Metro Changes Rail Plan

[debmartin]

several community leaders are disgruntled that metro is changing the rail plan previously put before the voters. do they have a legitimate gripe, or is mayor white doing what's best for the city?

debmartin

[brijonmang]

i think that what is best for the city is what should be implemented...sometimes change is needed

[RedScare]

Rick Casey at the Chronicle writes a nice piece on the political machinations behind the new rail plan.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/m...n/casey/3231106

And the Chron also does a big story on how BRT works in Las Vegas. If Houston's BRT works as well as it does in Vegas, it may get upgraded fairly quickly. Time will tell.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory/3231107

[RedScare]

...and still more commentary on the expanded rail plan, this time from el jefe himself.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/e...outlook/3231587

[Heights2Bastrop]

It is my feeling the METRO is somewhat of a dictatorship and is gonna do whatever the hell they want to do no matter what the voters want them to do. I think there needs to be a great deal more accountability from the transit authority. I thought their handling of Shirley DeLibero and her fake degree was irresponsible and a bit racist.

[ricco67]

Yes, I do believe Bill White is trying to do something that would push the rail plan ahead.

H2B,

If that was the case, we would have had rail a long time ago.

Metro is simply trying to adjust for some political backstabbing which has occured over the past couple of years.

it's sorta' like giving a 5 year old a choice between two shirts, he may have the option to pick one of those two shirts, but he's not really given a true option of the entire closet.

Ricco

[MidtownCoog]

Well, two years ago on this very board I said Houston needed "rubber tire rail" on dedicated lines.

I guess somebody was listening to me.

And don't call it a bus!

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory/3231107

[Talbot]

IMO, I think it's a better plan, in this plan we can start our commuter lines earlier than expected, and if the BRT goes like Vegas or is anything like the mainstreet line, we would be way ahead than what we may be with the first plan if they upgraded the BRT to rail.

[VicMan]

However, I do not like the fact that the plan does not yet call for rail service from the airports!

The airport rail service must start ASAP!

[dp2]

It is my feeling the METRO is somewhat of a dictatorship and is gonna do whatever the hell they want to do no matter what the voters want them to do. I think there needs to be a great deal more accountability from the transit authority. I thought their handling of Shirley DeLibero and her fake degree was irresponsible and a bit racist.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, I agree. If that liar had been white, she would have been fired on the spot.

I love how these groups scream 'racism' the second they don't get 101% of what they want. Now they'll have to wait a few more year to get rail, but will get rail-like service using buses in the interim. How quick they are to scream about 'geographic discrimination', but were completely silent when last year's rail plan was almost totally contained within the loop, leaving nada rail for the majority of Metro taxpayers who reside outside that area (the Bush airport line wasn't scheduled for completion until almost 2025, the 8 mile southwestern commuter rail was unfunded, and all the other dashed lines were post-2025.) Gee, how dare they be asked to share a little of the rail construction with the suburban areas, who were already subsidizing their whiny tushes.

But the reality is that without this compromise, those inner loop activist groups would have gotten almost zero rail or had to wait a much longer time. Fact is, the Federal Transit Admin. shot down all those light-rail proposals, because the projected ridership wouldn't come close to being cost-effective based on the formula that they use to rank all proposals throughout the nation that seek the limited Fed funds. And without the Fed funds, which were expected to pay about 50% of the project costs, Metro would have had to delay most of those political porkbarrel lines. So at least this compromise gets the track infrastructure built, and over time Metro will be able to accumulate and allocate enough money for the incremental upgrades(rail cars and electrification), which will still take place before 2025. Thus in the end they still will get rail before most of the suburban areas.

And the FTA's decision didn't come as a shock, many had previously warned Metro that the ridership wasn't high enough. But Metro, as par for the course for them, ignored the facts and simply lied, told people what they wanted to here, and bloated up their proposal with pork politics. I remember a meeting on the north side where the Metro rep was promising the crowd that sure, they'd elevate almost the entire line along Airline Drive (despite the fact that such would double the cost without substantially increasing ridership, sinking its cost-effectiveness and affordability, while delaying its construction, if it somehow still got approved by the FTA.) That's what the crowd wanted to here, but what a shameless liar, he knew that was never going to happen. Metro has had a long history of dishonesty and duplicitiousness, hence DeLay's distrust of them, at least until the leadership changes. So I could understand why the inner city groups feel a bit duped now. Welcome to the club. But don't start this racism bullcrap.

BTW, you guys should be thanking DeLay, not vilifying him. He had nothing to do with the FTA's ranking of cost-effectiveness. And let me repeat, it was the failure to qualify for Fed funding that sunk the timing of the old plan.

[dp2]

 

Metro is simply trying to adjust for some political backstabbing which has occured over the past couple of years.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, Metro is trying to adjust for the fact that the FTA rated the 2 LRT plans they submitted as 'medium-low' based on relatively low cost-effectiveness/projected ridership, and hence would not approve Federal funds that were planned on to pay for half the project. And the other lines had similar ridership and cost-effectiveness problems. The only politics involved would be Metro proposing and sending up plans they new that were deficient, but which served the neighborhoods that certain politicians were demanding be served. No backstabbing, just fiscal realities.

BTW, even though the ridership numbers aren't high, I still am in favor of all but one (the totally porkbarrel last-minute addition Sunnyside line), as most of them are good candidates to one day develop into denser urban corridors. But an incremental BRT to LRT approach is probably the only way to get them built, unless you want to wait an extra decade for more funds to accumulate without Fed help(which also means waiting an extra decade to meet additional needs, such as commuter rail to the north, south, and east, airport lines, etc.)

The big deal is making sure that rails are laid at the time of the BRT installation. Then the upgrade becomes just a matter of when, not if, because there is much smaller cost and inertia issues to overcome in the upgrade.

BTW, it will be interesting to see if the tracks are laid to the cheaper trolley standards or full-blown LRT standards. I think Metro is waking up to the reality that most of these lines are just going to be medium traffic inner-city lines, rather than trunks to the suburbs, and thus trolley may be the better (and more cost-effective) end option than LRT.

[ssullivan]

However, I do not like the fact that the plan does not yet call for rail service from the airports!

The airport rail service must start ASAP!

I think we need service to the airports as well. However, let's be realistic. The price of running a rail line all the way from downtown to IAH is huge. It's the type of thing where we could have rail to the airport in a couple of years and nothing else, or new service all over the city. There is no option for getting both at the same time; there simply isn't enough money available. And, let's think about what the ridership to the airport would be like, compared to new BRT, LRT, and commuter rail lines. An airport rail line would be used, but the ridership probably won't be as high as service to inner-city neighborhoods that are transit-dependent or to suburbs where increasingly congested freeways will drive many people to transit. There are thousands more people in this city that would ride a train downtown five days a week than would ride a train to the airport once every few months. I fly almost every week and I can tell you that with a link to the airport, I'd still use service to places like downtown and the Galleria more often than I would to the airport.

Relatively few cities in this country have direct rail links to their airports, because in many cases, an airport link is a much lower priority than serving the local residents who are paying the taxes and fares to support the transit system's day-to-day operation. Most of the cities with direct rail links to their airports have not had them for long, and in many cases those lines were added only years after the central core rail system was well established.

Metro is working on an airport link; mention of this service that is in the works was made again in today's Chronicle. The proposed express bus service would provide nonstop service between IAH Terminal C and downtown, with stops downtown at the Hilton Americas, Hyatt Regency, and Downtown Transit Center. This type of service, running every half hour with Metro's suburban commuter buses that have reclining seats, luggage racks and individual reading lights and air vents, would be much more viable than a rail line, and could be up and running in a few months as opposed to years from now.

[Talbot]

I also heard I think from the chronicle a few days ago when all this was announced that the links to the airports may start in the next phase.

But like ssullivan said, they may just have dropped the rails and will use the busses for now.

[mbgriffith1]

Yes, I agree.  If that liar had been white, she would have been fired on the spot.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Amen. People can be so hypocritical sometimes.

[GovernorAggie]

Agreed about the airport connections. Even the mighty, seasoned BART just recently got a direct connection to the San Francisco airport, IIRC. And BART's been around what seems like forever.

[VicMan]

But Houston's Bush airport is the second largest in Texas. Many of the cities that don't have rail service are much, much smaller.

In addition, having a rail service would help foriegn businessmen from countries where rail service to the airports is common.

[ricco67]

I think a Bus Hybrid system would be great for the airport. But not a "DIRECT" link to DT. Why not perhaps let it meet at Metro hub or or a line towards downtown?

They could always have friends or relatives meet them at a hub closer to town as opposed to meeting them at the airport.

As far as hobby (which is used mostly by the locals) would be ideal to build a rail system to and from the place, but I think a hybrid system would be best there as well until ridership/awareness increases.

Ricco

[ssullivan]

But Houston's Bush airport is the second largest in Texas. Many of the cities that don't have rail service are much, much smaller.

In addition, having a rail service would help foriegn businessmen from countries where rail service to the airports is common.

I agree with your points, but the fact is, there's simply not enough money available to build a rail link to IAH and provide new transit options within the city. Far more people will be served every day by increased transit within the city between than will be by a rail link to the airport.

And those international businessmen you referred to are finding a way from the airport to wherever they're going just fine now. I travel all the time for work myself and can tell you that many business travelers are perfectly happy taking a taxi from the airport directly to their hotel if not renting a car. That expense is being reimbursed for by the company anyway, and budgets are created with that expense in mind. Even in cities like Chicago, Philadelphia, and San Francisco, where there is a rail station in the airport, I see far more locals using it than business travelers. I'm all for rail service to the airport, but I agree with Metro's leadership on this one. It's a much lower priority than providing better service to the people who live and work here and depend on Metro every day to get them to their jobs in the morning and back home at night.

[VicMan]

I think a Bus Hybrid system would be great for the airport.

[ricco67]

Vicman Sez:

A Hobby line can continue down to Ellington, Clear Lake, and Galveston.

now that would be an excellent idea, lord knows CL needs a transportation system of SOME sort (their current P&R site are totally insane). Maybe having a light rail go down and stop at Ellington and one or two stops in Clear Lake where it the busses would branch out from there or at least have a nice sized parking lot there.

As far as going to galveston, I think that would be grand, but on a slightly smaller scale as in the past. The Bus system in Galveston would have to adjust to the influx of people wanting to go to different destinations.

Of course, people could simply take cabs to their final destinations.

R

[VicMan]

Now, as for Bush, I wonder if rail service Bush would be a good as a stop on the way to any prominent Houston suburbs (e.g. The Woodlands). If it is, perhaps an off-site stop for the airport can be made if it is too much to take the rail system directly into the airport property.

[ricco67]

I have to put in my two cents on that one...

On the avg in the "prominent" neighbhorhoods 12 households (1, 2, or 3 people) per day leave or arrive to/from a place like Bellaire, copperfield, Montrose, woodlands, Sugarland, and Katy to IAH. there are approximately 10-20 people arriving/leaving PER HOTEL in downtown and a bit less from those far flung hotels (such as Sugarland, Katy, Clear lake).

Those heading to and from hobby are about 50% lower on most counts.

I use my job and experience in gathering that information.

It is my opinion that a route to/from neighorhoods to the airport wouldn't support the ridership. It would be best if a line from IAH go to greenspoint, northline, or another hub up north before people pick their own way to their final destination be it Bus, Rail, car, or Cab.

Ricco

[VicMan]

Hmm... what if there is a Northline Mall-Aldine/Greenspoint-Bush IAH route and a Downtown-Northline-Spring-Woodlands route? People wishing to go from Downtown to Bush IAH would connect at Northline.

[skwatra]

^if that's the case, the trip downtown would take over an hour. when/if they do put rail out to IAH, they should have the option of an express that costs more but doesn't stop. like the gatwick express in london, you pay twice as much but you get to the CBD in half the time.

[KatieDidIt]

several community leaders are disgruntled that metro is changing the rail plan previously put before the voters.  do they have a legitimate gripe, or is mayor white doing what's best for the city?

debmartin

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

White is a DICTATOR with his tow plan, metro plan and cameras. He does what he wants. I voted for Sanchez and wish more had.

[citykid09]

Denver Transit PlBy JON SARCHE, Associated Press Writer

Mon Jun 20, 5:53 AM ET

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050620/ap_on_...gested_colorado

DENVER - Motorists in the Denver metro area

[kjb434]

Does is bother anyone that the news story had to emphsize red-state and car worshiping. I don't think they would have said the same thing about California or Los Angeles at least.

Just something bothers me.

Anyway, the new plan is a great adjustment to original is regards to timeline.

The overall alignments aren't that bad either. Can anyone say east-west line from UofH to the Galleria.

[713 To 214]

I love how these groups scream 'racism' the second they don't get 101% of what they want.

[kjb434]

Oh no, here they go again on this oil and congressman are ruin us again.

[713 To 214]

Oh no, here they go again on this oil and congressman are ruin us again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you have a better explanation for why the 4th largest city in the most powerful country in the world has the subpar system of mass transit it does, as compared to less similarly situated cities. What happened to Houston's "can do" spirit that erected Reliant, Toyota, and Minute Maid (formerly Enron) in about 4.5 years? That same "can do" spirit seems to be lost when it comes to finding a way to fund a rail plan that makes MORE sense. I guess Houstonians care more about their sports venues than how they get to them!!!