Jump to content

102IAHexpress

Full Member
  • Posts

    587
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 102IAHexpress

  1. This is needed to support the high ridership estimates by Metro. Passengers boarding to get to their rental cars will no doubt still be counted as light rail passengers. An easy way to inflate the numbers. Much like the Smith Lands stop on the Red Line.
  2. Good discussion of the tax/political hurdles. The only solution I have other than expanding the highway and/or just abolishing Metro and starting from scratch, is to restrict the HOV lanes to Metro buses only. There are too many cars slowing down the HOV lanes, and too many HOV violators. Motorcycles are exempt per federal law I think, but other than that, keep the solo drivers out of there.
  3. Good point. The issue is the Metro board and their fiduciary duty to their "shareholders" to borrow from corporate law. The largest shareholder, Houston, gets the most board seats (5). Second is Harris County Commissioners court (2), then the other 14 municipal members share (2). For a total of 9 board members. Most of the board members are loyal to "shareholders" in Harris County or Cities on the Harris County border. Accordingly, most of the movement will be intra-Harris County or intra-Houston. Again, I'm not opposed to abolishing Metro and starting from scratch. Heck, that's how Metro was created in the first place, by replacing the old HouTran system.
  4. Mostly accurate representation of my view. But to be more accurate, my view is specific to Houston. Or more specifically to the incorporating charting documents of the Metropolitan Transit Authority. It was chartered primarily as a means to serve people who cannot afford automobiles, AND people who are physically impaired. If you believe that the Metropolitan Transit Authority should have a different primary purpose. Then petition your representatives and ask to either amend its stated purpose or abolish it and start from scratch. The more fundamental disagreement here, as I see it, is what people -think- Metro's legal purpose is vs. what its -actual- legal purpose is. If you think Metro was chartered to be a New York City type public transportation network, then of course you want more rail. But, Houston is not NYC.
  5. That's like saying, lets build this skyscraper right the first time and make it 100 floors instead of 35. The busway "track" is just surface road. There is no disruption in rapid bus service during light rail conversion because the bus, is still a bus, and it can just drive around that section of rail construction. Not that hard.
  6. Indeed it is not part of it. People can still take the 82 Westheimer and tons of other buses. The "system" is one of local buses, commuter buses and light rail. Our bus system is one the most successful in the country. But even with our successful bus system, the green and purple lines have not been able to leverage that success relative to the buses they replaced.
  7. The red line is proof that if high ridership bus routes between the med center and downtown are converted to a light rail line, it will remain high ridership route, but at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. The green and purple lines are proof that if existing low ridership bus routes are converted to light rail, they will remain low ridership light rail routes but at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars.
  8. Your sample size is too big which is why it seems like a great investment. Objectively, the additional train trips that the purple and green lines take now compared to the buses they replaced has -not- yielded compounded results in ridership/revenue. Why should an extension to Hobby be any different, this time, to every inaccurate Metro projection from the past? If your projections are correct why not just start off with a rapid bus line extension? If the numbers hold up, expand to light rail.
  9. Not sure I would call it a joke. It's public transportation. What are you expecting? It's a bus. A pretty reliable one that I've taken many times to Hobby. Usually takes me less than an hour or about an hour. But I hear you. Buses "suck" and trains don't "suck." But in my opinion, building light rail at a cost of almost a billion dollars to shave 20 minutes off the bus time (if we're lucky), is not a good use of taxpayer money.
  10. I agree. But we don't need to speculate too much. We have data already. Public transportation exists and is in use to/from Hobby. All of the types of travelers you mention in your post have already rejected public transportation at the airport. The real question is, how will light rail (at a significant higher cost) be more attractive than the current bus service?
  11. Outside of Hobby Airport workers, who would actually use this light rail route? Families? No. Single travelers with large suitcases? No. Business travelers who can expense a taxi? No. I'm thinking only budget minded travelers who are traveling to downtown. Not a huge a market. If I was in charge, (which i'm not) and I had to yield to the mob that wants this boondoggle. I would incorporate park and ride stations along the route, with over night parking available (at your own risk). Park for free or just a couple of bucks, take the light rail to the airport. Kind of like the Smith Lands station. Med Center employees park at the station and ride to the Med Center (also inflates the ridership numbers, but that's for another thread). But I'm not in charge, so that means Metro will double down on stupid and think that if they build it, riders will just come.
  12. Good article in today's WSJ regarding why high speed rail has failed to materialize in the US. Illinois is shown as the example of why it has failed to take off. Governments are realizing that European/Chinese like high speed rail is not feasible in the US. However, higher speed rail is more feasible (up to 110/mph). The article remains open minded about investor backed high speed rail projects like the ones in Texas and Florida. https://www.wsj.com/articles/high-speed-rail-in-the-u-s-remains-elusive-illinois-shows-why-11551713342
  13. Not sure if this belongs here. Mods can move if you want. Saw this in today's WSJ. Renovations on the Rothko Chapel. Full article with some cool pictures... https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-push-to-preserve-a-rothko-masterpiece-11551283796
  14. Whatever hope of new rail infrastructure being built with federal tax dollars, just took a huge hit because of California's boondoggle of a high speed train fiasco. If anything, the feds may want to get money back on wasted train investments! I can see the feds spending money on rebuilding/repairing -existing- rail infrastructure though.
  15. This is a very old table from the feds. But i'm just amazed at how -few- highway miles Houston has. I would like to see more recent statistics. But the case could be made that Houston should add more highway miles. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/onh2p11.htm Urbanized Area Location Prime State Location Other State(s) Estd. Urbanized Population (1,000) Federal-Aid Urbanized Land Area (Sq. Miles) Persons per Square Mile Total Highway Mileage Total & Expressway Mileage Total Freeway Miles per Urbanized Population Total Highway Vehicle Miles (000) Total Freeway Vehicle Miles (000) Daily Vehicle Miles Per Capita % of Travel Served by Freeways Average AADT on Freeways New York Northeastern NJ NY NJ 17,089 3,962 4,313 37,623 1,130 66.1 263,905 101,299 15.4 38.4 89,639 Los Angeles CA 12,384 2,231 5,551 26,949 652 52.7 280,793 126,498 22.7 45.1 193,875 Chicago - Northwestern IN 1/ IL IN 7,702 2,730 2,821 23,764 477 62.0 158,240 48,276 20.5 30.5 101,167 Philadelphia 1/ PA NJ 4,068 1,347 3,020 13,417 347 85.4 77,005 24,483 18.9 31.8 70,457 San Francisco - Oakland CA 4,022 1,203 3,343 9,316 330 82.0 90,277 47,982 22.4 53.1 145,461 Detroit MI 3,836 1,304 2,942 13,808 283 73.8 92,359 31,125 24.1 33.7 109,882 Dallas - Ft. Worth TX 3,746 1,712 2,188 17,830 594 158.5 116,548 49,197 31.1 42.2 82,872 Washington DC MD, VA 3,617 999 3,621 10,329 306 84.6 82,959 34,533 22.9 41.6 112,852 Atlanta GA 2,977 1,757 1,694 13,145 306 102.9 100,693 42,488 33.8 42.2 138,701 Boston MA 2,917 1,138 2,563 10,148 211 72.3 59,361 22,890 20.3 38.6 108,468 San Diego CA 2,653 733 3,619 5,965 246 92.8 62,809 33,745 23.7 53.7 137,029 Houston TX 2,487 1,537 1,618 15,251 368 148.0 91,883 39,195 36.9 42.7 106,458
  16. NYC also has the biggest, fastest, most frequent, heavily used, train system in America. It's supposed to be the "best." Funny, I thought more trains=less congestion. No matter how you slice it, Houston's congestion is not that bad. Congestion should be measured by not only automobile congestion but the combined congestion of automobile and public transportation congestion. Because as we can see, standing, waiting for your NYC subway train is a real thing. But fine, if you want to only include automobile congestion then INRIX traffic analectics is the best source in my opinion. Even there, Houston is not even in the top ten most congested cities in America for automobile traffic. http://inrix.com/scorecard-city/?city=Houston%2C TX&index=77 http://inrix.com/scorecard/ I stopped reading after you said Chron article. Wikipedia is more accurate than chron.com
  17. You are entitled to your anecdotal evidence. And I'm not suggesting you should ignore your personal observations. However, the fact is Houston's commute time relative to other cities, has actually gotten faster not slower. If you have facts that suggest otherwise, then please post them.
  18. You could. But it would be misleading. NYC commuters have the longest commute time in the Country. Houston does not. But nice try. A nice visual aid of the facts: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/average-commute-time-by-state.html
  19. Tales of Subway Hell: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/02/11/nyregion/mta-subway-tweets.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage And this from the only city in America where rail makes economic sense.
  20. It's a question of recourses. There are only so many transportation dollars. How much can we afford to throw at expensive slow speed trains at the expense of more useful alternatives? Once those dollars are gone, they are gone. Houston is not the federal government where it can print its own money. The bigger question becomes, do you want to invest your limited dollars in old technology or the future? Trains are old technology. They just are. Those in the pro train debate should acknowledge that. Now, instead if we're talking about investing billions in a 200mph regional mag lev, or high speed train instead of a 30mph light rail then I could get on board with that. But investing billions in a technology that travels as fast at it did when it originally debuted powered by steam is a complete waste of tax payer money.
  21. Voting for transit and riding transit are not the same thing. Just ask Los Angeles' metropolitan transit authority. https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-metro-ridership-20180124-story.html The data is there. Light rail in America has just not lived up to the hype. Houston has a choice to make. Houston can be brave and cut it's loses or it can double down on more light rail, thinking light rail will be different in Houston if we just spend more billions and spend more time on it.
  22. Because public transportation should primarily serve the citizens who need transportation, not people who worship trains. It would be a disservice to squander public transportation dollars, when buses can do the job just fine. A recent article on other cities who are saying enough with the rail already: https://www.azcentral.com/in-depth/news/local/phoenix/2018/12/20/ten-years-into-light-rail-continue-expand-metro-phoenix/2144400002/
  23. Wondering if Metro should just scrap all rail plans? Nation wide auto sales actually increased in 2018 over 2017. https://www.marklines.com/en/statistics/flash_sales/salesfig_usa_2018 More people are purchasing more trucks and SUV's, if that's even possible. These are national wide numbers not Houston numbers, but generally mass transit numbers are plateauing or falling off nationwide and auto sales are increasing. So, why invest in rail, when buses are more flexible and economical? I think the data is speaking for itself. People in car cities, are riding public transportation only until they can afford to purchase a car, then they stop riding public transit. Which makes sense. Metro should stick to it's founding charter and focus on providing public transportation to people who cannot afford cars, and providing public transportation to people who are disabled.
  24. The courthouse extension is the only thing that makes sense in this taxpayer boondoggle of a plan. The lack of access to the courthouse was a glaring oversite that I mentioned over three years ago in the Metro Rail East End/Southeast Line Downtown Construction pics and updates Thread. Also, I'm not sure why you think the CoH courthouse might be relocated or demolished? Absolutely zero chance for funding of a new a courthouse anytime soon.
  25. Very happy for UH and the city on the new medical school. As to the location. I can see arguments for both. My wife is a professor of medicine at Northwestern. At NU the medical/business/law schools are in Chicago, but the main campus is up in Evanston. There are times when my wife will have to take the shuttle to Evanston to work on something, but 99% of the time she stays on the Chicago campus. Expansion is an issue here for the medical school. There is only so much real estate in this part of Chicago and construction costs are very high (it's basically like the Galleria (mag mile) and med center (NU med center) rolled into one very expensive area). However keeping talent and attracting top students in this part of Chicago is easy. Tons of amenities in this neighborhood. The concern for UH Medical would be if professors, researchers, post docs, etc. would want to commute/live in that part of Houston?
×
×
  • Create New...