That's how it is already with Southwest Airlines, though. You fly to Love Field, rent a car and get to where you're going. Rail would be an alternative to that...and hopefully cheaper.
I'm assuming this would be utilized mostly by business travelers (the vast majority of Hou-Dallas flights) who will just do the same as before: rent a car or take taxis. You're spot-on about the mass-transit infrastructure being necessary; it's always built from the inside-out. Will be interesting to see how that progresses in Houston.
you're probably right, not to mention the imminent domain that would be required... but i would be more open to this plan than i am to the trans texas corridor. also, a friend suggested making the train cars large enough to park your car on one. then you ride in the passenger cars, and once at your destination you hop back in your car and drive off.
good question. i was a freshman in college when that was being discussed, and i remember that was the hurdle they claimed was stopping it. there was some pretty extensive progress, as i remember it, on putting this together in the early-90's.
Yeah, I have no idea about what's been proposed in the past. When I was a freshman in college...well, I wasn't in Waco.
We were just talking about this in one of my classes. How there is talk, most likely not anywhere near future.....but a proposed one that goes from Houston to BCS to austin etc. That would be SWEET!!!
But have you ever had to sit near the plane's bathroom? I don't know what you call safe... Max, Buck, thanks for the feedback re: rent cars at destination. Makes sense to me.
Well, from what I've read, most of the London-Paris/Brussels traffic is for business commuters, so they'll end up going to either downtown or other business areas that are (presumably) well-served by transit, such as the Med Center. You have a good point, though, in that we need to build up infrastructure to other desirable locations (Greenway, Galleria, Gunspoint, etc.) so that high-speed rail becomes a better option. Re: Cars - the Eurostar has trains made for carrying cars, and it would be a great idea to do the same here.
Also, for comparison's sake, France is a bit smaller than Texas and the major cities are more-spread out, yet they have an extremely extensive high-speed system connecting to them, as well as high-speed links to foreign cities (Brussels, Amsterdam, Cologne, Frankfurt, Milan, etc)
They have something called government support for building infrastructure, using tax dollars. Something I support, and a forward thinking way of looking at things, you know, planning for the future, because it's cheaper than playing catchup when the future gets here, but an idea that doesn't seem to be politically correct these days. At least not in Texas. At least not in Texas if no one bothers to vote.
I'm in complete agreement with you - after having spent time in France, Germany and the Netherlands this summer, I was in awe of their great transportation infrastructure. It's definitely a big shock coming from a city where driving is the only option
texas: 261,797 sq mi 21 million people GDP in US dollars .989 trillion france: 260,558 sq mi 64 million people GDP in US dollars 1.871 trillion that's wild. we're not at densely populated as france (yet), though i would still support the transit idea. and not that this will happen, but if we triple our population and the GDP triples as well, we would have almost a $3 trillion GDP. that would put us, one state, ahead of germany, the UK and france.
I-10 will be fifty lanes wide before we get any sort of commuter rail in Houston, or high speed rail in Texas. Who'll be buying all the Hummers, Ford trucks and SUVs if we develop any semblance to mass transit?... I had the chance to ride on the high speed rail in Japan - that was very cool.
