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!!!

[Astro]

I am very happy about Metro's modified plan! This one makes much more sense and will accomplish much more as far as moving people from all part sof the city. I don't understand why those on the east side are complaining since they are still getting all of their transit lines they voted for in the form of BRT which is practically the same as light rail, and even better since it's less expensive. In addition to this they are getting a new light rail line which will connect UH to the west side of town. This is definitely a win-win plan for all of Houston...

[VicMan]

By the way, when are METRO board meetings?

I would like to ask for airport routes (including the Hobby continuing to Clear Lake route) ASAP.

[VelvetJ]

713 to 214, it's people like you Houston needs so badly in a powerful decision making position. Houston seems to be swinging more and more into one direction and it is causing the city to loose it's edge and retard it to a degree. That loss of "edge" can be seen everywhere, from architectural designs, to the attitude towards the city's citizens. We like to brag about our glorious past but in today's Houston, the Astrodome would not have been built, the ship channel would not be a reality, Pennzoil Place would more than likely be in Downtown Atlanta, and NASA and Bush Intercontinental would be in other places. We used to be known to set the bar, now it seems we are always a step behind.

I actually like the routes of this new plan better, however I am not thrilled that those that were promised rail are not getting it when they were told. I am also EXTREMELY fearful those BRT routes that are scheduled to eventually get rail won't do so for another 15-20 years. I hope I am proven wrong.

And those that do not believe this was a Delay and Culberson, "Do as I say or get nothing" situation should wake up a bit. IMO, this had less to do with the Feds and more with Delay and Culberson personally not being happy with the amount of light rail in the initial plan we voted for.

[RedScare]

I disagree with this post on nearly all counts.

The city finally started rail after 25 years of rejection (credit to Brown and DeLibero). Not token objection, but lawsuits, political and other rejection.

The city is making stands on its polluted image by buying hybrid cars, designing 'green' buildings, and pushing the state to strengthen and enforce its environmental laws.

We've built TWO Astrodomes in the last 5 years!

DeLay and Culberson OPPOSED light rail. This is a concession to the fact that their constituents are now asking for transit options.

NASA was aproduct of the same political deal-making that you now rail against (love that pun!).

713/214 should do a little research to see who was instrumental in getting federal funding for his bright yellow trains....it was Tom DeLay!

[RedScare]

Just a reminder that not all people view progress the same way:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/3233855

[Ethanra]

Do people realize that rail cost billions of dollars? Who do expect to pay for all this. Don't you think that money can be used towards hiring more teachers, libaries, more police officers (exspeacially since their will be a shortage soon) etc... Sure LRT look neat and serve a purpose but not what they cost.

I can justify the Main Street Line. It runs through the heart of the city, it helps attract more conventions and activities between DT and Reliant Park. I can see that line paying for it self (with out going into detail). The next lines should run from the airports to DT and the Galleria area through Greenway plaza to DT. I can see how that can attract buisness (once again not going into detail). I always that a elevated train of some sort down Westheimer from the belt way would be effective to, maybe? Commute Trains from the burbs are needed IMO people would ride them to work and it wouyld encourage them to atten city events more.

Saying all this I got a consp. theory. Does any one think the plan that was laid out during the elections, was to attract the poorer ends of town to vote yes. Do you think the more wealthier ends of town would have voted yes to this plan. if the lrt were running through their areas. By saying this I mean most wealthier people enjoy their car and wouldn't ride lrt. ( i said most not all, so no1 argue about this and say u would, your only one person out of millions.) Also I mean most conservatives are against LRT and voted against lrt. They like keeping their money they earned and not spending tax money. So all of this the city needed a vote Yes so thats why they had the original plan to trick them for voting yes thinking it would run through their part of town. The poorer end maybe would haved voted against it if the original plan was this plan since they would have not rode it. Also why sould people who pay more taxes pay for a line that runs throug parts of town who pay virually no taxes.

Sorry if know of this makes any sense. Feel free to ask questions and I'll make any of my opinions more clear.

One last thing does taking 7000 cars of the rode clear up trafic in Houston? Is their a study or fact about this.

Thankyou

[Talbot]

^ It would seem that taking 7000 cars off the road would be a good start in clearing up traffic in Houston. But if your statement is meant to mean something else.. im not getting it?

[Heights2Bastrop]

I don

[Lowbrow]

I don

[VicMan]

"Do people realize that rail cost billions of dollars? Who do expect to pay for all this. Don't you think that money can be used towards hiring more teachers, libaries, more police officers (exspeacially since their will be a shortage soon) etc... Sure LRT look neat and serve a purpose but not what they cost. "

You are wrong about the teachers bit - Schools are handled by a variety of separate school districts in Houston, not by the cities.

Anyways, I say "Yes, it's worth it!"

The red line is not much, but wait until all of the suburban and airport lines are built!

"We've built TWO Astrodomes in the last 5 years!"

Huh?

The former football team kinda held the city hostage regarding the Astrodome, therefore we had to build those two stadiums if we wanted the teams to stay.

[GovernorAggie]

I don't get what is so hard to understand about the shift of more rail to the west side? Is it philosophically wrong? Yes, but that is the way it is with rail transit planning. Ironically, I think that Houston bucked a trend in basically replacing a subustantial bus ridership corridor with its existing rail line. However, any transit planner who is honest will tell you that the target 'audience' for light rail is the 'choice' riders. Agencies all over the US give the mostly poor, mostly minority transit 'dependent' riders the shaft because the know they will always be there. At least they are getting BRT lines and not just forsaking transit improvements to those areas all together.

Also, I can't understand why its so hard for people to understand that this is a good move because it goes light years to secure the money for transit improvements, even if it does add a swanky line to swanky areas. Isn't that all rail is anyway? Image? That image of sleek, sexy trains is what METRO is counting on to get those who have more transportation options to make the switch to transit. Is it a screwed up way of thinking? Yes. But it is what it is. Also, without this money with DeLay and Co. help, we could be looking at substantial delays for light rail. Ironically, the delays may have been so long, that they could have possibly been in place even after the scheduled time of about 10 years after the BRT lines would be built.

I understand the ridership argument--that people in the north, east, and southeast are the ones who have 'supported' METRO the most throught its ridership...but alas, let us not forget that METRO has a bigger coverage area than that and people even in the suburbs are paying for METRO even if they don't use it. Throw in that it's no secret that people paying fares only cover a small portion of transit costs and that it takes quite a bit more of a subsidy to cover costs and I can at least see some people's arguments to make some intermediate changes. I know, I know, people in the inner city subsidize those in outer areas with other infrastructure improvements, but it just shows a flaw in our system.

I keep referring to Charlotte, but they just started turning dirt on their first light rail line--and it's already about 2-3 years behind schedule. It was originally supposed to be done by this coming Spring, now they're looking at 2007 sometime--maybe. And they have federal help already. Delays happen in public projects. I think that the end date will actually be the same, but in the interim, instead of waiting with no improvements (because their lines were not rated very well), those areas will get a much improved transportation mode and infrastructure--complete with dedicated guideways, stations, and TVM ticketing machines.

[VicMan]

I've always wondered if the light rail had the same specifications as railroad lines. I would assume different gauge. How many lines run beside the Hardy and how much traffic do they currently see? Definately seems like a good commuter line route if nothing else.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So why not send a letter suggesting METRO gets to work right away on a Hardy Toll Road (Bush IAH, Spring/Klein, and the Woodlands) system and a Hobby/Clear Lake/Galveston system? METRO should start these projects first thing!

[kjb434]

Light Rail and Freight rail are not compatible.

Commuter Rail (Heavy Rail) are compatible with Freight Rail.

This is why they are planning to use existing freight rail along US90 and Hempstead Highway.

[bachanon]

the 2003 referendum seems to have included a community consensus which this updated plan does not. however, having increased mobility options sooner than expected sounds great too. i'm conflicted.

[NewMND]

Kind of a random thought, but whenever they build the rail line down Post Oak, will the arches have to go to accomadate the LRT powerlines? I like the uptown arches.

[ricco67]

Lowbrow asks:

How many lines run beside the Hardy and how much traffic do they currently see?

Vicman, during various times I've traveled to and from IAH to downtown (up to 4 times a day) there are usually 6 trains (or so) at a dead stop waiting north of 610. I've never counted how many lines are on Hardy, but I'm assuming only two. A 3rd can be made to be dedicated as strictly commuter/light rail, but it would obviously have to make some arrangements with the railroad.

[Heights2Bastrop]

How many lines run beside the Hardy and how much traffic do they currently see?

As far as I can tell by looking at an aerial photo map, there is one set of tracks from The Woodlands to Spring, and at least two sets of track all the way in to the North Loop. From the Loop to Downtown there are two parallel routes that rejoin at a point just north of Downtown and I-10. The eastern segment is joined by the line running out US 59 at around Collingsworth.

[Ethanra]

^ It would seem that taking 7000 cars off the road would be a good start in clearing up traffic in Houston. But if your statement is meant to mean something else.. im not getting it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

7000 cars less = 2 billion dollars Hardly worth it

I didn't mean anything else, I just meant i feel most lr lines are a waste of money. Thier has to be a better way. The lines a i mentioned above I can get it, maybe? Look at Dallas lines, It cost tax payers 10's of millions of dollars a year for what, a fancy toy. Thier ridership decresaes by the month. Don't u think that will happen here?

Maybe I meant why should I pay my hard earned money to run stupid ass trains through the east end and north side for people who for the most part don't contribute thier fair share of taxes. At least if they are going to build this giant toys it will be in area they can recieve some benefit from it.

Sorry to sound like such a jerk-off but this topic angures me and at least this forum will listen and respond politely.

Thankyou

One more thing, if u can't handle the traffic move closer to work. Thats a great thing about houston is that the traffic in the burbs are worst then the city core. Also they are plenty of great affortable communities located close to the several buisness didtricts. Hell I live on gessner, briar forest area and can get to DT in 20 min during 5:30 rush hour. U just got to find a good route. 7000 less cars will not improve traffic dramaticly.

Can't afford a car or hate driving in traffic, Ride the damn bus it stops at every main bus stop hourly, or take park and ride on the HOV lanes.

[ricco67]

Ethanra sez:

7000 cars less = 2 billion dollars Hardly worth it

actually, it's more like 7000 per DAY, and driving along the mainstreet corridor as often as I do, it's VERY noticible once people got used to driving around the rail.

Maybe I meant why should I pay my hard earned money to run stupid ass trains through the east end and north side for people who for the most part don't contribute thier fair share of taxes.

I think that's a very bad statement on your part, I'd like to see how you can argue that particular point.

Perhaps if you read more of the posts on here, you can see the various debates and discussions on the very point you are saying.

Can't afford a car or hate driving in traffic, Ride the damn bus it stops at every main bus stop hourly, or take park and ride on the HOV lanes.

You forgot to include the Rail.

Taking buses and the HOV takes a substantial number of cars off the road, unless you sit there and calculate the people in buses and cars in the HOV lanes and other commuting options, you will not notice the impact of traffic unless you drive those routes every day.

Ricco

[VelvetJ]

Redscare, I think you missed my point. The last sentence of my first paragraph was really the key.

Anyway, I wonder what gas prices will look like in 5 years and if we will wonder if the money for rail is worth it?

Also, I would just like to say that I am really getting a kick out of what's happening with rail. When I first moved to Houston in 89' and Kathy Whitmire was pushing for rail, I said then, rail in Houston is inevitible and the longer this city waits, the more expensive it's going to be. I shook my head as they were removing the rail tracks along the Soutwest Freeway and out Westpark and replaced with a toll road. I shook my head as they were removing the tracks along the Katy Freeway in the late 90's. I shook my head when it was revealed where the precise location of Minute Maid Field would be and to now see a multimodule facility in the recently revised METRO proposal north of Downtown. And I shook my head as recently as a couple of years ago when Commuter rail on the existing tracks along 290 and another freeway (I forget) was shot out of the water because it was deemed too expensive.

Simply a hoot I tell ya'.