Jump to content

Study recommends rail on US 290 and Texas 3


musicman

Recommended Posts

Houston just seems behind so many other cities in the rail department like: Dallas, Portland, Seattle, Los Angeles, San Diego, Miami, San Francisco, Atlanta, DC, Baltimore, NYC, Chicago, Boston, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Philly, St. Louis, and Denver. Look at what they have, and compare them to ours. Pathetic.

Yep, and it is very much ahead of so many other cities in the moving-people-with-cost-effectiveness department.

Commuter rail is duplicative to P&R, is wasteful of precious right of way and trackage rights, and as it is currently planned is less flexible and does not necessarily result in time savings. Just what is the point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply
behind what? please be specific? sounds like some is plagiarizing a list of cities with light rail and has no actual knowledge. it's not like you haven't done that before..this week.

Those are a list of cities that all have rail transport (more than Houston). Whether it be light rail, commuter rail, or heavy rail. Houston is behind with only seven miles of any kind of rail transportation. That is pathetic.

And about the plagiarizing thing, I have known him for over three years and he didn't mind when I asked. Should have kept in quotes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What mass transit does Pittsburgh have?

The incline doesnt count as mass transit. Its a tourist attraction. Sure, some people actually do use it to get to work, but only because its a novelty.

Pittsburgh has light rail. Even parts of it are in a subway.

Yep, and it is very much ahead of so many other cities in the moving-people-with-cost-effectiveness department.

Commuter rail is duplicative to P&R, is wasteful of precious right of way and trackage rights, and as it is currently planned is less flexible and does not necessarily result in time savings. Just what is the point?

Commuter rail can save time. It isn't like you have to eliminate the P&R buses, too, while having commuter rail. Both can coexist. Also, those cities I mentioned have light rail, subway, heavy rail, and commuter rail (some don't have each and every one of those though). All have more miles of track than Houston.

We can't just continue to widen freeways and build tollways down the middle of them. That is just stupid and costs more money to use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the latter.

when you say build a decent commuter rail line, are you talking about obtaining land too? how is that cost effective?

there could yes. either way if you drove does the bus still beat your time?

I think for the most part we agree on this issue as we have debated it before in a different thread but to your points...

At the time I leave in the morning (about 6:30) the P&R saves no time at all. My P&R really only saves time during peak hours around 7 am and 5 pm. I don't think people ride the bus to save time, it is about saving money and maybe the environment for some people.

I havent seen any information about how much it would cost to put in commuter rail into downtown with stops to link with the uptown and red lines, but if you could do it for less than the cost of widening 290, then yes, it is cost effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Commuter rail can save time. It isn't like you have to eliminate the P&R buses, too, while having commuter rail. Both can coexist. Also, those cities I mentioned have light rail, subway, heavy rail, and commuter rail (some don't have each and every one of those though). All have more miles of track than Houston.

If P&R and HOT lanes are used effectively and in combination (as is planned for the Katy Freeway), it is very difficult to conceive of how commuter rail could be anything more than duplicative, more expensive, slower, and less flexible.

Considering how much mass a commuter train has, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it used more energy per passenger mile and polluted more than busses, too.

We can't just continue to widen freeways and build tollways down the middle of them. That is just stupid

What magnificent powers of reasoning! :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are a list of cities that all have rail transport (more than Houston). Whether it be light rail, commuter rail, or heavy rail. Houston is behind with only seven miles of any kind of rail transportation. That is pathetic.

it's funny how many other cities are clamoring to discover why our park & ride system is so successful at a far less cost. doesn't sound pathetic to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I can't argue that here may be no time savings today with commuter rail on some of these lines, has anyone thought about if the projections are true and there's 9 million people living in Houston in 27 years? I'm not so sure that build-as-we-go piecemeal approach will continue to do us too well. The aggressive freeway expansion in the 80s and 90s got out ahead of the congestion, so why can't rail do the same thing? Why can't a robust rail system (yes it may cost upfront) be available to use once people are ready to use it instead of having to wait in a years long process of getting anything built? Is the Eastex a waste of money because it's basically free-flowing in the peak hour? Or is it worth the cost because it won't be congested for quite some time? The Eastex is a case, IMO of planning ahead for congestion that is going to come in the next couple decades. It's the most reliable route to the airport, and if congestion gets bad enough on I-45, could be a plausible alternative for people who don't want to pay tolls to travel northward (cutting over on the free part of the Beltway and then heading north on the less-congested part of 45). The few times a year that I head in that direction, that's the route I take even now, especially if it's near the peak hours.

I just can't understand the knee-jerk feel that rail has to provide time-savings and be the cheapest alternative from day 1. METRORail may seem like a waste to many today, but can it be argued that in 2035 as part of a system in a 9 million person metro,it was money well spent and a bargain pricewise? We won't know the answer to that for 27 years, but given my bias that I'm not afraid to admit as well as the likelihood that implementing infrastructure in the future will cost more in hard and soft costs by then, I would say yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but that would be an improvement over the current service how????

Right now, a Cypress resident could take the P&R all the way downtown with just a stop (not a transfer) at the NWTC.

I moved here in 2004 and no new lines have yet been built. It sounds like pixie dust to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... still waiting for someone to show us how commuter rail is an improvement over P&R buses with HOV lanes... (and getting to add pretty colored lines to the fun map on radicalcartography.com isn't good enough... we could make our own fun map showing routes and miles of efficient and flexible P&R bus systems and overshadow every other city in North America.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If P&R and HOT lanes are used effectively and in combination (as is planned for the Katy Freeway), it is very difficult to conceive of how commuter rail could be anything more than duplicative, more expensive, slower, and less flexible.

Considering how much mass a commuter train has, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it used more energy per passenger mile and polluted more than busses, too.

What cities?

What magnificent powers of reasoning! :wacko:

Like you have shown any.

... still waiting for someone to show us how commuter rail is an improvement over P&R buses with HOV lanes... (and getting to add pretty colored lines to the fun map on radicalcartography.com isn't good enough... we could make our own fun map showing routes and miles of efficient and flexible P&R bus systems and overshadow every other city in North America.)

It is another added use to our transportation system. You can have it, as well as P&R going together. Works in other cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... still waiting for someone to show us how commuter rail is an improvement over P&R buses with HOV lanes...

I think we have a great HOV system... but if you really want someone to show you why commuter rail is better... try

here for starters. Sure seems like a better experience to me.

(and getting to add pretty colored lines to the fun map on radicalcartography.com isn't good enough... we could make our own fun map showing routes and miles of efficient and flexible P&R bus systems and overshadow every other city in North America.)

This was in response to someone questioning the validity of Pittsburgh having a line or not. I remember having seen this graphic and wanted to share. It was not to make any point for or against rail... it's strictly a fascinating graphic comparison for overall system.

Plus : Those are complete transit system.. including heavy and lite rail, along with dedicated bussways, peoplemovers, & trolleys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like the idea of rail to Galveston and would like to see this pursued independently of the other commuter rail proposals. It would serve not only commuters, but weekenders/day trippers to the island, plus be a major part of evacuation planning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is another added use to our transportation system. You can have it, as well as P&R going together. Works in other cities.

Yes, I suppose you can have both, but why? You still have not given us any reason why we should prefer commuter rail over the park & ride system. What will rail do that the P&R system doesn't or can't do?

I think we have a great HOV system... but if you really want someone to show you why commuter rail is better... try

here for starters. Sure seems like a better experience to me.

This was in response to someone questioning the validity of Pittsburgh having a line or not. I remember having seen this graphic and wanted to share. It was not to make any point for or against rail... it's strictly a fascinating graphic comparison for overall system.

Plus : Those are complete transit system.. including heavy and lite rail, along with dedicated bussways, peoplemovers, & trolleys.

If so, then the map is completely inaccurate. Houston has dedicated busways all over the place, in the form of HOVs, that should be shown on that map.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep reading the term "less flexible" by the anti-railers. Would anyone care to explain to me how a 22 lane freeway is "more flexible"?

This has been discussed a number of times here. Surely you know better than your question suggests... It is obvious that a "22-lane freeway" is not flexible. But then, nobody is talking about building 22-lane freeways for P&R buses. More importantly, it's the P&R bus system that is more flexible than a commuter rail system, not the particular concrete it is driving on. In the medium to long run, P&R buses and their systems can easily adapt to changing circumstances, by going off the dedicated busway, adding and subtracting stops as demand dictates. Commuter rail, not so much.

Furthermore, on a day-to-day basis, a P&R system can provide better service because of its flexibility by sending one bus with 50 passengers to the Northwest Transit Center while another bus with another 50 passengers can be routed directly downtown, where more than one stop can be made, avoiding further transfers, and another directly Uptown and another directly to the TMC. It is not really possible to do that with commuter rail. Commuter rail will have 200 passengers going to the northwest transit center, where 100 of them get off and transfer to another train or bus to get to Uptown or TMC and the other 100 wait for the train to proceed to its single stop downtown, where most of them will also have to transfer to another bus or light rail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we have a great HOV system... but if you really want someone to show you why commuter rail is better... try

here for starters. Sure seems like a better experience to me.

You're posting a blog about the eastern seaboard Acela as an example of how commuter rail is better than a P&R bus? Nice try, but that is either dishonest or clueless. Most commuter rail trains in this country (and other countries for that matter) have more in common with a school bus than they do with Acela trains. And, FWIW, Metro's P&R buses are not your standard issue Metro local buses. They are pretty nice and are actually more similar to the Acela trains than are most commuter rail cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

anti-railers

I am certainly not anti-rail. That's a cheap rhetorical device.

I would love to see rail along 290 if someone could explain to me how it would improve the quality of service over the existing P&R system commensurate with the costs involved. So far, no one has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am certainly not anti-rail. That's a cheap rhetorical device.

I would love to see rail along 290 if someone could explain to me how it would improve the quality of service over the existing P&R system commensurate with the costs involved. So far, no one has.

I don't really come down on either side of the debate, but I can tell you that some improvements with commuter rail would be that it is not affected by HOV accidents or freeway accidents (rubber-necking), traffic in the HOV lane (it backs up badly), and traffic just getting on to the HOV lane as the lane stops at Eldridge.

All these issues could also be fixed more cheaply by extending the HOV, and only allowing buses or increasing the number of people required to ride a car in the HOV. I have no idea how to stop rubbernecking in the HOV from accidents on the mainlanes.

As far as I know though, no one is talking about doing these things for a very long time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these issues could also be fixed more cheaply by extending the HOV, and only allowing buses or increasing the number of people required to ride a car in the HOV. I have no idea how to stop rubbernecking in the HOV from accidents on the mainlanes.

As far as I know though, no one is talking about doing these things for a very long time...

You forgot to mention enforcement. If there was more enforcement, I'm sure it would decrease congestion a little bit.

I'm all for commuter rail, there are people that simply don't want to take their car or even volunteer their car for a car pool considering the costs of fuel the way they are now.

Commuter rail can be used as an additional option for those that want to commute to work.

If P&R works, awesome.

If they want to pick up a slug or carpool in the HOV, cool.

Take a train directly to your downtown destination. Terrific.

Wanna veg out in your car by yourself and stuck in traffic. Go you.

No one solution is great for everyone, the trick here is to be able to find something that works for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're posting a blog about the eastern seaboard Acela as an example of how commuter rail is better than a P&R bus? Nice try, but that is either dishonest or clueless. Most commuter rail trains in this country (and other countries for that matter) have more in common with a school bus than they do with Acela trains. And, FWIW, Metro's P&R buses are not your standard issue Metro local buses. They are pretty nice and are actually more similar to the Acela trains than are most commuter rail cars.

I have ridden our commuter bus.. it's no better or worse than a charter bus as far as space is concerned. ...and at least the charter busses have restrooms.

You're right, I don't know the Acela brand.. i assume its trypical commuter rail, and not something more akin to interstate Amtrack service.... obviously not.

But as far as space, and electrical outlets.. details like that.. Yes.. Why shouldn't those be applicable to every heavy rail commuter line in the country?

None have elec outlets ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is rail better?

It looks better and seems more modern.

Looks are subjective, the newer P&R buses we have on the 217 line are quite nice.

A train is more modern than a bus... :wacko:

were you being sarcastic? My interweb sarcasm skills aren't that great...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is rail better?

It looks better and seems more modern.

I think people are not seeing the potential of a P&R system to evolve into a true mass transit system. P&R I think has a lot of untapped potential and now is having record ridership. I think there is opportunity to lengthen HOV lanes, add routes, add more buses to current routes, further segregate the buses from cars to improve trip time, improve pick up stops downtown by expanding the covered areas, improve existing P&R facilities (the newest ones at Cypress and Katy are awesome), and even add weekend trips or trips for special events (Texans and Astros like we do for the Rodeo)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...