New study states Houston not as affordable as it seems

The Bay Area is a spread out metropolis, and yet they have the BART.

What's your point?

 

Not short term economically viable, no. But then again, what is your definition of "economically viable"? If it is to make money, then that's a philosophical divide. Some people believe government entities aren't supposed to be run like a business, but rather, they step in and act for the greater good with initiatives like this that lead the way and change the status-quo. Houston's sprawl is not an economically healthy trend either, so working to build infrastructure to make the city more efficient and prosperous is an economic reason in and of itself. Of course, these things take vision and leadership. So good luck there I suppose.

 

SF has 17,000 people per sq mile.

Houston about 3,000.

next.

 

not sure why people bother engaging bigtexxx on this issue. many of us view rail as a long term investment for the overall efficiency and betterment of the city as opposed to simply viewing it as a line item on next years CoH budget.

 

Because they cannot use logic to defend themselves on the issue, so they keep trying harder and harder.

Houston doesn't need another "me too strategy" to copy what other cities have done around rail. Just look at the disaster that is DART for proof. We need forward thinking approaches to solve transit for HOUSTON, not simply copying other cities who are in different starting positions than we are.

 

so we need to abandon "me too" strategies like rail and instead adopt "forward thinking approaches" like buses?

got it.

 

Poor people problems.

 

I have an old high school friend who's realtor in Houston. She's always posting listing on facebook and I have to say I'm shocked by the inner loop real estate prices. She's routinely putting up 2 bedroom condos at around 300,000. That just seems nuts to me for Houston.

 

That's the problem. Houston doesnt need to be as dense as San Francisco but the lack of density is a problem. It isn't sustainable in the long run.

Transportation grids can encourage density if done properly. Our transportation strategies are built around perpetual highway expansion. That encourages less and less density and a larger amount of city to serve at a time where the state is cutting funding left and right.

The rest of Texas wont be around to subsidize highway expansion forever. TxDOT is already broke as is and there's no stomach in Austin to properly fund it.

 

Trains pre-date buses by about 100 years, so technically buses are more forward thinking.

Personally I believe a BRT such as the one in Curitiba Brazil could be a more appropriate option.

People have to free the shackles of their mind that trains are somehow the only good option for our city. Think, people, think.

 

So your objective is DENSITY? That is not everybody's objective.

 

that was well before Houston's population exploded. So you're incorrect.

 

I have never met anyone who has lived in Houston and NYC who would agree with this report. Also it seems like most financial advisers disagree with this report as they seem to tell their clients to live in Houston.

 

+1

Brilliant post.

 

that's not everybody

 

Link? I couldn't find any reference to them replacing BRT with light rail. I only found articles stating how great their BRT system is.