Houstonist: IMHO: Westpark Tollway goes from Hot to Not

Bryan

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 12:31:36 -0600

In a metroplex with a population this large do you people HONESTLY think that EVERYONE can live inside the freakin' loop? Not possible. Cities this large HAVE to have suburbs, although Houston does sprawl more than most.

'stina

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:37:02 -0600

Oldie but goodie, the proposed Richmond rail would only be from Main to the Galleria area, not the area discussed in this post. After about Sage or so, the proposed line would meet up with Westpark. Going all the way down Richmond hasn't ever been suggested, and Westpark on the west side of town has always been on the plans. The debate is about what the Univeristy line will look like inside the loop. I'm actually one of the few people who rides the Main street rail line, and I generally agree with the Richmond Rail dot Org folk, but Westpark has always been part of the plan.

Urban Houstonian

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:13:58 -0600

P.S. You're right though, Raddack is a grade-a jerk-off.

Urban Houstonian

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:12:30 -0600

Sorry, but lower cost living exists inside the loop, I pay $500 + bills to live 5 miles from Downtown. No, the opporunities are not going to walk up to slap you in the face, but they are out there for those who look for them. METRO should be blamed for holding onto land that they intend to use as commuter rail. Plus, Westpark was never intended to be a major transportation artery a la 59, I-10 or 45, nor was it intended to be a cure-all for west side commuters. The tollway is not being used as it was intended, and they are taking measures, albeit drastic, to curb the problem. If this affects you negatively, find another way to get to work; Houston is not as hard to get around if you're willing to take the time to figure it out. Anywhere you live in any city in the country comes with a certain level of sacrifice. If you move somewhere without addressing and/or compensating for those sacrifices, that's your problem, not the city government's.

goal10der3874

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:03:53 -0600

You know what I like about Houston? It's a big city and that affords me about 6 different routes I can take to and from the 7 miles I have to travel for work. Most of the time, they are mildly congested, but I can safely say there is usually at least one that will get me to/from in less than 25 minutes. By living 15 miles away from the places you want to go, you have to pay a price. One price is the amount of traffic you have to deal with. Another is that you have access to these "special" tollways, but you don't necessarily have to use them. Their access is the price you're willing to pay for an easier trip. If you don't want to pay the cost, sit in traffic like the rest of Houston. On the flip side of my argument, I do agree with some of the suggestions made in the piece. I think having company carpools, shuttles and tax breaks are superb options and I'm guessing there are more out there. Also, IMO, the light rail to/from Galleria could ease some of the congestion on Richmond & Westheimer - eventually - but people need to stop bitching about it and just let them get it built already! There is one more thing you can do, run for office and see how much you can get done.

messdale

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 08:40:58 -0600

Hooray for living in the suburbs... and working in the suburbs too! Every day I give thanks for the 1.5 mile round trip commute thru shady neighborhood streets. Thanks for making me appreciate it even more.

adr

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 07:26:12 -0600

LOL @ Living in the suburbs.

shannon

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 04:07:38 -0600

Dear hohiro, Where, dear sir, might you suggest a blonde chick who likes to wear skirts should live within the loop when her budget - at least the one she would like to have so that she can afford to move out of Htown traffic hell - allots no more than $400/month? I'd rather drive out to the suburbs if it means that I can feel safe in a $400 abode. But, maybe you're not in my situation, so you didn't think of that. As for the L.A. argument: sorry, gotcha there too. Lived in LA for 4 of the past 6 years. I can't say I care enough to debate which purgatory I prefer; I-10 through Houston or I-10 through LA. But, no, I don't trust you when you say Houston traffic isn't bad. It is. LA traffic is bad too, but irrelevant when compared to Houston for several reasons. LA has a public bus system that functions effectively in and out of the suburbs. LA has an established and sensical metro system. LA has much stricter requirements on cars than Houston, including both the emission regulations and the carpooling rules. In other words, LA is TRYING. Our traffic is terrible, and our officials could give a flying fajita. That, dear hohiro, is why Houston traffic is outrageous and why we should do something about it - like ditch Radack. P.S. - I actually really appreciate your comment hohiro, and I don't at all want to discourage your comments nor anyone else's. They help open up this conversation that I feel (and I have no political motive) is so important. So thanks!

hohiro

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 02:48:08 -0600

C'mon guys (and girls). Traffic in Houston isn't bad. I lived in Los Angeles for years (still travel there several times a month) and trust me, Houston traffic isn't bad. Yes, it does have its moments that approach L.A. At least in Houston there is some method to the traffic madness, whereas in L.A. it's always traffic all the time. Hell, I was there today, it was 12:45 P.M. and I was stuck in a traffic jam for 90-minutes. No accident, no fire, I guess everyone just decided to stop in the middle of a ten lane freeway. However, I will admit that some of the reasoning behind the decisions of our esteemed elected officials Mr Radack is suspect. BTW, if it takes you an hour to get downtown--move inside the loop! ;-)

ImpeachRadack

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 01:43:24 -0600

Interestingly for the congestion, it rarely has accidents. As opposed to all the other commuter routes. Note how the commissioners were salivating at the new found money they would get to spend. Note they intend to have multiple lanes of I-10 be toll also. As soon as they get that past just wait. They will say how successful it is and convert lanes of all the other freeways to gold to enrich them and their contractor/developer buddies. Lets recall/impeach Radack and the bunch and let them "go down Richmond". Heck Richmond ends at West Oaks Mall. Shows how often Radack goes slumming out there.

OldieButGoodie

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:11:39 -0600

When they want you to do something, they cause chaos so they get their way. I am wondering if this is a ploy to get the toy train down Richmond, instead of the voter mandated Westpark route. hummmmmm.......remember all the traffic "accidents" in the 70s and early 80s to get Beltway 8? Which, by the way, will be a pay-as-you-go route into perpetuity. Follow the money.

Jax

Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:44:51 -0600

Lucky for people like me who live inside the loop, we never have to go on that stupid tollway!

kevin whited

Wed, 20 Jun 2007 21:03:58 -0600

How on earth could someone build a freeway in 21st century Houston - expecting it to solve traffic problems - and then make it have 2 lanes that narrow to ONE? Now, I'm no advocate of 20-lane plans, not in the least. But, I mean, once you're up there, once you're building those ridiculous ramps, why not go ahead and create a solution that fits the crime? 2 lanes? Come on. Apparently cost-benefit analysis was not part of the plan. It's a four-lane tollway. The preference was to build a larger toll road, but METRO refused to sell enough right of way for that, so they get to share in the blame. It's a shame that capacity is already tapped and congestion pricing must be used to alter behavior, but this is what can happen when various transit organizations do not cooperate very well. Still, whatever its deficiencies, the Westpark Tollway still adds freeway capacity in an area that needs it, and that's a plus.