"Yeah, and one pesky lawsuit. Are we to expect the local PRAVDA to viciously attack the judge as they did the two judges who ruled against METRO in 2000 and 2001? How about the SECRET MEMO accidently posted to the Houston Chronicle's editorial page on it's website? see link: http://www.bloghouston.net/item/7"

...and the point is?

I rode the 53 down Richmond yesterday. Afton Oaks is starting to look like a middle-class ghost town. I guess they can move back now since the rail isn't coming anywhere near them.

I'm actually a supporter of the Wheeler/Elgin line because it goes straight to Eastwood Transit Center. That will produce more ridership than simply dead-ending into the campus because you'll get passengers from the 40 Telephone/Pecore and the 240 series routes in addition to all of the routes that run through the campuses.

The only problem I foresee is the flooding that occurs under the Gulf Freeway at Elgin/Lockwood. When Erin came through a couple of weeks ago, they had to block it off to traffic.

On the other end, I'm kind of torn between Cummins and Buffalo Speedway. Cummins provides better service to Greenway Plaza, but Buffalo Speedway is wider and has less auto traffic. Ideally, I'd have replaced the entire 78 Alabama route with the rail line; send it down Alabama as far east as Scott or Ennis and turn onto Buffalo Speedway to Westpark. But I don't work for Metro.

I wish people would stop gnashing their teeth over the wording of the 2003 ballot.  The line was labeled "Westpark," and guess what; it goes down Westpark.  Now, how about that, crazy ain't it?  

Anyone who is familiar with public transportation will know that just because a certain route is labeled "A" street or "B" street does not mean it will spend it's entire time on that particular street.  Take the 11-Nance and the 40-Pecore for example; both routes only serve their namesake streets for 1/4th of a mile.  

"Oh, but Nance and Pecore streets are only about 1/4th of a mile.  Do better than that!"

Challenge accepted.  I'll give you the 35-Fairview, 3-Langley, 5-Southmore, and the 60-S. MacGregor.  The routes serve their namesake streets, just for not long periods of time.  In fact, the Westpark rail line will serve more of it's namesake street than any of the routes I mentioned.  Of course, let's just ignore that with more useless debate and hissy fits.

I swear, if TxDot wanted to build some sort of tollway on Richmond for better access to the Greenway Plaza/Galleria/Uptown area, all of these vocal anti rail residents could do all the squawking they wanted about businesses, homes, and trees, but they'd still be taking it with no vasoline at the end of the day.  But of course, Metro has to hold 8 public hearings to commission a study on a study about a study about the impact on a dollhouse whose figures might topple over when surveyors come to commission a study on cracks in the sidewalk someone wants preserved.  

J. Liggins said:

"I wish people would stop gnashing their teeth over the wording of the 2003 ballot.  The line was labeled "Westpark," and guess what; it goes down Westpark.  Now, how about that, crazy ain't it?  

Anyone who is familiar with public transportation will know that just because a certain route is labeled "A" street or "B" street does not mean it will spend it's entire time on that particular street.  Take the 11-Nance and the 40-Pecore for example; both routes only serve their namesake streets for 1/4th of a mile."

But we are not talking about a route name  because if we (or Metro) were then they would not now call the previous Main Street Line the 'Red Line' since it doesn't not run at all on Red St.

Everyone (prior to the election) knew that Metro bought the ROW on Westpark. Why did Metro call it the 'Westpark' line when what they really wanted was the Richmond line and only due to the tenacity of many people were forced to turn at Cummins (no matter what anyone says about this option being preliminary...it IS where they will go) and do a token Westpark run.

What Mr. Liggins failed to remind people was that Metro, until Culberson and others balked, planned to run it all on Richmond.

To make it even easier to understand. Why then, if "Westpark" was meant as a general concept, did they change the name to "University" then?

Hissy fits are when we try to confuse people with names of existing routes to proposed routing that requires a vote of the people. Last time I heard, in a democracy, if you are going to have a vote...tell the truth from the get-go.

You're telling me Metro planned to run the entire line on Richmond, and for the sake of your intelligence and credibility I hope that's not the case, or that it was an OPTION, PROPOSAL, POSSIBILITY, that PERHAPS the line would run along Richmond from Wheeler Station to Chimney Rock?  You see Don, what YOU are failing to remind people is that that alignment was one of many options presented after the vote, and it STILL HAD A SEGMENT ON WESTPARK.  

And why couldn't it be also called the University line?  Both names fit in my opinion because you see; the eastern portion serves two UNIVERSITY'S (GASP!) and the western portion goes down WESTPARK (crazy I know because according to you all, only Richmond will be affected, forgetting all about that little residential area to the east and the numerous businesses along Westpark).  So yes, either name fits the route, but perhaps not your agenda.

And your definition of hissy fit is laughable, like literally, I laughed at the ridiculousness of it.  But that's just me being petty.

Actually, METRO has a route for a street which does not exsist, acording to the COH:  8-South Main.  There is Main, North Main, Old Main, West Main, but no "South Main", on COH signage.  However, TxDot does use "South Main" sout of the jct. of Main and OST, the route of US 90Alt.

Er, unless Westpark uses a wormhole or a portkey, its eastern end is at Kirby Drive.  Now, is Richmond the best route?  I don't think it is wide enought.

I think the thing that concerns me more than the name is the fact that there's a lot of traffic on Richmond and you *can* make left turns there reliably.  If the train does to Richmond what it's done to Main it's just going to make traffic a nightmare all around it and you don't even have the streets paralleling it like you do Main to somewhat alleviate the problem.

It would be further lunacy for METREAUX to build a tram, at grade on Richmond, but if you throw enough taxpayer cash at the consultants, an agency is likely to get the "recommendation" that fits an ill-devised agenda.

Where are the heavy-handed city enforcers and environmental-whacos?  The tram project will destroy about 150 mature trees in the City right-of-way.  If it were a property owner on Richmond responsible for killing a single tree they would face a $25,000 fine and possible incarceration in the Harris County jail.

The construction of the University line will likely not improve mobility at all, and in my view, it further negatively impact the bus service to the poor, minority, elderly, and handicapped bus transit dependent riders throughout the service area.

Dear Mike,

I appreciate your concern. I drive into the Medical Center twice a day. Now that I've gotten used to the presence of the train, it's the least of my worries. I am concerned, however, to see bicyclists riding against traffic on the rail line, drivers making illegal U-turns at intersections along the line, and pedestrians  walking along the tracks next to the fenced off portions of the rail stations.

There are parallel streets to Richmond, though. West Alabama immediately comes to mind, not to mention Westheimer. As a matter of fact, the average person could *walk* from Richmond to Westheimer without getting tired, and it's only 4 stops on the 26/27 Loop bus.

I live in the Greenway hiserise at Richmond and Timmons. The proposed Richmond/Cummins turnoff to Westpark would be a traffic nightmare for all the residents(over 300 units) and the apartment dwellers(again in the hundreds) in the complex next door. Train safety whistles from 5 am to 1 am at the corner of Cummins/Richmond every six minutes. Let's not have any concern for driving the residents batty from that noise. Does Metro really want to solve the traffic congestion. Then build rail from Sugarland, Katy, Cypress, and Friendwood to Downtown. Oh, but that would take real foresight and intelligence to do that.

Hey Paul, this isn't Sim City where you can just plop down a commuter rail line for some simoleans and be done with it.  People are already soiling their diapers over the cost and time it takes to build the LRT lines,  which are only a few miles each.  Just imagine the sheer lunacy if Metro decided to invade the suburbs with their plans.  But hey, that's real foresight and intelligence for you though.

Mr. Royko/Tom Bazan,

What is the support for your contention that a property owner cutting down a mature tree would be subject to a $25,000 fine and incarceration?  Unfortunately, property owners cut down trees seemingly with impunity in this city, even trees that are located on city right-of-way.  Nothing, nothing seems to happen to those owners, certainly not $25,000 fines or incarceration.  In fact, tree protection in Houston seems to be very, very toothless.  Who or what are the "enviromental whacos" that you refer to?  Is that some kind of taco?  Is that just one of your general derogatory terms for anyone and everyone who has concerns about pollution and environmental issues in general, including protection of urban tree canopy, particularly tree canopy that has been planted on city right-of-way with private funds raised through private foundations and organizations?  And really, get off the false sanctimony about all of your efforts being expended only for the benefit of the poor, elderly, transit-dependent populace.  To get a real idea of your feelings about your fellow human beings one need look no further than your descriptions of them as "sheeple", "lemmings", "dim-witted", "nuts", etc.  You even had particular concerns and descriptions about rail patrons and body odors.  You despise transit in general and rail transit in particular and will do, say, and write anything to further denigrate public transportation.  You will, of course, retort that you don't hate public transportation, yet your idea for public transportation is only as a "safety net".  In other word, the street and highway transportation system is all that you want, which basically means that, in your world, if don't have a car, you don't count, but you'll throw those poor folks a bone and provide a little "safety net" system instead of providing a transportation system with choices and alternatives for all, including the poor, elderly, and transit-dependent.  Are you running for office again?

CHris,

Gordon Quan demanded some developer be fined the maximum ($25,000) several years back, and no I have no proof since I did not record his statements, go ask him if you wish to challenge my recollection.

How can you determine my level of concern for the poor, minirity, elderly and handicapped bus transit dependent citizens being abused by METREAUX?

I have no idea who you are, or if I have ever had the honor of meeting you.

How do we know you are not one of the "special interests" funded directly or indirectly by METREAU or surrogates to attack critics?

What are your interests in METREAUX expanding its wasteful urban rail empire?

You referenced your peers, are they the speculators, engineering and/or architect firms who have made a fortune feeding at the publiccly-funded "trough?"

CHris,

Gordon Quan demanded some developer be fined the maximum ($25,000) several years back, and no I have no proof since I did not record his statements, go ask him if you wish to challenge my recollection.

How can you determine my level of concern for the poor, minirity, elderly and handicapped bus transit dependent citizens being abused by METREAUX?

I have no idea who you are, or if I have ever had the honor of meeting you.

How do we know you are not one of the "special interests" funded directly or indirectly by METREAU or surrogates to attack critics?

What are your interests in METREAUX expanding its wasteful urban rail empire?

You referenced your peers, are they the speculators, engineering and/or architect firms who have made a fortune feeding at the publicly-funded "trough?"

"What are your interests in METREAUX expanding its wasteful urban rail empire?"

Makes no sense---that statement.  PLEASE elaborate on that question.

If you don't want more and more cars off the road, then you need to get up, go to 1900 Main and tell METRO that yourself.

Also, you need to go and tell TxDOT to better maintain our freeways that constantly need caring for.  You DO know that your money also goes into that, right?  I say (to answer that question for you)---NOPE.

You want to know my interests in METRO (not METREAUX) expending its wonderful urabn rail empire?  For one thing, it can put more and more buses where they need to be.  That's one.  I'll worry about more laterz!

Mr. Royko/Tom Bazan,

At least you finally admitted that you didn't have "proof" for something.  I really don't see why I should go ask Gordon Quan about something since you're the one who made the statement as if it were factual.  I certainly hope that a developer has been fined at some time in the past for destroying city property.  The only trees that are afforded any type of protection in the city are, of course, those trees that grow on city property, certainly not any trees that grow on private property.

As far as who I am, I'm merely an interested citizen, taxpayer, and a very frequent user of Metro.  I don't believe that we have ever formally met, but I recall seeing you at past events and I recall your spectacularly unsuccessful run for Congress a few years ago.  I began posting comments here to help be certain that readers would be aware of your factual inaccuracies, one-sided opinions, and blatant hypocrisy in promulgating the notion that the street and highway transportation system is the highest achievement of mankind rather than the taxpayer-funded, central-planned system that it is.

As far as determining your level of concern that you pretend to have for transit-dependent patrons of Metro, as I have already mentioned, one needs only to review any of your thousands of past postings and e-mails to encounter your descriptions of your fellow human beings as "sheeple", "lemmings", "dim-witted", etc.  Your past descriptions speak volumes about your concerns.

Again, what is the perceived significance in your little term "METREAUX"?  Maybe if you provided a glossary of your terms your posting would be a bit more decipherable.

Chris,

I like the "merely an interested citizen" where you have seen me at past events.  Other than METRO board meetings, where the pro-urban rail "special interests"

hang out, I can think of no "event" where you would have seen me.

I tried to unseat Queen Sheila, in a presidential election year, and was crushed by tens of thousands of straight-ticket, Democrat voters.

The Democrat incumbent has always won by a land-slide in the 18th CD; so, do you think mentioning that will in some way undermine what I comment upon concerning the ill-devised, wasteful policy of METREAUX?

What do you think about my complaints that METREAUX was shortchanging all of us by not sharing what they promised of the "Windfall" sales tax for General Mobility (yes, concrete streets for evil rubber-tired passenger cars) projects, and, then having the METREAUX board suddenly approving a whopping 65% INCREASE in GMP spending for the FY2008 Budget, where in the FY2006 CAFR and FY2007 Budget METREAUX stated they were winding down those expenditures, and/or, shifting how the money was to be spent (as matching funds for federal pork spending)?

I do use colorful and descriptive rhetoric to make a point, and hope you are not personally offended if the shoe fits.

Chris,

About the "admission" of no proof Gordon Quan made the statement.  It doesn't mean he did not.  I have no "proof" for you that the sun rose in the East this morning, but few have reason to require such proof.

Cedric,

I do go to 1900 Main Street, and tell the METREAUX board the same things I mention on their offical propagana blog.

TXDOT could spend more for roads and bridges if the federal highway trust fund were not being looted by the urban rail interests.  Also, 5-cents of the state gasoline tax is diverted to the failed public school system where educrats indoctrinate the children to embrace politically correct baloney and Socialism.

METREAUX needs to refocus on providing improved bus service if they ever expect to increase boardings.

Mr. Royko/Tom Bazan,

Again, what is the significance of your little term "METREAUX"?  Probably only your twin speaks your secret twin language, or whatever it is.  As far as past sightings, I have never been to a Metro board meeting, and I have never stated that I have.  All of those meetings are broadcast on municipal television.  You also seem to have forgotten your appearance at past Katy "Free" way events.  Proof of the sun rising in the east is hardly analagous to the need for proof to support statements of strident ideology. Manufactured language, terms and labels, and pointless invectives are no substitute for facts.

Chris,

I do not recall ever attending any "Katy Freeway" event.  Show me your proof!