Dallas has a several-year headstart building their light rail and they aren't even to either airport yet.
I visited Boston last month and their subway system was really easy to use and very convenient. I was thinking that I really wished Houston had a mass transit system like this. The proposed expansion looks like what they did with all of the lines having a different color.
The issue Houston can never get around is that the old (pre-automobile) East Coast cities like Boston are tightly centric, making them ideal for mass transit. Houston and LA are such sprawling masses that mass transit is only plausible as an alternative to the major commutes (I-10, 45, 59).
As I recall, it took many many years and a lot of painful construction for the Boston rail to get done, but now that its complete, Ive heard nothing but good things about it. As far as the UH rail- that will take a lot long than expected- a few debates are going on, such as the proposed expansion to the eastwood transit center, as well as the placement on wheeler. Im pretty sure anyone who goes to UH now will never the rail to get to class. However, the rail is a major part of the 'master plan,' as they are planning to have fewer parking spots, banking on the rail to cut down the number of cars that come to campus.
Agreed, it's not as plausible here because we are so spread out. I commute down I-45 everyday and wish there was another alternative.
I am going to start taking the bus next week. I am transferring offices and it just wasn't plausible where I was at before. Hopefully it will be a little better because the drive is a pain, especially when there is bad weather. Friday it took me over 2 hours to get home from work.
It saves you time, but - more importantly - it saves you stress. It's a 30 minute break. Read, nap, listen to your tunes... Peaceful, actually.
I would have quit my job years ago if I had to actually DRIVE from Kingwood to Downtown and back every day. And the Eastex is the least congested freeway in town. I can't even imagine driving I-45, 290, or I-10 every day. No thank you. I don't know how anyone can do that.
I used it once to get to Reliant for the Texans game - it was awesome. We parked in my mom's office garage near MFAH, and hopped the train. 15 minutes later or so we were at Reliant - no fuss no nothing. Same way back - no traffic no nothing. Contrast that with the old days of going to Oiler games. A huge massive-ass traffic jam starting on 288 or OST or Fannin or whatever where you just sat for hours and hours, then you get to pay 5$ (in 1980's dollars, lol) to park 80 zillion miles away next to that Red Dot warehouse building in the crappy dome parking lot. Getting out was no bargain either. It was so bad that we eventually developed shortcuts, eitehr park on this small backstreet near the Ronald McDonald house or Park at my uncle's apartment complex on Holly Hall or whatever and walk. Either way it totally sucked.
And this is my problem with Houston's Rail plans. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for rail....but done smart. The success of the Park & Ride system CLEARLY illustrates the need for COMMUTER RAIL in this city, more then any other form of rail. I use P&R, and its largely traffic-related delays would not exist if P&R were commuter rail. In fact, if P&R were commuter rail, Im sure ridership would easily double that of P&R bus ridership numbers. This would likely result in less traffic on the freeways, which is what we all WANT. Demand COMMUTER RAIL. this is what Houston needs.
Man, this is totally going to get moved to D&D. I was against Light Rail from the beginning, and I still am. For Midtown, it NEEDS to be elevated. For the Galleria area, it needs to be elevated. For the Medical Center, it needs to be elevated. There's too much traffic for that stupid thing to take up multiple lanes. Houston is too big and too spread out for anything but buses. I agree with the above that nothing in that article is evidence that light has been successful in Houston. That said, an elevated train would be fantastic in Austin. It would stay above the already crowded streets and would decrease traffic by decreasing pedestrians. <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CV2rdGX4JYc&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CV2rdGX4JYc&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
I agree. Totally and completely. The HOV was goofy. Just plain goofy. You could have put in a commuter rail system in the same way, with more stops and better flow.
That's too bad. I can't understand the idea of building IAH 30 miles north of downtown when there's no mass transit linking it with downtown.
Agree with this. I've always thought all HOV lanes should have been monorails to begin with. You could have them running both ways all day every day, instead of just one way during rush hour. Weekends too. I'm pretty lucky in that the Eastex HOV lane hardly ever has any cars in it. Our bus is able to shoot up and down it like a rocket. But from what I understand, other HOV lanes (I-10, 290, I-45) can get as backed up as the regular traffic. That would really piss me off.
