[citykid09]

News and Info about DART:



I think the Cityplace Subway Station is very cool, and very clean. Are there any more DART subway extention plans? I heard one was going to go to the DFW airport. cityplace has to be one of the deepest stations in the world 10 stories is pretty deep. That has to be some tuff rock under there. There should be another stop on that 3.5 mile subway line they have now.

Here are some pics of the station and the construction:







I also like Mockingbird Station alot:

[citykid09]

[rantanamo]

There was supposed to be a stop at Knox-Henderson, but residents fought it initially. Now they want it, but have to get in the back of the line.

The new lines have subway possibilities at Love Field, and if the 'middle' alignment is chosen at DFW. All depends on the level of funding.

[citykid09]

rantanamo, on Thursday, March 23rd, 2006 @ 8:43pm, said:

There was supposed to be a stop at Knox-Henderson, but residents fought it initially. Now they want it, but have to get in the back of the line.

The new lines have subway possibilities at Love Field, and if the 'middle' alignment is chosen at DFW. All depends on the level of funding.

I hope it all gets done. Dallas does a good job at making nice rail stations.

[C2H]

If only Houston could think that smart.

[VelvetJ]

C2H, on Friday, March 24th, 2006 @ 3:27pm, said:

If only Houston could think that smart.

Yeah, tell me about it. The "Conservative Thought" that has taken over Houston has retarded it in so many areas but particularly in transportation. When I first moved to Houston 17 years ago, I predicted that the longer we waited for the inevitable rail portion of our mass transit, the more it would cost, thereby making it more difficult to get. We are here.

I still have yet to ride Dart, although I have been at a Dart Train Station (why I didn't ride is a long story), but I am very excited about what is going on with it. I am actually floored by how quickly it has progressed. I wish it all the success in the world, if no other reason than to slap Houston in the face with it's reality.

This post has been edited by VelvetJ: Friday, March 24, 2006 at 9:12 PM

[dalparadise]

Is there any information on the real viability of these light rail vehicles being used as a commuter solution (as opposed to the urban people-mover, for which they seem to be designed)?

By running beneath grade, as they do in parts of Dallas, they seem to be a pretty good facsimile of a real commuter subway, in that they can be opened up to reach top speeds (about 65, I believe). They are still restricted to the length of the trains, though, because they ultimately end up at grade, in traffic, just like ours does.

A system like BART (SF-Oakland) reaches speeds of near 80mph under the bay and can be as long as platforms allow, meaning it is much more flexible to respond to changing passenger loads. The smaller Muni system in SF seems to be a full subway realization of the DART plan, in that I believe it is actually underground light rail and stays primarily within the city (no long-haul commuter traffic beyond SFO). Does anyone know if ths is a function of its coming after the heavier BART system and a desire to avoid redundancies, or is this actually an indication that a light rail train, even an underground one is just not a good commuter solution?

There is particular relevence to the Westpark vs. Richmond argument here, as the Sugar Land contingency fights for the Westpark alignment for MetroRail, "in order to bring commuter rail to Ft. Bend County." This is a separate argument from the one for a heavy rail connection running along Hwy 90, by the way, and has only come up recently to join those who oppose a Richmond Ave. alignment.

Is their plan inherently flawwed in believing MetroRail can be a commuter solution, with its slow pace and limited train lengths?

[rantanamo]

The Kinkisharo vehicles that DART uses are not what I'd call urban people movers. They are designed to be commuter type trains, and can link up vehicles to a desired length and capacity. The longest I've seen together is 3, which is about the length of most of the stations. I don' t know the possible top speed. But if you've ridden while the train was at 65(you know because there are speed signs all over the lines), that speed is easily reached. 65 may be a limit DART wants for timing issues in the current system. These vehicles are not the same as the Houston vehicles in their construction or purpose except for the fact they use overhead wire(which doesn't limit speed in and of itself as we know from super fast trains in Europe). The term light rail vs heavy rail differs in that third rail of heavy track vs a lighter overhead wire to close the electrical circuit.

I wouldn't mistake the current downtown alignment of DART for what will be there in the future. That will be a subway line downtown, eliminating that limit in speed. The rest of the line has its own ROW, whether elevated, at street level or underground. They don't stop for lights, cars, etc. Downtown is the exception.

For your vehicle type in Houston, that may be an issue. I dunno. But speed and capacity hasn't been an issue so far because of reasons mentioned above. You also have the Super Kinkisharo vehicles that seem to be slowly phased in with a few each time new vehicles are bought. These are basically two of the standard model linked together with a platform level middle section. Two of those linked together = 4 of the old trains that can be loaded in the current stations.

[slfunk]

citykid09, on Thursday, March 23rd, 2006 @ 9:52pm, said:

I think the Cityplace Subway Station is very cool, and very clean. Are there any more DART subway extention plans?

There a couple of possiblilities for the second alignment downtown. One is to close Jackson street and make this the second alignment. The second is to build a subway under ground. The subway seems to be the most accepted solution. It is being studied and will more then likely be announced by the end of the year where the second alignment would be.

This post has been edited by slfunk: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 at 4:23 PM

[houstonfella]

Let's give it to Dallas. I remember when Dallas was simply talking about a rail line. Then, next thing you know, they have a fantastic rail system and getting better all the time. Can Dallas send someone 250 mi. south to get one done down here?

[CE_ugh]

dalparadise, on Friday, March 24th, 2006 @ 9:00pm, said:

Is there any information on the real viability of these light rail vehicles being used as a commuter solution (as opposed to the urban people-mover, for which they seem to be designed)?

By running beneath grade, as they do in parts of Dallas, they seem to be a pretty good facsimile of a real commuter subway, in that they can be opened up to reach top speeds (about 65, I believe). They are still restricted to the length of the trains, though, because they ultimately end up at grade, in traffic, just like ours does.

A system like BART (SF-Oakland) reaches speeds of near 80mph under the bay and can be as long as platforms allow, meaning it is much more flexible to respond to changing passenger loads. The smaller Muni system in SF seems to be a full subway realization of the DART plan, in that I believe it is actually underground light rail and stays primarily within the city (no long-haul commuter traffic beyond SFO). Does anyone know if ths is a function of its coming after the heavier BART system and a desire to avoid redundancies, or is this actually an indication that a light rail train, even an underground one is just not a good commuter solution?

There is particular relevence to the Westpark vs. Richmond argument here, as the Sugar Land contingency fights for the Westpark alignment for MetroRail, "in order to bring commuter rail to Ft. Bend County." This is a separate argument from the one for a heavy rail connection running along Hwy 90, by the way, and has only come up recently to join those who oppose a Richmond Ave. alignment.

Is their plan inherently flawwed in believing MetroRail can be a commuter solution, with its slow pace and limited train lengths?

Who gives a crap what Fort Bend County wants. Honestly what business do they have butting in the affairs of METRO or the city of Houston. Oh yeah, Mr. Delay.

This post has been edited by CE_ugh: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 at 10:48 PM

[MidtownCoog]

Rail or no rail, Houston's HOV system is something Dallas lacks, and it moves a lot of people via bus.

How do overall ridership numbers compare?

What's the difference between light rail from Plano to downtown Dallas or a bus from Sugar Land to downtown Houston?

[RedScare]

MidtownCoog, on Thursday, March 30th, 2006 @ 8:32am, said:

Rail or no rail, Houston's HOV system is something Dallas lacks, and it moves a lot of people via bus.

How do overall ridership numbers compare?

What's the difference between light rail from Plano to downtown Dallas or a bus from Sugar Land to downtown Houston?

Coog is dead-on here. METRO Park and Ride lots have roughly 35,000 parking spaces. Since the gas price spikes, they are routinely filled to capacity. I couldn't find rider numbers on short notice, but 70,000 Park and Ride trips plus 40,000 rail trips daily surely dwarfs DART's ridership and provides greater coverage right now.

This is not to dis DART or rail. However, most comments on this forum (including mine) are much more concerned with how a transit system LOOKS versus how well it WORKS. HOV lanes are ugly and uninspiring. Some people like light rail, others subways, still more heavy commuter trains. But, what METRO is concerned about is building something that people will ride, not how us amatuer urban experts think it should look.

Realistically, commuter rail to the burbs is duplicating what Park and Rides already do. I want to see it as much as the next guy, but only because it sounds cool. But, to suggest DART is doing a better job because they atarted sooner or put in a subway along part of the line is ignoring what these systems were built for. You have to look at the entire "system" of rails, busses and coaches to make that claim. METRO is doing some things well, others not. DART is the same.

[Dallasboi]

Ok....Metro ridership may dwarf DART's but you guys seem to always forget what you always brag about.....Population....(I'm gonna say it) The city of Houston has just about double the population as Dallas,with that said .....there are twice as many riders that ill rely on metro.My point is ...Sure the numbers say houston's Metro has more riders than little ole Dallas but Metro has to serve double the amount of people,and in a city of 2.2 million people 110,000 riders is kinda low.




P.S. Hi Redscare Light my cigar next.

[MidtownCoog]

Dallasboi, your argument would hold water if DART was exclusively in Dallas or METRO exclusively in Houston.

[The Great Hizzy!]

METRO serves about 2/3 of Harris County. DART covers most of Dallas County and parts of Colin. Even if you added "The T", which serves about half of Tarrant County, the ridership numbers favor METRO.

This is neither here or there because the discussion is about the 61,000 or so rail riders for DART compared to the roughly 39,000 riders on METRO Rail.

Huzzah. A few interesting people get to sit and suck their thumb over that disparity, something they do well.

[MidtownCoog]

I only brought up the Metro HOVs becuase many in Houston are so sad we don't have more rail.

But it's not about the form of transportation, it's about moving people.

And Houston's HOV system moves tons of people and is the model of efficiency.

[The Great Hizzy!]

I understand that but you miss the bigger picture here: someone gets to focus on something to whine about, as is their specialty. You don't expect them to actually comment on something that's a positive, do you?

[zaphod]

DART is cool. and all of texas has to put up with conservative garbage, not just us. Houston just got screwed over more. You also have to realize that when if or when the time comes that the current siemens 'avanto' trainsets arent cutting it, metro will buy much larger cars. Simple as that. stations could be expanded or trains could just extend past the platform. Right now the siemens cars are the perfect size. they are usually moderatly full but you can find a seat(at least thats what ive experienced when i rode it during rush hour one day)and when they really need to carry a lot of people they couple 2 together. Dart could do the same thing. In fact, i wouldnt be surprised if they do in maybe 10 years from now, considering those cars will then be 20 years old.

And Midtown Coog is right about the HOV lane system. Its probably the best HOV system in the country. metro should brand it to make it more popular. Maybe buy some more comfortable larger BRT type buses for a new "Metro Express" service. Rail is good for more urban areas and i'm all for expanding the light rail. But lets not cry over getting a rapid transit system because we wont get one any time soon. But we can expand metrorail and do BRT and it'll be just as good for our current situation.

its gonna be cool when build the line out to las colinas. that TOD project is badass.

This post has been edited by zaphod: Saturday, April 1, 2006 at 7:30 PM

[VelvetJ]

Yeah, it's always been my belief that the only reason Dallas and most other cities of the world built rail in the first place was due to cosmetic reasons. I mean that's the only reason I really want rail for Houston. Dallas focusing more on rail than on HOV lanes, what fools. Dallas sprawls just as much as Houston yet they were foolish enough to think that rail was a good idea for that city. I'm glad we were the smart ones. What was the point of building the 7 miles we have now since the form of transportation is not important? Couldn't buses do the same job as our current rail line? What a waste of my tax money.

As I mentioned in my initial post, as well as a few other posters on this thread, we are TOTALLY against HOV lanes. That's why WE brought up the subject in the first place.

( for those that didn't realize it, that was all sarcasm)

Zaphod, you are correct in Houston not getting a rapid transit system soon, as well as it shouldn't. Plus I think you will find that those that admire the appearance of the pics of DARTS system above, are very much aware of what is in store for METRO in the future and are not opposed to the current METRO plan, if no other reason than the alternative would more than likely be nothing at all. I PERSONALLY think elevated or underground in some areas, would be the BEST option for a place like Houston, but know that is not the reality of our situation.

And for what it's worth, yes I would love to see a underground or depressed rail station in Houston, like in Dallas and most other cities of the world. Not because it will increase rider numbers but because it just looks darn good, on top of the trains being able to travel at higher speeds. There so sue me.

[TxDave]

I think the attractiveness of rail is higher for the members of this site than the regular population.

Rail lines are not built simply to "look good". They actually establish transportation corridors that guide future development, not unlike the freeways that already exist.

Initially they may not have drastic effects, but as time passes rail lines will be an important part of a region's mobility network. This is already apparent in the interest in development around rail stations in Dallas and Houston.

HOV lanes have been extremely successful in Houston, and should continue to be, but they are mostly a commuter based, rush-hour solution. Rail lines, where justified, provide a flexible transportation option for many different users and uses.

[zaphod]

Quote

I think the attractiveness of rail is higher for the members of this site than the regular population.

its cuz were a bunch of stinkin liberal hippies...

I heard something, that maybe when the new yellow/green line goes into downtown instead of forming a bottleneck on the existing line they'd dig a new subway segment. Does that rumor have any validity? If they did do that it would be cool but it seems so unlikely...

As for stations looking good, its great to have nice looking stations, but i read on a site one time how all this fancy stuff makes the lines big money losers,and that the systems that are very efficient(calgary and san diego) have very simple stations and facilities.

This post has been edited by zaphod: Monday, April 17, 2006 at 6:21 PM

[TexasStar]

Buses share highways with automobile traffic. Accidents will cause delays for buses while rail passengers are unaffected by traffic tie ups. IMO one of the primary advantages of rail over buses.

I take the Red Line from far Southwest Dallas to work downtown everyday and I never have to concern myself with morning traffic reports. And I get to work at EXACTLY the same time every day.
Trains run like clockwork.

This post has been edited by TexasStar: Thursday, April 27, 2006 at 4:10 PM

[The Great Hizzy!]

Quote

Buses share highways with automobile traffic. Accidents will cause delays for buses while rail passengers are unaffected by traffic tie ups.

That's not entirely true. At-grade LRT systems (found in both Houston and Dallas, as well as in San Francisco and Denver), also have to occasionally deal with highway accidents--sometimes, unfortunately, they're part of them.

But overall and in general, you are correct; buses are more prone to being held up by an accident and are more likely to suffer a breakdown on the highway.

This post has been edited by The Great Hizzy!: Friday, April 28, 2006 at 10:33 AM

[slfunk]

The Great Hizzy!, on Friday, April 28th, 2006 @ 10:32am, said:

That's not entirely true. At-grade LRT systems (found in both Houston and Dallas, as well as in San Francisco and Denver), also have to occasionally deal with highway accidents--sometimes, unfortunately, they're part of them.

But overall and in general, you are correct; buses are more prone to being held up by an accident and are more likely to suffer a breakdown on the highway.

I can't speak for Houston's LRT other then I do know that a large portion of it through downtown shares the road with cars. This is not the case for DART. Dart has a desginated path way through downtown where there are only a couple of areas DART shares the road with cars. This is where cars exit parking structures. DART is not affected by any highway. It runs separately from US 75 and where it comes to a busy street the tracks are elevated on an overpass. It would have to be one hell of an accident to cause DART to be affected by the highway traffic, but that has yet to happen since opening in 1995. The DART's right of way is built like the traditional train tracks are, meaning it does not move with the traffic, but traffic crosses perpendicular (90 degrees) to the tracks. So once those rail guards come down the tracks are uninterrupted except for those fools that ignore all the warning signs.

[slfunk]

DART rail now $700M richer
Federal officials sign agency's largest grant, green-lighting growth

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dw...ey.1a45280.html

11:46 PM CDT on Monday, July 3, 2006
By TONY HARTZEL / The Dallas Morning News


"....Federal officials came to Dallas Area Rapid Transit on Monday, and this time they brought their checkbook.

In a morning full of pomp and ceremony, DART and the Federal Transit Administration signed a long-awaited, $700 million grant agreement.

The amount is the largest DART has ever received, and it represents the second-largest federal grant of its kind to any transit agency in the nation....."

"..The federal funds will pay for almost half of the cost to build 21 miles of light rail from Farmers Branch to Buckner Boulevard in Pleasant Grove. Those 21 miles will help launch DART's planned 45-mile, $2.5 billion expansion that is expected to be completed by the end of 2013.

For about eight years, DART and the local congressional delegation have lobbied extensively for the grant.

The transit administration announced in February that it would give DART the money, but the award was then subject to reviews and congressional approval.

"This is a great day for Dallas," said U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, who fought for the DART funds on Capitol Hill.

Although San Antonio and Houston created transit agencies before Dallas, "DART has made up for lost time," Mrs. Hutchison said. "DART has surpassed Houston and San Antonio with its commitment to rail early on. It wasn't easy, but this is going to benefit our area for years to come."

DART's system is recognized nationally for its successful 10-year operating history and its impact on the region, Ms. Bushue said. In addition, DART helps its standing with federal officials because it can pledge more of its sales tax revenue to projects than many other transit agencies, she said...."

"....Minor work has started on the northwest and southeast lines, and workers could start laying the first tracks early next year.

The first section of the new line is scheduled to open to Fair Park in September 2009. The rest of the federally funded section between Farmers Branch and Pleasant Grove is planned to open in late 2010. DART-funded extensions to Carrollton, Irving, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and Rowlett are expected to open between 2010 and 2013.

To some leaders, the rail line represents more than just rapid transit. DART's new rail lines will connect Fair Park, Deep Ellum, Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas, the hospital district, Dallas Love Field, D/FW Airport and northwest Dallas County suburbs...."

[MidtownCoog]

Quote

U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison

From those statements it sounds as if she only represents North Texas.

She's another on my list of those to vote-against.

[ricco67]

This just irritates me to no end.


I'm going to contact ALL my rep's and mention this article and demand that we need some funding as well!

[tamtagon]

ricco67, on Tuesday, July 4th, 2006 @ 11:24am, said:

This just irritates me to no end.
I'm going to contact ALL my rep's and mention this article and demand that we need some funding as well!

It has been a much more difficult political battle in Houston, but I'm confident that as soon as local pressure to expand rail service overcomes oil industry politicians' defiance the Houston transit agency will pull it all together to become every bit as successful as the one in Dallas, probably in less time:

Quote

DART's system is recognized nationally for its successful 10-year operating history and its impact on the region, Ms. Bushue said. In addition, DART helps its standing with federal officials because it can pledge more of its sales tax revenue to projects than many other transit agencies, she said...."

Before the Feds hand over the money, they have to be convinced the agency knows how to spend it. DART gets the prize for that one.

==============
On my wish list: as the Federal funding for passenger rail service in Houston comes together, Federal and State funding for direct passenger service between downtown Dallas and downtown Houston is also secured.

This post has been edited by tamtagon: Tuesday, July 4, 2006 at 11:01 AM

[VelvetJ]

MidtownCoog, on Tuesday, July 4th, 2006 @ 10:17am, said:

From those statements it sounds as if she only represents North Texas.

She's another on my list of those to vote-against.

Well in all fairness, she is based in North Texas so I would expect a little bias.

Before you vote MidtownCoog, please do not minimize the hand she has had in Houston having the little rail we have now. It was shameful that she seemed to support rail for Houston more than the politicians that were actually from the Houston area. I can say she is one of the very very few Republicans I have a little respect for.

By the way, I say congrats to Dallas. Their ability to have vision beyond the immediate future has paid off.

[MidtownCoog]

Quote

Well in all fairness, she is based in North Texas so I would expect a little bias.

Not the kind of talk you expect to hear from our Senator.

Texas has two Senators elected to serve the entire state. She has on office on Smith St.

Other than her "seeming to" have supported rail, she has served Houston poorly.

[Houston19514]

MidtownCoog, on Tuesday, July 4th, 2006 @ 1:25pm, said:

Not the kind of talk you expect to hear from our Senator.

Texas has two Senators elected to serve the entire state. She has on office on Smith St.

Other than her "seeming to" have supported rail, she has served Houston poorly.

Don't be an idiot. She said nothing untoward or inappropriate AT ALL. Her home is in Dallas, for crying out loud. So why should she not be able to refer to it as "our area"? And her other comments were just statements of fact (eg, Dallas has taken the lead in rail development)

She has also been strong and consistent supporter of rail for Houston.

[MidtownCoog]

Quote

Don't be an idiot.

Houston19514,

Check you PM inbox. I have a special message for you.

Kiss Kay Bailey's arse all you want, but she has done nada for rail in Houston.

Jockstraps also provide support, but they don't build light rail. Money does.

http://hutchison.sen...ov/transpor.htm

WASHINGTON, DC -- Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison issued the following statement on passage of the Houston Metro ballot initiative:

"Now that this hard-fought - and often heated - campaign has come to a close, it's time to put differences aside and move forward. Houstonians have spoken in support of light-rail. It's time to get to work to ensure Metro builds a world-class transportation system that addresses Houston's pressing mobility needs. I am committed to helping them in every way possible to achieve this goal."

This post has been edited by MidtownCoog: Wednesday, July 5, 2006 at 11:02 AM

[Houston19514]

MidtownCoog, on Wednesday, July 5th, 2006 @ 10:53am, said:

Houston19514,

Check you PM inbox. I have a special message for you.

Kiss Kay Bailey's arse all you want, but she has done nada for rail in Houston.

Jockstraps also provide support, but they don't build light rail. Money does.

http://hutchison.sen...ov/transpor.htm

WASHINGTON, DC -- Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison issued the following statement on passage of the Houston Metro ballot initiative:

"Now that this hard-fought - and often heated - campaign has come to a close, it's time to put differences aside and move forward. Houstonians have spoken in support of light-rail. It's time to get to work to ensure Metro builds a world-class transportation system that addresses Houston's pressing mobility needs. I am committed to helping them in every way possible to achieve this goal."

First, as you can see by reading my post, my "don't be an idiot" statement was regarding your complaints about her statements in Dallas, statements which were correct and appropriate in every way.

Second, regarding her support or actions for rail in Houston, what, exactly,would you have had her do at this point that she has not done? (After all, it's not her fault that Houston's local politicians and populace has taken this long to get on the rail program... do you want her to come to Houston and starting laying rails down Richmond herself, or what?)

[MidtownCoog]

All I am saying is that it IS possible to compliment DART without painting Houston and San Antonio transit agencies in a bad light.

Houston (Metro) is pretty commited to rail if you ask me, espeically since Metro built the first section WITHOUT Federal funding due to road blocks by memebers of her own party.

But Kay is getting up there in years. She fits in just fine in the Metroplex by her comments.

[JasonDFW]

MidtownCoog, on Wednesday, July 5th, 2006 @ 11:59am, said:

But Kay is getting up there in years. She fits in just fine in the Metroplex by her comments.

I think you over reacted on the comments and I don't think they were negative about SA and Houston.

However, if you want to get rid of Hutchison, you'll find a huge number of Dallas residents behind you. Heck, nearly the whole DFW forum thinks she needs to go.

On a side note I think Houstonians in this forum are hard on their rail system but from the timelines I've seen, the system is going to explode on the scene pretty quickly. DFW got more than its share of rail $ previously, and Houston got more than its share of highway $, and each metro has lots to show for it (e.g. Houston's extensive HOV system).

Jason

[MidtownCoog]

I think y'all are over reacting if you think I am over reacting.

She's just an old tea-sip cheerleader who remembers how to shake it.

Let her celebrate Dallas. She's in Rick Perry's "I can't belive Houston beat-out Dallas (Olympic Bid)" boat if you ask me.

Off with their collective heads.

[JasonDFW]

MidtownCoog, on Wednesday, July 5th, 2006 @ 8:17pm, said:

I think y'all are over reacting if you think I am over reacting.

She's just an old tea-sip cheerleader who remembers how to shake it.

Let her celebrate Dallas.

Ironically, her anti-Dallas (proper) antics are why I want her gone.

Jason

[slfunk]

[musicman]

slfunk, on Thursday, August 17th, 2006 @ 4:09pm, said:

Here's a nice problem for DART to have.

DART parking demand exceeds supply

It's great too that they designed more than one park and ride lot into their DART LRT system and don't charge to park either unlike METRO.

[MidtownCoog]

Metro charges parking? Where?

Metro is also having growing pains.

The Bay Area Park and Ride is maxed out. They just added a new route from Grace Church on 45.

I've been taking it in from Galveston this week.

[musicman]

MidtownCoog, on Friday, August 18th, 2006 @ 8:16am, said:

Metro charges parking? Where?

the fannin south LRT station.

[MidtownCoog]

That's essentially a satellite parking lot for the Medical Center. That's why they do it.

Glenn Heights is 20 miles out in the middle of nowhere.

[musicman]

MidtownCoog, on Friday, August 18th, 2006 @ 8:30am, said:

That's essentially a satellite parking lot for the Medical Center. That's why they do it.

Glenn Heights is 20 miles out in the middle of nowhere.

obviously it is somewhere if the parking lot is full.

[The Great Hizzy!]

MidtownCoog, on Friday, August 18th, 2006 @ 8:30am, said:

That's essentially a satellite parking lot for the Medical Center. That's why they do it.

Glenn Heights is 20 miles out in the middle of nowhere.

'Coog is right. The Fannin South lot is a special situation and is the ONLY lot in which there is a fee. Their (METRO's) other 26 P&R lots are free, and the following locatinos have routine capacity issues, to the point where METRO police actually has somewhat ignored illegal parking:

Southpoint
West Bellfort
Northwest Station

Until the last two years, before METRO added nearly a 1,000 new spaces, you could add Addicks and Kingsland to that list as well. Addicks was especially bad. FTR, Northwest Transit Station is also a location with a decent number of parking but still with serious overcrowding issues. Not all transit stations offer parking so this is somewhat of a non-apples-to-apples comparison.

BTW, the Smithlands lot is owned by the TMC and a permit is required to park there.

[musicman]

You think METRO should accomodate the commuter by providing more parking at a few more LRT stations instead of just the fannin south one?

[RedScare]

musicman, on Friday, August 18th, 2006 @ 9:10am, said:

You think METRO should accomodate the commuter by providing more parking at a few more LRT stations instead of just the fannin south one?

Since virtually every station has parking nearby, though not necessarily owned by METRO, I don't think that is the best use of limited funds. Building more space in the P&R lots, or even building garages, if space is unavailable, sounds like a better plan, especially considering that most commuters on the LRT in town do not need parking...they are commuters.

[musicman]

RedScare, on Friday, August 18th, 2006 @ 9:16am, said:

Since virtually every station has parking nearby, though not necessarily owned by METRO, I don't think that is the best use of limited funds. Building more space in the P&R lots, or even building garages, if space is unavailable, sounds like a better plan, especially considering that most commuters on the LRT in town do not need parking...they are commuters.

i know quite a few that drive to a station. I"m speaking primarily for most of the METRO possible users who have no idea where the train is exactly. would additional clearly designated LRT parking help gain new riders?

[RedScare]

musicman, on Friday, August 18th, 2006 @ 10:12am, said:

i know quite a few that drive to a station. I"m speaking primarily for most of the METRO possible users who have no idea where the train is exactly. would additional clearly designated LRT parking help gain new riders?

I still think it would be a neglible increase in riders. Those who live near enough to rail, will walk (obviously), or if slightly farther away, will still know the area well enough to find desirable low-cost parking. I know several people who park free in Midtown and take the rail DT to save a couple of bucks. Those who commute on P&R or busses, then transfer to rail, do not need parking. This is the majority of users.

The only potential users that might not know where to park would be occasional users, not specific enough, or frequent enough to justify their own lot, other than the almost suburban Fannin South station, which already has a lot. Events at Reliant DO draw riders, who seem to have little problem finding parking near the stations, especially considering that most Reliant events occur in the evening or on weekends, when parking near downtown stations is plentiful.

Given the cost of land near DT and Med Center stations, coupled with the fact that the rail draws 40,000 riders daily, I don't think it is cost efficient, but more importantly, I don't think METRO sees the need to spend that money to increase ridership. Once the rail is expanded past its current mostly inner city route, for instance, ALL of the planned extensions., I think station parking becomes much more desirable to attract riders.

[Captain Impossible]

MidtownCoog, on Tuesday, July 4th, 2006 @ 1:25pm, said:

Other than her "seeming to" have supported rail, she has served Houston poorly.

I see you have yet to qualify this statement.