Jump to content

Free Metro? No Rail And More Buses? Please


ricco67

Recommended Posts

In today's MOVE IT!, it seems that Kemah's former Mayor, Bill King is giving some advice on how to run metro:

<quote>By canceling the planned spending on rail, he said, Metro could afford a huge increase in bus service. And the lure of free rides could "jump-start" a mass migration of solo drivers to mass transit.</quote>

While a free metro would be nice, a free TODAY's Metro would be insane. What good is having more buses on the streets if they move no better than the regular traffic.

The additional problems that Austin had with the issue back in 1991 that it was (Good research, Chron!) having crime and homeless on the buses. If this would to happen today, People who do not rely on metro as its sole means of transportation would abandon it with ease.

Why do people propose these insane solutions with insane solutions in a city they don't live in? Don't they read HAIF? :)

Oh...the bike thing? Blah. blah. blah. You got bike racks, be thankful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have something to add, then by all means....

Been there, done that.

I agree that free busses can create more problems than they solve. As far as congestion goes, local busses actually do more to cause congestion--given frequent stops on roads without pull-ins--than they do to aleviate it. Express and Park & Ride routes on the other hand, do wonders to releive congestion. These are what ought to be made free, with many more of them made available to serve a variety of cross-regional routes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In today's MOVE IT!, it seems that Kemah's former Mayor, Bill King is giving some advice on how to run metro:

<quote>By canceling the planned spending on rail, he said, Metro could afford a huge increase in bus service. And the lure of free rides could "jump-start" a mass migration of solo drivers to mass transit.</quote>

While a free metro would be nice, a free TODAY's Metro would be insane. What good is having more buses on the streets if they move no better than the regular traffic.

The additional problems that Austin had with the issue back in 1991 that it was (Good research, Chron!) having crime and homeless on the buses. If this would to happen today, People who do not rely on metro as its sole means of transportation would abandon it with ease.

Why do people propose these insane solutions with insane solutions in a city they don't live in? Don't they read HAIF? :)

Oh...the bike thing? Blah. blah. blah. You got bike racks, be thankful.

Does Kemah even pay Metro sales tax? Why would anyone care what this guy thinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget that as stupid as this may sound, some people who ride the rail would never ride busses. I read somewhere that a high percentage of regular metro rail riders said they didn't used to take the a bus before the Metro Rail opened. I'm not saying that makes sense, but apparently it's true. I actually know many people at Rice and in the Med Center (grad students and medical residents mostly) who commute regularly on MetroRail and won't go near the busses.

Last time the metro rail was shut down and we had to take a bus instead, everybody (even the poor people) were pissed off that they couldn't stay on the train. The fact is, the trains are all around more comfortable than a bus (not to mention faster and on time more often, and having a higher capacity).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does Kemah even pay Metro sales tax? Why would anyone care what this guy thinks.

He plans on running for Mayor of Houston in 2009. He's just posturing right now.

Niche, regarding your point about making express routes free and such, i agree with it on the surface--as long as they are like express overlay routes of busy local routes. Making commuter buses and suburban surfaces free and not local service has got equitability issues written all over it. People who think that the rail doesn't serve them would pale in comparison to those who would feel (and I don't necessarily consider this a favorite word) "disenfranchisement" by preferential treatment to choice riders. At least all of the rail lines (except Uptown) will go through transit dependent areas. Actually basically all of North, nearly all of East End, nearly all of Southeast, and maybe a third of University would go through transit dependent areas.

EDIT: I should also add that in my opinion working to reduce congestion is a losing battle. Maybe we can try reducing the *growth rate* of congestion, but if Houston remains economically strong, traffic congestion will just become a part of more and more parts of our lives. Doing "what has always worked" may not work as well as we move forward. If H-GAC is right and Houston grows by about 60-70% over the next thirty years, there's basically no way that there will be a 60-70% increase in roadway/travel/transit capacity in that time frame. It can be done for a price--one that Houstonians are not willing to pay through tolls, taxes, leases to private companies, or increased fares. Changing the Houston mindset of "fixing congestion" to "providing as many travel options as possible" is going to be difficult, but it has to be the way we proceed. Lastly, Cleveland is a city that has had improved traffic conditions recently, but that's due to it's stagnant economy and shrinking population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget that as stupid as this may sound, some people who ride the rail would never ride busses.

--snip--

The fact is, the trains are all around more comfortable than a bus (not to mention faster and on time more often, and having a higher capacity).

Which is why the second clause of your first sentence isn't as stupid as it sounds.

wow a fact? ask a park and ride user whether they'd agree.

In my experience, the P&R buses are a whole 'nuther animal than the local buses. Your mileage my vary....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my experience, the P&R buses are a whole 'nuther animal than the local buses. Your mileage my vary....

I agree with you on that. Park and Ride busses are nice, but I am talking about city busses. Unless somebody has suggested that we replace the proposed Metro Rail lines with park and ride busses that run every 6 minutes along the proposed routes.

Changing the Houston mindset of "fixing congestion" to "providing as many travel options as possible" is going to be difficult, but it has to be the way we proceed

I totally agree with you on that. There is no way the congestion is ever going to be "fixed" but wouldn't it be nice to cruise by a congested street on the light rail at Christmas to go shopping in the Galleria, for example? Once I decided to take the highway (stupid I know) in December on a Sunday morning to the Galleria. It took me about an hour to get there from the Museum District, and 45 of those minutes were going from the 59 to 610 and exiting on Weshteimer, and trying to find a parking spot. It was a nightmare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Niche, regarding your point about making express routes free and such, i agree with it on the surface--as long as they are like express overlay routes of busy local routes. Making commuter buses and suburban surfaces free and not local service has got equitability issues written all over it. People who think that the rail doesn't serve them would pale in comparison to those who would feel (and I don't necessarily consider this a favorite word) "disenfranchisement" by preferential treatment to choice riders. At least all of the rail lines (except Uptown) will go through transit dependent areas. Actually basically all of North, nearly all of East End, nearly all of Southeast, and maybe a third of University would go through transit dependent areas.

Yeah, the political backlash could be something fierce. I accept that though it may have real merit, it may not be politically feasible.

I'm not clear exactly how any of the rail lines are going through transit-dependent areas, though. Would you care to define what is "transit-dependent"?

EDIT: I should also add that in my opinion working to reduce congestion is a losing battle.

It can be done for a price--one that Houstonians are not willing to pay through tolls, taxes, leases to private companies, or increased fares. Changing the Houston mindset of "fixing congestion" to "providing as many travel options as possible" is going to be difficult, but it has to be the way we proceed.

Politically speaking, I suspect you're right. The only solution I can think of is to do a dramatically better job at providing economics education to people throughout the country so that they understand the various options we have and so that they are rid of this irrational fear of such things as toll roads and foreign direct investment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget that as stupid as this may sound, some people who ride the rail would never ride busses. I read somewhere that a high percentage of regular metro rail riders said they didn't used to take the a bus before the Metro Rail opened. I'm not saying that makes sense, but apparently it's true. I actually know many people at Rice and in the Med Center (grad students and medical residents mostly) who commute regularly on MetroRail and won't go near the busses.

This is very true as I know some of those types of people. I know a couple who are not willing to ride a bus from Spring to Downtown but have admitted they would ride a train. In fact the wife who travels a lot for work, brags about riding the train in DC, Toronto and San Francisco. The same holds true for another friend in Sugarland who will not ride a bus but would be willing to ride a train if one existed.

I agree with you Jax in that whether it makes sense or not, there are a lot of people who would not ride a bus but would more than be willing to ride a train.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In today's MOVE IT!, it seems that Kemah's former Mayor, Bill King is giving some advice on how to run metro:

<quote>By canceling the planned spending on rail, he said, Metro could afford a huge increase in bus service. And the lure of free rides could "jump-start" a mass migration of solo drivers to mass transit.</quote>

While a free metro would be nice, a free TODAY's Metro would be insane. What good is having more buses on the streets if they move no better than the regular traffic.

The additional problems that Austin had with the issue back in 1991 that it was (Good research, Chron!) having crime and homeless on the buses. If this would to happen today, People who do not rely on metro as its sole means of transportation would abandon it with ease.

Why do people propose these insane solutions with insane solutions in a city they don't live in? Don't they read HAIF? :)

Oh...the bike thing? Blah. blah. blah. You got bike racks, be thankful.

Actually, I kinda like the free or reduced fare bus rides to get people thinking about it as an alternative. BUT, they would have to create some super bus lanes to get people from downtown or wherever out to the burbs. If it's a longer commute, I wouldn' care if it's free.

And they need lots of buses to make it work. Waiting an hour between buses is ridiculous!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...