IronTiger

I'll choose to withhold my opinions on the matter until the real story is made clear. After all, the Trayvon Martin case was widely mis-reported, so I have reason to believe there's a part of the story not being told.

With the right transit connections and the completion of the highway, I think Northwest Mall could come back to life. Sure, the Macy's needs to be rebuilt as a new building, but I think it's still got legs.

Yeah, I meant "and those extra California costs", or something, to indicate that it would be way more expensive than $800M (not to mention costs of upkeep). I do wonder about these cap-and-cover freeway plans...they have a mission to "reconnect" the city, do they intend on rebuilding road connections cut off?

LA's park idea is pretty crazy, since Klyde Warren Park cost about $471 per square foot (if what I read on another source was correct, dividing cost by square foot of park) and here they're talking about a 38 acre park, which if we multiply 1655280 square foot x $471, we're looking at $779,636,880 at the bare minimum. Due to earthquake retrofitting and other things (and why California costs more in general), we're easily looking at a billion, maybe more.

Arguably part of the cost was stuff that should've been done years ago: the city had no real downtown highway system at all except for a crappy 1940s viaduct that wasn't designed to handle nearly as much traffic as it did.

Looks like I found another one, in an ethereal gas station location: 14647 S Main St, Pizza Inn, replaced in the last year or so. Speaking of gas station locations, the McDonald's in the Exxon in College Station is being replaced with a Mooyah. Should add that.

Yeah, if you did walk everywhere you would be healthier. Still, it deals with average lifestyles. If I lived in my Midtown apartment eating Cheetos and Mountain Dew sitting in front of the computer, versus lifting weights and doing runs around the neighborhood in the suburbs, the suburbanite would be healthier. The point is, it's not inherent that living in urban areas are healthier, it's personal habits.

But not to argue. At least not about Culberson and rail anymore. Most people would call that sarcasm (at least, I hope so). It would be different if we were actually discussing it in person. I don't use air quotes in real life conversations. Look, I'm really not defending Culberson, but am I generally disgusted at politics and politicians in general, of which Culberson is thrown into. As for cost overruns, it doesn't mean that every agency that underestimates a cost is incompetent or the project isn't worth it. The Big Dig went $10 billion overbudget (at least) and still had problems. That was a disaster.

Page updated with new format! There's a small error on the index (missing <hr> tag between Pizza Hut and Ponderosa Steakhouse). A few new restaurants have been added to the list, and restaurant suggestions have been added. Enjoy! Thanks to all who helped out! Another update is coming in a month or so.

Page updated with new info, and not just on Champ's and Jojo's. Not a big one, though. One picture was added.

Fair enough. But for the record, I never defended Culberson, just clarifying what he did and didn't do, and it's not unique to him (only in the fact it regards rail). Mentioning that Sarah Palin never said "I can see Russia from my house" doesn't make you a Palin defender, for instance... ...and just because I stop arguing doesn't mean there's a "winner" in an argument.

Except for maybe the fact I already mentioned that and stated that he was always against rail while you were swearing up and down that he said "go to bat for METRO" (those words) and seemed more concerned in trying to trip me up in an effort to discredit what I was saying. So yes, he lied. I'm not disputing that. What makes this especially bad? That it involved rail, and anything involving federal rail funding is a "special" sin? I'm done arguing here. No use arguing with someone whose mind is already set and has already insulted those who disagree with him.

His words, not mine. Here. [Metro board changes referendum's wording, Houston Chronicle - Tuesday, September 23, 2003] A part of the relevant article has been included. There you go.

I have access to the Houston Chronicle archive via a Houston Library Card, and I can't find anywhere where he said that. The only thing that he did say is that he'll help METRO match funds for $640 million, which he didn't do. How am I standing on shaky ground? On every one of these topics I try to do research on the subject and figure out the truth, not talking up half-truths heard elsewhere and making crazy accusations. That's all.

That was in response to the "Culberson is the devil" sentiment from Swamplot and other HAIF threads. It seems by pointing out even something he didn't do is somehow frowned upon. Yeah, but he didn't block funding for the whole system, just not on the Richmond line. I think I read that the Main Street line was funded locally, though. Except that he never said that. Culberson wanted to block federal funding for rail in Houston if that didn't pass (actually, I believe the wording was without majority approval). The closest thing to your quote lies to comes from Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. [bill could clear Metro track for U.S. funds - Local transit president happy over panel action, Houston Chronicle - Wednesday, June 14, 2000] Neither the Houston Chronicle search nor a good old fashioned Google search turned up anything else relevant.

A lot of cost overruns happen. Katy Freeway's widening ended up being $2.67 billion in 2008 (including ROW acquisition). Originally it was estimated in 1986 to be 1.1 billion to 1.3 billion, but accounting for inflation to 2008, that's 2.1 billion to 2.4 billion. While there were cost overruns, it's not as bad you try to make it out to be. That's not to mention that TxDOT is an agency funded an entirely different way. That's not what you were arguing, though. You were arguing that Culberson was "overriding the will of the people" by not allowing federal funding on the Richmond portion. Culberson was always against the rail project in 2003, believing it not to reduce congestion or improve mobility outside the Loop (which is mostly true). He also did say that if it was passed, he would help Congress match the $640 in federal funds, too. [Metro board changes referendum 's wording, Houston Chronicle - Tuesday, September 23, 2003] But wow, a politician not doing something he said he would do in office? Call a congressional hearing, this is unheard of! Seriously, I'm not defending Culberson, I'm just clarifying what he did and didn't do. What, are you going to hate me now because I said Culberson wasn't the Devil? The 2003 referendum was described as Carol Lewis of METRO (in that article linked) as a "plan, not a commitment". Those lines will probably be built someday. Remember, the Beltway went from a plan to a fully built tollway ring in 60 years. Look--I understand you want the rail built out. But surely there's a better way to try to do something about it instead of ranting on an Internet forum and making childish insults? Does this help the rail get done faster?

Ah, the old "Culberson overturns will of the people" rumor rears its head again. Or the tl;dr version: You do realize that the University Line can still technically be built with local funds, right?

OK, maybe your argument isn't "We need to be like Dallas" but you have yourself an incendiary topic title (and the paragraph you wrote) that purports that if you aren't fully 100% backing rail, you are clearly an idiot and the "bad guy" in the rail battle. That's what I interpreted as.

Density is the best thing that makes rail effective, which is why it's effective in India and the Northeast. Unfortunately, another fact is that METRO grossly underestimated how much the additional lines would cost, and ran out of money authorized in the 2003 referendum. This was stated and discussed in another thread, and thus, is one reason why others are reluctant to give them additional funding, especially how the built lines really affect traffic, congestion, and mobility is questionable.

"Rail vs. Rednecks"? See, people like you are why we have these arguments. The anti-rail contingent has a "You want to take people to the 19th century" view while the pro-rail contingent has this equally wrong "Anyone who doesn't support rail is a backwoods Luddite" type reasoning. Have you noticed that?

According to Houston Freeways, the Hardy Toll Road didn't reach self-sufficiency until 2002. One of the big changes of how it started turning a profit was the airport connector in 2000.

I can't believe you actually went to all of those places within relatively recent memory, and I think you're either lying or grew up in a wealthy household that could afford to go to those types of places. Both are equally plausible for their own reasons, as I can't think of any other reasons ("My job sends me all over the world" or "My parents were missionaries, we traveled around a lot", are far less plausible answers) [sorry if you get offended, that's honestly what I believe until I see real proof otherwise]

"There's no such thing as a free lunch" as the old saying goes, and despite any "rewards" you may rack up for "healthier" commuting, it looks like another data mining service. Take caution.

Yeah, the Swamplot comments are awfully mean-spirited. I think I'd like to go there at least once...after all, I did enjoy the Houston Maritime Museum, a small museum just off the Medical District that my Dad had wanted to go to.

I think the name-calling and pigeonholing is a bit of a stretch, but have you (Metro West) actually ridden any train-based public transportation in the last 10 years? I've personally ridden four, the DART in Dallas (which has been operating since the mid-1990s), Houston's line, NYC, and Washington DC. While I have different feelings on each of them (first time in the Houston METRO I was in a car with some definitely creepy people, like the one guy that seemed to wear a crown out of what appeared to be twisted up coat hangers), I remind myself that I'm just a tourist and it's a novelty. I might feel differently if I was doing it every day during the rush hours, which is what a lot of the starry-eyed metro railfans seem to forget. The closest to that rush hour experience in recent times was riding back on DART packed with families riding back from the zoo, and I had to stand the whole way, unable to move in much direction until the train was almost to my destination. I certainly don't hold it against anyone that prefers not to ride public transportation or chooses not to fund public transportation (because in many situations, it's not worth the cost), but I do get a bit annoyed when people start pointing out other city rail systems, namely DART (Atlanta's and San Francisco's run a close second) and start saying "THIS is the way to do it! Why don't we have THESE?" It gets annoying after the first half-dozen posts.