New Beaumont station

[saxman]

Nice to see them so hard at work!

A don't think one picture taken at one instant should be an indication of how hard the builders are working. It could be a Sunday evening for all we know.

 

[George Harris]

So if it is being turned over to the city why don't they just call it a park instead of a station. You put up a nice picnic shelter for a couple of grand and be done with it. It would just happen to be next to a slab of concrete that the train stops at. Would that get by all the ADA bs? It just seems like you could separate the shelter from the platform and call them two different things.

I guess I don't see how that "gets by all the ADA bs". The platform is the biggest ticket item. The rest of the shelter isn't a big issue to make ADA compliant beyond the basic construction. And it's not "BS" if you're the person in the wheelchair.

"All that ADA bs" is called Federal Law. There is no choice about compliance. The only question is how you comply. As also said, it is not "BS" to the person in the wheelchair, or with mobility issues that make getting around difficult but are not in a wheelchair. Amazing how often those that disparage this stuff find themselves or someone they care for, if they can find it in their arrogance to care for anybody other than themselves, in need of exactly the things the ADA requires. Be warned.

 

[henryj]

I for one am glad Beaumont is finally getting a nice new station. I can think of much worse uses for our tax money that replacing an ugly slab with a nice station. Why are you blasting some progress on the Sunset route when there is so much more that is needed?

 

[user 1215]

I suppose the blasting is referring to the cost. A building and 100 yard slab of concrete costing the better part of $3Mil when a gorgeous custom house on an acre of land (with a restroom) can be built from scratch for less than half a mill. Bet it could even be built ADA compliant for that.

This new, beautiful Amshack will be subject to vandalism if what previous posts about this part of turn are true.

Meanwhile, a bureaucrat and a prime contractor are sleeping sound in their own palaces.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I can think of much worse uses for our tax money that replacing an ugly slab with a nice station.

The nation's taxpayers are not replacing a bare slab with a "nice station." Instead they are being charged over a million dollars to replace the previous station with a covered slab. Let Beaumont replace what Beaumont refused to maintain. If Beaumont wants a million dollar slab of concrete then let Beaumont pay for it. Heck, even a 50/50 investment would sit a lot better with me than this no-strings handout nonsense. If a million dollars must be spent on a station in Texas they should look at ways to provide an overnight parking area for the San Antonio station. Or to help get the ball rolling on a station at DFW. In other words, spend it on something that has enough service and volume to be a more worthwhile expense for average folks who might actually travel there some day. Not that I'm actually advocating for spending a million dollars on any Texas train station. I'm just pointing out that there are other locations with more service and more volume that would benefit far more people than replacing the humble but appropriate station Beaumont chose to ignore and let rot away.

 

[mfastx]

A don't think one picture taken at one instant should be an indication of how hard the builders are working. It could be a Sunday evening for all we know.

I know, I was joking no worries.

 

[henryj]

I can think of much worse uses for our tax money that replacing an ugly slab with a nice station.

Let Beaumont replace what Beaumont refused to maintain. If Beaumont wants a million dollar slab of concrete then let Beaumont pay for it. .........................I'm just pointing out that there are other locations with more service and more volume that would benefit far more people than replacing the humble but appropriate station Beaumont chose to ignore and let rot away.

The station and land were owned and maintained or not by the SP and eventually the UP. The city had nothing to do with it. The city bought the land from the UP so the new station could be built and since it will now belong to them I assume they will now maintain it. Beaumont did not choose to ignore and let it rot away. If you are going to perpetuate these flame wars you should at least get your facts straight.

 

[user 1215]

I doubt that UP would have rejected an agreement for Beaumont to pay to maintain the existing slab.

 

[GP35]

I can think of much worse uses for our tax money that replacing an ugly slab with a nice station.

The nation's taxpayers are not replacing a bare slab with a "nice station." Instead they are being charged over a million dollars to replace the previous station with a covered slab. Let Beaumont replace what Beaumont refused to maintain. If Beaumont wants a million dollar slab of concrete then let Beaumont pay for it. Heck, even a 50/50 investment would sit a lot better with me than this no-strings handout nonsense. If a million dollars must be spent on a station in Texas they should look at ways to provide an overnight parking area for the San Antonio station. Or to help get the ball rolling on a station at DFW. In other words, spend it on something that has enough service and volume to be a more worthwhile expense for average folks who might actually travel there some day. Not that I'm actually advocating for spending a million dollars on any Texas train station. I'm just pointing out that there are other locations with more service and more volume that would benefit far more people than replacing the humble but appropriate station Beaumont chose to ignore and let rot away.

Why do you volunteer to attack without reading? Clearly the article said UP owned the property, not the City. Clearly the article said the city

will build a police sub-station and other short comings of this station. I call that a joint project. Reeeeeeeeeeead the article.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

The station and land were owned and maintained or not by the SP and eventually the UP. The city had nothing to do with it. The city bought the land from the UP so the new station could be built and since it will now belong to them I assume they will now maintain it. Beaumont did not choose to ignore and let it rot away. If you are going to perpetuate these flame wars you should at least get your facts straight.

Many cities and towns across the country do not have any more ownership of their stations than Beaumont originally did. And yet several hundred of them are still maintained to the point that they can at least keep rain off your head while you wait for the train to arrive. I remain convinced that Beaumont could have stepped up to the plate and started taking charge of the upkeep back when they still had a train station. Unless you think Union Pacific was going to run them off with shotguns or something. If Beaumont had spent the necessary political capitol to disarm KCS and wanted some federal funding to help restore the original downtown station that would be perfectly fine with me and worthy of the money. But a million dollars for a covered slab and a couple benches in the middle of nowhere on a three-times-a-week route is a complete waste of money in my view. If you're going to receive a million plus in federal funds you should be able to contribute enough of your own resources and political capital to end up with a real station that's actually in town. Seems like a pretty reasonable expectation to me.

Clearly the article said UP owned the property, not the City. Clearly the article said the city will build a police sub-station and other short comings of this station. I call that a joint project.

I've already responded to the ownership defense above. I also don't see how two projects that have zero dependency on each other and aren't pooling their resources can be called a "joint" anything. Beaumont may indeed put a police substation somewhere in the area, but to the best of my understanding they are in no way obligated to do so.

 

[henryj]

The station and land were owned and maintained or not by the SP and eventually the UP. The city had nothing to do with it. The city bought the land from the UP so the new station could be built and since it will now belong to them I assume they will now maintain it. Beaumont did not choose to ignore and let it rot away. If you are going to perpetuate these flame wars you should at least get your facts straight.

Many cities and towns across the country do not have any more ownership of their stations than Beaumont originally did. And yet several hundred of them are still maintained to the point that they can at least keep rain off your head while you wait for the train to arrive. I remain convinced that Beaumont could have stepped up to the plate and started taking charge of the upkeep back when they still had a train station. Unless you think Union Pacific was going to run them off with shotguns or something. If Beaumont had spent the necessary political capitol to disarm KCS and wanted some federal funding to help restore the original downtown station that would be perfectly fine with me and worthy of the money. But a million dollars for a covered slab and a couple benches in the middle of nowhere on a three-times-a-week route is a complete waste of money in my view. If you're going to receive a million plus in federal funds you should be able to contribute enough of your own resources and political capital to end up with a real station that's actually in town. Seems like a pretty reasonable expectation to me.

Clearly the article said UP owned the property, not the City. Clearly the article said the city will build a police sub-station and other short comings of this station. I call that a joint project.

I've already responded to the ownership defense above. I also don't see how two projects that have zero dependency on each other and aren't pooling their resources can be called a "joint" anything. Beaumont may indeed put a police substation somewhere in the area, but to the best of my understanding they are in no way obligated to do so.

Texas Sunset, you are a hopelessly negatory case. I think you must belong to that Louisiana bunch that is still pissed because they couldn't get 'their' train restored back to Florida. lol. There is really no other reason to continually bash the Sunset route getting a nice new station in Beaumont, Texas.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Since it's a Done Deal this is Beating a Dead Horse (I too was opposed to building this Waste of Money Joke in the middle of a Vacant Field, the Over and Under on it being Trashed/Destroyed is under a year!) but one must remember that Texas doesn't exactly have Politicians that are in favor of Rail or Related Projects with the exceptions of One Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (who is Leaving office next year and helped save the Texas Eagle and Amtrak!) and the Leaders in the DFW Area who are doing a Great Job with their Rail Projects and to a certain extinct our Brillant Leaders here in Austin with the recently Opened Red Line and a Plan to expand Light Rail to the Airport and East and South Side of the City! The Rest of the State might as well be Ohio or Wisconson or Florida where the Newly Elected Idiots, er Governors and Politicos are busy Dismantling Rail Projects @ Full Speed! :angry2: :help:

 

[henryj]

Since it's a Done Deal this is Beating a Dead Horse (I too was opposed to building this Waste of Money Joke in the middle of a Vacant Field, the Over and Under on it being Trashed/Destroyed is under a year!) but one must remember that Texas doesn't exactly have Politicians that are in favor of Rail or Related Projects with the exceptions of One Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (who is Leaving office next year and helped save the Texas Eagle and Amtrak!) and the Leaders in the DFW Area who are doing a Great Job with their Rail Projects and to a certain extinct our Brillant Leaders here in Austin with the recently Opened Red Line and a Plan to expand Light Rail to the Airport and East and South Side of the City! The Rest of the State might as well be Ohio or Wisconson or Florida where the Newly Elected Idiots, er Governors and Politicos are busy Dismantling Rail Projects @ Full Speed! :angry2: :help:

Well Jim, you have a station in your Austin and it's even manned and you have daily rail service. So I don't know why you think it's such a waste of money unless you just wanted that money for your own area. Down here on the Sunset route we take anything we can get.

 

[GP35]

The station and land were owned and maintained or not by the SP and eventually the UP. The city had nothing to do with it. The city bought the land from the UP so the new station could be built and since it will now belong to them I assume they will now maintain it. Beaumont did not choose to ignore and let it rot away. If you are going to perpetuate these flame wars you should at least get your facts straight.

Many cities and towns across the country do not have any more ownership of their stations than Beaumont originally did. And yet several hundred of them are still maintained to the point that they can at least keep rain off your head while you wait for the train to arrive. I remain convinced that Beaumont could have stepped up to the plate and started taking charge of the upkeep back when they still had a train station. Unless you think Union Pacific was going to run them off with shotguns or something. If Beaumont had spent the necessary political capitol to disarm KCS and wanted some federal funding to help restore the original downtown station that would be perfectly fine with me and worthy of the money. But a million dollars for a covered slab and a couple benches in the middle of nowhere on a three-times-a-week route is a complete waste of money in my view. If you're going to receive a million plus in federal funds you should be able to contribute enough of your own resources and political capital to end up with a real station that's actually in town. Seems like a pretty reasonable expectation to me.

Clearly the article said UP owned the property, not the City. Clearly the article said the city will build a police sub-station and other short comings of this station. I call that a joint project.

I've already responded to the ownership defense above. I also don't see how two projects that have zero dependency on each other and aren't pooling their resources can be called a "joint" anything. Beaumont may indeed put a police substation somewhere in the area, but to the best of my understanding they are in no way obligated to do so.

So the station is not in town. Geez.

1. The City of Beaumont can not build on PRIVATE PROPERTY. The City had to buy the property from UP for the current project.

2. I agree that 1.25 million for this station is too much for what will be built. But that is nothing new or unique. The government pays 3k for a wrench, Amtrak pays 20k for a 500 dollar toilet repair. Ripping off the government is not new.

 

[GP35]

Since it's a Done Deal this is Beating a Dead Horse (I too was opposed to building this Waste of Money Joke in the middle of a Vacant Field, the Over and Under on it being Trashed/Destroyed is under a year!) but one must remember that Texas doesn't exactly have Politicians that are in favor of Rail or Related Projects with the exceptions of One Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (who is Leaving office next year and helped save the Texas Eagle and Amtrak!) and the Leaders in the DFW Area who are doing a Great Job with their Rail Projects and to a certain extinct our Brillant Leaders here in Austin with the recently Opened Red Line and a Plan to expand Light Rail to the Airport and East and South Side of the City! The Rest of the State might as well be Ohio or Wisconson or Florida where the Newly Elected Idiots, er Governors and Politicos are busy Dismantling Rail Projects @ Full Speed! :angry2: :help:

So while the station is being trashed, what will the police be doing in the sub-station built on the side of the station?

yes I do expect an answer.

1. Houston had to cancel it's 100 million dollar transit center because of UP. If the 10th largest metro couldn't beat UP, how could the 131st metro beat UP.

2. Did Austin pay for that project or was it funded by all tax payers in the country?

 

[Devil's Advocate]

So the station is not in town. Geez.

1. The City of Beaumont can not build on PRIVATE PROPERTY. The City had to buy the property from UP for the current project.

2. I agree that 1.25 million for this station is too much for what will be built. But that is nothing new or unique. The government pays 3k for a wrench, Amtrak pays 20k for a 500 dollar toilet repair. Ripping off the government is not new.

1. If Beaumont had gone to UP offering to managed and maintain the station prior to its collapse and was rebuffed then you'd have a good point. But so far I've yet to read anything like that.

2. Yes, fraud occurs elsewhere. Why that would be any sort of a defense for Beaumont's blatant overspending is beyond my comprehension.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Since it's a Done Deal this is Beating a Dead Horse (I too was opposed to building this Waste of Money Joke in the middle of a Vacant Field, the Over and Under on it being Trashed/Destroyed is under a year!) but one must remember that Texas doesn't exactly have Politicians that are in favor of Rail or Related Projects with the exceptions of One Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (who is Leaving office next year and helped save the Texas Eagle and Amtrak!) and the Leaders in the DFW Area who are doing a Great Job with their Rail Projects and to a certain extinct our Brillant Leaders here in Austin with the recently Opened Red Line and a Plan to expand Light Rail to the Airport and East and South Side of the City! The Rest of the State might as well be Ohio or Wisconson or Florida where the Newly Elected Idiots, er Governors and Politicos are busy Dismantling Rail Projects @ Full Speed! :angry2: :help:

So while the station is being trashed, what will the police be doing in the sub-station built on the side of the station?

yes I do expect an answer.

1. Houston had to cancel it's 100 million dollar transit center because of UP. If the 10th largest metro couldn't beat UP, how could the 131st metro beat UP.

2. Did Austin pay for that project or was it funded by all tax payers in the country?

Good Questions! I don't have the Details on the police Sub-Station but would guess that it will be sort of a hang out for cops on Patrol in that part of town! There are alot of warehouses, abandoned houses etc. around there and based on the trashing of the last Amshak would guess that it will be a magnet for homeless, gangbangers etc., hence the trashing/graffiti etc.Also this is in A Hurrican Belt, the last Amshak was Wrecked by a Storm!

My beef is Not with the City of Beaumont who had no Leverage against UP, the Money came from Washington and could have been used on alot more Feasible Projects in Better Locations that Would Serve More People! (the Beaumont Passenger Count, on/off is dismal!)

Austin's Red Line was overseen by CapMetro, a Keystone Cop type Political/Transportation Agency that's Ward of the City! They went $50 Million Dollars Over Budget, took Years Longer than was Planned to get it Running and Finally they had to Fire the Company (Veolia) that had so called "overseen the project" and hire a Real Rail Company to get the Line Operating! (see jay hadleys posts on this topic)! Of course lots of Federal Money was also squandered on this Fiasco, as is usually the case in Government Contracting! They could have gone to the DFW Area and checked out DART and TRE but Didnt, it was Too Close to Home and Too Well Done! :lol:

 

[AlanB]

So the station is not in town. Geez.

1. The City of Beaumont can not build on PRIVATE PROPERTY. The City had to buy the property from UP for the current project.

2. I agree that 1.25 million for this station is too much for what will be built. But that is nothing new or unique. The government pays 3k for a wrench, Amtrak pays 20k for a 500 dollar toilet repair. Ripping off the government is not new.

1. If Beaumont had gone to UP offering to managed and maintain the station prior to its collapse and was rebuffed then you'd have a good point. But so far I've yet to read anything like that.

2. Yes, fraud occurs elsewhere. Why that would be any sort of a defense for Beaumont's blatant overspending is beyond my comprehension.

I'm at a loss to figure out how one concludes that the price being paid for this station is too high and/or fraud.

In addition to Beaumont, Amtrak used stimulus funds for at least 2 or 3 other similar, small stations in various parts of the country with different contractors, different bids, etc., and other factors being equal they all came in at around the same price.

If one wants to argue around how things could have been located differently, or how things could/should bave been done in the past differently, fine. But based upon the other examples, one thing that is clear is that the Beaumont project is not way out of line in terms of costs for the project.

 

[user 1215]

Based on the other examples, commercial projects cost more than residential, and government projects cost more than commercial.

 

[GP35]

So the station is not in town. Geez.

1. The City of Beaumont can not build on PRIVATE PROPERTY. The City had to buy the property from UP for the current project.

2. I agree that 1.25 million for this station is too much for what will be built. But that is nothing new or unique. The government pays 3k for a wrench, Amtrak pays 20k for a 500 dollar toilet repair. Ripping off the government is not new.

1. If Beaumont had gone to UP offering to managed and maintain the station prior to its collapse and was rebuffed then you'd have a good point. But so far I've yet to read anything like that.

2. Yes, fraud occurs elsewhere. Why that would be any sort of a defense for Beaumont's blatant overspending is beyond my comprehension.

Amtrak is building the station and platform. The city is doing a separate project.

 

[GP35]

Since it's a Done Deal this is Beating a Dead Horse (I too was opposed to building this Waste of Money Joke in the middle of a Vacant Field, the Over and Under on it being Trashed/Destroyed is under a year!) but one must remember that Texas doesn't exactly have Politicians that are in favor of Rail or Related Projects with the exceptions of One Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (who is Leaving office next year and helped save the Texas Eagle and Amtrak!) and the Leaders in the DFW Area who are doing a Great Job with their Rail Projects and to a certain extinct our Brillant Leaders here in Austin with the recently Opened Red Line and a Plan to expand Light Rail to the Airport and East and South Side of the City! The Rest of the State might as well be Ohio or Wisconson or Florida where the Newly Elected Idiots, er Governors and Politicos are busy Dismantling Rail Projects @ Full Speed! :angry2: :help:

So while the station is being trashed, what will the police be doing in the sub-station built on the side of the station?

yes I do expect an answer.

1. Houston had to cancel it's 100 million dollar transit center because of UP. If the 10th largest metro couldn't beat UP, how could the 131st metro beat UP.

2. Did Austin pay for that project or was it funded by all tax payers in the country?

Good Questions! I don't have the Details on the police Sub-Station but would guess that it will be sort of a hang out for cops on Patrol in that part of town! There are alot of warehouses, abandoned houses etc. around there and based on the trashing of the last Amshak would guess that it will be a magnet for homeless, gangbangers etc., hence the trashing/graffiti etc.Also this is in A Hurrican Belt, the last Amshak was Wrecked by a Storm!

My beef is Not with the City of Beaumont who had no Leverage against UP, the Money came from Washington and could have been used on alot more Feasible Projects in Better Locations that Would Serve More People! (the Beaumont Passenger Count, on/off is dismal!)

Austin's Red Line was overseen by CapMetro, a Keystone Cop type Political/Transportation Agency that's Ward of the City! They went $50 Million Dollars Over Budget, took Years Longer than was Planned to get it Running and Finally they had to Fire the Company (Veolia) that had so called "overseen the project" and hire a Real Rail Company to get the Line Operating! (see jay hadleys posts on this topic)! Of course lots of Federal Money was also squandered on this Fiasco, as is usually the case in Government Contracting! They could have gone to the DFW Area and checked out DART and TRE but Didnt, it was Too Close to Home and Too Well Done! :lol:

Austin could have save tax payers money by using bus's. Do you agree?

 

[AlanB]

Good Questions! I don't have the Details on the police Sub-Station but would guess that it will be sort of a hang out for cops on Patrol in that part of town! There are alot of warehouses, abandoned houses etc. around there and based on the trashing of the last Amshak would guess that it will be a magnet for homeless, gangbangers etc., hence the trashing/graffiti etc.Also this is in A Hurrican Belt, the last Amshak was Wrecked by a Storm!

My beef is Not with the City of Beaumont who had no Leverage against UP, the Money came from Washington and could have been used on alot more Feasible Projects in Better Locations that Would Serve More People! (the Beaumont Passenger Count, on/off is dismal!)

Austin's Red Line was overseen by CapMetro, a Keystone Cop type Political/Transportation Agency that's Ward of the City! They went $50 Million Dollars Over Budget, took Years Longer than was Planned to get it Running and Finally they had to Fire the Company (Veolia) that had so called "overseen the project" and hire a Real Rail Company to get the Line Operating! (see jay hadleys posts on this topic)! Of course lots of Federal Money was also squandered on this Fiasco, as is usually the case in Government Contracting! They could have gone to the DFW Area and checked out DART and TRE but Didnt, it was Too Close to Home and Too Well Done! :lol:

Austin could have save tax payers money by using bus's. Do you agree?

Nope. Not a chance!

Rail is cheaper long term than any bus. On average in this country in 2009 according to the National Transit Database it costs 40 cents per passenger mile in operating costs to move someone on commuter rail or heavy rail (subways & L's). Put that same passenger on a light rail train and it costs 60 cents per passenger mile.

Put them on a bus and its 90 cents per pax/mile and that doesn't include an allowance for fixing all the damage that more than 50,000 daily buses cause to our roads & highways.

Rail has a steep, upfront price tag, yes. But it costs so much less to operate that over time it's the better bargain in any area where you need very frequent buses running to handle the load.

With Austin's mishandling of things it may take longer to realize the savings than it should, but it will still be cheaper eventually.

 

[ScottC4746]

Then again it's Beaumont. Just another zit on the face of Texas.

II beg your pardon; I really do not like this comment. I have many friends and relatives from Beaumont. What if someone were to call your home town a zit.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Then again it's Beaumont. Just another zit on the face of Texas.

II beg your pardon; I really do not like this comment. I have many friends and relatives from Beaumont. What if someone were to call your home town a zit.

Lots of Nice Folks in every Town (well, maybe not Dallas! :lol: )but most Texans would agree with the Description of Beaumont, it's a Good Place to be FROM!!! :excl: :excl: :excl: The Really Low Number of Pax that Board/Deboard in Beaumont makes the Million Dollar plus Unmanned Amshak a White Elephant in Most Peoples Opinions! The Money could have better been spent in Houston or San Antonio or even Dallas! :lol:

Actually Beaumont could be Eliminated as a Stop for the Sunset, Orange could make a Great Crew Change Place, it's right on the Tex/LA Border and Close to Beaumont also!

 

[henryj]

Then again it's Beaumont. Just another zit on the face of Texas.

II beg your pardon; I really do not like this comment. I have many friends and relatives from Beaumont. What if someone were to call your home town a zit.

Scott I wouldn't even respond to him. He obviously isn't from around here inspite of his name. Or maybe his name is his wish. lol.