METRO Meeting June 18 Regarding Halting Of Transit Expansion

[Slick Vik]

Show up! Tell Metro's board you want transit!

Metro's board wants to hear citizen comments about whether or not to halt transit expansion for many years in order to continue the diversion of hundreds of millions of sales tax dollars to 15 cities and Harris County. On June 18, from 6-8 pm, show up at 1900 Main to speak your piece - we need about 200 people!

We hope you'll agree that it is in the best interests of all the cities - especially the City of Houston - to invest that money in improving the quality of life and increasing the tax base through the rising property values and sales taxes that could occur around the new transit stations.

Corporations want transit in Uptown/Galleria

Uptown District CEO John Breeding told Metro's board "we are talking to corporations who are seeking space today and transit is paramount for them." Let's face it: as far as traffic goes, the Galleria area is full. Growth of that economy requires transit.

Interesting agreements for three area cities

Three cities in the Metro area have special arrangements with Metro to receive funds from the transit sales tax. Missouri City, Katy, and Humble threatened Metro in the legislature in 1997 and Metro then agreed to returning half the sales tax to them.

Incredible shrinking Metro

Strapped for funds, Metro's bus fleet has been shrinking. Metro chairman Gilbert Garcia told a Greater Houston Partnership transportation committee that "buses have diminished from about 1400 to about 1200." This implies service is shrinking too - as population increases.

What's at stake

With no money for additional transit, the central urban rail system that is necessary to enable a serious regional transit system that connects to jobs is threatened. People commuting by transit from the edges of the region need that service to get around when they arrive at work.

http://us1.campaign-archive2.com/?u=eec237167293af5bc017cf80b&id=08edd61af9

[kylejack]

If the Galleria area is full, why does it matter that corporations are seeking space today? Logical annoyance in PR release.

[IHB2]

Incredible shrinking Metro

Strapped for funds, Metro's bus fleet has been shrinking. Metro chairman Gilbert Garcia told a Greater Houston Partnership transportation committee that "buses have diminished from about 1400 to about 1200." This implies service is shrinking too - as population increases.

What's at stake

With no money for additional transit, the central urban rail system that is necessary to enable a serious regional transit system that connects to jobs is threatened. People commuting by transit from the edges of the region need that service to get around when they arrive at work.

http://us1.campaign-...b&id=08edd61af9

There is a correlation between the funding and buildout of the Solutions light rail system and the decline in bus service. Decreasing service for public transit as a sacrifice to promises of quality of life, and development at some future date (almost a decade since 2003 and counting) is perhaps not the most efficient use of scarce taxpayer funds 4 years into economic hard times.

[mfastx]

There is a correlation between the funding and buildout of the Solutions light rail system and the decline in bus service. Decreasing service for public transit as a sacrifice to promises of quality of life, and development at some future date (almost a decade since 2003 and counting) is perhaps not the most efficient use of scarce taxpayer funds 4 years into economic hard times.

I think the decline in bus service is due to the fact that buses are so inefficient and there are many routes with very low ridership. METRO is paying a lot of money per rider on a lot of bus routes so it makes sense that they are cutting bus service. On the contrary, METRO spends less per rider to maintain light rail.

[Ross]

How about Metro stops wasting money on utterly stuipid rail projects, and starts providing better bus service to the people who really depend on transit to get around.

[IronTiger]

The METRORail has one of the highest passenger/mile ratios in the country. Let's not discount that. Bus service may be declining because bus services are rendered obsolete by the light rail, and that will probably continue.

And if all else fails, consider making METRO a private company with a government contract.

[kylejack]

How about Metro stops wasting money on utterly stuipid rail projects, and starts providing better bus service to the people who really depend on transit to get around.

As a person who really depends on transit to get around, I applaud the rail projects.

[Ross]

As a person who really depends on transit to get around, I applaud the rail projects.

What happens when you move to a part of town that isn't served by rail, but has less bus service because the rail sucked all the money out of the budget? And, rail is inflexible - it cna't be moved to accomodate changes in population.

[IronTiger]

What happens when you move to a part of town that isn't served by rail, but has less bus service because the rail sucked all the money out of the budget? And, rail is inflexible - it cna't be moved to accomodate changes in population.

Is the shrinking bus problem that bad, or are you just exaggerating?

[RedScare]

What happens when you move to a part of town that isn't served by rail, but has less bus service because the rail sucked all the money out of the budget? And, rail is inflexible - it cna't be moved to accomodate changes in population.

This is a red herring. Freeways are rather inflexible, too. At least, they were the last time I checked. For that matter, I am aware of precious few arterial streets that have been moved due to changing population. And, what does "changing population" even mean, anyway? The Red Line runs from Reliant Park through the Med Center, Museum District, Midtown to Downtown. Are you suggesting that any of those population centers are going to move? The expansion is virtually all within the confines of Loop 610. In the two places where it is planned to go outside the Loop, Northline and the Galleria, there is no expectation that these areas will disappear soon.

Perhaps you could explain what you mean.

[Ross]

Is the shrinking bus problem that bad, or are you just exaggerating?

There's a quote above that the number of buses has dropped from 1400 to 1200. There have been several articles in the media about protests by people who live on bus routes that Metro proposes to terminate. Those routes tend to be in places like Acres Homes, where the residents are more likely to rely on public transport, and there is no intent of building rail. Metro isnt' all about helping the professionals take the cool train to work. It's far more important, in my mind, to help the folks whose circumstances make it difficult for them to own cars.

[Ross]

This is a red herring. Freeways are rather inflexible, too. At least, they were the last time I checked. For that matter, I am aware of precious few arterial streets that have been moved due to changing population. And, what does "changing population" even mean, anyway? The Red Line runs from Reliant Park through the Med Center, Museum District, Midtown to Downtown. Are you suggesting that any of those population centers are going to move? The expansion is virtually all within the confines of Loop 610. In the two places where it is planned to go outside the Loop, Northline and the Galleria, there is no expectation that these areas will disappear soon.

Perhaps you could explain what you mean.

It is trivially easy to add buses and routes as needs change. Rail doesnt' have that same flexibility. Buses can run on smaller streets, or be rerouted if necessary. rail is stuck with a single path.

Populations move. Midtown was dead for 30+ years, and there's nothing to stop that from happening again. That applies to any population center in town.

[RedScare]

Freeways are also stuck to a single path. So what. This adaptability thing is a red herring proffered by the build more freeways crowd. It is hogwash. A route that constantly changes loses ridership, because the riders never gain confidence in its long term viability. In fact, let me quote YOU a couple of posts earlier: "There have been several articles in the media about protests by people who live on bus routes that Metro proposes to terminate." It is also detrimental to development, for the same reasons. A rail line...like a freeway...draws development precisely because it is permanent. You are citing a positive attribute of rail and calling it a negative one. And you are wrong.

Now, about this 200 bus reduction. Are you aware that METRO has 132 bus routes? Do you know how many buses it takes to serve those routes? Do you know which buses were decommissioned? Were they the old, inefficient and costly to maintain buses? In other words, how do you know that this reduction to 1200 buses is not an improvement to METRO's efficiency? Show me.

[IronTiger]

Is the Acres Home route being eliminated entirely, or just have less buses running on it?

[IHB2]

Freeways are also stuck to a single path. So what. This adaptability thing is a red herring proffered by the build more freeways crowd. It is hogwash. A route that constantly changes loses ridership, because the riders never gain confidence in its long term viability. In fact, let me quote YOU a couple of posts earlier: "There have been several articles in the media about protests by people who live on bus routes that Metro proposes to terminate." It is also detrimental to development, for the same reasons. A rail line...like a freeway...draws development precisely because it is permanent. You are citing a positive attribute of rail and calling it a negative one. And you are wrong.

Now, about this 200 bus reduction. Are you aware that METRO has 132 bus routes? Do you know how many buses it takes to serve those routes? Do you know which buses were decommissioned? Were they the old, inefficient and costly to maintain buses? In other words, how do you know that this reduction to 1200 buses is not an improvement to METRO's efficiency? Show me.

freeways are filled only with vehicles that are virtually unlimited in choices of paths once they exit. probably not the best analogy to fixed rail. any city benefits from as many transportation options as possible, including light rail.

but the mix vs. the available funds is the issue METRO seeks to raise here. they can fund buses til the cows come home and still give up their 25%. but not if they build out rail...

[kylejack]

Metro's eliminating the 44? I really doubt that. Link me to this article about an Acres Homes route being axed.

As to fewer buses, not as many buses are needed when rail is duplicating the path a bus used to go on.

Anyway, here's a list of Metro changes that went into effect today. http://www.ridemetro.org/SchedulesMaps/Pdfs/ServiceChanges/TakeOne061012_en.pdf

[mfastx]

METRO is toning down bus routes due to their low ridership and the inefficiency of buses. If more rail is built, then some of those 1200 remaining buses will be free to serve other areas they couldn't serve previously because they were serving what the rail will now serve.

If that makes sense lol.

[TheNiche]

METRO is toning down bus routes due to their low ridership and the inefficiency of buses. If more rail is built, then some of those 1200 remaining buses will be free to serve other areas they couldn't serve previously because they were serving what the rail will now serve.

If that makes sense lol.

So...after spending beyond our means forcing undesirable tradeoffs in the level of service, then (many years later and presuming that we still have those buses or that they still run) we can spend even more beyond our means on vastly more services. No, that doesn't make any sense at all.

[kdog08]

So...after spending beyond our means forcing undesirable tradeoffs in the level of service, then (many years later and presuming that we still have those buses or that they still run) we can spend even more beyond our means on vastly more services. No, that doesn't make any sense at all.

The fact of the matter is that Houston needs to do something in order to fund that vast amount of infrastructure it is going to need. Houstonians are going to have to decide how much, if any, of that cheapness quality Houston offers they will want to give up in favor of quality of life that comes with more parks, superior transit options, etc..

[Ross]

More parks? Where are you going to get the land for more parks? And, buses ARE the superior transit option. I've found them far more useful than rail.

[Trae]

More parks? Where are you going to get the land for more parks? And, buses ARE the superior transit option. I've found them far more useful than rail.

Lol, buses arent superior. Maybe in your specific situation, but overall, rail is clearly superior (on time performance, more capacity, etc.).

[kylejack]

More parks? Where are you going to get the land for more parks? And, buses ARE the superior transit option. I've found them far more useful than rail.

So about that Acres Homes route that is getting canceled...the article, please?

[woolie]

More rail, please. I'll try to show up.

[Slick Vik]

More parks? Where are you going to get the land for more parks? And, buses ARE the superior transit option. I've found them far more useful than rail.

Most buses are empty, so I don't think people agree with you.

[mfastx]

So...after spending beyond our means forcing undesirable tradeoffs in the level of service, then (many years later and presuming that we still have those buses or that they still run) we can spend even more beyond our means on vastly more services. No, that doesn't make any sense at all.

The only thing that has forced undesirable tradeoffs in METRO's service is the General Mobility Tax. METRO needs more funding to adequately serve the Houston area, and I think it will get those funds.

In fact, IMO, having light rail as opposed to little used bus routes is a desirable tradeoff to me.

Edit: Re-reading your reply, I'm not sure you understood what I was saying. As the rail is built, it will replace some bus routes. If some bus routes are replaced by rail, then what happens to the buses that were running those bus routes before the rail came in? Well, they are free to beef up other bus routes that need more buses, OR they can serve new routes and/or restore routes that had been cancelled.

Get it?

[mfastx]

More parks? Where are you going to get the land for more parks? And, buses ARE the superior transit option. I've found them far more useful than rail.

Not sure of how parks are in METRO's plans, but there is already plenty of undeveloped land in Houston, that's where.

On buses being a superior transit option, facts disagree with you. I'll go with facts any day.

[Slick Vik]

I'm at the meeting. Ordinary people support transit people that have a vendetta are against it.

[TheNiche]

I'm at the meeting. Ordinary people support transit people that have a vendetta are against it.

Your noxious rhetoric reminds me of anti-semetic propagandistic political cartoons from a century ago. The concept of the 'other' always seems abnormal.

[kylejack]

I'm at the meeting. Ordinary people support transit people that have a vendetta are against it.

What are "transit people"? What are "ordinary people"?

[Simbha]

What are "transit people"? What are "ordinary people"?

I'm pretty sure the period is intended to come after the word 'transit' (i.e., Ordinary people support transit[.] [P]eople that have a vendetta are against it.)