Rail Expansion

[lockmat]

I know we only have the red line up as of now. But I'm trying to think progressively here.

HGAC I think is proposing that we'll have another 3 million people living here not too far down the road. So what happens when we reach that 3 million, then another 25 years pass and we have another 3 milion or so.

Hopefully by then all kinds of rail in Houston will be used, LRT and commuter. And just like our road and highways, their use will also be at full capacity. What we do right now to eleviate vehicular traffic is expand the number of lanes.

But my question is, what will we do when the rail lines are at capacity? What do cities normally do? Or have cities like NY and European cities even reached that kind of level of capacity?

[wakester]

But my question is, what will we do when the rail lines are at capacity? What do cities normally do? Or have cities like NY and European cities even reached that kind of level of capacity?

For Commuter rail, wouldn't they just need to add more rail cars and/or increase the frequency?

[TheNiche]

New York isn't a particularly good example because of its geography, but a close look at Chicago and LA could yeild some good indicators of future transit solutions that would apply to Houston.

[lockmat]

New York isn't a particularly good example because of its geography, but a close look at Chicago and LA could yeild some good indicators of future transit solutions that would apply to Houston.

See any trends? Or are you saying we should let them lead the way since they'll get there before us?

For Commuter rail, wouldn't they just need to add more rail cars and/or increase the frequency?

Seems like the logical thing to do, but there's already talk about congestion right now and what the near future of commuter rails would bring.

Plus, seems like everyone on here says that the Houston area did a poor job of acquiring rights of way in the past. Hopefully they're looking to the future also and learning from their past mistakes.

Edited March 26, 2007 by lockmat

[lockmat]

Edited March 26, 2007 by lockmat

[MidtownCoog]

Your future scenario sounds like a job for sardine man:

http://www.sardineman.org.uk/

http://www.londonnet.co.uk/ln/talk/news/ar...s_20070326.html

I don't think we'll ever see the day where we debate our crowding formulas:

Crowding standards for London and South East services are expressed in terms of

Edited March 26, 2007 by MidtownCoog

[lockmat]

Your future scenario sounds like a job for sardine man:

http://www.sardineman.org.uk/

http://www.londonnet.co.uk/ln/talk/news/ar...s_20070326.html

I don't think we'll ever see the day where we debate our crowding formulas:

Crowding standards for London and South East services are expressed in terms of 'percentage of passengers in excess of capacity'. For services which run for less than 20 minutes non-stop into London, the capacity of the service includes a standing allowance which is usually around 35% of the seating allowance. During the morning peak there shouldn't be more than 4.5% of passengers in excess of the capacity.

That Sardine Man is hilarious.

[TheNiche]

See any trends? Or are you saying we should let them lead the way since they'll get there before us?

Barring significant advances in technology that favor one mode of transportation over another, what they've got would probably be a pretty good indication of what we'll have in the distant future.

[TheNiche]

I don't think we'll ever see the day where we debate our crowding formulas

We will. The Red Line has a fundamental limit on its capacity, and something will have to give within a few years of bringing on the University Line and BRT routes. METRO will be able to increase LRT frequency to a point, but will be forced to either shift bus routes to more logical configurations or cause major gridlock along the line. I'm going to bet that they'll go with the gridlock for as long as they can get away with it. At some point in the future, likely before the end of the useful life of the Red Line infrastructure, they will have to rebuild and either elevate or tunnel portions of the line. It is an inescapable outcome resulting from poor planning and underinvestment. Go figure.

[wakester]

Plus, seems like everyone on here says that the Houston area did a poor job of acquiring rights of way in the past. Hopefully they're looking to the future also and learning from their past mistakes.

At least along 290, TxDOT has set aside 50 feet of ROW for Transit (be it CRT,LRT, or BRT) along the future Hempstead Tollway.

[RedScare]

We will. The Red Line has a fundamental limit on its capacity, and something will have to give within a few years of bringing on the University Line and BRT routes. METRO will be able to increase LRT frequency to a point, but will be forced to either shift bus routes to more logical configurations or cause major gridlock along the line. I'm going to bet that they'll go with the gridlock for as long as they can get away with it. At some point in the future, likely before the end of the useful life of the Red Line infrastructure, they will have to rebuild and either elevate or tunnel portions of the line. It is an inescapable outcome resulting from poor planning and underinvestment. Go figure.

The only place likely to see that level of congestion for a long while would be the Red Line. Once frequency is increased to its logical limit, the option does exist to cure the congestion problem the way New York did in Manhattan. That is, they built a parallel subway several blocks over. It relieved congestion, as well as improved access for more of the island. METRO could run a parallel line to the east or west of Main Street to relieve the Red Line.

More likely, if studies show that the Red Line has an overabundance of through riders, those who are not going downtown, but through it to get somewhere else, METRO could build a connecting line around downtown. For instance, if Northside riders going to the Galleria were overloading the Red Line, a line from the Intermodal down Washington to the Uptown line would get them to the Galleria faster, and out of downtown.

[desirous]

3 million people is a lot of people. Is there enough land to accommodate so much single-family construction? The commutes from outlying suburbs are getting pretty ridiculous even without traffic; will there be a fundamental limit to how far people are willing to drive?

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

3 million people is a lot of people. Is there enough land to accommodate so much single-family construction? The commutes from outlying suburbs are getting pretty ridiculous even without traffic; will there be a fundamental limit to how far people are willing to drive?

Houston nothing but land and room to grow. Unlike many other cities, Houston isnt boxed in!

[lockmat]

3 million people is a lot of people. Is there enough land to accommodate so much single-family construction? The commutes from outlying suburbs are getting pretty ridiculous even without traffic; will there be a fundamental limit to how far people are willing to drive?

But there is a trend towards more urban and multi-family housing. So things are getting more dense.

[musicman]

But there is a trend towards more urban and multi-family housing. So things are getting more dense.

not sure if there's a trend. single family is still overwhelmingly leads the market IMO.

[Vertigo58]

http://www.sardineman.org.uk/

I'm with Sardine man!

Great idea would be for someone to gather a LARGE group of fellow sardines to join in. Guarranty would make headlines here. Is that Charlie Tuna I smell?

[MidtownCoog]

We will

But Houston can run buses right next to the train almost the entire route. That's one of the main compliants about our rail to begin with.

It's not like we have circular streets like London.

A fancy bus can do what our rail does. Why else do you think we are getting fancy buses instead of more rail?

[RedScare]

A fancy bus can do what our rail does. Why else do you think we are getting fancy buses instead of more rail?

Because the FTA is pushing it.

[MidtownCoog]

FTA is right.

I've been preaching about "Super Buses" (my word) for a long time now. Way before FTA picked them for us.

[lockmat]

not sure if there's a trend. single family is still overwhelmingly leads the market IMO.

You're right. It's not a huge trend. But it is more prevelant within the city. I'm just saying there's more now than there's ever been before in Houston. Which will help the density increase some.

[desirous]

Houston nothing but land and room to grow. Unlike many other cities, Houston isnt boxed in!

The land becomes increasingly distant and inconveniently located. Speed limits aren't going anywhere, and even that won't matter, not with the exponential increase in traffic. Traffic volumes increase by a square factor, not linearly.

[TheNiche]

The land becomes increasingly distant and inconveniently located.

Inconvenient relative to what? Destinations (i.e. employment centers and shopping)? In time, destinations change.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

The land becomes increasingly distant and inconveniently located. Speed limits aren't going anywhere, and even that won't matter, not with the exponential increase in traffic. Traffic volumes increase by a square factor, not linearly.

Have you been paying attention to the types of developments that are taking place here? Far out or not, they are becoming more and more self contained neighborhoods. The trend is moving away from downtown as being the center of employment. Employment centers are shifting and are being located/expanded in areas where theres new development in housing.

As far as the trend for density goes...............

There are MANY MANY condos and townhouses that are built currently and are currently under construction which sit empty for months/years on end. Not everyone is in such a rush to run to an area where the housing sits atop of one another. Thats no different than living in an apartment.

[lockmat]

As far as the trend for density goes...............

There are MANY MANY condos and townhouses that are built currently and are currently under construction which sit empty for months/years on end. Not everyone is in such a rush to run to an area where the housing sits atop of one another. Thats no different than living in an apartment.

You friends with a realtor? Wow, I thought they were being eat up. Seems weird that they're building so many if there's not a big market for them. Maybe if they'd go down on the price, they'd have a bigger market to sell to.

And I guess people in Houston really are married to their cars.

[MidtownCoog]

The Edge City....

We have a few, that's for sure. But downtown is the place to be. You can get the best and brightest from all over the city and the prestige of having a CBD address.

Smith St. (and Louisana St.) mean big business.

[lockmat]

The Edge City....

We have a few, that's for sure. But downtown is the place to be. You can get the best and brightest from all over the city and the prestige of having a CBD address.

Smith St. (and Louisana St.) mean big business.

"The place to be" is in the eye of the beholder. My dad loves his two acres of land. But yeah, a lot of other people still think DT is the place to be. I know I'd be there if I could, I'd be there in a second.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

You friends with a realtor?

Nah, just good at observations.

[ricco67]

I originally brought up the article here:

http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...amp;hl=capacity

Everyone is rather correct, even is also wrong.

CBD is a place that's easier to get to for their out of town clients/partners/employees that come from out of town and it has a basic infrastructure (cabs/transit/restaurants/entertainment) that helps them do business better.

while other "Downtowns" have sprung up around town, woodlands, sugarland, and various portions of the city, there needs to be a way that people in these remote "satellite" DT's to be able to move around town.

These centers didn't spring up over night and they won't be able to disappear in the near future, so it's just best to hook them up to some form of mass transit that can be attainable from various parts of the city.

[TheNiche]

I originally brought up the article here:

http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...amp;hl=capacity

Everyone is rather correct, even is also wrong.

CBD is a place that's easier to get to for their out of town clients/partners/employees that come from out of town and it has a basic infrastructure (cabs/transit/restaurants/entertainment) that helps them do business better.

while other "Downtowns" have sprung up around town, woodlands, sugarland, and various portions of the city, there needs to be a way that people in these remote "satellite" DT's to be able to move around town.

These centers didn't spring up over night and they won't be able to disappear in the near future, so it's just best to hook them up to some form of mass transit that can be attainable from various parts of the city.

The CBD is really only advantageous for 1) really big firms that have a huge draw on the regional labor market, 2) firms that hire highly-specialized labor that is available but scattered throughout the region, 3) firms that have many clients that receive attention in-person that are scattered throughout the city. Even then, the Galleria area is able to duplicate most of the relevant advantages.

The further-flung edge cities, Greenspoint, The Woodlands, Sugar Land, Clear Lake/NASA, etc. are smaller and hence have a smaller demand for transit which would be expensive to run out their way in the first place because they're so far out. The demand is also generally more decentralized across very low-density areas than is transit demand for central Houston. Furthermore, the edge cities aren't very easily walked. The Energy Corridor would suck to attempt to walk around, for instance, as would Sugar Land, and Westchase. So accounting for their present form, lower transit demand, more dispersed transit demand, and distance from the existing system, there are a few bus routes that would be suitable, but not really all that many. And thinking about some sort of light or commuter rail designed to serve these areas is an outrageous proposition, especially in the form that METRO likes to implement it.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

CBD is a place that's easier to get to for their out of town clients/partners/employees that come from out of town and it has a basic infrastructure (cabs/transit/restaurants/entertainment) that helps them do business better.

I travel for work. My frequent US destinations are to corp. headquarters in Washington DC and sometimes Charlotte. I guarantee you i do not use public trains or busess to get to where i need to be once in these cities. Theres either a car waiting for me or an airport taxi. My European/Asian trips, i do not use public trains or busses to get to where i need to be. Theres either a car or an airport taxi waiting for me.

Some of these destinations are similar to Houston in the sense that business isnt always conducted in the CBD. Having extensive rail or bus routes to these places is a bit silly if the catalist for it is to make things easier for people from out of town. Businesses dont typically rely on public transport, in the form of busses and trains for out of town meetings/business trips because it isnt always reliable or efficient. Places like the Energy Corridor.....I would bet a great number of the people that work there reside in and around the area. Thats another place that is becoming more self contained, with people living working and shopping in the same area, independent of the CBD-hence no need for extensive mass transit.