http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070119/lf_nm/bush_environment_dc I presume these environmentalist have never sat in bumper to bumper traffic for an hour trying to get from Katy to downtown, and the idea that enough people would take a train is just naive.
Real Shady -- I think rail CAN work. But the expansion on I-10 was to CATCH UP to development. The population center of Houston is I-10 and Gessner, at this point. Most projections I've seen have it at I-10 and the Beltway in another 10 years. This was just necessary. I still don't think this ends up being the biggest freeway in the country...I think there's one with more lanes in LA. But having grown up on the west side of town...and still living there today...I-10 needed this, badly. The genie is already out of the bottle...deal with it and plan for the future with rail or other alternatives. Difficult planning when Houston has the equivalent of about 5 downtowns where people work.
I don't know about Houston but I loved the public transportation in UK when I visited London during December, but it seems public transportation is 2nd class transportation in the US.
It's fruitless for an environmentalist to impose a rail alternative upon a commuter heavy city. He should be aware about infrastructural growth. If I was him, I'd lobby harder for improving clean air emissions in a state that barely has any other than federal standards. Houston gas prices are 50 cents cheaper than any pump in Southern California. A lot of it has to deal with the refined gas being burned.
Wow. It's really wonderful how the writer of that article managed to link Bush to Texas environmental practices that he has had absolutely no part in. If you don't read the article with a fine toothed comb, as most won't, you might actually fall for it.
Just out of curiosity, what good would a rail line do where those tracks used to be? What would compel people to ride the train from the suburbs into work when they don't ride the bus into the city. I was in Houston in December, and worked downtown for three days. I took the bus down there each day, and it was great! It was clean, convenient, fast, and NOT CROWDED. There just aren't that many people who ride the bus into downtown -- what would convince people who don't take the bus to take a train instead? I am very big on public transportation -- I take it all the time. When I lived in Pittsburgh, I took the bus a lot, and now that I live in Chicago, I take the CTA Trains (The "El") everywhere I can. And while public transit works pretty well for both of those cities, there is no way that I can see it translating to Houston. Among many, many other issues is the fact that Houston is so freaking hot most of the time. Here in Chicago, we had an unprecedented heat wave in mid-July -- it was in the mid to upper 90s and even topped 100 for a few days. At the time, I had just started my job, so I was working in the Sears Tower, and taking the train into work -- I live about ten minutes from the station. Walking that distance in the incredible heat was just awful. I'd get home and stand in front of my window AC for a few minutes. Thankfully the heat wave passed and temperatures got back to the 80s, which was not so bad. But I would never expect most people to walk ten minutes outside in that heat for months at a time. Especially with Houston's humidity. I don't know -- as much as I usually side with environmental groups, I just think that sometimes they are very short-sighted when it comes to things like this.
The article seems to take a bunch of irrelevant jabs at Texas. Since Texas is one of the largest refiners of oil in the world, and it's the second most populous state, not to mention vastly larger in area than most states, then we are bad in these respects? Texas doesn't use all those oil products by itself, it gets shipped to many other "environment concious" states as well. It has to be done somewhere. Lets just shut down Texas and let other states "exploit" the natural resources.
You know what historically happens when they build bigger roads in most cities? Traffic increases. You build more lanes, then more people drive in them. Atlanta tried to super-highway its way out of traffic for decades and now boasts among the very worst traffic in the country, because the excess of freeways encouraged people to build far away in inefficient locales. Who/what does that help?
I don't oppose the I-10 expansion ...but I do oppose that it was built not only without future possibility of rail but they ripped up what rail did exist. Light rail isn't the answer for commuters. Instead, commuter rail would work very well ...if they hadn't ripped it up. All that said, one of the biggest complaints about light-rail is how it negatively impacts businesses during construction. Freakin' A ...I-10 expansion has decimated countless businesses but nobody seems to be upset about that.
buses are a night mare in the city - i took a bus from a job interview in north houston down to mt vernon and it took me 4.5 hours. that was 15 years ago - but still. i can't imagine rail working, but once you take the train into the city - you probably still won't be close enough to walk in the scorching heat. Houston is not NYC or London, where the downtown area is compact enought to make rail efficient. I think Houston would need a rail plus some kind of transport system within the city other then buses.
You should go to China or India man. They need more then that there. New Jersey. One day we'll have 50 lanes ya know? Think about that. Triple decker highways. Which level do you pick to express on?
the smack about the drive through things were funny. I went to CVS this evening to pick up some prescription meds for a family member. And I saw the back and thought, why the hell did I not go through the drive through?
I hate Houston traffic. I hate the Houston solution to houston traffic, which creates more traffic. I really enjoy everything else about Houston (even the weather), but the traffic is starting to wear on me. I'm here for at least five more years, but after that I dunno. Better get in as many Rockets games as I can.
I've been to China. ok I can see why it might be necessary there since it has 5 times more people than the U.S. The NJ Turnpike has 16 lanes some places which is completely unnecessary IMO.
that's why we have tunnels downtown. you can get virtually anywhere downtown without having to step on the streets, at all. look, the Metro Park & Ride buses do quite well. they're pretty heavily used. they're fast and efficient. commuter rail could do that same job, as well...and maybe it would attract more people due to rail bias. maybe.
