IronTiger

Please don't hijack this thread with your anti-freeway nonsense, and besides, while the plan is on ice, I wouldn't go so far as to say it's "dead forever".

I think if done effectively, driverless cars (at least for some people) could ease jams. Traffic jams are less caused by simple congestion but rather when a jerk decides he can't wait 10 seconds, requiring the car(s) around him to brake, and so by the time you actually get to it, the perp's long gone.

Hey, did you hear about the new light rail lines opening later this year or early the next? No? And as usual, Slick doesn't face the arguments he can't hope to win or has been backed into, but continues beating a dead horse into pudding.

I suppose where there's severely underbudgeted emergency services and swaths of abandoned blocks, then yeah, it's gonna be difficult!

You mean new right of way? The Dallas method took lines that were abandoned in the 1990s (and long stripped) and used them as new lines for light rail. Houston is (for the most part) putting light rail in the middle of the roads. While obnoxious in some respects (shaves off ROW, eliminates lanes/lane width, bans left turns), it does put the light rail where the people are.

I'm confused. First, you say that the MKT (abandoned and stripped in '97, IIRC) should've been kept as a commuter rail. Then you admit that the Dallas system is inefficient because they used abandoned ROWs. Now you say that the Katy line should've been light rail too?

OK, GreenMaine...found the answer...but you owe me a favor.

It's also about saving money! ...oh wait. Wasn't it you that said the expansion of the Katy Freeway should have spared the MKT ROW but turning it into commuter rail or something along those lines?

That's because many malls in LA are built super-dense and have parking garages only with minimal surface lots.

Yes. Driving should be only for the wealthy. Don't want the common folk cluttering up the road, do we now? [/sarcasm] Never said that Houston doesn't need commuter rail or more light rail lines. A large part of why there's no commuter rail paralleling 290 is not so much conservative boogeymen but rather the fact that UP has priority for freight use and other bureaucratic issues.

Um, no. Ross is right in that respect, and sometimes your "mass transit advocate" thoughts come out as "anti-automobile fascist", which is probably not your intent (as there are plenty of the former who aren't the latter). I'm going to have to call BS on that, because the point was just made that Houston wasn't the same type of city of those others. Washington DC is far more compact than Houston is (and their traffic problems aren't exactly non-existent), and with Istanbul, you're comparing a city that is about 200 years old with a city that's over 2000 years old, so yeah, there's a HUGE difference!

There you go. The problem with mass transit, ladies and gentlemen. In all fairness, though, the last time I went to Dallas (about 7 years ago?), there were walkways above, below, and surface-side to take people around downtown.

Dallas managed to force rail despite conservative suburbs, but then everybody will be stuck with higher taxes and low ridership. That said, since so many rail-reliant businesses for the Hempstead Tollway construction will be destroyed, it would make sense to add commuter rail on that stretch and make it the priority.

How about adding a parallel truck route to the north side of Interstate 610? One lane each direction, trucks only, with a breakdown lane for emergencies.

Do you have a Houston library card? (It's free for everyone who lives in Texas) You might be able to find something in the online Houston Chronicle archives. I'd like to, but I don't have the time right now...

It's been determined and confirmed it used to be a TG&Y Family Center...

Additionally, I would like to amend my list: 8. The traffic circle would reduce traffic by a dramatic amount (improve traffic flow by 300%, or something cool), which couldn't be achieved through other means (such as timing lights better). This would negate #4 or even #6...but I doubt it.

Yeah, it looks like there is. However, from I-45 south to I-610 west, there isn't.

Over in southeast Houston, the Sam's Club in a dying strip mall next to Mall of the Mainland relocated to the other side of the highway, which had the Walmart (had taken the jump almost a decade ago).

Nothing remains of it today--the building was razed and rebuilt in 2005.

I wasn't mocking you, I was surprised. Usually, it's the other way around: a retail corridor is dying if Sam's pulls out, unless there was some other pressing circumstance.

Wikipedia has them as different things, so they must have SOME differentiation. Me? I don't like traffic circles or roundabouts, unless certain criteria are met: 1. A road angles at a sharp 90° turn, which would otherwise require a stop and then a left turn. 2. A road breaks into two and it would be easier than an awkward Y-shaped intersection. 3. The joining road has one lane in each direction, or if not, the total traffic on the intersection is very low. 4. The road isn't reconfigured from a traditional stoplight. 5. The traffic circle, if replacing a traditional stoplight, eliminates not one, but two lights. 6. No property is forced to be condemned for the construction (relates to #4) 7. It was built before 1970 (thus, grandfathered in) Traffic circles require a lot of extra land, so they're not practical in some circumstances. Some trucks may not be able to make the tighter curves a roundabout forces and often requires a lot of curb driving. However, if you notice the criteria I have outlined, it doesn't eliminate all traffic circles or roundabouts from existence, it just gets rid of the more annoying ones.

A Sam's Club closed?

Thanks! It even answers displacement questions...Dixie's Roadhouse was the mystery restaurant that bothered me so much.

Yeah, thanks! Sounds good.