There were supposed to be two new lines that would connect downtown to hillcroft and nw transit center up and down post oak to richmond. But you can thank afton oaks for stalling the process to the point where the funding is gone.
Well, you can go back home on the bus actually. I did it once when I forgot something. And they have outbound routes all day long, although they only leave once an hour. I don't disagree that rails going all over Houston would be better. Just wondering if it's truly worth the cost.
Ah, did not know that. I always wondered when I worked downtown if there was an emergency or had to leave if I would just have to bite the bullit and take a cab. As far as I know, they are still planning a commuter rail going down 290 as well as a toll road on old Hempstead highway (on top of widenning 290). I just think they wait too long on some of this stuff and then do it in all the wrong order.
so to recap, you think: 1) Buses pollute more than rail -- do you have proof? You'll need to account for the power generation pollution in your analysis. 2) Buses cannot carry people as efficiently "at a rate of time" than rail. I'm not entirely sure how you're defining this metric, but I would assume that your point depends on robust demand for the line. Otherwise you have wasteful excess rail capacity, which is expensive. How do you define efficient, what are your assumptions to back this up? 3) Buses have lower capital costs -- well that supports buses over rail.
Is the link working? I see a bunch of articles from May 25, 1999, but nothing about rail proposals (multiple ones).
obligatory <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/AEZjzsnPhnw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Afton Oaks did not want the mature live Oak trees cut down in the median on Richmond. energy efficient, easy to build, no traffic conflict, fun From The Gallaria, to Greenway, to Downtown (but noooooo,ooooo)
the grid just keeps getting cleaner.. its easier to consolidate emissions to a few large sources and clean those over time rather than having more tailpipes
This debate goes no where because people look at a pro for busses, and want to immediately assume that that makes it a con for rail. And vice versa. It's obvious that Houston's answer is a balanced approach. Busses should be the answer until they begin to approach diminishing returns. Then rail should enter the picture in CONJUNCTION with busses. Unfortunately, we all know that that will never happen. Usually the crowd that's against rail is the one that scream's the loudest. Leaving a bus system that's destined to be bogged down by growth, traffic, and sprawl. Advocates for busses over everything else typically don't have to use them.
We all know you are staunchly anti-rail (which is a respectable viewpoint), but I am not certain if you are factoring in long-term strategies into your BRT preference. Houston will continue to grow and spread and there will be a greater need for all sorts of transit. As HR Dept just mentioned, a balanced approach is the winning strategy. Rail in Houston isn't simply a "me-too" system; if you look at it from an overall perspective its benefits are greater than what bus alone can provide. Of course this isn't factoring in cost, and where YOUR money is spent would certainly affect opinion.
oh that little detail? yeah if we had unlimited funds, of course we should have tons of rail, maglev trains, monorails, magic carpets and more!
^ I would like A Whole New World... can we at least have Magic Carpets? GOOD LUCK making the mountains when we have NO ROOM in Houston, EINSTEIN!!!!
You could build it right over the Richmond Ave. right-of-way, over the trees with widely spaced towers. The station platforms could be above street level, on vertical columns with elevators and escalators down to the street. I don't know what you mean by mountains, it would look a lot more like the trams at Six Flags with bigger, climate controlled cars. Picture this near the Gallaria, Greenway and a station that hooked up with the train down town. The advantage is spanning long distances with cheap cable; and not conflicting with street traffic and existing infrastructure.
1. Buses pollute more than any other vehicle besides 18 wheelers. Light rail in particular is much cleaner than buses. 2. Take a bus, and the number of people it can fit, run it along a corridor. Not only does the train hold many more people per unit, but it has better acceleration and deceleration between stops, and a higher top speed. This over time makes a huge difference particularly when demand is heavy. How often do you ride the bus? When's the last time you rode the bus? I'm very curious.
That 1983 heavy rail plan would be pretty baller right about now. You know there would have been an extension to IAH, too. I could be riding the rail to work and the airport right now instead of using my car sitting in traffic.
You mean with your Starbucks, satellite radio and Ipad, in a germ free, climate controlled environment. Sounds horrible.
