Jump to content

mfastx

Full Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1438

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

mfastx last won the day on July 25 2012

mfastx had the most liked content!

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    New York, NY
  • Interests
    Building construction.

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo
    mtourenq@yahoo.com

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

mfastx's Achievements

(21/32)

727

Reputation

  1. mfastx
    To maximize any fixed guideway line (whether it's heavy rail, light rail or BRT) it shouldn't be built on railroad ROW or highways. Richmond, Westheimer and Washington Ave are all good east-west corridors to build a line and would maximize ridership. People don't want to get dropped off in the middle of a highway wasteland or along and old railroad ROW where there isn't much development.
  2. mfastx
    This area could really use another parking lot... NOT.
  3. mfastx
    The most expensive subway in the US was the 2nd Ave subway in NYC, $2.5 billion/mile. So, even assuming that exorbitant price, it'd be about a tenth of that cost. But yes - super expensive for sure. I'd serve the region well for centuries however.
  4. mfastx
    Yup exactly, but if some of the Silver Line buses took a left turn at Westpark and continued down towards the center of town, I think more people would rather take a one seat ride than transfer to the 25 at Richmond. Man the Westheimer corridor is the most prime spot in Houston for rail/subway IMO. It's by far the highest ridership bus route.
  5. mfastx
    Yea, I was going to mention that the Silver Line and University Line should overlap, so you can take a one-seat ride from the Galleria area towards downtown along Richmond.
  6. mfastx
    You just pulled that out of your ass... not remotely true. The irony here is that you haven't brought anything concrete to the discussion besides your opinions, and are criticizing me for that while I actually cited ridership data. And for that, I will excuse myself from this useless discussion.
  7. mfastx
    Yup, that's what I thought, no counterexamples. Lmao, so that's what's required to post on HAIF, a peer reviewed research paper? Gimme a break ..
  8. mfastx
    I'm well aware of all of this .. I really don't think we're in much disagreement, but if you're saying LRT should be built in lower density areas, and BRT should be built in higher density areas, then that's where we disagree. Any new system built today will continue to appreciate in value over the next several decades, including the LRT lines in east Houston. My point was, that building rail in more densely populated areas and connecting employment centers would yield faster positive returns. I don't see how that's a controversial statement. I'm well aware of ridership reports, having sourced them in this very thread just a few posts up. You're comparing entire P&R routes to one single metrorail station, which is not remotely an apples to apples comparison. If you're asking whether P&R routes would have higher ridership if they were converted to rail, the answer is most likely yes.
  9. mfastx
    Any year now, Mr. Crane..
  10. mfastx
    The Silver Line serves the second largest employment center. If you're not going to contribute a counter example which proves my comment about LRT generating more ridership than BRT wrong, then I can't take your comments (which are all out of thin air) seriously. Voters don't have to approve, Metro elects do hold these referendums. Also, voters voted for rail numerous times. I agree that LRT on the east side, lower density areas wasn't the best investment, the money would have been much better spent in higher density areas of Houston where it would have generated more ridership. You're switching goalposts now. In addition, you're treating transit like a business - which it's not. No form of transportation in and of itself is profitable. However, dollars invested in transit have proven to generate economic benefits, there's been numerous studies on the subject if you'd like to educate yourself. Just because they're in need of transit options (I'm weary of making that blanket assumption but alright) doesn't mean we have to build them the most expensive option available. LRT provides way more capacity than what the Green and Purple lines currently carry. The east side lines were originally proposed as BRT - which I feel makes sense given the lower density and population of those areas.
  11. mfastx
    Which transit dependent populations does the original Red line (not north side extension) traverse? If you read my earlier post in the thread, you'd see that I acknowledged the high initial capital costs associated with rail. You get what you pay for - if you want more transit ridership, need to pay for better infrastructure.
  12. mfastx
    In most places yes, but the western corridors like Richmond and Westheimer absolutely have enough population to make rail work. Instead, Metro built rail in the less-dense, underdeveloped eastern and northern areas of Houston. Just backwards - it'll take a long times for development to densify in those areas and for those lines to be well utilized (decades if not more). Let's take a look at the first fully BRT route in Houston, the Silver line. Right now it carries 849 riders on an average weekday, according to Metro's data. The Green line in a much less developed area of east Houston? About 3,600 riders a weekday. That's almost 4x as much. Obviously, even when putting LRT in an area that doesn't have the density to fully utilize it, the returns are much better than BRT ridership wise. The Red line, which actually goes through some employment centers, carriers around 32,900 riders/weekday. See ridership numbers above. All modes of transportation are subsidized, so there's not point in discussing your second point. Rail, on an operating cost basis, is subsidized less per rider than bus modes.
  13. mfastx
    BRT does not generate the same ridership as LRT, so if you want to have something that competes against cars, rail is the superior mode given that it attracts more riders. Obviously, Houston may not need the capacity of LRT right now, but these lines will be in place for 100+ years. What will Houston, especially west inner-loop, look like then? Those lines' utilization will continue to increase over the decades. I understand they'll be using the new lanes, but I do not recall seeing any plans for them to actually stop at the BRT stations.
  14. mfastx
    The user I was responding to seemed to think that the P&R system would not only use the BRT busways but also stop at their stations, or at least that's what I interpreted from their post. BRT certainly can spur economic/land development as we've seen from multiple projects over the last decade or so. I'm not discounting that. Most of my preference for LRT over BRT is the actual transit aspect - higher ridership/utilization and greater capacity/ability to handle future demand increases. I'm still in support of BRT over nothing and am excited about the project. Of course, HRT (heavy rail) is superior to all modes and it's a damn shame that Houston never built the 1980 proposed system but no use arguing for it since it's not an option Metro is considering now.
  15. mfastx
    I think the user I was responding to wasn't talking about transfers, but rather the P&R Buses operating within the BRT right of way. Perhaps I was mistaken though. I am aware of the current and proposed transfers the new BRT lines would offer. Sorry, maybe try this? https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-12-811
×
×
  • Create New...