Commuter Rail in Houston

[skwatra]

BTW, some interesting statistics regarding commute methods are found in the following.  If you want to test yourself, I've listed stats for three cities below - Houston, Dallas, Austin.  Pick the city first and then look at the report and see how correct you were.  If you're feeling really brave, post your answers before you look at the report. 

 

http://demographia.com/db-jtwmma2012.pdf

 

City A

79.7% commute in car alone

11.0% car pool

  3.5% work from home

  2.6% use mass transit

  1.4% walk

  0.3% bike

  1.6% other

 

City B

81.0% commute in car alone

10.1% car pool

  4.6% work from home

  1.5% use mass transit

  1.1% walk

  0.2% bike

  1.5% other

 

City C

76.3% commute in car alone

11.1% car pool

  6.4% work from home

  2.3% use mass transit

  2.1% walk

  0.8% bike

  1.1% other

 

I'll play.

Based on working from home and biking, I'll go with Austin for City C.

A and B is a crapshoot. I'll go with Houston for B. My rationale, I watched 1000 commuters in Dallas and saw 2 bikers, but in Houston I saw 3 (ok, i just guessed).

 

[arche_757]

A: Houston

B: Dallas

C: Austin (basing that on number of work at home)

[Slick Vik]

Bus/BRT is far more flexible than rail because you have the option to initiate a number of different levels of service on it utilizing either dedicated or not dedicated right of way considering the amount of congestion or demand in the area. Additionally, BRT allows the ability to add features to individual stations progressively if volume increases on a particular route. As a result, it's much more cost-efficient especially when trying to build a large network.

Brt is not more flexible it requires the same ROW acquisitions and requirements as light rail. Buses are more flexible but since they aren't grade separated are prone to delays and traffic.

[Slick Vik]

wow, those DART numbers are extreme. (though to be fair, no one ever said this transit system would be profitable.. as i dont even think the NYC system is profitable) but to counter that, what about all the development those rail lines have brought to the area? there was an article recently about how over the last 10 years DART has attracted 7 billion dollars in development along its rail lines. one could say by having an extensive transit system in place, it makes your city more attractive to developers and potential new residents, driving more growth to your city. that 7 billion dollars is more than enough to counteract the 5.65 billion loss over 10 years in the profits vs operating costs.

yes jobs are spreading out, but they are doing so along established corridors (for the most part), so rail could theoretically have stops at those job centers (if there are rail lines near/along those corridors, like Westpark, 290/Hempstead, and i10 would be, if they decided to put that planned rail down the middle of 10 that they strengthened the new bridges for).

heh.. funny you mention that. i believe ive used "spiderweb" to describe my plan in this very thread. or maybe it was over in the ideal transit plan, but i completely agree. thats what the busses are for that are being taken off the highways with the rail system in place. all those P&R busses could be rerouted to spiderweb out from the rail stations into the surrounding areas, so that people dont have to find their own way or walk long distances, to get from the rail station to their final destination (or from their starting point).

and yeah the ease of BRT to LRT conversion is why im fine with building the richmond/westpark (hopefully?) and uptown lines as BRT initially, since culberson is blocking LRT.

i dont think HOV lanes should be used for commuter rail. i love the HOV system. i just think commuter rail would take all the busses and more of those commuters out of the HOV lanes, freeing them up for the expanding population increase we are having.. the HOT lane conversions already slowed down many HOV lanes apparently, with all the additional vehicles. it would be the same effect with the population boom, just slower, over a longer period of time. but its still going to happen, and i dont want our HOV system to be rendered useless (if that ever happens, then by all means im down to throw commuter rail lines down every HOV lane in Houston, lol)..

and yeah, it would be nice to build rail when its needed, but by 1990 LA was far and away the largest city in the US without rail. just as before 2004 Houston was the largest city without rail.. its just more expensive to acquire the ROW in the future, so im all for acquiring that ROW now to reserve it for when its needed. but as arche pointed out, it takes years to build this type of stuff, so we need to technically start before its actually "needed". otherwise all the heavy traffic and lack of any alternative ways of getting around town is going to hinder our growth as the traffic/area becomes less attractive to potential new residents.

What highway is profitable?

[livincinco]

Brt is not more flexible it requires the same ROW acquisitions and requirements as light rail. Buses are more flexible but since they aren't grade separated are prone to delays and traffic.

 

That's completely incorrect.  There are many levels of service that are considered BRT and they can include no separation, partial separation, dedicated roadway, and grade separated.  Read the GAO analysis of BRT.

[livincinco]

What highway is profitable?

 

The construction costs of Beltway 8 have been paid off by the tolls collected and has been highly profitable.  The tolls collected are far higher than the maintenance costs for the highway.

 

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/13_undercover&id=8674303

[Slick Vik]

That's completely incorrect.  There are many levels of service that are considered BRT and they can include no separation, partial separation, dedicated roadway, and grade separated.  Read the GAO analysis of BRT.

 

It's not true BRT unless it is grade separated and/or dedicated roadway. Have you ridden Primo in San Antonio? Would you consider that BRT? It's just a bus that runs more frequently, like quickline here. But if it's subject to the same traffic constraints, that's not BRT. So you are totally incorrect.

The construction costs of Beltway 8 have been paid off by the tolls collected and has been highly profitable.  The tolls collected are far higher than the maintenance costs for the highway.

 

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/13_undercover&id=8674303

 

Beltway 8 is a tollway not a highway. Good try though. Also related to the beltway the tolls were supposed to stop when construction costs were paid off, good to see that happened. Oh, wait...

[Slick Vik]

So I dug into the DART numbers that cuatro gave and he decorated them to say the least. First of all he stated total costs, not costs by mode. Light rail is 35% of the total operating costs, while bus is 50%. Second of all the rail operating costs have gone down from 2009 financial plan to 2014 financial plan, from $164.4 million to $157.8 million. Finally I'd like to add this interesting note, the biggest reductions were from elimination of HOV lane costs

 

The most significant change in expenses comes from the elimination of HOV costs.

DART has operated, maintained, and enforced compliance on 75 miles of High

Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes across six primary corridors. This is down from 84

miles in the first half of 2011 due to 9 miles along IH 635 (LBJ Freeway) being taken

out of service as the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) began

reconstruction that highway. For FY14, TxDOT will assume nearly all of these

responsibilities and expenses. DART will continue to pay for an existing contract with

Barrier Systems to operate the Barrier Transfer Vehicles on I-30. Beyond FY14,

DART will have no more responsibilities related to HOV operations, and HOV

operating expenses become zero. As such, HOV Expenses for the period of 2014 –

2018 are reduced by 96.9%.

[livincinco]

It's not true BRT unless it is grade separated and/or dedicated roadway. Have you ridden Primo in San Antonio? Would you consider that BRT? It's just a bus that runs more frequently, like quickline here. But if it's subject to the same traffic constraints, that's not BRT. So you are totally incorrect.

 

Beltway 8 is a tollway not a highway. Good try though. Also related to the beltway the tolls were supposed to stop when construction costs were paid off, good to see that happened. Oh, wait...

 

The definition of BRT that I gave is the definition that is given by the GAO and FTA.  If you would like to inform them that their definition is wrong you're welcome to do so.  For reference, I've once again attached the GAO analysis of BRT.  I would suggest that you read it.

 

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-811

 

The definition of a tollway according to the MacMillan dictionary is a highway that you have to pay to drive on.  The definition of a highway by the same source is a wide road built for fast travel between towns and cities.  Based on those definitions, not sure how you can consider the Beltway to not be a highway.

 

Interesting to note that the Beltway is apparently not only profitable, but is apparently too profitable for your tastes.

[livincinco]

So I dug into the DART numbers that cuatro gave and he decorated them to say the least. First of all he stated total costs, not costs by mode. Light rail is 35% of the total operating costs, while bus is 50%. Second of all the rail operating costs have gone down from 2009 financial plan to 2014 financial plan, from $164.4 million to $157.8 million. Finally I'd like to add this interesting note, the biggest reductions were from elimination of HOV lane costs

 

The most significant change in expenses comes from the elimination of HOV costs.

DART has operated, maintained, and enforced compliance on 75 miles of High

Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes across six primary corridors. This is down from 84

miles in the first half of 2011 due to 9 miles along IH 635 (LBJ Freeway) being taken

out of service as the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) began

reconstruction that highway. For FY14, TxDOT will assume nearly all of these

responsibilities and expenses. DART will continue to pay for an existing contract with

Barrier Systems to operate the Barrier Transfer Vehicles on I-30. Beyond FY14,

DART will have no more responsibilities related to HOV operations, and HOV

operating expenses become zero. As such, HOV Expenses for the period of 2014 –

2018 are reduced by 96.9%.

 

Every number that I provided was either from the DART FY 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report or the DART FY 2014 Business Plan.  Both of those documents can be found at the below link.  I'd suggest that anyone who is interested should review that information and draw their own conclusions.

 

http://www.dart.org/debtdocuments/investorinformation.asp?zeon=investorinformation

 

[Slick Vik]

The definition of BRT that I gave is the definition that is given by the GAO and FTA.  If you would like to inform them that their definition is wrong you're welcome to do so.  For reference, I've once again attached the GAO analysis of BRT.  I would suggest that you read it.

 

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-811

 

The definition of a tollway according to the MacMillan dictionary is a highway that you have to pay to drive on.  The definition of a highway by the same source is a wide road built for fast travel between towns and cities.  Based on those definitions, not sure how you can consider the Beltway to not be a highway.

 

Interesting to note that the Beltway is apparently not only profitable, but is apparently too profitable for your tastes.

 

I've gone through that and actually ridden BRT in many cities around the world. I can say with confidence that without separation from traffic, it's useless. There's a huge difference between Transmilenio in Bogota and Primo in San Antonio.

 

Also, there's a difference between a highway and a tollway. A road where you don't pay tolls is never, ever profitable. But why is it that this is ignored and rail gets the scrutiny with fares not equaling operating costs? TxDOT doesn't have enough money to maintain what it has right now. At some point we have to be honest with ourselves and figure out a way to invest in alternative transit that is fast and efficient. Buses that go with cars is NOT fast nor efficient.

[arche_757]

And there is a big difference between Bogota and San Antonio.

 

One is a capital of a nation.  The other a large city (by population) but a relative economic backwater by American standards.  One has the benefit of all the federal money one would expect a capital of a rather provincial nation would spend, the other fights tooth and nail to claw some funding away from cities with a much higher/broader interest in transit than car-centric low density San Antonio.

 

To expect that Houston's first forray into BRT would result in grade seperated BRT lanes/roadways/paths is a bit too optimistic.  If we go to that extreme all over we may as well build Light Rail.  Instead BRT will allow for a flexible approach to transit while right of way is acquired and lines researched.  BRT can move a few blocks if it proves to be lower ridership than originally thought.  LRT cannot.

 

Also, if you're going to look at Bogota - find the revenue sources for their transit projects.  I'll wager some of those fingers point back towards the US, if not the federal government, then perhaps some private company that would love to say:  See here's our buses working at full capacity inside a major urban area.  I would also love to see the riders, cost per mile, cost per unit etc.  Vastly different than what we assume I'll imagine.  Should be interesting.

[Slick Vik]

And there is a big difference between Bogota and San Antonio.

 

One is a capital of a nation.  The other a large city (by population) but a relative economic backwater by American standards.  One has the benefit of all the federal money one would expect a capital of a rather provincial nation would spend, the other fights tooth and nail to claw some funding away from cities with a much higher/broader interest in transit than car-centric low density San Antonio.

 

To expect that Houston's first forray into BRT would result in grade seperated BRT lanes/roadways/paths is a bit too optimistic.  If we go to that extreme all over we may as well build Light Rail.  Instead BRT will allow for a flexible approach to transit while right of way is acquired and lines researched.  BRT can move a few blocks if it proves to be lower ridership than originally thought.  LRT cannot.

 

Also, if you're going to look at Bogota - find the revenue sources for their transit projects.  I'll wager some of those fingers point back towards the US, if not the federal government, then perhaps some private company that would love to say:  See here's our buses working at full capacity inside a major urban area.  I would also love to see the riders, cost per mile, cost per unit etc.  Vastly different than what we assume I'll imagine.  Should be interesting.

 

Houston's first foray into BRT is actually using separated lanes, the uptown line. Once you have separated lanes I don't see where the flexibility comes from, aside from running more buses.

[arche_757]

You don't have to seperate the lanes the entire length of the line.  Only major stops need to be calculated.  BRT is brilliant because it can be implemented prior to doing all of that - for the most part.  Once the routes catch on then you can upgrade over time.

[mfastx]

I never understood why "flexibility" is even an issue regarding transit. Unless it's a low density, low population line, being flexible is useless. The permanence of grade separated BRT and rail is actually an advantage. People know it's going to be there for the long haul, and that the adjacent neighborhoods will always get great transit service.

It's the same concept with freeways. If you place a high quality piece of infrastructure somewhere, the city will grow around it. No need for flexibility at all.

[arche_757]

I guess one can equate flexibility for BRT to being able to manuever the route.  For instance, if there was to be a line down Westheimer - and there was so much traffic that METRO decided to make it a quicker route and moved it to W. Alabama?  Just a thought?

 

Grade seperated BRT is different from what I'm writing about.

[Slick Vik]

I guess one can equate flexibility for BRT to being able to manuever the route.  For instance, if there was to be a line down Westheimer - and there was so much traffic that METRO decided to make it a quicker route and moved it to W. Alabama?  Just a thought?

 

Grade seperated BRT is different from what I'm writing about.

 

In that sense BRT isn't really rapid unless it has grade separation or at least a dedicated lane. Running more buses is pointless if they all get stuck in traffic.

You don't have to seperate the lanes the entire length of the line.  Only major stops need to be calculated.  BRT is brilliant because it can be implemented prior to doing all of that - for the most part.  Once the routes catch on then you can upgrade over time.

 

The issue here is then that once you leave dedicated lanes, it's slow again. That takes away from the "rapid" concept.

[arche_757]

^Baby Steps people!  I want a NYC/London scale transit system overnight, but we have to start somewhere.

[livincinco]

I've gone through that and actually ridden BRT in many cities around the world. I can say with confidence that without separation from traffic, it's useless. There's a huge difference between Transmilenio in Bogota and Primo in San Antonio.

 

Also, there's a difference between a highway and a tollway. A road where you don't pay tolls is never, ever profitable. But why is it that this is ignored and rail gets the scrutiny with fares not equaling operating costs? TxDOT doesn't have enough money to maintain what it has right now. At some point we have to be honest with ourselves and figure out a way to invest in alternative transit that is fast and efficient. Buses that go with cars is NOT fast nor efficient.

 

I agree that there's a huge difference between BRT in San Antonio and Bogota and that's been exactly my point.  BRT can be implemented at many different levels with or without separation from traffic.  Regarding your analysis of the uselessness of BRT without separation, both the GAO and the FTA disagree with you.  You would know that if you actually read the report.

 

Regarding highways and tollways, you might notice that virtually every new highway that is being built in Houston is a tollroad.  Those are profitable entities.

 

This is really becoming quite tiresome.

 

 

 

[Slick Vik]

I agree that there's a huge difference between BRT in San Antonio and Bogota and that's been exactly my point.  BRT can be implemented at many different levels with or without separation from traffic.  Regarding your analysis of the uselessness of BRT without separation, both the GAO and the FTA disagree with you.  You would know that if you actually read the report.

 

Regarding highways and tollways, you might notice that virtually every new highway that is being built in Houston is a tollroad.  Those are profitable entities.

 

This is really becoming quite tiresome.

 

 

 

 

San Antonio and Las Vegas aren't BRT despite the name. Bogota, Istanbul, Leon Mexico, those are BRT. Not having the dedicated lane makes all the difference. You can be like an attorney and argue on a technicality but I'm arguing on reality.

[Slick Vik]

Here's a study for you guys

 

http://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/publications/files/lightrailvsbus.pdf

[Slick Vik]

And another that says LRT Is better cost wise and ridership wise than BRT

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/blogs/lyndon-henry/research-study-new-lrt-projects-beat-brt-on-capital-cost-ridership-measures.html

[IronTiger]

And another that says LRT Is better cost wise and ridership wise than BRT

Oh look, you're back to posting random articles to prove your point again instead of actually trying to input your own words. (In regards to your "research", I would find a "study" from one who writes on a rail advocacy group to range from biased at best to a complete fabrication at worse)

but I'm arguing on reality.

When you've repeatedly stated with a straight face that the Pierce Elevated should be demolished, I don't think you can claim "arguing on reality" yet.

[Slick Vik]

Oh look, you're back to posting random articles to prove your point again instead of actually trying to input your own words. (In regards to your "research", I would find a "study" from one who writes on a rail advocacy group to range from biased at best to a complete fabrication at worse)

When you've repeatedly stated with a straight face that the Pierce Elevated should be demolished, I don't think you can claim "arguing on reality" yet.

Pierce elevated isn't the only freeway in downtown people could take 59

[IronTiger]

Pierce elevated isn't the only freeway in downtown people could take 59

The prosecution rests, Your Honor.

----------

Anyway, commuter rail! One thing I think if there was commuter rail in Houston, it should not only go for the suburbs that are just outside of Houston (Sugar Land, for instance), it should go across the entire greater area Houston sprawl. It should terminate at Conroe, Texas to the north, for instance (not The Woodlands), Beaumont (in regards to that versus College Station, the College Station-Bryan metro area is a lot larger than Beaumont's, and the miles of rail from downtown are about the same as well), and Galveston. The "terminal points" wouldn't have daily service, but they are connected in with the network.

[livincinco]

I never understood why "flexibility" is even an issue regarding transit. Unless it's a low density, low population line, being flexible is useless. The permanence of grade separated BRT and rail is actually an advantage. People know it's going to be there for the long haul, and that the adjacent neighborhoods will always get great transit service.

It's the same concept with freeways. If you place a high quality piece of infrastructure somewhere, the city will grow around it. No need for flexibility at all.

 

The advantage of flexibility is if you're looking to build an extensive network.   As I mentioned previously, my feeling is that Houston is best served by having a multi-hundred mile network of bus/BRT which is more focused on providing extensive coverage than it is on generating high ridership on any individual line.  In that scenario, utilizing the multiple levels of BRT makes a lot of sense.  A line might be a standard bus line today, but based on potential could be upgraded to a Quickline service.  Additional upgrades could be added incrementally.

 

A good example would be a potential BRT line down Westheimer.  I would suggest that you would want something similar to Quickline west of Hwy 6, some further upgrades toward Beltway 8, and dedicated lines as it moved closed to the Galleria and inside the loop.  I think that there's a number of other areas that would fit a similar model.

[arche_757]

The prosecution rests, Your Honor.

----------

Anyway, commuter rail! One thing I think if there was commuter rail in Houston, it should not only go for the suburbs that are just outside of Houston (Sugar Land, for instance), it should go across the entire greater area Houston sprawl. It should terminate at Conroe, Texas to the north, for instance (not The Woodlands), Beaumont (in regards to that versus College Station, the College Station-Bryan metro area is a lot larger than Beaumont's, and the miles of rail from downtown are about the same as well), and Galveston. The "terminal points" wouldn't have daily service, but they are connected in with the network.

False.

 

Beaumont MSA: 388,000

Bryan/College Station MSA: 234,000

 

both off the 2010 census.

 

[IronTiger]

False.

 

Beaumont MSA: 388,000

Bryan/College Station MSA: 234,000

 

both off the 2010 census.

A bit misleading. The city of College Station alone recently surpassed 100k with Bryan coming in at 75k, with the additional small-town satellites (even going as far north as Franklin or as far west as Somerville to account for more.

Conversely, Beaumont's also pulls in Orange, which is about 14 miles away from Port Arthur or 20 from Beaumont. A gap even exists between Beaumont and Nederland. The metropolitan areas really just try to cluster areas...the Temple-Killeen area clocks in at around 400,000k, but it's just a collection of disconnected cities. The College Station-Bryan cluster actually functions as one city.

[Slick Vik]

The advantage of flexibility is if you're looking to build an extensive network. As I mentioned previously, my feeling is that Houston is best served by having a multi-hundred mile network of bus/BRT which is more focused on providing extensive coverage than it is on generating high ridership on any individual line. In that scenario, utilizing the multiple levels of BRT makes a lot of sense. A line might be a standard bus line today, but based on potential could be upgraded to a Quickline service. Additional upgrades could be added incrementally.

A good example would be a potential BRT line down Westheimer. I would suggest that you would want something similar to Quickline west of Hwy 6, some further upgrades toward Beltway 8, and dedicated lines as it moved closed to the Galleria and inside the loop. I think that there's a number of other areas that would fit a similar model.

While I understand your point to an extent talking about investing in solely buses while the rest of the world is many steps ahead makes houston look sad and laughable in this aspect.

[arche_757]

A bit misleading. The city of College Station alone recently surpassed 100k with Bryan coming in at 75k, with the additional small-town satellites (even going as far north as Franklin or as far west as Somerville to account for more.

Conversely, Beaumont's also pulls in Orange, which is about 14 miles away from Port Arthur or 20 from Beaumont. A gap even exists between Beaumont and Nederland. The metropolitan areas really just try to cluster areas...the Temple-Killeen area clocks in at around 400,000k, but it's just a collection of disconnected cities. The College Station-Bryan cluster actually functions as one city.

 

Yet Beaumont is larger.  This isn't CSA (which adds all the little towns from all over and everywhere in between), its MSA.  And Beaumont has 100,000 more people than Bryan-College Station.  Nothing against BCS, just isn't as large.

 

Beaumont has the oil industry and a port complex going for it.  BCS has Texas A&M University going for it.  Personally I'm not sure which of those two I would rather have if I were a city?

 

Temple/Belton/Killeen is a hodge-podge of cities that have only grown because of the massive spending by the Army/Dept of Defense at Fort Hood.  Take away Fort Hood and TBK would be a lot smaller.  (But we are shifting away from the tired conversation of commuter rail in Houston)

 

I should add - Beaumont (itself) while not a great city feels like a city, while Bryan-College Station have never felt like a city.  I have not ventured into Bryan since the work on their main street, so I'll reserve total judgement until that time.  Suffice to say Aggieland while nice, could have been so much more had the university actually been located in one of Central Texas' quaint little towns (Brenham, Navasota, Bryan, even Anderson or Montgomery).  Oh well.