Ha ha on Orlando "Small Mind" Sanchez! At the same meeting where he proposed a scaled down rail "plan", his "constituents" propose a plan that will add a few miles of rail (no way Metro cuts from the other lines). I'm beginning to think Metro underestimated people by coming out with a relatively small plan. I don't think Houstonians mind the $$ tag as long as the plan makes sense. All the uproar over the cost is coming from local politicians. Stay tuned.
i think you may be right...if Orlando freaking Sanchez is saying he'd support rail, it's a new day in Houston.
Why hasnt someone posted the lyrics to The Monorail song yet? Man, people are slow today. I'm psyched about the rail because.... I work on Main St I have Texans season tickets I am planning on moving to Med Center soon I would only move back to West houston if there was a rail system, worst traffic in the city....plus they built a Lupes in town so no reason to drive out there anymore...sorry Cagey.
see if you still think that after you have kids (assuming you don't have any now!). but i'm with you...i plan on kissing off my parking pass to texans games in 2004 and parking somewhere along the rail route.
I have rail in my city, and I assume it's pretty cool. I've not taken a ride yet because it doesn't go anywhere I need to go, but if I were heading somewhere along the US75 corridor or to downtown Dallas, I would at least try the train from beautiful downtown Plano. Plus, it does appear that the rail line into Plano has sparked some new development. We've got "chic urban" apartments that have been built, probably the first new rental housing units built in East Plano in decades. There is potential for some good redevelopment of Plano's downtown and surrounding areas. Something that, from the looks of the area, is long overdue. If the Plano City Counsel would get off their stupid idea of spending bond money to build an arts center in McKinney or Frisco and just start an arts district in the downtown area, I think they could potentially put together something that would be unique to the Dallas suburbs. The illusion of city living in Plano.... with trains available to take anyone directly to a real downtown if need be.
The problem with mass trasit systems is that to use it you need to be a walkable distance from it. Hell, Houstonians will park in the fire lane at Walmart if there isn't a space within 100' of the front door. And frankly, who can blame them when for 300 days a year it is either too hot or too wet to comfortably walk any distance. I love my personal transportation; it takes me from door to door in air-conditioned, high-fidelity comfort. I would rather sit an hour in a traffic jam in my own enviroment than ride a half hour next to some smelly urine stained crackhead. Besides, I can always get off and kill some time in a bar or movie or Starbucks. If your on the tain you are stuck at either poit A or Point B, you have no chance to change you mind and go somewhere else. Sure traffic congestion is a problem; as is pollution and non-renewable resource consumption. However trying to retrofit a rail solution in a city with Houston's low population density is looking to the past and not the future. I would suggest that Houston's leaders approach the problem by encouraging smaller ligher more fuel efficient vehicles. Perhaps allowing them to use the HOV lanes and tollways for free. They could be built in Houston by Houstonians creating a whole new industry. Secondly, our traffic problems only occur during rush hours. I can drive all over this town from 9-4 or after 7PM at the posted speed limit. Encouraging flexible work hours would have more positive effect than building a rail system; maybe property tax breaks for businesses willing to vary their hours. Or maybe all of ya'll can ride the train and clear out the freeways for me.
UH,... thanks for sharing that "insightful" post, Gene. Nope, no generalizations there. So you're a person who loves their car, which is fine. You pay your hard-earned $$ towards its maintenance, and you enjoy driving. To each his own. As for myself, I DESPISE driving whether it's rush hour, weekend mornings, etc. I hate having to find a parking space once I get to my location, worrying about having my car broken into or towed away, pulling up to a gas station, spending a day in some waiting room having new tires installed, etc. But I really have no choice but to drive since our only mass transit option (bus) is over-worked to the point of being inefficient. And as local polls show, there are a lot of Houstonians who feel the same way & are ready for another option. (BTW, the times I've rode Metro, all I've ever seen on the bus were white-collar types, students, and hard-working people who just can't afford a car. No crackheads or urine smell. Nice ATM\UT-ish, "...shoot-outs, hookers at Cougar High..." generalization there.) Oh yeah, apparently Metro (through their public meetings) has hinted that all future rail expansion will exist in separate, dedicated, or even elevated railways. In other words, no rail user should worry about being stuck between A & B. Car drivers, however...
Metro will be in an interesting position They will have a lot of power if\when the expansion plan is approved. They could dictate development in this area for a long, long, long time, i.e. the CTA in Chicago & residential demand along the El. But then again, Metro can't be any worse than the road builders that dictate development now.
That's where I get on the train every morning...it's a badass development that's only missing a good bookstore. If I stay in Dallas, I'm definitely looking at renting there, too.
Live - there is a LOT of truth in Gene's statement. I don't think we can discount it...Metro's ability to meet tthe desires/wishes of the public are going to dictate whether or not this is a success. One of the problems with the monorail that Whitmire proposed (and Lanier ran against) were the stations being so far from the landmark they intended to serve. If I remember right, the Astrodome station was 1.5 miles from the Astrodome. That's ridiculous. You can't blame the public if they don't EVER ride that line. You're telling people that they have to walk 1.5 miles in the Houston heat, rain, thunderstorms, etc...that you can do no better. That's silly...you can't expect people to ride it. He also brings up the point that we're a city that is used to driving...he's correct there too. You have to give people a reason to get out of their cars other than the altruistic, "it's good for the environment" approach. That's not going to win over the vast majority of riders you'll need to make this a success. One big problem is cost-effectiveness...if I still need a car to get around on weekends, even if rail takes me to work and home...then I'm STILL stuck with car insurance payments and payments on my car. Now if you make the cost of riding MORE than it costs for me to fuel up my car and get back and forth you have actually given me a DISINCENTIVE to ride your rail. That's exactly what happened to me and Park and Ride one summer I worked at the First Court of Appeals. It was cheaper and more convenient for me to have my own car. It cost me as much to ride the Park and Ride 2 days as it did for me to fill up my old Honda Civic at the time and drive to work on my own. That's just the reality of it...there was no way in hell I was gonna spend more money for less convenience. In addition...the real challenge, it seems to me...is to lay down real effective rail OVER a city that has already developed. The magic of the rail up in the northeast is that the rail was there, and the city grew around it. Here, you're seeking to link what's already been developed. This is made further difficult in a city that really doesn't have a centralized business district. More people work outside of downtown than inside each day. Finally...this rail starter kit is nothing more that a showcase...great for tourists...and great because the ridership numbers are already built in..it's already the most heavily used bus line in town...so you're guaranteed good results in ridership numbers when you move over those people from bus to rail...makes it easier to sell further extensions. But understand, IT'S A ZERO SUM GAME WHEN IT COMES TO ACTUALLY IMPROVING MOBILITY IN HOUSTON. And that's ultimately, my problem with this Metro plan. I don't think any of it...proposed extensions included...do anything to address the real problem areas on the freeways...the gridlock that has people complaining. I'm for rail...rail that works. Not rail that's merely a showcase...not for extensions that take you from one tourist site to th next.
Hopefully they get this train thing going before the SUPER BOWL COMING TO HOUSTON!!!!!! And MLB All Star Game!!! Too bad no Olympics.
This article shows increasing support for mass transit. Report: 98% of US Commuters Favor Public transit for Others WASHINGTON, DC--A study released Monday by the American Public Transportation Association reveals that 98 percent of Americans support the use of mass transit by others. "With traffic congestion, pollution, and oil shortages all getting worse, now is the time to shift to affordable, efficient public transportation," APTA director Howard Collier said. "Fortunately, as this report shows, Americans have finally recognized the need for everyone else to do exactly that." Of the study's 5,200 participants, 44 percent cited faster commutes as the primary reason to expand public transportation, followed closely by shorter lines at the gas station. Environmental and energy concerns ranked a distant third and fourth, respectively. Anaheim, CA, resident Lance Holland, who drives 80 miles a day to his job in downtown Los Angeles, was among the proponents of public transit. "Expanding mass transit isn't just a good idea, it's a necessity," Holland said. "My drive to work is unbelievable. I spend more than two hours stuck in 12 lanes of traffic. It's about time somebody did something to get some of these other cars off the road." ...
LOT is subjective to me. Sounds like typical "...I won't vote for it because it doesn't benefit ME..." Houston logic. I won't deny that Gene has every right to drive his car, as do you or anyone else. I'm not one of these idealists who wants to just build rail lines all over the place & expect people to give up their cars, the car is here to stay. The fact is, car or not, its far too difficult to get around this city, especially when you consider the amount of exisiting roads & our "low-density" populace. It's time to consider other options, no? Don't you find the "...Houston is a city of drivers..." argument a bit simplistic? We're not the only low density, pro-car city in the country to try rail, Dallas is even more extreme than Houston in both instances. And, as the article illustrates, there is evidence of rail-friendly developments in cities w\rail lines. Whether that holds true for Houston, we'll see. But then again, take a drive through Midtown, check out the new "density" that's taking place. Could Houston re-create itself to accomodate both car & rail, perhaps? And as far as that 0 SUM GAIN FOR HOUSTON, TXDOT is about to begin a $1.6 BILLION expansion of the Katy section of I-10. Great for Katy. Great for Cinco Ranch, Bear Creek, etc. Great for W. Houston. And the rest of Houston benefits how? This expansion is 1/2 the price of Metro's plan, how many of Houston 5 million residents are going to directly benefit? 200K-400K? People w\family in S.A.? And yet, I agree that something needs to be done about I-10. I hate TXDOT's plan, but only because I prefer the grass root Katy Coalition plan (which reserves space for, surprise, rail, as well as being more enviromentally friendly, etc.). Question: If you'd like to see regional rail here in Houston, ask yourself where would it be aligned? How much would it cost? And the big one, would it be approved? And then see if it's much different than Metro's start-up plan. Once again, aside from being a bit conservative (and some tweaking), I think it's a solid plan.
Live: 1. Ummm..Houstonians aren't the only ones who approach it from this perspective. Most people do period...you have to give people good options that appeal to them. That's the lesson of the private market, and that's not exclusive to Houston. You can't just build some overpriced rail system, make it overly expensive and inconvenient and expect people to ride it for the good of humanity. People don't work that way. 2. It may be simplistic that Houston is a city of drivers...but it's true...I'm clearly not saying that rail can't work, however. 3. You're Katy freeway question makes no sense to me...I'm saying that if the Main Street rail line does nothing more than get the people off the buses and on to trains...the very same people...then it's a zero sum game as to reducing congestion. No less people are in their cars....and you're not expanding lanes, so congestion is still as tight. On the Katy Freeway, you're reducing congestion and time in to work, presumably, by expanding lanes. For those thousands of drivers, you're making the commute quicker...which should, in turn, lead to more productivity. The overall impact of the Katy freeway expansion absolutely dwarfs the impact of the 7 mile rail line. Not even close in terms of number of people whose commutes are affected/benefitted. 4. New Midtown...is it sustainable? For how long? I went to church in Midtown as a child. It was an area that boomed once...and fell away later...and now is booming again. Is it cyclical? Or is it sustainable growth? Would you send your kids to the schools HISD has to offer in Midtown? If not, it's not likely to be sustainable. People live there as singles...get married...have kids...and move away from those schools. Honestly, I can't blame them for that. 5. My plan would be aimed more at getting commuters out of their cars...they're the ones doing damage to the environment...they're the ones guzzling gas over long miles. There is no proposed rail expansion down the Katy Freeway by Metro...none at all. TxDot's plan aside...Metro doesn't even propose it in their expansion projections. The proposed rail hits tourist sites...that's it. It runs from stadium to stadium...the expansion takes it to the Galleria on the westside...and there is a commuter option heading north. I think we're talking 2020 for that. Again...this is not Metro solving traffic problems...clearly that's not the goal of this plan. My regional plan would include heavy commuter rail making fewer stops and running at quicker speeds. Those would shoot out of all the arteries...59...10...45...290. If you're serious about really combating congestion, you do that...that's would make the 7 mile line worthwhile...because then those people could carry on to the Med Center...and then you'd add the link to the Galleria. But you'd definitely provide rail options down those corridors. Expensive? Absolutely. All of these options are expensive, though. And saving money to create a neat little system for visitors doesn't address the real problems...it does nothing to eliminate MOST Houstonians dependence on an automobile to get to work.
So in other words, Max, you'd come up with a plan that looks like this. Notice how "Phase 2" serves as the "foundation" for the regional plan. Notice how just about every corridor you've mentioned is eventually served. (And Katy is very much included, as are Kingwood, Clear Lake, etc.) Something to point out, this will be the first true rail plan we've voted on. Remember, we voted to continue the Main line, not approve it. IMHO, that's the crux of Metro's conservative, "touristy" plan (BTW, tell the users on the N & E side this plan is "touristy", it doesn't just serve the Galleria & DT you know). A huge system with an even bigger $ tag could\would make the eventual plan D. O. A., simple as that. So they pick an "inner ring" of lines that would be popular, pitch them, & cross their fingers. And believe me, if Metro hears good news this Fall, I'd bet that a "Phase 3" plan, i.e. everything else excluding Katy (thank TXDOT for that) and Westpark (thank the Toll Authority for that), will coincide with the next mayoral election (2008 presidential election at the latest). Ever heard the term "Induced Demand"? Basically, "...if you build it they will come...", i.e. expanding I-10 just welcomes more people to utilize the freeway --> brings you back to the same point of congestion, pollution, etc. Just ask the citizens of Clear Lake about I-45's expansion & how it's done jack for them.--> 0 sum gain in terms of wasted $$ & time. Once again, I won't argue that the initial line is extremely limited from a functional POV. Let's be honest, it's a "Model Home", a "Merchandise Display." But considering the legacy of rail in Houston, Metro has a point about slowly introducing us to the concept of mass transit alternatives. This is not just a mobility, quality of life issue, it's very much political in nature as well. No need to promote a plan that has no prayer of being implemented.
Which schools are you talking about?? Lamar, River Oaks Elementary, Laneir. People aren't neccessarily avoiding these schools.
Couple of thoughts here, Live: 1. The dotted lines on the map aren't even proposed yet...they're not on the table. I would have started by addressing those. Want to win votes?? Solve problems on the freeways sooner rather than later. Start showing people that they're commute is made easier, and you'll win votes. 2. the north and east side?? i see the line to greenspoint mall in phase 2...but what's to the east?? where does that line go? 3. I think the Katy Freeway expansion is necessary...and it's much more signficant than any expansion I've ever seen. It's consistently rated one of the most congested freeways in the country...rail alone won't solve that problem. Too many people depend on their car for their jobs in a city this spread out to say rail alone will solve any corridor's problem...but it should be part of the solution. 4. I understand the politics and the costs associated...but I think you have to be able to show people the benefit before they vote. Price tag, once you're spending an outrageous figure to begin with, isn't as important to most voters as the need it serves. Even in conservative Harris County where we've approved referendums for three sports stadiums in the past 6 or so years. Again...if I had my way, we wouldn't be building light rail at street level...I think that's a mistake. There was a reason we ripped up those lines years ago. We'd be building something elevated...something extremely efficient...and something much faster than the line that runs down Main St. at about 7 mph. with stops.
