Jump to content

METRORail Green Line


Guest danax

Recommended Posts

Then we should expect to see small and mid-sized communities that stopped growing at a walkable pre-war density and scale adopting and operating mass transit. We don't, of course, for the obvious reason that transit is an expensive and inconvenient measure whose principal purpose is to alleviate congestion and save the time of people commuting in private automobiles.

In those places, ideally suited for affordable and convenient transportation, we find that mass transit isn't that.

Say them.

Then why is nearly every major city around the world adopting transit initiatives? Is Houston some special case? If LOS ANGELES can extend its system to Santa Monica, Houston can't build a university line?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then we should expect to see small and mid-sized communities that stopped growing at a walkable pre-war density and scale adopting and operating mass transit. We don't, of course, for the obvious reason that transit is an expensive and inconvenient measure whose principal purpose is to alleviate congestion and save the time of people commuting in private automobiles.

Sometimes the tail wags the dog. City of Houston imposing minimum parking lot requirements for restaurants and bars creates vast expanses of concrete that a pedestrian has to walk past to get where he's going. Car culture is promoted and enforced, so of course it's most convenient.

Edited by kylejack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why is nearly every major city around the world adopting transit initiatives? Is Houston some special case? If LOS ANGELES can extend its system to Santa Monica, Houston can't build a university line?

Houston has transit initiatives. However, comparing to a metropolitan area that has triple the number of people confined within a smaller urbanized area due to the mountains and the sea...well, its just self-explanatory why we don't look alike. Open your eyes, man.

Sometimes the tail wags the dog. City of Houston imposing minimum parking lot requirements for restaurants and bars creates vast expanses of concrete that a pedestrian has to walk past to get where he's going. Car culture is promoted and enforced, so of course it's most convenient.

You've missed the point. Nothing about that comment was unique to the City of Houston. Try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Houston has transit initiatives. However, comparing to a metropolitan area that has triple the number of people confined within a smaller urbanized area due to the mountains and the sea...well, its just self-explanatory why we don't look alike. Open your eyes, man.

You've missed the point. Nothing about that comment was unique to the City of Houston. Try again.

Niche I always thought you were intelligent but you're just another sheep that eats what is fed to you. Steve Radack and Ed Emmet love people like you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

niche the sycophant! hardly.

houston is enormous with too little concentrations of people and/or businesses. we need mass transit only where we need it. the region is too big and spread out for mass transit to solve all of our needs.......hence, the auto is ideal for a city like houston. not pretty, not my dream for a livable city, just a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Niche (for once?) simply because that as much as people talk about it, the "post-automobile world" is just not here yet and won't be for years and years to come. Unless you dwell exclusively in the Inner Loop and have an apartment about a block away from the LRT, your work is on the route, and the local Kroger/Randalls/H-E-B/Fiesta/what have you is also within walking distance, it's just not very economical. There's a reason why light rails never break, say, 2% ridership in terms of city population: it doesn't go everywhere. Roads do. Even the New York subway breaks maybe 50% of the population, and that's a huge number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Niche (for once?) simply because that as much as people talk about it, the "post-automobile world" is just not here yet and won't be for years and years to come. Unless you dwell exclusively in the Inner Loop and have an apartment about a block away from the LRT, your work is on the route, and the local Kroger/Randalls/H-E-B/Fiesta/what have you is also within walking distance, it's just not very economical. There's a reason why light rails never break, say, 2% ridership in terms of city population: it doesn't go everywhere. Roads do. Even the New York subway breaks maybe 50% of the population, and that's a huge number.

So we shouldn't build any more rail because most people don't live a block from where the rail already is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we shouldn't build any more rail because most people don't live a block from where the rail already is?

right now we shouldn't build any more rail than what is currently completed and under construction b/c the agency that does that can't pay for it for the foreseeable future with the revenues available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Niche (for once?) simply because that as much as people talk about it, the "post-automobile world" is just not here yet and won't be for years and years to come. Unless you dwell exclusively in the Inner Loop and have an apartment about a block away from the LRT, your work is on the route, and the local Kroger/Randalls/H-E-B/Fiesta/what have you is also within walking distance, it's just not very economical. There's a reason why light rails never break, say, 2% ridership in terms of city population: it doesn't go everywhere. Roads do. Even the New York subway breaks maybe 50% of the population, and that's a huge number.

Exactly. I actually meet all of IronTiger's criteria except for one, having a job along the route. I'd like that last bit to change, but even then...something I discovered back when I used to live within a ten-minute walking distance of my employer was that although I found walking enjoyable, I'd often take the 90-second drive instead.

What if I had a meeting with a client, a vendor, a bureaucrat, or some other stakeholder to a project? What if I had to go out and check up on a property in Waller? What if it happens on short notice? Perhaps I checked the weather before leaving and thunderstorms were blowing through mid-day, preventing me from retrieving my car in order to go on to the meeting. Perhaps it blew through afterhours and I hadn't anticipated staying late, and then I had to stay even later. Co-workers didn't seem to mind me bumming a ride to go to happy hours or during inclement weather, but you can only get away with that so many times before it gets old. And what if I had scheduled a date, and it was less than a mile away (within walking distance), but I didn't want to show up sweaty...and also didn't want to have to bum a ride if it went further from there? Lets say that she lives in the Hyde Park neighborhood of Montrose and I live in the Museum District. I'm going to drive the two-mile distance to visit her. It's faster, cleaner, more secure, has air conditioning, has room for a complete change of clothes, and can be relied upon at any hour of day or night to get us where we want to go...even if that ends up being Chinatown at 3AM.

Transit use just isn't very convenient to people with an active lifestyle, whether its because of their job or their personal lives. The private automobile still equates to freedom, convenience, and security.

Edited by TheNiche
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then we should expect to see small and mid-sized communities that stopped growing at a walkable pre-war density and scale adopting and operating mass transit. We don't, of course, for the obvious reason that transit is an expensive and inconvenient measure whose principal purpose is to alleviate congestion and save the time of people commuting in private automobiles.

The cost of private transit vs public transit is a give/take, Houston has a horrid public system it's worse than unreliable, obviously people will choose private transit even considering the financial cost is so low.

Hell, look at any place where public transit is spot on (Germany for instance public transit is relatively cheap and exceedingly reliable), they still prefer private over public, assuming they can afford it. And cost of entry for private is MUCH higher. Japan is an even more extreme example of even higher reliability and even higher cost of private ownership, but the people who have the choice still prefer private transportation.

It's a human thing, we all want to be independent, we all want to prove to the other guy that we made it. Part of independence and part of 'making it' are being able to cart yourself around in a car.

Edited by samagon
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we shouldn't build any more rail because most people don't live a block from where the rail already is?

You've missed the point again.

The ideal form of transportation is the private automobile. The purpose of transit is to siphon some vehicles off the road in order to reduce congestion, thereby improving mobility.

Transit might not work for every lifestyle (such as people who have to drive to Waller) but it absolutely can work for an active lifestyle, and does for me.

I used Waller as one particularly extreme real-life example, but there were many such places that I had to go visit on short notice. Spring, League City, Santa Fe, Pasadena, Channelview, and more. And there were at least as many such places that are closer-in that were just awkwardly situated. Do you even know where Denver Harbor or Kashmere Gardens is? Just how active is that lifestyle of yours?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've missed the point again.

The ideal form of transportation is the private automobile. The purpose of transit is to siphon some vehicles off the road in order to reduce congestion, thereby improving mobility.

That may be the purpose from a motorist's point of view. I have other purposes for it, like getting to work or shopping. As to "active lifestyle", I don't think number of miles traveled determines how active a person's lifestyle is. Are people flying to Australia the most active people?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be the purpose from a motorist's point of view. I have other purposes for it, like getting to work or shopping. As to "active lifestyle", I don't think number of miles traveled determines how active a person's lifestyle is. Are people flying to Australia the most active people?

Are you intentionally missing the point just to piss me off!? What I've said has very little to do with distance. Go back, re-read what I said about my own frustrated attempt at making Houston walkable, and try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you intentionally missing the point just to piss me off!? What I've said has very little to do with distance. Go back, re-read what I said about my own frustrated attempt at making Houston walkable, and try again.

If it has nothing to do with distance, why is it apparently impossible to live an active lifestyle within a more closely defined area? Why does driving to Waller make me a more active person than say, riding my bike to the store, or using bike + bus to get me to a friend's house in Spring? I would argue that I'm a lot more active than a lot of sedentary motorists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd just like to chime in on the subject, since I'm everyone's favorite poster around here, especially Niche and IHB2 ;)

Having good highway infrastructure and automobile infrastructure is important in every large city. I will say that the statement "the automobile is ideal" is just an opinion though. There are many who live in cities that do not have a car at all. For example yours truly, whom I'd like to say has an "active" lifestyle. There are many jobs where people do not leave the job site at all during the day, and just walk somewhere to eat for lunch. Many workers downtown fall into this category. For them, taking reliable transit to work might be more "ideal" than driving a car and spending more money on gas etc.

For me, I'd like to live in a city where I do not need a car and that added expense at all. If you really need to go somewhere where there's no transit, take a taxi. Of course, living in cities that do not require a car to travel about reliably is much more expensive, but you get what you pay for.

I realize that Houston will probably never get to that point, at least in my lifetime. But I am very much in favor of building rail, improving the bus system, and just investing more money into our public transportation system in general. So while most people will still have cars, more might be able to get to work reliably without a car, and I know that many people would appreciate having the option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That will be very interesting and of more interest when the developer of this NEW business center has to deal with that overpass completely blocking his/her brand new shopping strip smack next to the RR tracks. Guess no one is ever happy. Smell litigation? sad.gif

4do85c6.jpg

This shopping center has really fallen into disrepair... and fast!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The automobile is the ultimate expression of one's autonomy. With my automobile I can come and go as I please. I set my own schedule, I don't fit my life around Metro's schedule. While traffic may impact me, I can *choose* what time I leave or what route I can take.

The automobile has always been about freedom and autonomy which has never set well with authority, be it parental or governmental.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The automobile is the ultimate expression of one's autonomy. With my automobile I can come and go as I please. I set my own schedule, I don't fit my life around Metro's schedule. While traffic may impact me, I can *choose* what time I leave or what route I can take.

The automobile has always been about freedom and autonomy which has never set well with authority, be it parental or governmental.

BUT, But but but...

The complete ultimate freedom would be the to choose to take the car, or a viable public system!

What better choice could there be?

Do I want to be autonomous and control when I go to and leave the office, or do I want to sit and read a book leaving the driving to someone else, but maybe have to leave the house at a specific time, and then leave the office at a specific time to get back home?

that is the ultimate in luxury choice, which we currently don't have because our current system is so bootay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it has nothing to do with distance, why is it apparently impossible to live an active lifestyle within a more closely defined area?

How is it that I can use the qualifier "very little" and that is read by you as "nothing" when describing the effect of distance? That you're relying on strawmen fallacies to make some of your points makes all of your points less credible. And it's pissing me off. Stop pissing me off.

Why does driving to Waller make me a more active person than say, riding my bike to the store, or using bike + bus to get me to a friend's house in Spring? I would argue that I'm a lot more active than a lot of sedentary motorists.

In the example, a drive to Waller (or the Port Houston neighborhood) was used as an example of a work-related task that had to be accomplished on short notice. Many people have jobs that demand a higher degree of versatility with respect to scheduling and mobility than others. I don't know what you do for a living, but if you work a 9-to-5 job and mostly are just sitting behind a desk all day, then you probably are not as cognizant of people like myself. I can hardly blame you. It would never have occurred to me how many people are like that until I became one of them.

Now compare to your bus/bike ride to Spring. How many times longer did it take you to get there and back than in a private automobile? How safe did you feel in Aldine (i.e. were you willing to whip out an iPad while waiting at a bus stop)? Were you able to effectively and reliably account for the possibility of inclement weather? Did it concern you that bike riders have a tendency to get run over in areas not as used to accommodating them? Were you able to get any work done while you were on the bus; what fraction of time were you on the bus, anyhow; and if you were productive at all, where you as productive as you would've been at home or at the office? What if a family member or a friend had an emergency on the opposite side of town and needed your assistance? Once you got to Spring, did your schedule mesh well with public transit through the rest of the day? What if there were a change in plans? What if you or your friend were to lose track of time? What if your friend had lived in Pearland (about half the distance to Spring, but not in a METRO service area and separated from downtown by a very crime-prone part of town)? Did you remember to pack enough fluids? Did you charge your cell phone before leaving? Does it matter to them that you can't balance a 24-pack of beer on your bike, or that the six-pack you show up with is warm (and sweaty) (and shaken up) when you get there?

I look at your example, and I think to myself that you must have a very leisurely lifestyle to be able to accommodate such uncertainty and such long stretches of sub-optimal productivity. That, and possibly some very forgiving friends for whom B.O., showing up late, and bumming rides are all forgivable on an ongoing basis. All I can say is, it must be nice. I even envy you a little.

Edited by TheNiche
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the example, a drive to Waller (or the Port Houston neighborhood) was used as an example of a work-related task that had to be accomplished on short notice. Many people have jobs that demand a higher degree of versatility with respect to scheduling and mobility than others. I don't know what you do for a living, but if you work a 9-to-5 job and mostly are just sitting behind a desk all day, then you probably are not as cognizant of people like myself. I can hardly blame you. It would never have occurred to me how many people are like that until I became one of them.

I was specifically addressing the sentence: "Transit use just isn't very convenient to people with an active lifestyle, whether its because of their job or their personal lives." My work is pretty sedentary, but my personal life is an active lifestyle that incorporates the transit system.

Now compare to your bus/bike ride to Spring. How many times longer did it take you to get there and back than in a private automobile?

Since I don't own an automobile, why does it matter? Sure, cars are "ideal." Like I said before, a million dollars in my bank account would also be ideal, or a personal helicopter, but since we can't afford to issue every person a car or helicopter, it's good to have a transportation system for people without cars to get around. That's an important purpose for a transit system, but you only seem to care about the transit system as it relates to decreasing congestion.

Edited by kylejack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do I want to be autonomous and control when I go to and leave the office, or do I want to sit and read a book leaving the driving to someone else, but maybe have to leave the house at a specific time, and then leave the office at a specific time to get back home?

that is the ultimate in luxury choice, which we currently don't have because our current system is so bootay.

So you're telling me my bus drivers name is Jeeves and that smell is Connolly leather not butt-odor?

Luxury and choice? To describe public transit?

Are you mad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The complete ultimate freedom would be the to choose to take the car, or a viable public system!

What better choice could there be?

But then it has to be paid for. And that costs money. You get taxed. And that means that you have less discretionary income and that your lifestyle will suffer in some other way. If the luxury of choice of transportation modes is foisted upon you by government, then the only choice that you are left with is which other luxury you'll consume less of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was specifically addressing the sentence: "Transit use just isn't very convenient to people with an active lifestyle, whether its because of their job or their personal lives." My work is pretty sedentary, but my personal life is an active lifestyle that incorporates the transit system.

Since I don't own an automobile, why does it matter? Sure, cars are "ideal." Like I said before, a million dollars in my bank account would also be ideal, or a personal helicopter, but since we can't afford to issue every person a car or helicopter, it's good to have a transportation system for people without cars to get around. That's an important purpose for a transit system, but you only seem to care about the transit system as it relates to decreasing congestion.

If your work is sedentary and your friends and family are forgiving of your scheduling challenges, body odor, and lack of passenger and cargo carrying capacity on your part, then I'd say that you have life pretty easy. Maybe "active lifestyle" wasn't the best descriptor on my part. Clearly you're getting a lot of exercise, so that could confuse people. How about "carefree", "luxuriant", "unbothered", "delightfully impractical". Pick your poison. Whatever the case, enjoy it while you can. I hope that you can appreciate that I envy your incredible luck and that you actually are special. The world shouldn't be built for people like you, though, because there are too few of you. It should be built for the masses, and private automobiles enable them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been on many excellent transit systems

The Paris Metro is excellent, the Tube in London is excellent, but they're not luxurious. I'll consider it luxury when my train car seats 4, smells like an English saddle shop, and accommodates my ever-changing schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...