[The Voice of University Oaks]

Pickup driver killed in crash with METRORail

It appears that the driver was at fault in this case (as was the case in all but one of the previous 47,635 METRORail collisions), but that doesn't make me feel any better.

I am a transit professional who supports an expanded rail system in Houston. But this is what happens when you build a train at street level in a city that is home to some of the nation's worst drivers.

I had hoped that there would be a learning curve associated with this thing as drivers learned how to co-exist with the train, and it is true that the number of accidents began to decrease (from a high of 11 in March 2004, for example) as adjustments were made. But it's become clear that, as long as this thing continues to operate in its current configuration, it's going to continue to smack in to drivers who run red lights or ignore "no left turn" signs on a regular basis. And I really don't know if there's anything practical that can be done about it. Put crossing gates at every intersection along the line? Replace the existing rolling stock with smaller streetcars capable of stopping quicker and operating in line-of-sight conditions?

Houston's rail line is the laughingstock of the nation and rail opponents both local and nationwide are having a field day with it. I am very frustrated.

[kzseattle]

[bruce_oneal]

[Talbot]

I wonder how mcuh this is going to affect our current lines? If people could wait a little longer, instead of rushing to a place they need to be at, alot of accidents could be prevented.

it's a shame.

[DJ V Lawrence]

danax, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 6:57am, said:

A lot of things can happen when one runs a red light, and very few are good.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Miscalculations: They don't work when skydiving, they didn't work at Enron, and they don't work running past a Houston light rail

[kjb434]

No fault is to Metro or the rail line. It is all the drivers fault. The took the chance of not taking the warnings and suffered the consequences. I agrree with kzseattle. It's the driver's fault.

We're lucky the trains runs on the street an not in public spaces like in Berline and Amsterdam. Some the trains run right through heaviliy pedestrian plazas with know guards between the people and the train. They are just considerated enough to not think of themselves and move out of the way. I find the biggest problem with Houston drivers and drivers in many large US cities is selfishness. They are always thinking of themselves and not others. I think we can all be guilty of this sometimes, but we should stretch traffic rules and not respond to warnings because of it. Really, is waiting 30 more seconds for red light to change to green that horrible?

I think Metro should respond to these incidents as the driver stupidity. The media needs to reinforce the concept and not play like the train is at fault and Metro should not have to make changes.

[LTAWACS]

The truck driver was at fault. Next time, don't run red lights. This is Darwin at work here folks.

[N8TIV]

LTAWACS, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 9:20am, said:

The truck driver was at fault. Next time, don't run red lights. This is Darwin at work here folks.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Totally agree...This guy died because he was careless. Same applies to people who fall down onto subway tracks. I don't think the Metrorail is being called the "Laughing Stock" of the nation. It's Lite-Rail, not the NJ Transit system.

[bachanon]

people will continue to disrespect red lights and street signs until they are enforced more stringently. in addition, seeing officers disrespect traffic signals when not on an emergency undermines the law as well (i've seen it more than once). it is unfortunate that this man has died. it is also unfortunate to see morning news stories water down the fact that this man ran a red light and address the story as if the train murdered someone.

[dbigtex56]

Rather than waste scarce transit funds on crossing gates, I'd rather spend the money on perfecting and installing traffic signal cameras. People don't seem to care that they may kill someone (or themselves) by running a red light, but getting hit in the wallet gets their attention.

We can never 'child-proof' the world, so let's hold people accountable for actions which endanger themselves and others.

[bachanon]

exactly, dbigtex.

[Parrothead]

LTAWACS, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 9:20am, said:

The truck driver was at fault. Next time, don't run red lights. This is Darwin at work here folks.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't usually agree with most things you say, but I have to tell ya you are right on! My husband would joke "It's natural--it's just thinning of the herd." Survival of the fittest, et al...

I don't understand why people think they can run red lights, period...my car was totaled (and thankfully I was not) in an accident involving a driver that ran a red light. It was horrible. I see broken glass at that intersection (Memorial and the Beltway) every few days and I wonder what is the deal?

[hokieone]

I also tend to think we need a don't block the box law. How many times have you been at an intersection that is blocked by cars that just piled into the middle of an intersection that is jammed up and then gets worse because when the light changes, they are still stuck in the middle. Everyday at San Felipe and 610, I see people make the mistake, which the compounds the problem.

[Gary]

I agree that this is a drivers error. I just don't understand why people don't respect these huge trains. Everytime I come to one of the rail crossings I do a quadruple check.

[bachanon]

hokieone, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 10:01am, said:

I also tend to think we need a don't block the box law.  How many times have you been at an intersection that is blocked by cars that just piled into the middle of an intersection that is jammed up and then gets worse because when the light changes, they are still stuck in the middle.  Everyday at San Felipe and 610, I see people make the mistake, which the compounds the problem.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i thought we did have a law on the books. i understood that if the light is green and you cannot clear the intersection, you do not enter the intersection. if you are stuck in the intersection you can be ticketed for running a red light should it change while you are still in the intersection. this is not enforced enough to make a difference.

[MidtownCoog]

San Felipe and 610 problem is single entrance to 610 North.

[editor]

I wouldn't feel bad about one death in a year and a half. How many people die on Chicago's train system in a year? Maybe 20 or 30? Almost all of those are suicides. If you count the regional (Metra) rail, the number's more like 70, and mostly accidents.

Maybe in terms of crashes Houston's record is bad. But in terms of deaths, it seems to be doing pretty well.

[Gary]

editor, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 12:02pm, said:

I wouldn't feel bad about one death in a year and a half.  How many people die on Chicago's train system in a year?  Maybe 20 or 30?  Almost all of those are suicides.  If you count the regional (Metra) rail, the number's more like 70, and mostly accidents.

Maybe in terms of crashes Houston's record is bad.  But in terms of deaths, it seems to be doing pretty well.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good point.

[N Judah]

This can't be good for the image of rail, even though it was clearly the driver's fault. The writers over at some conservative Houston blogs are already having a field day with the man's death. The same people saying the rail is poorly designed by being at-grade are the ones who would be whining the most shrill about the cost of building it above ground.

[dbigtex56]

editor, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 12:02pm, said:

I wouldn't feel bad about one death in a year and a half.  How many people die on Chicago's train system in a year?  Maybe 20 or 30?  Almost all of those are suicides.  If you count the regional (Metra) rail, the number's more like 70, and mostly accidents.

Maybe in terms of crashes Houston's record is bad.  But in terms of deaths, it seems to be doing pretty well.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As an aside, I saw a Japanese movie on PBS which mentioned the high suicide rate in Tokyo. So many people were jumping in front of trains that it threatened the efficiency of their mass transit system. The government started charging the families of the deceased for the delays, and for cleaning up the resultant mess.

The rate of train/pedestrian 'accidents' dropped sharply. Presumably, the suicidal have found some more socially acceptable, less intrusive means to end their lives.

[kjb434]

It is already illegal to block signalled intersection. If the light is green and the only place for you is in the middle of the intersection, you cannot go.

As for the cameras, that is a whole other topic. I'm against them. They can't enforce anything. People in Phoenix, AZ realized that they don't have to pay any ticket issued by the cameras since the ticket is not personally served to them as with any moving violation (parking tickets fall under a different catagory not having to have the officer hand you a ticket). Also, if the person driving the car is not registered, then they are not served the ticket. My partner and I each have car and we are on the same insurance and can drive both, but each is only registered to one person. If he does something in my car and caught on the camera, I'm ticketed.

In Germany, cameras have been used since the 60s for red light running. The government would have the tickets delivered around midnight because they knew that'll be a time you were home. There law had a provision about being served a ticket by an officer and not the mail. Since then they changed the law. No the government can send you a ticket for pretty much anything and you can't really defend yourself. You have to pay whether you are guilty are not.

The loophole in Arizona would also work in Texas. Some people would mention the toll roads have cameras, but the toll roads are not public roadways. The toll roads are private facilities and have their own rules. The same pitfall of a ticket being issued to someone that didn't perform the crime, but the toll road can sight that usage of the facility places you in a different jurisdiction.

Metro needs to stand firm and not do anything to the rail system. A message needs to be placed on TV and around the city that gets the point acros that Metro won't stop if you run the red light or make an illega left turn. These kind of safety messages have been created for regular rail tracks and particularly applies to crossings that doen't have gates. The train companies are never at fault for rail to car accidents.

[hokieone]

bachanon, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 10:29am, said:

i thought we did have a law on the books.  i understood that if the light is green and you cannot clear the intersection, you do not enter the intersection.  if you are stuck in the intersection you can be ticketed for running a red light should it change while you are still in the intersection.  this is not enforced enough to make a difference.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

DIdn't know this already was a law. Good to know its just not being enforced, even though i see cops at that intersection everyday. I guess some signs would maybe help, but probably not. I know the problem is caused by the 610 North entrance, but god I get mad when I try to turn left to go 610 south and there is some idiot in the middle of the intersection blocking it. Even better are the honking showdowns that take place when someone is blocking, honking definitely solves a lot of problems like that.

Really if people just honked more, there would be no traffic in Houston anymore.

[skwatra]

hokieone, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 1:30pm, said:

Really if people just honked more, there would be no traffic in Houston anymore.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

sure, kinda like there's no traffic in manhattan?

[hokieone]

skwatra, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 12:39pm, said:

sure, kinda like there's no traffic in manhattan?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It was a sad attempt at a joke, I guess sarcasm doesn't eminate too well in written form.

Actually took it from letterman, one night they did top 10 things to do when stuck in traffic. One was just honk more, that always seems to get things moving. Another was play the see if your head fits in the glove compartment game.

[travelguy_73]

Not apologizing for the poor dead guy or anything (I'm a huge Metrorail supporter), but if you cross downtown Main street with any frequency, then you probably know just how messed up the 'smart signals' are on Main street as compared to the rest of downtown. Green for 5 seconds then back to red. Sometimes red with no trains in sight. Sometimes red right right as a train comes through, etc. There is no consistency, so this may have contributed to the problem. I know I have personally *almost* run the red because I saw a sea of green lights and not the red Main street light.

I have no doubt that Metrorail had a green light, but I think perhaps the issue is more complicated than "it was the driver's fault."

[citykid09]

Well If they would stop being so cheap, there would be a better rail in place then the one know, and people wouldn't have to worry about cars hittingf the train. They should really consider a subway or elevated rail. I know they have considerd both and said the subway would be downtown, but who thinks there really going to do it? There going to build the same rail like last time on the street.

[skwatra]

hokieone, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 1:43pm, said:

It was a sad attempt at a joke, I guess sarcasm doesn't eminate too well in written form. 

Actually took it from letterman, one night they did top 10 things to do when stuck in traffic.  One was just honk more, that always seems to get things moving.  Another was play the see if your head fits in the glove compartment game.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

sorry, i wasn't sure.

[MidtownCoog]

travelguy_73 is right!

Anyone try to cross Main at Congress lately? It's pretty dangerous IMHO. And now that it's down to two lanes, it is really scarry.

[dbigtex56]

kjb434, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 12:22pm, said:

My partner and I each have car and we are on the same insurance and can drive both, but each is only registered to one person.  If he does something in my car and caught on the camera, I'm ticketed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You would also be ticketed if your partner parked your car in a no-parking zone, or failed to pay a parking meter. I believe there also would be consequences if you allowed an unlicenced driver to use your car, and he was subsequently in an accident.

What I propose is that both the driver and the owner of the car be held liable for running a red light. If the driver cannot be apprehended, the owner is still responsible for his car illegally being in an intersection. In other words, running a red light would be two seperate offenses; one for the car, one for the driver. In the case of a camera-issued ticket, only the owner of the car would be ticketed. If the infraction is witnessed by a policeman, the driver would be ticketed the same as our current system.

I assume that people already loan their cars only to people they trust; this doesn't seem like much more of an imposition.

[DJ V Lawrence]

I'm trying to understand something here. I wouldn't be too surprised if all these accidents were taking place on the Richmond/Westiemer area, on any of our freeways, or just about anywhere in H-Town with suburban living, but look at where the light rail is located. Main Street Pedestrian Square, through downtown, thru MidTown, through the Medical Center, and ENDS at Reliant. That's like, um, the most urban-style living you can get in Houston. I didn't know it was associated at all with speed drivers. I thought it was perfectly clear in Houston where the tracks are located when you approach them. What's the mindset of anyone that'd be capable enough to park or speed past a rail that has it's own designated area? Is light rail light enough to ride off-track and score points on those driving along the rail or waiting at a stoplight?If the answer is yes, we're screwed

[greystone08(returns)]

kjb434, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 8:20am, said:

The media needs to reinforce the concept and not play like the train is at fault and Metro should not have to make changes.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Metro should too make changes. i think if rail were elevated or running underground, that would help deter half the problems. I've always believed in defensive driving and granted that there are some idiots out there that don't drive defensively, we can't control that. That's why i think that both the driver and the metro train are responsible for a death. We all know metro doesn't have the best layout plan and there's not a plan B to prevent an accident just incase a driver tends to be careless and stupid.

[DJ V Lawrence]

greystone08(returns), on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 4:55pm, said:

Metro should too make changes. i think if rail were elevated or running underground, that would help deter half the problems. I've always believed in defensive driving and granted that there are some idiots out there that don't drive defensively, we can't control that. That's why i think that both the driver and the metro train are responsible for a death. We all know metro doesn't have the best layout plan and there's not a plan B to prevent an accident just incase a driver tends to be careless and stupid.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I respect your opinion, but I'm not sure I agree. It's not like the majority of the drivers involved in these light rail accidents are tourist. These are Houstonians that have known very well that there are light rail tracks located at these specific locations.

I really can't blame Metro, though I did at first. We can't control the driver; to that point I agree. However, the drivers can control themselves...which is why there's so many accidents there to begin with.

For example: If you're at a Nascar motor speedway, you KNOW better than to try to cross the street during the race. It should be the same mindset for crossing light-rail tracks. If they wouldn't elevate the Nascar tracks, or run the race underground to avoid uncontrolable people even though you're going at 200mph, why should Metro have to do that on MainStreet?

[westguy]

We're also #1 in drunk drivers, and that area always seems to be crawling with them after dark. Was there any news on whether the guy was intoxicated or not?

[ssullivan]

hokieone, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 11:01am, said:

I also tend to think we need a don't block the box law.  How many times have you been at an intersection that is blocked by cars that just piled into the middle of an intersection that is jammed up and then gets worse because when the light changes, they are still stuck in the middle.  Everyday at San Felipe and 610, I see people make the mistake, which the compounds the problem.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We have one. It was passed about two years ago. I have personally witnessed a police officer issue several tickets to people who entered an intersection when they could not get across it. Unfortunately most people ignore the ordinance. But law or not, it's just common sense that you don't enter an intersection unless you can completely clear it.

[ssullivan]

For those of you who argue street-level light rail is inherently unsafe and shouldn't exist at all, let's not forget that MANY major cities around the world have street-running, grade-level light rail systems with not even half the signals and safety features ours does, with a much lower accident rate. I have seen intersections in Boston, Portland, San Francisco, and others where a light rail train crosses other streets with the cross street having nothing more than a "yield to trains" sign. The design METRO chose for our system has been tested and proven over and over again in cities around the world as safe. And ours has much better signal systems and signage than most others.

I feel very sorry for the family of this guy. However, even if MetroRail didn't exist at all, he could have just as easilly been killed by running the same red light at the same intersection if a car had hit him. Many people in Houston die every year in accidents caused by someone running a red light. And in all of those other cases light rail has NOTHING to do with it. I just watched a video on the Chronicle website of a couple of KHOU news reports on this accident and it's amazing to see the children of this guy standing there blaming METRO for killing their father. I realize they are very upset, but if he had run a different red light and been hit by a car would they be blaming the driver of the other car too?

I'm sorry. If you run a red light, you are at risk of serious injury or death. Period. It's nobody else's fault but your own.

[ricco67]

Sullivan,

In addition to other cities having light rail, we are not the only city in america with light rail that has claimed a life. there has been fatalities in 2 other cities (minneapolis and somewhere in california) within the past 6 months.

Life in general is full of risks, it's just a matter on how we assess those risks that keep us alive.

Ricco

[ssullivan]

ricco67, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 9:59pm, said:

Sullivan,

In addition to other cities having light rail, we are not the only city in america with light rail that has claimed a life.  there has been fatalities in 2 other cities (minneapolis and somewhere in california) within the past 6 months.

Life in general is full of risks, it's just a matter on how we assess those risks that keep us alive.

Ricco
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ricco, I know other cities have light rail with fatalities. I never said that wasn't the case. Not sure if you misunderstood my post or if I'm misunderstanding yours... but I doubt there's a city in the country with any kind of rail system that has at-grade crossings where there hasn't been a fatality.

My point was that it's ridiculous for people to blame this fatality on the presence of light rail on downtown streets, because the accident could have happened in exactly the same way without rail being there. The guy could have run a red light at the exact same intersection with no rail there, and been hit by a car or light truck moving at the same speed and still been killed. And in that scenario, would people be blaming the driver of the car that hit and killed the red light runner?

[N Judah]

Gotta wonder how many pedestrian fatalities occur that we never hear about. Uh, yeah, let's get rid of cars...

[The Voice of University Oaks]

Just to make it clear, I am not blaming the train for the deadly accident that occurred yesterday. This guy chose to ignore a red light and paid the ultimate price for it. I also completely recognize that, had this guy instead been hit by a bus or an 18-wheeler and died, it wouldn't have so much as made the back page of the Chronicle. But since it involved the train, it's the top story.

Also, I've met some of of the folks at METRO aswell as a few of the consultants who designed this thing. They did what they could do with the budget they were given to work with. The METRO-hating bloggers and wingnut AM radio guys can blame the "incompetent METRO planners and engineers" for the high accident rate all they want, but the initial decision to build a train at street level wasn't theirs. Blame Lee Brown, not the METRO rank and file.

With all that said, I still contend that the mixture of grade level rail and stupid Houston drivers is a recipe for disaster.

Yes, it's true that street-running light rail exists in cities all over the nation. And yes, it is true that accidents and fatalities occur in other cities as well. But Houston leads the nation in accidents involving light rail even though we have one of the nation's shortest systems. Boston operates 26.9 miles of light rail. The San Francisco MUNI runs 31.7 miles. Portland has about 48 miles of rail including the downtown streetcar. Dallas's network is 44 miles. Our system, on the other hand, is only 7.5 miles long. Yet we're number one...

There are two reasons for this. First, Houston's rail line operates almost entirely in-street. Many other light rail systems around the nation have only limited sections running in-street. From a practical standpoint, our train has more in common with the streetcars of New Orleans than it does the light rail systems in Portland or Dallas (Dallas's system, for example, only runs in-street along Pacific and Bryan through downtown - otherwise, the Red and Blue lines operate within their own right-of-way). The second reason: Houston drivers. We have 'em. Other cities don't. Put these two factors together, and the result is a rail line that led the nation in accidents last year and will probably continue to suffer a good three or four collisions a month from here on out. We wouldn't have this problem if we didn't have such ignorant, careless, selfish drivers in this city. But we do.

That being said, the Main Street line is complete, operational, and it is here to stay. Some more minor tweaking will probably occur, but there's not much that can be done to dramatically reduce the accident rate without essentially rebuilding it and that ain't gonna happen anytime soon. My concern is for the extensions that were approved under the METRO Solutions plan. My understanding is that these extensions were costed assuming a street-level configuration running down the middle of thoroughfares such as North Main and Harrisburg and Scott. But does anybody really think that drivers in the Near North Side or the East End or Third Ward are going to be any better than the drivers downtown or in the TMC? If METRO builds more of the same, they're going to get more of the same. On the other hand, if they avoid the stupid driver problem by building reserved or grade-separated alignments, the cost will increase and fewer miles of rail will be constructed.

And to think... if local voters hadn't voted against the heavy rail bond issue in 1983 or put Bob Lanier the highway lobby shill in office in 1991, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

[ricco67]

Sullivan,

actually, my post wasn't directed at you, but was meant to reinforce what you stated.

I was a bit peeved by the fact that KHOU had chosen to interview the family of that poor gentleman and then have the audacity to state that light rail was dangerous.

The Idiot at Action America must be wringing his hands with glee now that he has something to write about.

Ricco

[LTAWACS]

hokieone, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 1:30pm, said:

Really if people just honked more, there would be no traffic in Houston anymore.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No thanks. I don't want to get shot.

[editor]

dbigtex56, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 12:20pm, said:

As an aside, I saw a Japanese movie on PBS which mentioned the high suicide rate in Tokyo. So many people were jumping in front of trains that it threatened the efficiency of their mass transit system. The government started charging the families of the deceased for the delays, and for cleaning up the resultant mess.

The rate of train/pedestrian 'accidents' dropped sharply. Presumably, the suicidal have found some more socially acceptable, less intrusive means to end their lives.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is true. When I was in Tokyo I asked a number of people about this, and it's taken as a fact of life that if you jump in front of a train your family will be billed for the clean-up and the delay time. It's actually the railroads that bill the family, not the government.

It is also proper to take your shoes off before you jump in front of the train to show that your act was intentional and you were not pushed.

One train line became popular for suicides because it had a nice long stretch of track where the train could get up to a good speed. The subway company installed barriers and plexiglass walls along the platform that open when the train arrives to keep people from jumping. I hear it worked pretty well.

As an aside to your aside, the Tokyo rail system is the most amazing, fascinating, clean, and efficient thing I've ever seen. Instead of being run by a single government entity like METRO in Houston, or the MTA in New York or BART in San Francisco, there are dozens of private companies competing for your subway, elevated rail, surface rail, and bus service. I can't imagine what it would be like if Houston had bus competition.

Here's a partial map mostly of just the subways. I've never seen a map that actually shows every line, plus the surface and elevated trains. In fact, this map leaves off the JR East lines, which are probably more popular than the subways. I guess because they compete.

[LTAWACS]

westguy, on Wednesday, May 11th, 2005 @ 6:49pm, said:

We're also #1 in drunk drivers, and that area always seems to be crawling with them after dark. Was there any news on whether the guy was intoxicated or not?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think he was. I think he was also an illegal.

[kjb434]

Yeah,

I wish the government would get out of mass transit and private business would get involved. The only problem is that mass transit in the US doesn't make money except for NYC's subways. And it is not much. For any entity, mass transit is a loosing proposition that tax payers support. In Tokyo, the density and necessity for transit outside of vehicular transport made the business model for rail extremely profitable and popular. And because the competition exists, each rail company competes by trying newer technology which in the end makes the sytem overall better.

Isn't Capitalism great!!!

The drawback in the US, is that in most cases rail is a profitable venture because the nations highway (congested as they are) are sufficient in most cases. I hope the tide changes and that trains in the US would be more profitable, then the expansion of lines wouldn't occur quickly. Cities that have built large systems such as Dallas do so because the lobby exists for it and they get the Federal funding. In Houston, the demand isn't as large. And the people look at as something cool and not something to jump on and support. I think the tide is changin though. With the referendum passing for more light rail, I think the public is giving Metro a chance to prove itself. A few more lines and I think we'll see the network will begin to grow much faster.

[bruce_oneal]

kjb434, on Thursday, May 12th, 2005 @ 9:14am, said:

Yeah,

I wish the government would get out of mass transit and private business would get involved.  The only problem is that mass transit in the US doesn't make money except for NYC's subways.  And it is not much.  For any entity, mass transit is a loosing proposition that tax payers support.  In Tokyo, the density and necessity for transit outside of vehicular transport made the business model for rail extremely profitable and popular.  And because the competition exists, each rail company competes by trying newer technology which in the end makes the sytem overall better.

Isn't Capitalism great!!!

The drawback in the US, is that in most cases rail is a profitable venture because the nations highway (congested as they are) are sufficient in most cases.  I hope the tide changes and that trains in the US would be more profitable, then the expansion of lines wouldn't occur quickly.  Cities that have built large systems such as Dallas do so because the lobby exists for it and they get the Federal funding.  In Houston, the demand isn't as large.  And the people look at as something cool and not something to jump on and support.  I think the tide is changin though.  With the referendum passing for more light rail, I think the public is giving Metro a chance to prove itself.  A few more lines and I think we'll see the network will begin to grow much faster.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i agree wholeheartedly. but i still maintain that mass transit in houston will not catch on UNTIL they start building lines that COMPETE with the freeways. I10-->downtown, I45N-->downtown, I45S-->downtown, 288S-->downtown. right now, the ONLY way to get from those places to the city is to DRIVE. i like the idea of cross town routes, and inner city routes, but the major impetus (at least traffic-wise) would seem to be to get the tremendous throng of people that are driving on the major thoroughfares out of their cars.

until people on these freeways see the benefit of leaving their cars behind and jumping onto a train at a park and ride stop (to conduct business in the city), they will continue to sit in traffic on the freeways.

[kjb434]

The issue would also be to convince people to let go of their car once the line is built. That sad part is that many won't. They don't like the lack of flexibility and freedom of a rail system.

Also, any line that would have to go against a freeway would have to be faster than the freeway. Except for the occasional major accident, traveling on the freeway would equal are be faster than a rail system. In Dallas, the rail line parallel to the Central Expressway takes just a little less time than the freeway. Once the High Five interchange is finished. The freeway should be a little faster. Dart has realized that part of the low ridership is that people haven't given up their cars. On a positive note, downtown Plano is seeing a rebirth of urbanism which makes the rail the center piece. Other areas are seeing some development because of the rail also.

Houston has been appearing to implement the concept of building rail lines to one replace buses and two stem economic development. The Harrisburg line has many proposal from commerical developers for new retail where the the proposed line is to go. Land is being bought up. The N. Main line corridor is seeing development interested right now too. Of course, Midtown hasn't grew much faster sine the rail line either. I'm thinking due to costs though.

[WestGrayGuy]

I hate to admit this in an open forum but I run red lights from time to time. Come on now, this is Houston.

I have to agree though, Darwin was at work with this accident. How does one not see a large silver bullet with flashing lights racing towards them?

I have to also agree with NO CROSSING GATES FOR MAIN STREET. Spend that money somewhere else.

[N Judah]

They had a privatized bus system in Chile (started under Pinochet when he went all fascist-free-marketeer) but I don't know if it's still in existence. Supposedly it didn't work too well for logistical reasons, but I can see a privatized subway working. It probably wouldn't do anything to stop idiot drivers from running into the trains, or driving down the starwells into the stations, or if it's an elevated train you know some moron is going to crash into a support pylon and take the thing down...

[jpcampbell]

kjb434, on Thursday, May 12th, 2005 @ 9:11am, said:

The issue would also be to convince people to let go of their car once the line is built.  That sad part is that many won't.  They don't like the lack of flexibility and freedom of a rail system.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Right. I like the idea of taking transit, but it would certainly limit my lunchtime options. I think the deli in the building would get old after about 2 days. That may sound silly, but losing freedom to roam the city in search of good restaurants during lunch would suck.

We are probably moving downtown soon, so maybe there is more there within walking distance.