Some one
-
Posts
80 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Some one
-
-
It's fine.
-
21 hours ago, Toopicky said:
I repeat ..... BRT will not be replaced by LRT for at least 30 or so years, IF EVER. You cheered it on so you will just have to live with it.
And while subways are possible to construct in Houston (they are in other places that are just as "floody") they will never be approved.
If you saw my earlier posts, I actually preferred rail being built over BRT. I understand why they had to build it as BRT, but I do agree that we screwed ourselves over any chances of rail on the west side in the next few years
-
Mono...DOH!
-
Maybe I shouldn't have said near-future. I was just curious about if they're planing on upgrading some of the brt lines to rail, especially because some of the corridors seem to warrant the ridership for rail. A subway under Westheimer would be interesting.
-
Did Metro actually say anything about upgrading the brt to light rail in the near future? I heard people say that's partly why they're building brt but I never actually heard Metro say it. The closest I heard them talk about it was when they said they plan on upgrading uptown brt to light rail in the future.
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, lithiumaneurysm said:
What compensation does the city offer to businesses affected by regular road construction? I don't think the dozens of businesses on Memorial Drive on the west side are getting anything for the pain of that disastrous project. I'm not sure why transit projects should be (and often are) held to a different standard. Infrastructure projects are disruptive by nature and a necessary evil.
The people who bend over backward for any road projects are the same people who will scream and cry foul if Metro wants to build one mile of light rail.
-
4
-
-
6 hours ago, cspwal said:
Telephone and Broadway are sperated by 3/4 mi - it's walkable, but I doubt it will turn the huge mass of people who live on broadway into daily train users. Hopefully they can coordinate a frequent bus on broadway that would connect them, because otherwise it would leave some ridership off the table.
How are they going to bridge the train tracks on Griggs? That seems like a big issue
There's a boost corridor being planned that runs down Broadway.
Honestly the good thing about the realignment is that not only is it cheaper, but it also goes through Gulfgate , which could bring in more riders.
-
3
-
-
25 minutes ago, 102IAHexpress said:
Mostly accurate representation of my view. But to be more accurate, my view is specific to Houston. Or more specifically to the incorporating charting documents of the Metropolitan Transit Authority. It was chartered primarily as a means to serve people who cannot afford automobiles, AND people who are physically impaired.
If you believe that the Metropolitan Transit Authority should have a different primary purpose. Then petition your representatives and ask to either amend its stated purpose or abolish it and start from scratch.
The more fundamental disagreement here, as I see it, is what people -think- Metro's legal purpose is vs. what its -actual- legal purpose is. If you think Metro was chartered to be a New York City type public transportation network, then of course you want more rail. But, Houston is not NYC.
Not everyone wants to sit in bumper to bumper traffic for 1 hour just to go 5 miles.
-
4
-
-
I think they're most likely going to change the alignment of the extensions if they go through with just one. I think they should go with what Ramabhadran said and have the two lines meet up earlier to form one line. Hopefully they use the money from that to fund the other lines. (and judging by the comments they got, I think it's possible, they are considering it after all).
(https://ridemetro.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=5&clip_id=1780&meta_id=41291 if you're interested in seeing the presentation)
34 minutes ago, cspwal said:The purple line could extend down to Pearland, the Green line toward Galveston. At one point the red line was going to connect to Hobby; the beginning of a southern cross town line could do that, at least initially with BRT.
I think it would be a better idea to extend the red line to Pearland, since it would connect the TMC to Pearland (and Pearland really wants to have transit connection to the TMC). I do agree with you on a potential Green Line though.
-
2
-
-
I doubt Southwest will fly there, given their record of airports like these. I think smaller airlines, and maybe Allegiant, will fly there instead.
-
1
-
-
Quote
There are no plans to build light rail on Richmond, but for the first time in a long time there is nothing stopping Metro from asking for federal funds to help pay for it.
The federal spending bill signed Friday by President Donald Trump, averting a government shutdown, lacks a provision in previous funding plans barring the Federal Transit Administration from funding any part of light rail on Richmond or Post Oak.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, august948 said:
i would think, though, that this would reflect more on bullet train projects between cities rather than commuter projects in cities. Is the TCR project using any fed funds or is that all private?
It's privately funded
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, 102IAHexpress said:
Whatever hope of new rail infrastructure being built with federal tax dollars, just took a huge hit because of California's boondoggle of a high speed train fiasco. If anything, the feds may want to get money back on wasted train investments! I can see the feds spending money on rebuilding/repairing -existing- rail infrastructure though.
A light rail/commuter rail project is WAAAAAY different from the $77 billion fiasco that was the California high speed rail
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:
Dallas may have a more complete rail transit system (which isn't saying much), but last I checked, Houston still had a higher percentage of people using transit.
Dart is a good example of how NOT to build a rail system. They built it on a bunch of old right of way and now they have to deal with problems like gaps on the north and east side, stops avoiding neighborhoods and major activity centers, and the 4 lines going through downtown together. It’s kinda sad when the metrorail has about 10 million less riders than dart does (and dart is the biggest light rail system in the us by miles).
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, august948 said:
Good point on the rail as an option for commuters in Dallas and elsewhere, but is it realistic that Metro will do anything like that in the next 22 years? Or is it going to continue to focus on inside the loop?
I think it’s possible. The guy who’s long opposed them is gone and has been replaced by someone who’s willing to help metro. There’s also been a huge increase in support in rail. The only concern is cost, but if the infrastructure bill does pass, metro could take advantage of that.
Building rail to the suburbs may be harder, but this is being planned in conjunction with HGAC’s high capacity transit task force (http://www.h-gac.com/taq/transportation-committees/HCT/default.aspx). Take it with a grain of salt though, as barely any transit project included in HGAC’s regional transportation plan has been built.
-
Trains (and public transportation in general) should NEVER be proposed as a way to solve traffic congestion. No matter what we do, there’ll always be traffic. Even cities with the best public transportation still have terrible traffic. Instead, it should be proposed as an alternative to traffic.
-
3
-
-
An aging transportaton system that's way different from ours is breaking down due to a lack of fundings? Color me shocked.
-
1 hour ago, august948 said:
Agreed. So my metronext plan would be to make all highways (45, 610,10 east, 59/69, 8, 99, 288, maybe a few others like 249) be like the katy freeway west of 610 (26 lanes at it's widest inclusive of mainlanes, feeders, and hov) Add commuter rail down the middle either by taking an hov lane or (preferably) elevating it with hubs at each highway junction. Buses and light rail can spoke out from those hubs. Or, in a cheaper version, scrap the commuter rail and run park and ride style buses on the hov between the hubs all day long.
I think most of them will be more like the 290 hov lanes.
Honestly my preferred vision (which is like yours) would be that you can take the park and ride and commuter rail from the surburbs to the city and from there take the light rail and buses around the city.
-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, august948 said:
I think the best of both worlds would be self-driving buses, wouldn't it? Trains are nice and all, but they can't take you 5 blocks over from where the rail line is. A self-driving bus or self-driving car can take you anyplace there's a road.
Not that I disagree with you, but I think buses (and eventually self-driving buses) work best as feeder for rail.
-
Sorry to bring this up now, but this has been bothering me for a while. I'm sure Mr. Gattis is a nice guy, but I can't stand his op-eds on public transportation. They all boil down to nothing but "rail bad, highway good, self-driving car future." The notion that we should stop building rail because self-driving cars are the future is kind of laughable in of itself. Sorry, but I can't buy the whole "self-driving cars and ubers will make traffic better" thing. Nevermind the fact that there's been studies that shows that Uber and Lyft have been shown to make traffic worse, but self-driving cars are something that likely won't come in about 15-20 years (maybe even later, considering the malfuctions that have been happening as of late). Why would we abandon rail expansions for something that isn't even a guarentee. Plus, he seems to forget about the fact that self-driving trains are a thing (heck, some transit agencies already have them). Wouldn't it be better to have self-driving trains than cars?
-
7
-
-
I'm not gonna lie, I'm going to miss that ramp.
-
On 1/24/2019 at 5:28 AM, wxman said:
Seems like its been a while since we've had a new flag announced at IAH. I don't think we had a single one in 2018. Anybody know of any new flags in the works for this year?
Air India, Philippine Airlines and Ethiopian Airlines have expressed interests in flying to IAH. Problem is, they've said that a while back and we haven't gotten any news of it since then.
-
On 1/23/2019 at 11:53 PM, 102IAHexpress said:
Voting for transit and riding transit are not the same thing. Just ask Los Angeles' metropolitan transit authority.
LA Metro's recent line, the Expo Line, garners a daily boarding of about 61,957 riders. I'd say that's a pretty good thing. Heck there's even people who wish that the expo line is a subway. LA Metro light rail is also the most used light rail system in the United States by ridership (67,921,600 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_light_rail_systems_by_ridership). As for the declining numbers, like someone else said, when gas prices are at an all times low, it's no wonder that more people are buying cars. Will it last forever? Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Who knows? These articles on LA acknowledges the problem with light rail and what we can do to fix it.
https://www.citymetric.com/transport/los-angeles-metro-great-so-why-aren-t-people-using-it-2742
https://www.planetizen.com/node/86714/light-rail-successes-draw-attention-la-metros-rail-problems
On 1/23/2019 at 11:53 PM, 102IAHexpress said:The data is there. Light rail in America has just not lived up to the hype. Houston has a choice to make. Houston can be brave and cut it's loses or it can double down on more light rail, thinking light rail will be different in Houston if we just spend more billions and spend more time on it.
If Houston wants to build more light rail and not end up like Dallas or Los Angeles, then we're gonna have to start densifying our neighborhoods and build light rail in places where it actually makes sense (and not on old right of ways). Also, METRO is going to have to find a way to speed up transit time and solve the first/last mile issues.
-
3
-
-
You're missing my point. I'm not saying that we should have rail to please the "train worshipers" (heck, I agree that they should relocate the current extension to hobby airport because they are better served by the future boost corridors). I'm saying that the BRT extensions being proposed cannot handle the ridership numbers for corridors like the University Line. Considering the fact that the University Line plans on going through dense areas and major business districts like Westchase, Uptown, and Midtown, I think it's better off as light rail.
Also as for the "other cities", that's just an article on Phoenix. If other cities are saying "enough" with light rail then why did cities like Atlanta and Los Angeles approve for a referendum to build more light rail (and other forms of transit)? And yes, there were huge voter support for it and here's proof.
https://la.curbed.com/2016/6/2/11845368/metro-measure-r-data-ridership-transit
https://ballotpedia.org/Los_Angeles_County_Sales_Tax,_Measure_R_(November_2008)
http://www.atlantaloop.com/699-2/
As for Phoenix, a transit prop was passed with a vote of 55% yes and 45% no (https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2015/08/25/phoenix-elections-transit-results-prop104/32283455/). As for the anti-rail protesters, this article shows that the anti-rail group are being backed by the Koch Brothers, a company well-known for attempting to kill transit projects
But, at the end of they day I will admit that there are many problems with public transportation and rail in general. This articles gives a good example on the problem with transit and how we can improve it
Sorry it took so long to respond.
-
1
-
METRORail University Line
in Traffic and Transportation
Posted
Don't forget Bob Lanier, who killed the original monorail proposal and subsequently forced Metro to use local funding to build the red line.