Actually, if you read the article, the writer specifically says "Bush, who had no direct hand in the Houston highway expansion..." He wasn't linking it to Bush, just bringing it up in the context of the plan Bush is about to present regarding global warming.
I am all for increased public transit but I feel you are wrong in this example. Atlanta really does not have an excess of freeways. Their freeways generally cover crappy area - with whole chunks of heavily populated areas quite a drive from one. Sure, the 75/85 merge in the central part of the city makes for one giant freeway, but the rest of the city sucks. Atlanta just grew way too fast for its own good. They also have a fairly limited rail system because it covers pretty much the same area as the freeways. Additionally, their "regular" roads are generally small, windy, and lack turning lanes. Really just a miserable city for driving anywhere during certain hours (their morning and evening rush hour consequently run much longer as well).
Atlanta at one time boasted the most miles of freeway/capita of almost any city in the country, but it wasn't enough as it just induced more traffic.
the trick to that is to come in from the east. the traffic on the East I-10 freeway is not even close to the stuff I see on the west side. Im all the way out in baytown and I can get to downtown in about 35 minutes at 7-8 am. How long do you have to sit in the west side traffic? if you go to the north of 10 near the beltway, there is tons of new neighborhoods going up...its night and day from the older areas south of 10. find a place up there...not as much traffic and you dont haev to give up Rockets games.
Except one thing really has almost nothing to to with the other. Andy, you're a smart guy. I know you must understand why the writer chose to write the article the way he did and linked Bush in it.
I'm only 15 minutes from Baytown (Clear Lake). I don't drive downtown regularly, and when I do it's usually scheduled to minimize the pain. I'm talking about just everyday traffic - the result of absolutely no "neighborhood" planning, and a total lack of any public transportation worth beans. I can't walk or bike anywhere because it's all spread out ridiculously, I can't take public transportation of any sort because the time/effort is ludicrous - so I drive. Like everyone else. Which, of course, is the problem. And not a particularly solvable one either. My wife used to drive downtown everyday from Clear Lake. Taking the bus actually took longer, albeit with a lot less stress. The commute, regardless of the method she chose, sucked at least two hours out of her day. That's insane. If you are going to spread the city out like this, I think it's imperative to proactively address commute times via a large rail system. The park and rides and the carpool lots are packed down here in clear lake - the motivation is not lacking. Put a FAST and automated rail system in place with stops every 3-4 exits and damn near everyone will try and take it. But it has to be fast, and prompt. Otherwise it will be no better than the buses, which suck because they are slow, and unreliable.
Some people on this board and obviously many in Houston believe that the way to control traffic jams is more lanes. It is not. If you make more lanes then more people will move out because the traffic will move for the short term but soon you will have people not car pooling or taking the buses or any other traffic solution, and you will be right back where you started in a few years. There is a point of "diminishing return" when it comes to traffic. People will do the single occupant car thing as long as they can. Only when you reach this point of diminishing return will anything be accomplished. Mass transit, people moving back into the city to avoid traffic, car pooling, these are the only answers to traffic. Houston will have some going pains to move to mass transit but they have put it off for 30 years so even though the city is built for the single occupant car commuter they will have to eventually change. Just keep going out further and further won't last forever. When a rail system of some sort is put into a city you will see real estate and commercial adjust. Markets and work places will chose to locate around rail stops. Thus, it becomes easier to use the rail the longer it's in place. It will be tough but it is inevitable Houston, so get use to it.
I really think you are being a bit too sensitive with what you perceive to be slights against Bush. This article has a grand total of three mentions of Bush, one stating that he is putting forth new environmental proposals, one mentions that his home state is Texas, and the other specifically states that Bush had no involvement whatsoever in the I-10 expansion process. I don't see where you make the leap to this being a Bush bashing piece. More accurately, it is a Texan bashing piece.
that I-45 corridor from Fuqua to the Loop is insane at rushhour. A commuter rail from the Clear Lake area would be hugely successful, Ive seen the number of cars parked at the Park n Rides out there, surely folks would ride a straight line in rather than sitting in a bus in traffic. I doubt the east side out here would use it much if we had one, its alot less densely populated once you get outside the beltway which explains why I dont see that much traffic when I come in from this side. The thing I dont see is why have to drive too far away when you live in the CL area, I come there to get stuff cause of the wide selection of stores. Short of going to some special event or for work...I rarely see a reason to go into Houston.
Thought this might be interesting to some people: http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20070120/bob9.asp Sprawl makes you fat.
Correlation does not mean causation. However, lack of exercise and too much eating does cause people to be fat.
Yeah I knew that I worded that to strongly. To be fair, the article does not make that claim. But the evidence and logic is sound.
Why do people in other cities take rail? Not just because of traffic - but because it's cheaper and more convenient. That's not true in Houston. In NYC, parking is impossible, and at $20 a day it's worthwhile to take the train in. But it's easy to get around the city once you're there. It's actually more time to drive. Now in Houston - I don't think that's the case. Tunnels in the city? When did this happen? Anyway, You'd need some sort of rail + another form of non-road transport to get around. the bus+rail combo is not appealing. You might as well save time and drive. Although I haven't lived in Houston in 15 years, so I don't know what it's like anymore...
ok....after analyzing opinions i decided that OK build the highways. but start carpooling so you dont have to double the highway in 20 years AGAIN. also, these highways are gonna get crowded once agian with soccer moms driving their huge suburbans and tahoes to go get groceries and 'macho' guys looking 'tough' in their large pickups. highways can be great, only if used correctly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston_Downtown_Tunnel_System not sure how reliable this is, I found it at a site where the tunnels were listed as a Hall Of Shame nominee Ive never been in them, so I cant speak for how accurate the description is http://www.pps.org/great_public_spaces/one?public_place_id=668
The link says they're not accessible...yet they're packed at lunch time. The link says they're musty and not aesthetically pleasing...depends where you are. At parts they are merely tunnels. At other parts, they look great. But it misses the point. They're functional. They're widely used. I'm guessing the person who wrote this review never worked in downtown Houston.
i don't completely disagree. but we have an effective Park and Ride bus system, already, that runs right down those lanes. The criticism of the rail we already have is that it merely retraces lanes that were already busy with buses...so why spend the money to turn them to rail?
i'm not sure the trains would go any faster than the buses do in those lanes right now. in fact, i would highly doubt it. when cities like houston started ripping up rail and going to buses they did so because buses were seen as more flexible. they could always be re-routed if things changed, and rail couldn't. look...i'm a rail freak. i love it. but i'm not sure changing out the bus park and ride system for rail park and ride does anybody enough good to justify the huge expense.
