mfastx

Lol I like how McDonald's gets more room than a highrise.

Damn, I got excited for a second.  That looks great.

I'm curious about the new line that goes west through downtown. Every map I've seen shows the line terminating well short of hobby theatre, but they are currently extending it over the bayou. They clearly have future plans for that line that I've never seen stated publicly. It looks like maybe west down Washington?

It stops over the bayou.  There is a bridge to allow for switching directions and storing trains.  I'm sure they built it like that with future extensions in the Washington Ave. direction in mind, but that is unlikely to happen for many decades.  The next line that will happen (if ever) would most likely be some form of the University Line.

It's a dorm, what did you expect?

Something with slightly bigger windows, maybe?  Less like a prison, lol. 

Here's a newish dorm at BU:

That Cougar Village 2 building is pretty bad.  But everything else looks good!

Pics?

Yeah I'm with Daniepwils. 

While this is a cool development, I don't think this will do much to add to the area. 

I'd rather just see a bunch of apartment complexes sprouting up on those parking lots.  I don't think people are going to scramble to build new buildings just because of a nicer sidewalk.

What was the estimated price for the light rail?  $556 million sure seems like a lot for such a short BRT line which is supposedly much cheaper than rail.

In that setup, how do you handle all the traffic lights between hwy 6 and 610? Are brt's normally built to hop over intersections?

Tough call.  Grade separation would be quite expensive, similar to light rail cost.  Prioritizing signals is an option, drivers would be opposed though similar to light rail. 

It depends on how much money you want to invest.  If done right, BRT would be almost totally grade separated. 

Honestly, if we had unlimited funds, running a subway down Westheimer would be great.  Just do a cut and cover construction.  You can make it BRT, light rail, or heavy rail.  The more you spend, the more ridership it will generate.  I've always seen Westheimer as a high ridership corridor. 

Dedicated lane. I think that would be one corridor where it would be very successful. Run it from downtown to highway 6.

I agree, and I think it would be cheap to construct, at least outside the loop.  Westheimer is so damn wide, just rip out the median and put some dedicated bus lanes in.  Getting closer to downtown would be more difficult.

The step that I would love to see is integration of real time bus data and traffic conditions into a Google Maps type application. Have it tell you your transit time and options based on your departure time and allow you to determine your best options based on that information.

Haha, I basically said the same thing just a few posts before.

I agree with you on the quality of out P&R service, but would like to see them expand it to some other destinations. I'd also like to see express local bus service, like the quickline, run down Westheimer and other major arteries to give us a level of speed somewhere between the local bus and the P&R service.

That seems like a good idea.  The Quickline is great, I've rode it a few times but there's never anyone on it unfortunately. 

METRO has said that they'd be putting up indicators at certain stops saying when the next bus will come for each route.  That's the development I'm most excited for. 

There should be more P&R destinations I agree.  But building dedicated lanes is very expensive so I'd imagine that TxDOT or some other agency would have to shoulder some of the cost. 

Now we're getting somewhere. We know that the system sucks, at least for many, and that it carries a pathetic percentage of commuters. And since it's very unlikely that that a rail line will be run down Richmond all the way to Hwy 6, at least in my lifetime, we're left with the question of how to improve Metro's bus service. So how do we do that?

Metro isn't the only transit system I've ridden, but it's the one that's relevant to me at the moment. Giving an example of how it currently works isn't an attempt at inductive reasoning regarding mass transit in general and shouldn't be taken as such.

Suburban commuters like yourself are less likely to take transit than inner city commuters.  In most cities taking a commuter bus or rail takes longer than a car. 

I'm somewhat opposed to commuter rail in Houston for this reason.  While a couple of corridors have good potential, ridership likely wouldn't be much more than P&R buses already. 

This is a separate issue though.  How would you like P&R bus service improved (as opposed to local bus service)?  I personally think our P&R service is pretty damn good.  Local service is what needs to get better.

I have an idea: why not discuss ways of improving Metro's bus service? I think that's the topic.

 

For example, does Metro have an app so that smartphone users can easily access bus schedules (I don't have one, so I really don't know.)

 

A more exciting app would tell the user the way to the closest bus line, and/or the bus arriving soonest. Also, with GPS tracking, buses could be monitored in real time, so one would know if he had time for that refill, or to make tracks to the nearest stop. (And I hope I didn't offend opponents of rail by using the term 'make tracks'.)

That'd be great if they could somehow integrate it into map/transit direction providers, such as Google Maps app.  They could give real time routes based on how late buses are etc.  Probably a ways off but great idea. 

Yes, they have a real-time bus arrival app. It's in beta and hasn't had the bugs worked out but you can find it for iphone or android. Search Houston TRIP. Some prototype real-time display monitors are up at 1900 Main.

Interesting, I'll check it out next time I'm in town.

I disagree with your premise.  Most US cities that have built transit systems post WWII have done so exactly because it's cool and hip.  The thought is that cities won't attract the "creative class" without rail and the stigma that buses are for poor people.

Any evidence to back up this claim?  Considering the fact that most rail systems in the US attract more riders, carry them at a more efficient rate, and just generally make the area a better place to live, I have a hard time believe that all major metropolitan areas spend billions on something just because it's "hip."

If you want to understand the concerns that some Houstonians have about rail, look at Dallas.  They've spent a huge amount of money putting in an 85 mile light rail system that has a daily ridership of 109,511 as of Oct 2012.  And what has the impact of that system been?  They are doing massive amounts of highway improvement and construction so it doesn't seem to have alleviated that need.  They're needing to provide financial incentives to developers to get them to build next to the rail stations.  It hasn't created urbanization or density in the areas serviced by rail and it hasn't reduced sprawl.

 

If you would like to have a discussion about how Dallas' light rail has been useful and why you feel a comparable system would have different results in Houston, I would be happy to create a thread to have that conversation.

How long has it been since their first line opened, 20 years or so?  Even less?  Give it some time, jeez.  The benefits of rail will really start to show 50-75 years from now. 

Dallas is happy with their investment, and their transit ridership is growing.  It will continue to grow into the future. 

The entire basis for the original line was that METRO was eliminating parallel bus lines so that riders would be forced to ride the METRO and gain immediate ridership. Main st buses and those parallel were the most dense in the city of houston. METRO has shortened multiple perpendicular lines to also force customers to ride the rail on their last leg of their destination.

I think it was more about eliminating redundant bus routes that carry the same people but at a less efficient rate than rail. 

And Red, why the shot at me?  I don't bash Houston. 

Pics of the finished product are greatly appreciated, for those of us who don't live in Houston currently!  Thanks!

Also, strangely, Houston doesn't show up in the article at all, but NYC, DC, Atlanta, Boston, and San Francisco all make the top ten worst commute times. Could it be that focusing more resources on an extensive highway system and less on rail could actually reduce commute times (gasp!)?

Or maybe it's the fact that Houston is one of the least dense major cities in the country? 

Would be smart and genius to bring some residential aspect - even just an modest apt tower - like 10 stories into this or on one of the surrounding blocks - you listening Magic?

 

Regards,

Visionary Amateur Expert

Agreed.  In order for "Green Street" to be much more successful than Pavilions, more residents need to be around the area.  It was a dumb decision to not build the residential component of this project.

Nice to see the wonderful Chron comments, as usual.

That looks quite nice.  They finally are going to have a better street-level pedestrian environment.

there's no argument. the line is dead as is the uptown line. METRO dropped the ball on that one too.

Eh, I think the economy tanking had more to do with those lines being delayed than METRO.

The "will of the majority" hasn't amounted to much over the last 30 years. You have to ask yourself, "Why is that?"

Yeah I know, and I think it's a damn shame. 

Sure, Fiesta's not especially attractive, new or sexy. What it does best is serve a large and diverse number of people - various ethic groups, incomes and especially neighborhood residents. What many of these so-called 'walkable' developments lack is stores and businesses of a more pedestrian nature ('pedestrian' in both senses of the word.).

 

Fran Lebowitz commented that since the Times Square revitalization she can no longer walk to a bakery or butcher shop. I view Fiesta as an asset to the neighborhood. 

I also view it as an asset, but there are ways to make developments like Fiesta more pedestrian friendly, which I advocate.

So here we have an example of a thirty year lack of interest and political will to put in a rail network. Perhaps it's time, then, that "Metro works to make the bus system easier to use"?

True, but remember that just because there isn't political will, there is the will of the majority that have approved numerous rail systems since the 1980s.  Therefore, METRO is required per their referendum to not only make improvements to bus service, but to also build the rail lines that were approved in 2003.