Metro moving toward $3B bond vote for 20-year transit plan

[BeerNut]

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Metro-moving-toward-3B-bond-vote-for-20-year-13473227.php?fbclid=IwAR2iwk3pHvvNS5XSlonuwMcjgONp0qN3Zm3zjz-Z-b1gt4orE7NIq2R9mSo

 

https://kinder.rice.edu/2018/12/18/metro-presents-its-most-ambitious-plan-yet-anticipates-2019-bond-vote

 

[cspwal]

I wish that the university line could be LRT instead of BRT, but extending LRT is a good thing for those areas - they are places that can be redeveloped into denser communities, while being low traffic now so it should be easier to make the lines.

 

BRT from W Little York to Missouri City is ambitious - if they do it properly the whole way

[j_cuevas713]

I really hope this passes

[H-Town Man]

It seems peculiar that the west side of town is getting BRT, where many people are turned off by buses and more likely to ride LRT, while all the LRT is on the central/east side of town, where people are more tolerant of buses. It also seems like a glaring problem that even in 2040, you will still not be able to get on a single vehicle, either BRT or LRT, and take it all the way from the Galleria to downtown.

 

[cspwal]

There's going to be that signature Westheimer bus from downtown to the Galleria, but I'm not sure what the details are.

 

What we need is a good E/W rail route - if we could get some Boring company tunnels made for the light rail trains, it would be a 7 mi tunnel, and it would be about $140 million to make a 2 bore tunnel down Westheimer

https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/12/elon-musk-tunnel-ride-tesla-boring-company-los-angeles/578536/ 

 

Quote

Musk put a Tesla in a tunnel, and he did it for a potentially game-changing price: The demonstration tube cost $10 million a mile to dig.

 

[mfastx]

Strange to spend all LRT money on the east and north sides of town, when the much denser areas that actually support rail transit are all on the west side.  Still, would be a nice improvement. 

 

Still waiting on that University rail line promised with the 2003 referendum... 

[j_cuevas713]

1 minute ago, mfastx said:

Strange to spend all LRT money on the east and north sides of town, when the much denser areas that actually support rail transit are all on the west side.  Still, would be a nice improvement. 

 

Still waiting on that University rail line promised with the 2003 referendum... 

The University Line would be finished a long time ago had it not been for morons like Culberson. I don't mind the amount of BRT Metro want's to spend money on and where they want to place it. I think we're underestimating just how efficient that service is and how easily it could translate to rail in the future. 

[houstontexasjack]

On 12/19/2018 at 9:27 AM, cspwal said:

I wish that the university line could be LRT instead of BRT, but extending LRT is a good thing for those areas - they are places that can be redeveloped into denser communities, while being low traffic now so it should be easier to make the lines.

 

BRT from W Little York to Missouri City is ambitious - if they do it properly the whole way

Interestingly, the Metro plan suggests BRT could be converted for autonomous vehicle use in the future. 

[BeerNut]

[j_cuevas713]

Unlike the last time we voted on light rail, it seems Houstonians are finally accepting the fact that they need this more than anything. I've heard very few people actually complain about this. 

[cspwal]

Most of the complaining I've heard is we need more not that this is a waste

[rechlin]

The annoying thing is a subset of people saying we should vote no on this because they want more money spent on rail, unhappy that this puts a bigger focus on BRT.  But I'm pretty sure that if this fails, Metro will take this as the people just rejecting mass transit in general, so those people would be shooting themselves in the foot.

[j_cuevas713]

16 minutes ago, rechlin said:

The annoying thing is a subset of people saying we should vote no on this because they want more money spent on rail, unhappy that this puts a bigger focus on BRT.  But I'm pretty sure that if this fails, Metro will take this as the people just rejecting mass transit in general, so those people would be shooting themselves in the foot.

Isn't it ironic how spending too much money was an issue last election and now people are wanting to spend more? I think that's why METRO keeps telling people to educate themselves on the plan because its actually very cost efficient and smart. 

[cspwal]

My only problem with it is I think we desperately need rail going east west, but if the BRT line along I-10 is going to be an extension of the uptown BRT, then having 2 lines going every 5 minutes should help

[cougarpad]

1 hour ago, rechlin said:

The annoying thing is a subset of people saying we should vote no on this because they want more money spent on rail, unhappy that this puts a bigger focus on BRT.  But I'm pretty sure that if this fails, Metro will take this as the people just rejecting mass transit in general, so those people would be shooting themselves in the foot.

It's on Metro than to do a better job marketing their plan. They need to give people a better idea of what BRT is and that it is not a generic bus. Also, it is smart to design the BRT buses to look like light rail cars much as possible. It is going to come down to imagery. It be great to have all light rail but based on Houston's culture and the massive finances it has little chance of happening. Metro didn't do any favor for themselves with the boondoggle they turned the last light rail initiative into.

[j_cuevas713]

2 hours ago, cougarpad said:

It's on Metro than to do a better job marketing their plan. They need to give people a better idea of what BRT is and that it is not a generic bus. Also, it is smart to design the BRT buses to look like light rail cars much as possible. It is going to come down to imagery. It be great to have all light rail but based on Houston's culture and the massive finances it has little chance of happening. Metro didn't do any favor for themselves with the boondoggle they turned the last light rail initiative into.

I think they've done a great job overall selling the plan with countless meetings throughout the city the past year. There will always be an ignorant minority no matter what. One positive is people seem all in for light rail to Hobby. 

[crock]

 

2 hours ago, cougarpad said:

It's on Metro than to do a better job marketing their plan. They need to give people a better idea of what BRT is and that it is not a generic bus. Also, it is smart to design the BRT buses to look like light rail cars much as possible. It is going to come down to imagery. It be great to have all light rail but based on Houston's culture and the massive finances it has little chance of happening. Metro didn't do any favor for themselves with the boondoggle they turned the last light rail initiative into.

 

i follow this stuff and would say i'm probably in the 95% percentile when it comes to understanding what they've proposed.. but i still have no idea how a i10 BRT would work or look or function.  The idea that somehow people would be happy(?) with being dropped off somewhere near the Raising Canes/Wendys and that that would somehow be a destination that makes sense to anyone is beyond me.    

[cspwal]

7 minutes ago, crock said:

 

 

i follow this stuff and would say i'm probably in the 95% percentile when it comes to understanding what they've proposed.. but i still have no idea how a i10 BRT would work or look or function.  The idea that somehow people would be happy(?) with being dropped off somewhere near the Raising Canes/Wendys and that that would somehow be a destination that makes sense to anyone is beyond me.    

Cane's is awesome so I would take the BRT to Canes 

but your point is valid.  I assume some pedestrian bridges and bus connections will be involved

[j_cuevas713]

2 hours ago, Toopicky said:

Of there isn't light rail along the old "University" route down Richmond Ave I am voting against it .... BRT is a poor substitute and a waste of money while taking up just as much lane space. The trains add a cool factor to urban transit which attracts riders while BRT is still just a bus.

BRT is far from being a waste of money. This form of transit has proven to be efficient and reliable across the world. It just hasn't caught fire in the US just yet. Chicago and SF both have BRT lines that have been a success. But let me get something straight, you are going to vote against the entire initiative because you want trains, when BRT is just as efficient? Please reconsider for the sake of all of us in this forum to vote YES. This city would be stuck for the next 20 years if not longer without a decent transit system. Every vote is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT this year. We NEED this to pass. I'm a little lost how you didn't know about the University Line status, when it's been in the current state for almost 15 years. If you want to wait even longer for any form of transit, be my guest and vote NO. If you eventually want trains to replace the BRT lines, VOTE YES!

[cspwal]

Also a good way to make the case for light rail on the University corridor is to show high rider ship on the BRT - it can probably handle half the volume as light rail, so if the ridership approaches that then they can upgrade the guide ways.

[ZRFkris]

The only way to ever get LRT is to vote YES on transit expansion projects. We have to build an infrastructure now and can replace with whatever, whenever it makes sense. In the case for Houston the Northwest Transit Center will still succeed although it is not completely connected by train.

[j_cuevas713]

2 hours ago, ZRFkris said:

The only way to ever get LRT is to vote YES on transit expansion projects. We have to build an infrastructure now and can replace with whatever, whenever it makes sense. In the case for Houston the Northwest Transit Center will still succeed although it is not completely connected by train.

Exactly! The same way each block in this city goes from empty lot to house to skyscraper is the same way we need to think about this transit plan. If we don’t lay something down, we have nothing to build and improve upon while still moving people in the process. 

[samagon]

23 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:

Unlike the last time we voted on light rail, it seems Houstonians are finally accepting the fact that they need this more than anything. I've heard very few people actually complain about this. 

 

I think some of this comes down to certain representatives no longer representing areas of Houston.

[mfastx]

17 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:

BRT is far from being a waste of money. This form of transit has proven to be efficient and reliable across the world. It just hasn't caught fire in the US just yet. Chicago and SF both have BRT lines that have been a success. But let me get something straight, you are going to vote against the entire initiative because you want trains, when BRT is just as efficient? Please reconsider for the sake of all of us in this forum to vote YES. This city would be stuck for the next 20 years if not longer without a decent transit system. Every vote is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT this year. We NEED this to pass. I'm a little lost how you didn't know about the University Line status, when it's been in the current state for almost 15 years. If you want to wait even longer for any form of transit, be my guest and vote NO. If you eventually want trains to replace the BRT lines, VOTE YES!

 

I'm largely in agreement with most of your points but there's one thing I need to correct here: 

 

BRT is NOT as efficient or as good as LRT.  It is significantly cheaper, sure.  But on an operational basis, it generates less ridership, has less capacity and costs more per passenger to operate on top of all of that.  It's an absolute failure of Metro to never have built the original University Line as LRT.  It was promised to us in 2003 and was never built.  It is by far the second best corridor for rail in Houston after the original Red Line.  Just the University Line itself would have more ridership than the Red Line extension, Green and Purple Lines COMBINED.  That was the one important line coming out of the 2003 referendum and they screwed it up.  The original plan was to have the University and Uptown lines as rail and the east side lines as BRT.  

 

Now, all of that out of the way, despite my disappointment in the above, I would still vote yes on this plan.  Reason being is that after 2003 it took nearly 20 years for Metro to develop another expansion plan.  These projects won't all be completed until 2040 (assuming all projects get built which is quite doubtful).  If this fails, who knows how long it will be until there is another opportunity to improve transit in Houston.  While BRT for the west side lines is a disappointment, it is still a significant upgrade over what we have now.  

 

Rail to one of the airports is a win as well.  

[mollusk]

Let's not make the perfect the enemy of the good.  BRT can be upgraded to rail fairly easily.

[j_cuevas713]

57 minutes ago, mfastx said:

 

I'm largely in agreement with most of your points but there's one thing I need to correct here: 

 

BRT is NOT as efficient or as good as LRT.  It is significantly cheaper, sure.  But on an operational basis, it generates less ridership, has less capacity and costs more per passenger to operate on top of all of that.  It's an absolute failure of Metro to never have built the original University Line as LRT.  It was promised to us in 2003 and was never built.  It is by far the second best corridor for rail in Houston after the original Red Line.  Just the University Line itself would have more ridership than the Red Line extension, Green and Purple Lines COMBINED.  That was the one important line coming out of the 2003 referendum and they screwed it up.  The original plan was to have the University and Uptown lines as rail and the east side lines as BRT.  

 

Now, all of that out of the way, despite my disappointment in the above, I would still vote yes on this plan.  Reason being is that after 2003 it took nearly 20 years for Metro to develop another expansion plan.  These projects won't all be completed until 2040 (assuming all projects get built which is quite doubtful).  If this fails, who knows how long it will be until there is another opportunity to improve transit in Houston.  While BRT for the west side lines is a disappointment, it is still a significant upgrade over what we have now.  

 

Rail to one of the airports is a win as well.  

I agree it is lower capacity per bus compared to a train car but its frequent. We could see multiple buses loaded at one station at a time. It's not going to be one bus and then wait 15 minutes and then another bus. Idk why you think BRT is a disappointment. There are cities with entire BRT networks that carry tons of people daily. Just because it's not an elevated train doesn't make it less of a transit solution. 

[cspwal]

Also just having a train doesn't mean it will be frequent.  Made the mistake of trying to ride the Baltimore light rail on a Sunday, and it was over half an hour before it showed up.

[Texasota]

The Baltimore light rail is the worst light rail I have ever ridden. 

 

Shouldn't we merge this with the one in "trains"?

[cspwal]

Which BRT? I'm just asking because there's a lot of systems that use the term BRT for just a normal bus, while others operate it as much as a light rail train as possible

[Houston19514]

On 8/15/2019 at 1:06 PM, crock said:

 

 

i follow this stuff and would say i'm probably in the 95% percentile when it comes to understanding what they've proposed.. but i still have no idea how a i10 BRT would work or look or function.  The idea that somehow people would be happy(?) with being dropped off somewhere near the Raising Canes/Wendys and that that would somehow be a destination that makes sense to anyone is beyond me.    

 

On 8/15/2019 at 1:14 PM, cspwal said:

Cane's is awesome so I would take the BRT to Canes 

but your point is valid.  I assume some pedestrian bridges and bus connections will be involved

 

It's a Transit Center. It's clearly shown on the map.