por favor gracias

I'm not a fan of light rail going down a lengthy stretch of freeway (like the Katy Freeway) in general. That said, there's a few ways to handle the situation you're talking about. If we had trains that could carry 1,000 or more people at a time, and left every 5 minutes during rush hour...that would be 12,000 people being moved at their own *true* convenience (with no unexpected delays) per hour from one line. The Bloor subway line in Toronto alone gets almost 500,000 riders per day, which is more daily ridership than any freeway in the Houston area. The Yonge Line (which is really two lines) gets over 700,000 per day. I can't stress enough that it's all about what kind of rail, and how and where it's built.

My goal is to provide the safest, cleanest, cheapest, most efficient and least stressful way of getting the masses from point A to point B. It's not even a matter of opinion, the answer to all of those is trains and/or subways. That's really all I'm "for" at this point. We're just digging our hole a little deeper every day we continue to ignore/procrastinate on building something like that here. I know you're not "anti-transit" or anything. I hear and get what you're saying...and I actually agree with you on a basic level. I like how buses can move more people than individual automobiles, and I think for now it's easy to say they serve a good purpose (aside from all the black smoke)...but they just can't compete with trains on a number of levels. I think the most pressing needs in Houston stem from our consistently robust population growth. I would say the most pressing need would be to stop growing unless/until we can manage it efficiently. Since that doesn't appear to be in the cards in the foreseeable future, I think it's obvious that the most pressing need at this point is to build a real mass transit system. We've been ignoring this and building more and more roads and more and more automobiles, and look where we're at now...tearing up thousands of acres of more habitat that once belonged to nature and building toll roads "looping" 25 or 30 miles outside of the city. Needless to say, I'm not impressed. NYC has about 8 million residents (and about 20 million in the metro area), with 5.4 million people taking the subways every day and 450 subway stations serving the area. Their commute sucks no matter what method of transportation their residents use. Could you imagine what that place would be like at rush hour if it wasn't for their mass transit system? A lot more people there take the subway than automobile, even though there are 5,936 miles of streets in NYC and "only" 842 miles of track. LA is extremely automobile-oriented, and they have consistently been at or among the worst cities for commuting over the years. Like I was saying earlier, there are a number of factors that weigh in on a particular city's commute times. How is it laid out? How many residents does it have? What kind of transportation is available? Where is it located? I agree with what you're saying about commute times and transferring, but the answer to that is to either build more connecting lines...or learn from our mistakes and plan/build correctly the first time. I just looked up subway fares in NYC and Chicago, and it appears that there is very little difference in price when compared to taking the bus.

Yes...I would say that is the definition of "efficient." There's no way it's "less" efficient to carry 500 people on one train than by 400 or 500 vehicles.

I'm not saying those costs "should be attributed to the cost of the project." I'm saying that they are real costs that *aren't included* in those initial monetary costs. I strongly disagree that automobiles are a product of "discretionary" income. For some, that's the case...but the reason why a lot of people have cars is because they need a feasible way to get from point A to point B, and at least here in Houston, we are yet to have a real alternative. The people who buy larger and/or more stylish vehicles are choosing to spend discretionary income, but it's not like there's this great transportation system in place...and they are truly "choosing to drive" over reasonable alternatives. It's just that driving is really the only way to get around here, and a lot of people put a lot of stock in status. I've mentioned earlier that speed, efficiency and just overall effectiveness all depends on how and where these transportation systems are built. The biggest reason why some rail/trains are slower than vehicles is because we have based so much of our infrastructure on roads and automobiles. That's why we are in this position in the first place...and that is another area where change needs to happen and soon. All I'm saying is that it's better to start building smarter now than later.

I agree it looks a lot better than the older renderings...but still like International Tower much more.

That's true, and it's much better than it was before...although I can't help but criticize the design out by Eldridge and Hwy 6 where it goes down to 4 main lanes. That's a big reason for a lot of those backups, and it's not going to get any better with all the new development underway. And keep in mind that if we added all of the costs to the Katy Freeway project that have been spent since the initial "payment," from gas, tolls, maintenance, insurance, etc....that $2.8 billion price tag is already a lot higher. I don't really like the idea of light rail out as far as, say, the Energy Corridor. We need faster ways of getting to and from areas outside the loop for sure.

Let's at least make it a fair fight.

The Katy Freeway project costed $2.8 billion.

So one the best perks is that you can get to Baytown in 30 minutes on a weekend? That's a low bar if you ask me, and there are still plenty of "consequences" that occur from both everyday and situational events on the roads...traffic jams, lane/freeway closures, stalled vehicles, accidents, flashing stop lights like the ones the other day at Hammerly and the Beltway that "graced" thousands of us with yet another unexpected 10 - 20 minute delay, hydrochloric acid on the freeway for 6 or 12 hours, slick/icy conditions...you never know when most of these situations will present themselves. Then there's always that person who is either on his or her cell phone, or can't decide which DVD to put in, or "can't handle" going only 80 MPH and causes an accident...actually there are hundreds of them every day doing just that in the Houston area alone. Let's also not forget about the cop(s) sneakily waiting over some hill around I-10 and Normandy for a certain number to appear on his or her radar gun, whether or not that person is actually affecting traffic in any way. And then there's the fact that we all have to directly pay for our own personal automobiles, and their gas, and their insurance, and their repairs/maintenance, plus tolls and parking fees, plus and any extra time and/or money spent at the DMV, repair shop, court, etc....and then there are the environmental/health impacts. It's just crazy to me that so many people don't even want to talk about this stuff. Other than food, water, oxygen, etc...very few things impact our lives as much as our transportation system does on a daily basis. A lot of people who act as if there is either no consequence from their actions or they just don't care come off as being self-serving and/or fake to me...as if the thought itself of slightly altering such a consumerist lifestyle is "too much of a price to pay." I love driving as much as the next guy, and my business depends on it. That said, I would surrender my personal preferences for a greater good in a heartbeat if there were real options. Give me the train that I know is going to be safer, cleaner, cheaper, more efficient, more consistent, more sustainable and less stressful...unless there's an earthquake or something (and even then, it's not like the road is "the place you wanna be" either). If we had trains/subways going through/around town like our freeways do, you could still very easily make it to Baytown as quickly as (or faster than) you would by automobile...especially at rush hour.

That's true...I'm just saying that it's "more efficient" to carry 50 or 100 or 1,000 people by train than by 50, 100 or 1,000 automobiles. You're right, though...it all really depends on where and how it's built. To build a truly efficient system in Houston would require miles and miles of trains. The way I see it, it's better/cheaper/easier to stop building outward and start connecting places around town now then later.

Agree, although I don't like the idea of taking away a lane of Richmond. I'd like for us to build a subway from U oh H down Richmond or (preferably) Elgin/Westheimer all the way out to at least Westchase with stops at U of H, Main St, Montrose, Kirby, GWP/Highland Village/ROD, the Galleria, Bering/Augusta, Hillcroft/Dunvale, Gessner and the BW8/Rogerdale area...perhaps with fewer stops if we would build moving walkways underground with good access to street level and thoughtful placement of retail at or near certain intersections (particularly at stations where we would transfer).

We could very easily have as many jobs (probably more) from having a mass transit system than by widening freeways...and like I mentioned earlier, there are subway networks around the world that costed about the same amount of money or less (even half as much) per mile that the Katy Freeway costed us. I don't think people are moving here because of our "superior" transportation system, either. I can only speak for myself, but I can't consider Houston a "world class" city unless/until we get a real mass transit system. I absolutely consider us a "major" city.

Imagine what Houston is going to look like 60 years from now...and 160 years from now.

I don't think anyone is calling him "Satan," but he's proven to be the most critical obstructionist on these issues. Of course, no one can "prove" his intentions...but I just looked up his election results and his campaign contributions since 2000. During every election cycle during the Katy Freeway project, he got a lower percentage of votes from his constituency than the cycle before...but the constant was several of his highest "bidders"...the National Association of Realtors, the National Auto Dealers Association, National Association of Home Builders, and then mostly oil/gas companies, construction companies (I remember Williams Brothers worked on parts of the Katy Freeway) and law firms. It was also interesting to see Continental Airlines and Taste of Texas Restaurant so high on some of those lists. That first statistic leads me to believe that the Katy Freeway may not have been "what his constituents" wanted...but as is often the case with a lot of our political whereabouts, the loudest ones are the most catered to. People talk about "conspiracies" very dismissively sometimes, but you don't need an official "conspiracy" when you have friends in high places with common interests. We can blame our "representation" or the system itself...the truth is that these decisions affect all of us, and the moment we stop arguing about who is at fault and start working together to change our system/politicians will a great moment in progress.

Mass transit is by far the safest, most efficient and cheapest way to go, especially in the long run. I can't stress enough that the reason why roads and automobiles are so "convenient" (and we all know that's putting it VERY generously) is because of the way we have built our cities and how we have adjusted our lifestyles accordingly over time. You talk about how spread out we are...if our train/subway maps looked anything at all like our road maps and we built the rest of our infrastructure around them with more thoughtful planning than "this 5,000 acre plot of land a little further out looks like a good place to set up shop," we wouldn't be in this position. Then again, if we had "thoughtful planning," there may not have been more growth in the first place. The "urgency" you're talking about, though, has been created by the unsustainable way we've been doing things...and it's becoming more and more urgent every day. I agree that we should have been using our current (and past) railroad ROW for commuter rail lines...although I don't consider their current layout sufficient enough for my taste in a number of ways.

Stay Puft

I couldn't agree more...and I don't mind one bit when people are passionately expressing their thoughts about issues like this. I love talking about this stuff. If anything, it shows how much you care about this issue...and it's a very important one.

That's correct, it's a good 3 or 4 miles north of I-10.

I agree...although I don't like the idea of "going on the cheap" when it comes to transportation infrastructure....especially when the final product could be five times more expensive than it would have been to completely submerge it. There are subways in other parts of the world that costed about the same amount of money per mile as the Katy Freeway. I think they're the best kind of mass transit we can get at this point.

I'm sure that different transit systems have different results in different cities, but there's no doubt that more ridership = more cars off the road...and considering how many more miles of roads and freeways there are than there are for trains/subways, I don't think it's fair to label this method of transportation as largely ineffective. The problems we have with rail ridership have more to do with how our cities are so spread out (which is largely due to roads/automobiles in the first place) than anything. It's not close to a level playing field. There's simply not nearly enough access to mass transit. If we had the infrastructure (and we wouldn't need nearly as much as we do for roads and automobiles) in place, and built it the right way...we would have MUCH different results. There's more of a need for higher speeds for commuters coming in from the suburbs. If we had a rail/subway system somewhat similar to the one I "proposed," we could get from The Woodlands and Katy to GWP with or without a transfer. There are many ways to do it, but some are better than others. I agree that the Katy Freeway expansion has played a huge role in the activity that's gone on throughout that corridor since then...but I wonder what makes you think that the rest of Houston wouldn't have at least gained a net positive by now from what's been going on in the Energy Corridor lately if the Katy Freeway wasn't widened (if that's what you're saying)? We've still had a lot of growth of all sorts in town lately (and lots more to come apparently) despite rising prices. I'm not really arguing that the Katy Freeway expansion hasn't helped, but what if we build a subway system as well? I'm also not saying that more development would be concentrated in central areas...just that these areas may still be experiencing the same kind of growth they're seeing today if the Katy Freeway wasn't expanded, and perhaps more...most likely dependent on any overflow from would-have-been Energy Corridor employees. Not sure how much the difference would be or how much it would affect prices. The more development, the higher the prices more likely go. That said, I'd be willing to bet that all of this new development in the Energy Corridor (and The Woodlands) has contributed to increased prices in and of itself.

It if comes out looking like that Chronicle rendering, WOW!!

Please build this before Six Houston Center!

Ahh...the tradition continues!

I didn't know that either...thanks and welcome to the forum!

I hear you...we are so spread out that there is nothing close to a "perfect" solution to any of this. I'd just like for us to implement a rail/subway system like that to build on and around for the future...and then hope we are wise enough to base future development around it and the extent of future development itself.