Old METRORail Plan

[Jax]

I'm sort of just kidding, yeah Houston has a bit more than three, but seriously it's lacking. Yeah, there is a Payless shoes at main street square (I think), and Macys, but what else? I know there are more coming, and that is exactly what we need. I was thinking it would be nice if some more retail was scattered around between the bars and clubs in main to sort of even things out, rathan than having all of the retail concentrated on one side of downtown (pavilions, american apparel?, main street square, etc).

It looked like there were more actual stores in downtown Atlanta, at least more than Houston, but who knows, maybe they're all as sketchy as the t-shirt/wig store in Houston. I guess you are saying Houston has quality over quantity. The good thing about quantity though is it makes for a more interesting and active street life, although it would of course be nice to have both quantity and quality.

When I go to visit my grandparents, they are afraid to go anywhere besides Buckhead, so I never get to see downtown Atlanta for myself.

Edited July 5, 2007 by Jax

[TheNiche]

Just curious, how does BRT stack up to LRT, Niche?

Ditto for what musicman said. Price is the key advantage. For what it takes to build a single LRT line, a BRT system can be developed. BRT has a somewhat lower capacity per vehicle, but that might only mean that vehicles have to be run with greater frequency during peak hours...not really a bad thing.

That certain people have a rail bias is unfortunate, but is a reality. To the extent that such people refuse to ride something not on rails, that is a disadvantage.

[Jax]

I guess another advantage of LRT over BRT is that the trains are electric as opposed to using diesel fuel. They create less pollution and smell better than busses too! I guess the cost of the construction plus the electricity outweighs the fuel cost, most likely by a large margin though. I have to admit, I also think there's something cooler about riding a train than a bus... not that it matters.

[TheNiche]

I guess another advantage of LRT over BRT is that the trains are electric as opposed to using diesel fuel. They create less pollution and smell better than busses too! I guess the cost of the construction plus the electricity outweighs the fuel cost, most likely by a large margin though. I have to admit, I also think there's something cooler about riding a train than a bus... not that it matters.

Electricity generation pollutes too, but I'll grant you that it at least tends to be pollution that occurs away from population centers, so that much is a fair point. I don't know about the smell.

[Jax]

That's right, I always forget about that. I'm used the parts of Canada where we get 90% of our electricity from hydroelectricity. We may have kicked a bunch of natives out of their land to do it (in Quebec anyways - Southern Ontairo has Niagara Falls), but at least the electricity is clean.

I still call the electricity bill the "hydro bill" since I moved here, and people always look at me funny when I say that.

I guess there is always the possibility of hybrid BRT busses too...

[Trae]

I guess another advantage of LRT over BRT is that the trains are electric as opposed to using diesel fuel. They create less pollution and smell better than busses too! I guess the cost of the construction plus the electricity outweighs the fuel cost, most likely by a large margin though. I have to admit, I also think there's something cooler about riding a train than a bus... not that it matters.

Musicman might make fun of you for this comment, or at least calll you out.

[Houston19514]

I guess there is always the possibility of hybrid BRT busses too...

Indeed. The Metro plan is to use diesel/electric hybrid vehicles on the BRT lines.

[The Voice of University Oaks]

I guess another advantage of LRT over BRT is that the trains are electric as opposed to using diesel fuel. They create less pollution and smell better than busses too!

It is possible to have electric buses propelled by overhead catenary wires. Quito, Ecuador is one city that does this; notice the dual pantographs on the back of this bus:

Edited July 5, 2007 by The Voice of University Oaks

[musicman]

It is possible to have electric buses propelled by overhead catenary wires. Quito, Ecuador is one city that does this; notice the dual pantographs on the back of this bus:

infrastructure would be expensive though.

[Trae]

You might as well have LRT.

[Transit Nut]

One of the reasons BRT is cheaper than LRT is because you don't have to have overhead wires and the poles to hold them up. However, many cities, including San Francisco, Seattle, and Vancouver include electric buses (a.k.a. trolleybuses) as part of their fleet.

[Trae]

It would be nice to have a trolley around Downtown Houston. Was this ever proposed by METRO?

[citykid09]

CHEAP, CHEAP, CHEAP! I just don't get it. Around the nation cities are building all of these transit systems with much higher quality then what METRO has proposed in Houston, Yet many of these cities have less ridership then what Houston has? So whats the problem?

Los Angeles gets: Subway, Commuter Rail, Light Rail, BRT, Buses, etc

Dallas gets: Light Rail, Semi-subway, Commuter Rail, Buses, Trolley lines, buses, etc

Atlanta gets: Subway line, buses and soon Light Rail, BRT

Houston gets: A short light rail, buses, BRT

F**k anybody who disagrees, but Houston is getting screwed bug time. You people voted for more Light Rail, but they change it out for BRT, and no one said something?

And all of this fighting about where it goes, if people don't want it through their neighborhood, don't put it through their neighborhood. Richmond Ave houses are not the type of houses to put a Light Rail through, I could see if it was a dense urban type neighborhood, but its not its a bounce of ranch style homes. The solution: place the rail in its own right of way, between freeways, underground, or aboveground. Be unique, Atlanta was when they created the only subway line in the world to suspend over a freeway. Create something that has not been thought of, because you don't want another line like the terrible one you already have.

So can no one here answer my question? Why can't Houston get an established rail system? Its current ridership proves the ridership is there, but funding will not allow for the type of system Houston is worthy of. But cities that have shown less ridership than Houston has continue to add new lines to there system in addition to lesser transit systems such as Light Rail and BRT?

[musicman]

It would be nice to have a trolley around Downtown Houston. Was this ever proposed by METRO?

we had trolleys but METRO got rid of them so people would ride the train instead.

Be unique, Atlanta was when they created the only subway line in the world to suspend over a freeway.

wow that is unique remember subways are below ground.

[nmainguy]

we had trolleys but METRO got rid of them so people would ride the train instead.

wow that is unique remember subways are below ground.

No. METRO discontinued them because they were ineffective and free. They also realized that mass transit will never be a money maker but should also not strive to lose more money thatn nessessary. So they sold them at a profit. And only you could make up an excuse that says they discontinued trolleys so people would ride a train that doesn't even travel the trolly routes.

[citykid09]

No. METRO discontinued them because they were ineffective and free. They also realized that mass transit will never be a money maker but should also not strive to lose more money thatn nessessary. So they sold them at a profit. And only you could make up an excuse that says they discontinued trolleys so people would ride a train that doesn't even travel the trolly routes.

Obviously, musicman works for METRO, or is a one of those congressmen who don't like rail.

[musicman]

No. METRO discontinued them because they were ineffective and free. They also realized that mass transit will never be a money maker but should also not strive to lose more money thatn nessessary. So they sold them at a profit. And only you could make up an excuse that says they discontinued trolleys so people would ride a train that doesn't even travel the trolly routes.

Metro reconfigured six trolley routes into three and designed them to tie into the LRT. That move resulted in an immediate drop of 2,000 riders per day, according to statistics from METRO. They eliminated the midtown connections as well which didn't help. of course then with the sudden drop in ridership....they had become ineffective.

[Highway6]

CHEAP, CHEAP, CHEAP! BLAH BLAH BLAH... I WHINE ALOT !!!

Your childish rants are getting pretty old.

[CDeb]

Around the nation cities are building all of these transit systems with much higher quality then what METRO has proposed in Houston, Yet many of these cities have less ridership then what Houston has? So whats the problem?

Maybe the problem isn't with Houston. Maybe the problem is that other cities are wasting taxpayer money to overbuild their systems. Ever give that any thought? Ever give any of your posts any thought?

[musicman]

Ever give any of your posts any thought?

[Houston19514]

Maybe the problem isn't with Houston. Maybe the problem is that other cities are wasting taxpayer money to overbuild their systems. Ever give that any thought? Ever give any of your posts any thought?

I think we know the answer to that. The fact that most projects currently being proposed and built around the country are very similar to Houston's Metro system has also apparently escaped CityKid's notice, even when he writes about it. Hmmmm.... could it be that Metro and Houston are actually leading the way to better, more efficient mass transit systems? What's this, Atlanta planning surface LRT and BRT?? The horror! How could it be that Atlanta, that paragon of all that is good in a city, would be following in Houston's footsteps?

[Trae]

I just checked DART's website, and their new 27.7 light rail line (under construction and to be open by 2012) cost $1.67 billion dollars. METRO couldn't do that?

Edited September 3, 2007 by Trae

[Trae]

Yes, but BRT is proposed for the rest, except for the University Line. That is a complete joke. I hope it changes somehow.

My wish was granted .

[plumber2]

I don't have a reason to ride the Metro Rail, however its runs right through my place of employment. TMC employees used to commute from Smithlands by use of buses. It seemed to work just fine. Now most have to walk over to the rail depot on Greenbriar and ride this train. I do not see that much benefit and it does not improve the commute time.

I think a rail system would be good if it is elevated with fewer stops. We had street level rail at one time, it was called street cars. Who was the brilliant mind that thought this old technology was good enough to revive. What next, bring back the rotary phone?

[VelvetJ]

I think a rail system would be good if it is elevated with fewer stops.

The 6 million dollar question is whether Houstonians would be willing to pay for a elevated system with fewer stops.

[ricco67]

It's not so much whether Houston is willing to pay for it, but rather if the government is willing to shell out the cash AND the NIMBY's can knocking it down.

[northbeaumont]

I think light rail to IAH is a bad idea because the trip is so long. A regular subway line or even commuter rail is better -- maybe at some point in the future...

I'm looking at the new issue (November 2007) of Texas Monthly magazine. On page 78 there's an article about the Houston Metrorail. $2 for a 24-hour-day pass sounds excellent to me. There's only 3 hours and 45 minutes that it doesn't run. If I lived in Houston, I think that I might try to adjust my lifestyle and adapt to that so that I could try to do without a vehicle.

Some people say that they need a vehicle to carry all of their groceries. Why not, say, buy a couple of bags full one day, then the next day stop and get a couple more. You don't ten bags of groceries to make it through a day or two.

[Daniepwils]

I do believe one of the main reasons one of the Rail ordinances didn't pass a few years ago, was that the taxi companies had a fit, because one of the lines included going to one of the airports. I can't recall the entire story.

The taxi drivers in this city are a joke. 60$ just from IAH to Downtown is horrible (including tip).

[RedScare]

The 6 million dollar question is whether Houstonians would be willing to pay for a elevated system with fewer stops.

My $6 million question is why we would want an ugly elevated structure, and why we would want it to have fewer stops, thereby making it more inconvenient.

Haa anyone other than the editor ever actually SEEN the El? It is hideously ugly! Why would that be considered an improvement?

[Trae]

My $6 million question is why we would want an ugly elevated structure, and why we would want it to have fewer stops, thereby making it more inconvenient.

Haa anyone other than the editor ever actually SEEN the El? It is hideously ugly! Why would that be considered an improvement?

How expensive will it be to build a light rail subway? In Dallas, it costs about $50 million to build the CityPlace station and about $122 million for the 3.25 mile subway they have now. I am sure costs won't go over $200 million in Houston for a subway of that length. It would probably total out to about $250-$300 million (including the Uptown Line section of subway and two stations).

Edited October 30, 2007 by Trae