How Will 5m More Fit In Houston? Freeways?

[jpcampbell]

Evil is too strong a word.  How about malevolent, insidious, or insipid?  I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place.  I've got kids, but I don't want to live in the suburbs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you truly feel that the suburbs have these influences of evil or have a lack of excitement, the they probably are not for you. I would never use those words to describe where I live. I have lived in many neighborhoods inside the loop and now live in the burbs. I don't feel that one is better than the other, so I was equally as happy in all my neighborhoods.

Just do what makes you and your family happy and what makes sense for you.

[tomv]

I lived close in for years (Sharpstown) and now live in the Katy area. Each has its's pros and cons. The schools are definitely better out here, and the houses are MUCH more affordable. Driving in to town can be a pain sometimes, but you just don't do it as often unless you have to for work. There's plenty to do out here. For instance, there are four major parks within a 15 minute drive of my house: Bear Creek, Cullen, George Bush, and Peckham.

Contrary to popular belief, there are some decent restaurants out here. You don't read about them in the Press or the Chronicle, however. The bar scene does suck, though. And there aren't many cultural attractions, but how often do you visit those anyway? And they're only a short car ride away.

One thing I don't miss about living close in: the traffic!. Out here, traffic moves freely almost all the time, and the roads are well maintained. It's mainly just people who live out here who are on the roads. Close in, however, can be a nightmare at times. That's because you have people driving their cars who live in the area, PLUS people who are working in the area, those who are commuting, and people who are visiting from other areas. And it doesn't seem like the streets are as well maintained and they seem to be always under construction, probably from heavy use.

Another thing I don't miss, and I guess this makes me "insulated" or "isolated"or whatever, are some of the rather strange people you see just walking around and hanging out in some of the close in neighborhoods. I mean, you might be visiting a friend in a half million dollar townhome and there's a guy who looks like he hasn't shaved or bathed in months pushing a shopping cart down the sidewalk.

Oh well I could go on. If you're single, have money, and like to party stay inside the loop!

[N Judah]

we didn't leave because of poor mass transit there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nor did you move to Houston for the freeways.

[jghall00]

I lived close in for years (Sharpstown) and now live in the Katy area.  Each has its's pros and cons.  The schools are definitely better out here, and the houses are MUCH more affordable.  Driving in to town can be a pain sometimes, but you just don't do it as often unless you have to for work.  There's plenty to do out here.  For instance, there are four major parks within a 15 minute drive of my house: Bear Creek, Cullen, George Bush, and Peckham.

Contrary to popular belief, there are some decent restaurants out here.  You  don't read about them in the Press or the Chronicle, however.  The bar scene does suck, though.  And there aren't many cultural attractions, but how often do you visit those anyway?  And they're only a short car ride away. 

One thing I don't miss about living close in: the traffic!.  Out here, traffic moves freely almost all the time, and the roads are well maintained.  It's mainly just people who live out here who are on the roads. Close in, however, can be a nightmare at times.  That's because you have people driving their cars who live in the area, PLUS people who are working in the area, those who are commuting, and people who are visiting from other areas.  And it doesn't seem like the streets are as well maintained and they seem to be always under construction, probably from heavy use.

Another thing I don't miss, and I guess this makes me "insulated" or "isolated"or whatever, are some of the rather strange people you see just walking around and  hanging out in some of the close in neighborhoods.  I mean, you might be visiting a friend in a half million dollar townhome and there's a guy who looks like he hasn't shaved or bathed in months pushing a shopping cart down the sidewalk.

Oh well I could go on.  If you're single, have money, and like to party stay inside the loop!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I guess that's why the 5 million they say are coming to the region are moving to the burbs. I'm from New York, so it's just hard for me to give up urbanity. My wife and I just came back from trip from out near 2920, and drove back in to Fry/Mason area, then cross town through Cinco Ranch. The value is definitely there, but it doesn't appear there's much to do outside of the house itself. Everything is within driving distance, but nothing is within walking distance, and many of the communities do not look safe for cyclists or skaters. There are no cultural attractions, or strange people who make life...interesting. The whole thing reminds me of Edward Scissorhands. But of course I want to be around good schools and other adults with young children. I just wish someone would build neighborhoods like they used to, instead of cookie cutter subdivisions that segregrate everyone by income, and lack amenities that don't include shopping. Yeah, I sound bitter, but damn this new way of life is tough to get used to. It feels so...empty.

[Guest danax]

I guess that's why the 5 million they say are coming to the region are moving to the burbs.  I'm from New York, so it's just hard for me to give up urbanity.  My wife and I just came back from trip from out near 2920, and drove back in to Fry/Mason area, then cross town through Cinco Ranch.  The value is definitely there, but it doesn't appear there's much to do outside of the house itself.  Everything is within driving distance, but nothing is within walking distance, and many of the communities do not look safe for cyclists or skaters.  There are no cultural attractions, or strange people who make life...interesting.  The whole thing reminds me of Edward Scissorhands.  But of course I want to be around good schools and other adults with young children.  I just wish someone would build neighborhoods like they used to, instead of cookie cutter subdivisions that segregrate everyone by income, and lack amenities that don't include shopping.  Yeah, I sound bitter, but damn this new way of life is tough to get used to.  It feels so...empty.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think there's probably a lot of people like you that want the city lifestyle but feel compromised by having school aged children so it would be natural to assume that many will end up in the burbs. However, the desire to be a part of the city, wanting to feel like you're in the thick of things with all the color and chaos, to absorb the unseen pulse and, especially now with so many new and positive changes taking place in the inner-loop area, could spawn a movement of some of these young parents away from the leisurely land of lawn mowers and left-turn lanes.

It's possible that eventually there will be pioneers that will decide to raise their children in townhomes, just like many were raised in their architectural forefathers; the rowhouses and brownstones of major cities a century ago, despite the lack of traditional non-adult infrastructure. This could become more popular and eventually cause another inner-city neighborhood cycle to arise.

Maybe there are other cities already entering into this cycle. Eventually, if enough do it, there would be cool, progressive schools popping up and more parks too. I can see it now; kids on tricycles in front of high-rises, ice-cream trucks rolling down Main street, a Midtown Chucky-Cheese?

[largeTEXAS]

It's possible that eventually there will be pioneers that will decide to raise their children in townhomes, just like many were raised in their architectural forefathers; the rowhouses and brownstones of major cities a century ago, despite the lack of traditional non-adult infrastructure. This could become more popular and eventually cause another inner-city neighborhood cycle to arise.

Maybe there are other cities already entering into this cycle. Eventually, if enough do it, there would be cool, progressive schools popping up and more parks too. I can see it now; kids on tricycles in front of high-rises, ice-cream trucks rolling down Main street, a Midtown Chucky-Cheese?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This scenario exists almost everywhere! Most cities in the world don't have the space or infrastructure to support sprawling private lawns for every 4-year-old. Townhomes, high-rises, condos, apartments, and lofts are just as appropriate for raising kids as a two story house in the 'burbs. Most inner city neighborhoods have access to great schools, some of the best in the city. Plus, kids that grow up in the inner city get a much richer and well-rounded form of education - culture. It's good for kids to be exposed to interesting and diverse things besides just books and kids of their own class and race. Kids need exposure to many things if they are going to grow up tolerant, well-rounded people. The 'burbs can't touch the inner city in these aspects. I agree that the 'burbs are probably good for some adults, but generations of kids grew up and are growing up in the inner-city and are doing just fine.

[RedScare]

It seems the Chronicle has been reading our forum.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3211628

[bruce_oneal]

It seems the Chronicle has been reading our forum.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3211628

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

probably where they get story ideas!

[tomv]

Isn't it great to live in an area where there are choices for everyone? Live far out in an affordably priced master planned community, live closer in in an older, well maintained neighborhood, or maybe live in a loft or apartment and walk or ride light rail to work. One man's ceiling is another man's floor.

[The Voice of University Oaks]

On the subject of commuter rail, I wouldn't necessarily put complete faith in any predictions made by Mike Strech or Art Storey. They're tollway folks first and foremost, and commuter rail is not a subject of great interest or enthusiasm to them.

That being said, I don't expect an extensive commuter rail network to be built anytime soon.

There's an overwhelming conception that commuter rail is an easy solution to problems relating to commuting and congestion. After all, existing railroad rights-of-way represent underutilitized transportation capacity leading directly into the central city that is capable of carrying large numbers of people. It sounds so easy: build some stations, buy some locomotives and passenger cars, and voila! That old freight line can now carry passengers to work.

The realities of implementing commuter rail are much different. There are huge obstacles to overcome in implementing commuter rail, and one of the biggest hurdles are the railroads themselves. UP and BNSF are both notoriously difficult to work with when it comes to operating passenger rail over rights-of-way they own. They're in the freight-moving business, and they don't want anything on their tracks that might affect or impede that service (not to mention the liability issues involved). There's also the issue of the condition of the track; just because they can carry freight doesn't mean that they'll be able to safely or comfortably carry commuters, especially at speeds that would make rail competitive with buses or even private cars for suburb to central city commutes.

Another thing to consider is that, until transit ridership gets to the point that buses alone can no longer carry the load, it just doesn't make sense to build commuter rail in a corridor that already features express bus service. This is why there won't be commuter rail along 290 anytime soon: the freeway will be rebuilt with managed lanes that METRO's park and ride buses will be able to use, making expenditures to upgrade the parallel UP line for commuter rail service unnecessary for a long time. Right now, capacity problems with regard to park and ride service exist only at the parking lots themselves (especially at Northwest Station, which is METRO's busiest park and ride), and METRO is about to address that problem by adding a new park and ride at Cypress. Another one is planned for Fairfield.

There are a couple of corridors where commuter rail makes sense in the short term. My guess is that we'll see commuter rail along 90A into Fort Bend County in about a decade, mainly due to Fort Bend County's explosive growth rate and the fact that, while 59 has an HOV lane, 90A itself does not. Also, the mayors of Missouri City, Stafford, Sugar Land, Richmond and Rosenberg all strongly support the concept; 90A currently has the most political backing of any possible commuter rail alignment. Edwards and Kelcey recently completed an HGAC-funded feasibility study for this corridor; a more detailed alternatives analysis study will begin soon.

I suspect that the BNSF line to Tomball will probably be developed shortly afterward; increased growth in northwest Harris County and the fact that 249 itself does not go directly into inner-loop Houston make it viable in the short term. I know HCTRA's made noises about building a toll road along this corridor to 610; I also know that intense opposition from the folks in Oak Forest is probably going to keep it from becoming a reality. From a political point of view, commuter rail is probably a better option.

As for other possible commuter rail corridors along right of ways paralleling 290, Westpark, Eastex or the Gulf Freeway / SH 3: don't hold your breath.

[The Great Hizzy!]

Very good post, Voice. From what I've read of freight lines and their relationship with local entities wanting to use their lines for commuter services, they tend to want significant financial and logistical assurances tied to any agreement they might enter. The negotiations can often become lengthy.

[RedScare]

This is not quite on topic, but related. The City of Houston has decided that our population as of Jan. 1, 2005 is 2,060,444. US Census has not weighed in since July 1, 2003.

http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Demograp...Est_City_05.htm

[VelvetJ]

So as oil prices increase, oil supply reaches it's peak, deadlines loom closer to improve our air quality, and flooding progressively worsens city wide every year, the only thing Houston can feasibly see in the immediate future is aggressive plans for more roads and toll roads? And someone actually stated here that after leaving a meeting with the Harris County Infrastructure head, he sees commuter rail probably 25-30 years away?!?!?!

Question....how many out there think if somehow magically a rail line suddenly appeared along 290, ridership would stay the same as it currently is for Metro Buses along the park and ride routes?

One myth I think Houstonians have to get over is that, riding a Metro bus from Intercontinental Airport would not be the same experience as riding the train from the airport. Riding a train from Katy Mills to Downtown would not be the same experience as riding the Metro Bus. There is a HUGE difference in bus and train experiences in urban areas. That difference alone would attract riders.

Houston's traffic is at it's worst when,.......during rush hour. A significant amount of that traffic is from people comming in from the suburbs or outlying areas. Some critics say people won't give up their cars because they have other things to do. Most of those people go straight to their employment centers, and at the end of the day go straight back to their part of town, doing most of their shopping, dry cleaning, picking up the kids from day care, and stopping for dinner at a restaurant near their homes. So they will fight 30 miles of congestion on the freeway, only to shop at Randall's close to their homes. So most of the traffic nightmares are a result of people going straight to work and going straight back to their parts of town. Correct?

The problem is too many cars on the freeway at once during the same times everyday. So a large part of the answer is getting some of those cars off of the freeways during rush hour. How do we do this? Create an attractive alternative to driving. In this case, I see that as a cheap, fast, smooth, comfortable, barrier free ( not at the mercy of the automobile or traffic lights) easily accessible option. More rail from Katy, The Woodlands, Clear Lake, Sugarland, and Tomball, but the key is sooner not later.

Disturbing as I find it, I know there are residents in Katy that if given the option would choose having a toll road for their commutes everyday into town over a commuter rail line along with the current Katy freeway expansion. I just hope they and all of Houston won't learn to regret not paying enough attention or realizing the importance of non-automobile related transportation and infrastructure opportunities soon enough. Will our children curse us for lack of vision?

[RedScare]

There is a technical term for the phenonmenon you describe...that people who would not set foot on a bus would jump on a train...but that term escapes me.

I agree completely. While not a scientific survey, I have never spoken to a Woodlands or Katy resident who objects to rail. They may also want improved freeway access, but they also want options like rail. Only our elected officials seem to be against it and there is a simple reason for it. Their pockets are being lined by business contributors who feel they might suffer from rail.

[The Voice of University Oaks]

There is a technical term for the phenonmenon you describe...that people who would not set foot on a bus would jump on a train...but that term escapes me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The term you are looking for is "mode preference." It's also known as "rail bias."

It's hard to quantify, because it's so subjective, and rail opponents generally want to pretend like it doesn't exist. But it's a real phenomenon based on many factors, from a collective nostalgia about rail to the perception that rail is easier to use than bus to the fact that rail oftentimes provides a smoother ride than bus.

[RedScare]

Thanks Voice

Mode preference is what the transportation geeks use, I suppose, but rail bias is the term I was thinking of. It may be hard to quantify, but if you read the posts on this forum, you know it exists.

[kjb434]

Art Story and Mike Strech aren't anti-rail, it's just not their jurisdiction. HCTRA and Harris County itself cannot proposed, finance, and build any form of rail transit. They would have to get authorization from the State to form an RMA. Metro is the only entity in the region that can build rail. The only thing HCTRA and county can do is say go ahead and build it, and we won't stop you.

Any new Toll Road corridor has to consider other forms of Transit. The only new major toll facility that didn't plan a companion future rail corridor for metro is the Fort Bend Parkway. The reason was that 90A's corridor is close by. Metro and HCTRA have and agreement to allow the corridors to become multimodal. HCTRA worked with Metro to have a light-rail corridor along the Katy Freeway, but TxDOT said it would delay federal funding for years and went ahead and ingnored them. This was brought up at the meeting. Charles Dean, county planner, mentioned that this was a lost opportunity by TxDOT. We do have to realized that the Freeways aren't in the County and City's jurisdiction. They can have some input, but can't control the design. Having HOV lanes and the new Managed lanes was a feet that wasn't easy to accomplish itself. The biggest problem that different agencies have different jurisdictions. If often takes people and groups to make them realize they need to work to together. Most of the time when they do work together they want things to go smoothly. As soon a hiccup arrives, many want to back out because the effort is not worth it to them.

[The Voice of University Oaks]

Art Story and Mike Strech aren't anti-rail, it's just not their jurisdiction.

Just to clarify, I'm not saying they're anti-rail. I'm just saying that it's not a subject of great interest to them - like you said, it's not their jurisdiction - and therefore I'd take their predictions as to its implementation with a grain of salt. I'd be just as wary if Frank Wilson or John Sedlak were making predictions about tollway construction.

Different agencies, different areas of expertise.

[kjb434]

But they also have to be aware of the time frame for future rail projects. In the end, rail and toll road projects is about customer base. The rail line won't get built if they don't think they can get the people to ride. Same thing with Toll Roads.

Yes, the Hardy Toll Road was a mistake at first, but now the traffic is picking up during rush hour by people who don't want to wait on I-45.

Also, most of the future toll road corridors are in line with the rail corridors especially out of inner loop.

[jghall00]

But they also have to be aware of the time frame for future rail projects.  In the end, rail and toll road projects is about customer base.  The rail line won't get built if they don't think they can get the people to ride.  Same thing with Toll Roads.

Yes, the Hardy Toll Road was a mistake at first, but now the traffic is picking up during rush hour by people who don't want to wait on I-45.

Also, most of the future toll road corridors are in line with the rail corridors especially out of inner loop.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The problem with commuter rail is that it'll only see high ridership during rush hour. The ridership wouldnt' be high enough to to justify the expense until the Houston region is like LA. I think this is one of those situations where everyone is doing what's great for them, but bad for everyone as a group. It's the new math, my 2 + your 2 = ...1.5. Yeah, that's right, we're both WORSE off. Like it'd be great for me to move to the Woodlands for cheaper housing, better schools, and more parks. But when everyone does it, we get massive sprawl. There's a complete and utter lack of comprehensive long range planning. TXDOT builds freeways, Metro tries to provide transit service, and developers try to make money. When you put it all together, you end up with a bowl of moldy spaghetti. Gas prices go up, and we all get food poisoning.

And before someone mentions the 2025 plan, it's a joke. It's a bunch of fiefdoms trying to get money for road projects to encourage economic development. It has nothing to do with planning or quality of life. We need a regional authority with representatives from all interest groups to plan transportation, and we need economic incentives for developers to build communities that don't become ghettos in 30 - 40 years.

[kjb434]

Why all the pessimism?

Gas prices are way below inflation. The traffic in this city is not that bad. All the agenies that build transportation are now forming inter-agency committees to coordinate better.

Many of the studies that are used for toll-road and rail planning are done within the same study. This is to cooperate better.

The sprawl is not such a bad thing or people wouldn't want to live out there.

We as a forum has get over being pessimistic about everything dealing with sprawl and transit. Houston is young and growing. We are not ready for mass commuter rail since we are big enough (density). The inner loop and Galleria area are approaching the point where they are becoming more dense.

Rail and commuter line planning are on track and they will be built as needed. Needed combines cost to build and benefits of rail lines.

[VelvetJ]

kjb434,

With all due respect, sometimes it seems like you are in a totally different reality than the rest of the citizens. The average Houstonian couldn't give a rats tail that Gas prices are way below inflation. The only thing we see is we are paying more for gas than we ever have and the prices continue and are going to continue to increase.

Regarding traffic not being that bad, well I agree with you to a degree, however tell that to the studies that show Houstonians biggest concern in our city is traffic.

I also think at times sprawl and suburbs are villified more than they should be. However kjb434, there are indeed negative fallouts from a place sprawling to the degree Houston has, and we can't cover our eyes to the negatives of it soley based upon what people want. For example, we should not fill all of our bayous in with soil, simply because somone WANTS to do so so they can build on them. There would be negative consequences to making such a move. Short term benefits can cause long term problems, and the same holds true for extreme uncontrolled sprawl.

This is not to try to start a debate but I want to know what the gigantic difference between Dallas and Houston is? Why is it that those in Dallas could not see how unnecessary light and commuter rail is for a city as sprawled as the two right now but Houston can? What makes Houston and Dallas SO different to the point where it is a good idea to delay rail as long as possible in Houston but continuously expand it like MAD in Dallas? Why do Houstonians view rail so much differently than Dallasites now?

I chose Dallas because the two cities are different but have more in common than not. Why is significant rail RIGHT NOW and in the IMMEDIATE future, such a great idea for Dallas but not for Houston?

Lastly, I think before studying commuter rail in Houston the following link to the Trinity Railway Express in Dallas should be observed. Notice the schedule and how there are 'breaks' in the schedule during off-peak hours. Why can't the same be done in Houston? We must not forget that there is a purpose to commuter and light rail besides making a profit.

Link

[bruce_oneal]

kjb434,

With all due respect, sometimes it seems like you are in a totally different reality than the rest of the citizens. The average Houstonian couldn't give a rats tail that Gas prices are way below inflation. The only thing we see is we are paying more for gas than we ever have and the prices continue and are going to continue to increase.

Regarding traffic not being that bad, well I agree with you to a degree, however tell that to the studies that show Houstonians biggest concern in our city is traffic.

I also think at times sprawl and suburbs are villified more than they should be. However kjb434, there are indeed negative fallouts from a place sprawling to the degree Houston has, and we can't cover our eyes to the negatives of it soley based upon what people want. For example,  we should not fill all of our bayous in with soil, simply because somone WANTS to do so so they can build on them. There would be negative consequences to making such a move. Short term benefits can cause long term problems, and the same holds true for extreme uncontrolled sprawl.

This is not to try to start a debate but I want to know what the gigantic difference between Dallas and Houston is? Why is it that those in Dallas could not see how unnecessary light and commuter rail is for a city as sprawled as the two right now but Houston can? What makes Houston and Dallas SO different to the point where it is a good idea to delay rail as long as possible in Houston but continuously expand it like MAD in Dallas? Why do Houstonians view rail so much differently than Dallasites now?

I chose Dallas because the two cities are different but have more in common than not. Why is significant rail  RIGHT NOW  and in the IMMEDIATE future, such a great idea for Dallas but not for Houston?

Lastly, I think before studying commuter rail in Houston the following link to the Trinity Railway Express in Dallas should be observed. Notice the schedule and how there are 'breaks' in the schedule during off-peak hours. Why can't the same be done in Houston? We must not forget that there is a purpose to commuter and light rail besides making a profit.

Link

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

well said! while i am not a dallas resident, those folks have their acts together (seemingly) when it comes to mass transit. at least they are doing something proactive to prepare their city for more growth.

[The Great Hizzy!]

This is not to try to start a debate but I want to know what the gigantic difference between Dallas and Houston is? Why is it that those in Dallas could not see how unnecessary light and commuter rail is for a city as sprawled as the two right now but Houston can? What makes Houston and Dallas SO different to the point where it is a good idea to delay rail as long as possible in Houston but continuously expand it like MAD in Dallas? Why do Houstonians view rail so much differently than Dallasites now?

I don't think it's ever been viewed differently. What has happened is that DART was able to secure funding and had a pro-active legislator in its corner whereas METRO had Bob Lanier killing a voter-approved referendum that would've had rail in place in Houston roughly at the same time (or actually a couple of years sooner).

Remember, the November 2003 referendum wasn't the first pro-rail transit plan Houston area voters approved on the behalf of METRO.

[GovernorAggie]

Yeah, plus quoting from a NCTCOG planner, Dallas is at the point to where whole rows of skyscrapers would be torn down to accomodate three more freeway lanes. Rail basically became a cheaper option there, in his opinion. I think that rail will be examined more in the cases of the 290 corridor and any other corridor that may have as extensive and expensive development as say...the North Central Expressway in Dallas.

[kjb434]

The city of Dallas itself doesn't have the freeway capacity that Houston has. It's first real loop is much further out than our Loop 610. If you look at the last freeway capacity proposals in Dalla, they appear all way out there. The only one that will probably be built is the Pegasus project.

If you look at travel times in transit studies that uses rail as an option for Houston and Dallas, you'll see that rail was a better option for Dallas than Houston. Very few rail concepts in Houston will get you where you want to go faster than the freeway even in rush hour. Metro has to provide their justification around future traffic conditions and now the Red Line is showing good ridership it helps their case. Dallas proposals showed the rail lines moving you faster than their freeways during peak hours.

Dallas has the political climate to support rail at the time also. DART also has problems with there system not having the ridership they predicted.

Don't pin me as anti-rail, I'm just being realistic.

I feel that recent developments with the highway bill will be benificial to Houston with all the proposed transit dollars.

What I do like about Houston coming in late in the game is that we can look at many other projects and provide the best option for our money.

[bruce_oneal]

this just in: new rail-mass transit plans for houston and this: new buses in favor over some rail

finally!

[brijonmang]

I really like the idea of the commuter rail out to cypress...good information bruce

[MaxConcrete]

VelvetJ,

Don't put Dallas on a pedestal because it is no transit nirvana.

First of all, ridership of light rail in Dallas was DOWN 2.7% in 2004, and it was low to begin with. Daily boardings were 55,227 in 2004. That's very low for such an extensive and high-speed system. The large station in Plano saw a stunning 29% ridership drop from 2003 to 2004. (See the Dallas Morning News, 22-Dec-2004)

In the meantime, downtown Dallas (focus of the light rail system) continues to be in a major funk and has led to the recently-failed strong mayor proposition. Let's see: if light rail and commuter rail is so great, why aren't people flocking to downtown Dallas? (OK, that's a complicated question but it goes to show that light rail alone can't keep downtown bustling.)

The light rail system is not being expanded like mad. In fact I don't think there is any construction in progess at this time. The Stemmons and DFW airport lines will move forward soon as the money becomes available, however.

Dallas is just fooling itself if it thinks light rail will solve its transportation or downtown vitality problem. Houston is being smarter, putting more resources where they can have the most benefit.

[bruce_oneal]

VelvetJ,

Don't put Dallas on a pedestal because it is no transit nirvana.

First of all, ridership of light rail in Dallas was DOWN 2.7% in 2004, and it was low to begin with. Daily boardings were 55,227 in 2004. That's very low for such an extensive and high-speed system. The large station in Plano saw a stunning 29% ridership drop from 2003 to 2004. (See the Dallas Morning News, 22-Dec-2004)

In the meantime, downtown Dallas (focus of the light rail system) continues to be in a major funk and has led to the recently-failed strong mayor proposition. Let's see: if light rail and commuter rail is so great, why aren't people flocking to downtown Dallas? (OK, that's a complicated question but it goes to show that light rail alone can't keep downtown bustling.)

The light rail system is not being expanded like mad. In fact I don't think there is any construction in progess at this time. The Stemmons and DFW airport lines will move forward soon as the money becomes available, however.

Dallas is just fooling itself if it thinks light rail will solve its transportation or downtown vitality problem. Houston is being smarter, putting more resources where they can have the most benefit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

agreed. i think houston is smart to use these bus-thingamajigs to get people out of their cars (first and foremost) and used to the idea of safe, clean, quick mass transit. let's see how these buses work in these corridors and then move to rail.

additionally, we are getting 2 new (is this correct?) rail lines --just not the exact ones we were promised. i think it was a smart move to go with a revised plan, rather than headlong into a plan just because it was what was proposed a few years back.