike trail that enhances rather than blights a historic neighborhood.

Link

[ssullivan]

I'm glad to see the Chronicle and a city councilman coming out against this idea. I hope the public backlash is strong enough that HCTRA drops their idea of building a road there.

[HeightsGuy]

Someone was looking for a map, I attached what I think is the area in question. If I am not mistaken, this right of way has been listed as a proposed rail-to-trail for a while now.

Also, note that it is the same right-of-way that goes right past the proposed target shopping area just south of I10.

Follow the yellow dots

[MaxConcrete]

I'm a little late to this discussion, but when the first word of this came out I posted to misc.transport.road with my theories.

1. A financial shell game (a money-transfer mechanism)

Due to overruns on the Katy Freeway project and the fact that TxDOT has no use for the ROW inside Loop 610, HCTRA's purchase of the ROW would effectively transfer funds from HCTRA (which has money) to TxDOT (which needs money). HCTRA would probably later sell the most of the ROW to Metro for light rail at some point in the future.

2. HCTRA only wants the ROW to Washington

Realistically, I think HCTRA wants the ROW to extend the Katy Tollway to near Washington and I-10. The Hempstead tollway will also be extended to this point. This makes sense. Buying the full corridor would be part of the financial shell game to transfer HCTRA money to TxDOT to cover Katy Freeway cost overruns

3. (Unlikely) Vendetta against Metro

This corridor is slated for light rail, but if certain powers in Harris County or elsewhere don't want this light rail then buying the ROW and using it for something else would preclude the light rail

I think the answer is a combination of 1 and 2.

What's going to happen? If there is opposition, look for HCTRA to only buy what it really wants, from Loop 610 to near Washington. Metro would eventually get the rest of the ROW, either by purchase or gift from TxDOT (depends on the political climate when the transfer is made.)

By coincidence I personally inspected this corridor this past weekend without knowing about this thread. East of Heights Blvd the corridor becomes very narrow and cuts close to many houses. I would say the corridor is 40 to 50 feet wide - not wide enough for a tollway and barely wide enough for light rail. When I saw that, I knew for a fact no tollway would ever come through. The ROW actually curves southward and interects the Katy Freeway near Studemont. This means that any tollway would need to connect to the Katy Freeway at that point. Why would HCTRA extend the toll road to Studemont when it could connect it at Washington? There is no reason for a Studemont extension.

Suppose that HCTRA does buy the entire ROW (not just from Loop 610 to Washington). The possibility of anything being constructed depends on the political climate 10 to 20 years from now. In all likelyhood the political climate will be less pro-tollway.

So my words of advice to anyone concerned about this: Calm down. A tollway through the Heights is not going to happen. And if a purchase by HCTRA is dropped, that just means HCTRA will have more money for needed projects like the Grand Parkway. You'll get your light rail eventually, depending on how quickly Metro is able to burn up tax money on these rail projects.

[tomv]

I know it's not popular but I feel someone has to speak out so I'll take the plunge and make the case for the road.

Our population will probably double in the next 20 years. There could be 12 million people in the area by 2040. Many of these people will drive cars. The Northwest part of the metro area will get a large chunk of this growth.

The 290 Northwest Freeway is already overloaded and will soon be widened, but a separate toll road will have to be built down Hempstead Highway to keep traffic moving in that corridor. Both roadways are due to dead end at Loop 610, creating a potential traffic nightmare.

Extending the toll road down Hempstead to I10 would help a great deal, but the problem here is the increased traffic load on I10. This freeway is not only used by local motorists, but it is also a vital east-west route for interstate traffic. It has already been widened and probably cannot be expanded much further.

The proposed toll road would enable drivers coming in from the Northwest to the Downtown area to bypass I10 all together and take the strain off that road.

The toll road would be a minimalist freeway much like the Westpark Toll Road and the US90 mini-freeway just south of 610. Four lanes, no service roads, concrete barriers, no billboards, no toll plazas. Parts of it could be below grade much like the Sam Houston Tollway just south of the Katy Freeway.

Most of this corridor would be perfect for such a roadway. Drive over the Shepherd Drive bridge or the TC Jester bridge north of I10 and see for yourself. The most environmentally sensitive part would be the six blocks or so that pass through the Heights at Heights Boulevard, roughly from Yale Street to Oxford. This section would definitely be below grade.

Anyway, nobody speaks up for roads so I thought I'd make the case. Of course we could all stop using our cars and ride trains, buses and bicycles to get where we need to go. Or our population could stop growing. Or the Downtown area could diminish in importance making access to that part of town not as important. If this happens then we don't need the road.

Go ahead let me have it.

[HeightsGuy]

Of course we could all stop using our cars and ride trains, buses and bicycles to get where we need to go.

If this city does in fact double in the next 20 years, building this extension only puts off the inevitable. Nobody rides rail because they particularly want to. New Yorkers don't ride the rail because they want to, they ride it because it's not economically feasible to use a car in Manhattan. Ask any New Yorker out there, they will tell you that if they had an unlimited supply of money, they would take a taxi wherever they went. Same goes for people living in Northern VA and other DC suburbs. They ride rail because it's faster and cheaper than driving to DC daily. Rail is the only scalable answer, and the only way to get people to use it is pain. By pain I mean the amount of time it takes to get to work car vs. rail + the costs associated. If you keep stacking the cards against rail by building more and wider freeways, it makes that pain all the worse when it all collapses on itself, which it will if you add 7+ million to the Houston gumbo.

[KinkaidAlum]

Quite frankly, with what we know about what our continued sprawl does to our environment, I see let the friggin' dumb$@#$@ who continue to move further and further away from the center city wallow in traffic.

Their selfish deeds... we want a bigger yard we will never use... we want drive thru banks and pharmacies and dry cleaners and liquor stores and fast food joints...we want better schools but we don't wanna work to improve the existing ones... we want better roads to drive through your part of town but dammit, we ain't gonna pay for your lightrail...we want more square footage of house than we'll ever use... we want 30 lanes of highway... we want lower taxes... and on and on and on.

ENOUGH.

We need to tell people since the developers aren't listening that if you choose this lifestyle there will be consequences. One of those will be spending a third of your life in traffic.

[Subdude]

Thanks tomv it's good to hear both sides of the argument. As a point of reference, though, population growth might well be less. According to State of Texas projections, the 2025 population of the Houston metro area is estimated to grow from approximately 5 million today to between 5.6mm and 8.8mm, with 6.9 million being the "best-guess" estimate. 2040 metro population is projected between 5.8mm and 12.9mm, with 8.4 million as a likely case. The link for all this is in a thread under Other Houston.

The point Kincaid makes is a common arguement for toll roads. When roads are free to users, close-in residents effectively subsidize suburban development through taxes. Constructing toll roads has the benefit of monetizing some of the cost onto the actual users. Of course, that argument ignores externalities like the impact on neighborhoods through which the roads pass.

[MidtownCoog]

Their selfish deeds

Get a grip. This is America, not North Korea.

[VelvetJ]

It's been said a few times that "xyz" will be for future use by Metro, and certain pieces of land is set aside for future use for Metro. At what point is commuter or light rail viable for Houston? Rail in this city is inevitable, so the longer we wait, the more expensive it was going to be. In the 90's commuter rail down existing tracks along 290 was dismissed and deemed too expensive. If we thought it was too expensive then, what about 10-15 years from now?

Tomv said, "Our population will probably double in the next 20 years. There could be 12 million people in the area by 2040. Many of these people will drive cars. " The million dollar question is WHY will many of these people be driving? Is it simply because people will not get out of their cars?

Seriously, why not invest more in rail now? What makes Houston that much different than Dallas? Why is aggressive rail expansion in Dallas so much more of a good idea than in Houston?

Again, as gas prices continue to climb, flooding continues to get worse, and our air continue to get worse, Houston does not seem to be going in the right direction fast enough. We are retarding and deluding ourselves by planning more pavement and sitting on a hope that the arrival of a alternative to the automobile in 15-20 years is the most feasible answer to the issue.

[flatline]

I'm glad the Chronicle caught this, but how in the world did it take three months for this to get reported!!!

[westguy]

Metro has a large cluster of Park and Rides near the Westpark corridor (Westwood, Westchase, Alief, Mission Bend, Gessner) and they all seem to get a lot of use. I don't know why people wouldn't want to switch to a train and get to work faster.

[pineda]

Houston Press article

I wasn't sure if I had seen this posted on this website yet or not. If not, here 'tis.

[GovernorAggie]

It's been said a few times that "xyz" will be for future use by Metro, and certain pieces of land is set aside for future use for Metro. At what point is commuter or light rail viable for Houston? Rail in this city is inevitable, so the longer we wait, the more expensive it was going to be. In the 90's commuter rail down existing tracks along 290 was dismissed and deemed too expensive. If we thought it was too expensive then, what about 10-15 years from now?

Tomv said, "Our population will probably double in the next 20 years. There could be 12 million people in the area by 2040. Many of these people will drive cars. " The million dollar question is WHY will many of these people be driving? Is it simply because people will not get out of their cars?

Seriously, why not invest more in rail now? What makes Houston that much different than Dallas? Why is aggressive rail expansion in Dallas so much more of a good idea than in Houston?

Again, as gas prices continue to climb, flooding continues to get worse, and our air continue to get worse, Houston does not seem to be going in the right direction fast enough. We are retarding and deluding ourselves by planning more pavement and sitting on a hope that the arrival of a alternative to the automobile in 15-20 years is the most feasible answer to the issue.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Referring to Dallas, I remember hearing someone from their MPO basically saying that they were gettign to the point where it was actually cheaper to build rail than three more lanes of freeway b/c of the land costs. Houston has a lot of junk along the freeways that I'm sure many of us here wouldn't mind seeing gone. But since it is just junk, it is very cheap to buy out and move. However, TxDOT will have a bad taste in their mouths when they have to buyout AND demolish those 6-8 story buildings hugging 290 in the Pinemont/Hollister area to widen the freeway.

However, I have heard those in Houston express that the endgame for freeway expansion is near. That doesn't mean rail is coming soon, IMO, it just means more tollways and more value-pricing of existing facilities. Once that option becoems less appealing, THEN there will be an onslaught of rail.

[VelvetJ]

Referring to Dallas, I remember hearing someone from their MPO basically saying that they were gettign to the point where it was actually cheaper to build rail than three more lanes of freeway b/c of the land costs.  Houston has a lot of junk along the freeways that I'm sure many of us here wouldn't mind seeing gone.  But since it is just junk, it is very cheap to buy out and move.  However, TxDOT will have a bad taste in their mouths when they have to buyout AND demolish those 6-8 story buildings hugging 290 in the Pinemont/Hollister area to widen the freeway.

However, I have  heard those in Houston express that the endgame for freeway expansion is near.  That doesn't mean rail is coming soon, IMO, it just means more tollways and more value-pricing of existing facilities.  Once that option becoems less appealing, THEN there will be an onslaught of rail.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for that answer, I think my "emotion" scared everyone away. I have wondered about this for a long time, so thanks again for the answer

Although I hope you are wrong, essentially, paying to drive on the freeway is the direction we are going in?

[GovernorAggie]

Thanks for that answer, I think my "emotion" scared everyone away. I have wondered about this for a long time, so thanks again for the answer

Although I hope you are wrong, essentially, paying to drive on the freeway is the direction we are going in?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I hope I'm wrong too, but like MaxConcrete said, fellow Ag Governor Perry has pretty much opened the floodgates for several tollways.

I don't know too much about Gov. Perry, but my understanding is that Sen. Kay Hutchison may try to run for Governor in '06. I remember her being very supportive of rail in Houston before METRO's rail vote. I think that having her as Governor could be a very good thing for Houston and for Texas in general. She would have clout at home and in Washington in order to get the transportation monies needed in Houston.

Maybe if Gov. Perry's $186 billion TTC can have just 10% of that money flipped to widening I-35, I-45, and I-10 to 6-lanes in the rural stretches of the Triangle (similar to what MaxConcrete has been saying), and for state contributions to rail projects (intercity and intracity), that would be very helpful.

I know Gov. Perry was counting on a lot of private money for the TTC, so I propose something similar for METRO for getting more money and cooperation for rail there. I think that proposed stations could be "sold" to private developers and companies who may wish to "monopolize" those stops with their outlets, developments, etc (e.g. Crescent Resources is an arm of Duke Energy). That is similar to the governor basically selling interchange access on the TTC to companies.

However, this could get interesting as some with deeper pockets may just ask to have development rights among whole lines, or even name the lines after them. Imagine "The Texaco Line" or "The Hobby Airport Station, Presented by Southwest Airlines". This is similar to what Ric Williamson said in the '03 APA meeting in San Antonio--if it takes having a "Taco Bell Tollway" or "The Next 100 Miles have been sponsored by McDonald's" with a McDonald's at every interchange on the TTC, that's what TxDOT will do to get the thing built.

How you you all feel saying that "I take the galleryfurniture.com line home everyday"? Well, maybe you'd shorten to "The Gallery Line" but you get my point.

[ssullivan]

However, this could get interesting as some with deeper pockets may just ask to have development rights among whole lines, or even name the lines after them.  Imagine "The Texaco Line" or "The Hobby Airport Station, Presented by Southwest Airlines".  This is similar to what Ric Williamson said in the '03 APA meeting in San Antonio--if it takes having a "Taco Bell Tollway" or "The Next 100 Miles have been sponsored by McDonald's" with a McDonald's at every interchange on the TTC, that's what TxDOT will do to get the thing built.

How you you all feel saying that "I take the galleryfurniture.com line home everyday"?  Well, maybe you'd shorten to "The Gallery Line" but you get my point.

Gag. I hope this NEVER happens. I'm sick of everything having a corporate name and advertisement on it these days. I think it's great that Metro has been able to avoid selling advertising on buses and trains like so many other cities have. The last thing we need are rail lines sponsored by a corporation.

[MaxConcrete]

Referring to Dallas, I remember hearing someone from their MPO basically saying that they were gettign to the point where it was actually cheaper to build rail than three more lanes of freeway b/c of the land costs.  Houston has a lot of junk along the freeways that I'm sure many of us here wouldn't mind seeing gone.  But since it is just junk, it is very cheap to buy out and move.  However, TxDOT will have a bad taste in their mouths when they have to buyout AND demolish those 6-8 story buildings hugging 290 in the Pinemont/Hollister area to widen the freeway.

However, I have  heard those in Houston express that the endgame for freeway expansion is near.  That doesn't mean rail is coming soon, IMO, it just means more tollways and more value-pricing of existing facilities.  Once that option becoems less appealing, THEN there will be an onslaught of rail.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In terms of the freeway endgame nearing, yes and no. I think the next few years will represent the peak and the future will be long-term decline in construction. The main reason is financial. Governor Perry and his henchmen on the Transportation Commission have a stated objective of letting inflation wipe out the gasoline tax. No help is forthcoming from Washington, especially since Bush has run us into the ground financially.

The projects already in the pipeline, including Northwest Freeway expansion, expansion of I-45 through Conroe, the Gulf Freeway outside BW8, and continued work on US 59 in Fort Bend and Montgomery Counties is enough to consume the shrinking available funds to 2020 and beyond. As for HCTRA, their cash will eventually be spread thin since the ability of the Sam Houston Tollway to subsidize other projects is not infinite (and may already be tapped out).

As for rail making a meaningful difference, forget about it. Dallas' light rail system is far superior to Houston's but Dallas' system still suffers from eroding ridership, below 60,000 boardings per day, last I heard (I don't have recent data.) Will those ridiculus rail alignments to Hobby airport and Harrisburg solve any problems? No way.

So, we can hope for two things: slower population growth, and getting rid of Rick Perry in 2006 and hopefully getting someone who'll allow an increase in the gasoline tax.