Stop the Rail Plans!

[Trae]

Heavy rail system like Miami.

Edited April 2, 2008 by Trae

[N Judah]

I don't know anything about Miami, but yes a subway is what I am talking about. Keep in mind that most "subways" have an above-ground portion. I am guessing that would be the case with ours, if we ever do get one. And why shouldn't we?

Edited April 2, 2008 by N Judah

[Trae]

Subways don't have above ground portions. Subways are subways. Miami has a "heavy-rail" system. It uses the same trains that are used in Atlanta, etc. Heavy rail and light rail (Houston, Dallas, etc.) are different.

[musicman]

Just admit that you do not like rail and do not want Houston to have any. This is evident by your posts.

Where did i say this? Implementation is another story

Edited April 3, 2008 by musicman

[Trae]

Where did i say this? Implementation is another story

Context clues .

[musicman]

Context clues .

nope. never said i'm against rail unless you can point it out.

[Trae]

nope. never said i'm against rail unless you can point it out.

I don't need to point it out. Watching your posts over the past few months, it is obvious. I've never seen a pro-rail post from you.

[musicman]

I don't need to point it out.

thought so. keep up the propaganda trae.

[Trae]

It's not propaganda. It's the truth. Other members have PM'ed me about it, too.

[musicman]

It's not propaganda. It's the truth. Other members have PM'ed me about it, too.

i'm having flashbacks of the 3rd grade.

[GovernorAggie]

Where did i say this? Implementation is another story

Two questions.

1. How would you recommend that rail be implemented?

2. Are you in favor of paying the cost necessary to implement your method?

Now I must say that the cost of rail in other countries (the Metrosur project in Spain, for example) is a lot cheaper. Could it be because fewer palms are greased? Less involvement from the whiny public? Why is the cost here so high for more intensive rail solutions?

[crunchtastic]

For some reason, this response hasn't gotten the attention it deserves. We're fooling ourselves and wasting our time trying to find a "solution" to Houston's congestion. Face this--it's not going to be fixed as long as Houston keeps growing. The only cities with improving traffic congestion are those with shrinking economies. In fact, I think it was Niche who stated something like traffic congestion is an indicator of growth.

Implementing Alternatives is the only real way to address Houston's traffic woes--and these have to be wholesale improvements that are likely expensive instead of stop-gap measures that will nickel-and-dime the region to a final bill that would be higher than if a correct approach were selected in the first place. Rail is the most efficient alternative to move the most people (yes, better than BRT). 180 people can fit into a 100' long LRV vs. 60 people in a 60' BRT.

I've been wondering the same thing. Game over on transit solutions, people, as long as growth rates continue and the metro's population centers don't change dramatically. It's not much more than pain management at this point. We worshipped at the developers' altar, which was great, and now we live with the consequence.

Living near where you work is the obvious answer, but many people a) can't affford to and change jobs frequently enough that home ownership becomes a money-losing proposition. I for one would like to see more, more accessibly priced, and more attractive rental options available in every area of the metro. Renting shouldn't have to equal ghetto. It's far more than a transit issue.

edit: and given the current state of the mortgage industry and the ecomony in general (and possibly radical regulatory changes in the credit markets) the idea of home ownership may close for a significant portion of the middle class. Living/working in the same area becomes that much more compelling.

Edited April 3, 2008 by crunchtastic

[Trae]

i'm having flashbacks of the 3rd grade.

That's where you belong.

[woolie]

Subways don't have above ground portions. Subways are subways.

Most heavy rail subway lines go above ground in lower-density areas.

[Trae]

Most heavy rail subway lines go above ground in lower-density areas.

I know that, but heavy rail lines are not subways. They have subway portions. Miami has heavy rail. Uses the same type of trains as the ones on DC's Metro, or NYC's Metro. Doesn't make it a subway. There are only a few lines that are complete subways (Red Line LA, etc.). NYC is in a different category.

[musicman]

Two questions.

1. How would you recommend that rail be implemented?

2. Are you in favor of paying the cost necessary to implement your method?

Now I must say that the cost of rail in other countries (the Metrosur project in Spain, for example) is a lot cheaper. Could it be because fewer palms are greased? Less involvement from the whiny public? Why is the cost here so high for more intensive rail solutions?

there's a lengthy description in richmond rail thread but i'll give a brief synopsis. it shouldn't be a bus replacement. we have to maximize the number of riders and at the same time complete the trip as quickly as possible without affecting traffic (particularly at major intersections). ~35 min from fannin south to UH isn't enough incentive to draw a large number of new riders because if it doesn't save a commuter time, it won't be utilized to its fullest extent. station placement must be optimized which did not happen along the current line.

if implementation can be done in a cost effective manner, i'm for it. you bring up a key point when you ask about cost. METRO made "deals" which added to cost. METRO put requirements on the artists to use pavers, even though they were more costly. installed drinking fountains downtown but hooked up non-potable water rendering them useless, etc. transit should be the focus.

[N Judah]

I know that, but heavy rail lines are not subways. They have subway portions. Miami has heavy rail. Uses the same type of trains as the ones on DC's Metro, or NYC's Metro. Doesn't make it a subway. There are only a few lines that are complete subways (Red Line LA, etc.). NYC is in a different category.

Alright, alright...then I guess if we're going by your "definition" I am thoroughly in favor of spending an extra several bil (taken fro the feds) in favor of a "heavy rail line" that goes underground wherever it's too expensive to bulldoze a city block to install a station (i guess downtown would fit this criterion), and above ground everywhere else. Its train cars should be bigger and wider than any train cars on the planet, and should be an engineering marvel we can tout for decades to come.

[Trae]

That's another thing about heavy rail, they are never at-grade. Always above or elevated.

[GovernorAggie]

there's a lengthy description in richmond rail thread but i'll give a brief synopsis. it shouldn't be a bus replacement. we have to maximize the number of riders and at the same time complete the trip as quickly as possible without affecting traffic (particularly at major intersections). ~35 min from fannin south to UH isn't enough incentive to draw a large number of new riders because if it doesn't save a commuter time, it won't be utilized to its fullest extent. station placement must be optimized which did not happen along the current line.

if implementation can be done in a cost effective manner, i'm for it. you bring up a key point when you ask about cost. METRO made "deals" which added to cost. METRO put requirements on the artists to use pavers, even though they were more costly. installed drinking fountains downtown but hooked up non-potable water rendering them useless, etc. transit should be the focus.

Regarding your first point--this would be a key point except we can't act as if act-grade "bus replacement" LRT is the be-all-end-all for rail transit in Houston. Is it unreasonable to believe that at some point in the future, an at-grade Red Line and a subterranean heavy rail line running along the same or similar path with higher speeds and fewer stations can't be implemented? Why can't all the LRT lines, acting as "bus replacements" be analogous to arterial streets supplanting local streets, and future underground heavy rail lines be analogous to freeways? Houston doesn't have the pedestrian suitability to build heavy rail and call it a day. The Houston of today (and especially of 2040) is going to NEED several types of rail and road transportation types. Maybe you can consider our at-grade LRT as a beefed-up streetcar system. That way, maybe we'll look like we're being more aggressive in that area.

For your second point--my guess is that your definition of cost effectiveness will make an aggressive rail implementation next to impossible. Also, I don't know if METRO may have made "deals" (although I wasn't here then), but we just saw another poster allude to Dallas' ballooning Orange Line costs, and I know for a fact that Charlotte's Blue Line's costs increased almost 100%. And I know that at least Charlotte's isn't getting the bang for its bucks for ridership on its LRT that Houston is. By the way, Charlotte is also "forcing" their bus riders to use the Blue Line (as has been the plan for at least 5 years). The truth is that good 'ol private consulting firms are getting a lot of extra sauce from all public projects--from LRT to freeways. Everyone has to have steak and potatoes paid for by the taxpayers of these jurisdictions. Like I said, it would be much easier if we didn't have messy public involvement, whiny mom and pop consultant firms wanting their slice of bread, and greedy suppliers and contractors.

Edited April 3, 2008 by GovernorAggie

[VicMan]

installed drinking fountains downtown but hooked up non-potable water rendering them useless, etc.

Where can I find the useless drinking fountains? Next time I go downtown I would like to find them, take photos, hold water samples, etc.

If I was METRO instead of having water fountains in Downtown I would put vending machines selling soft drinks at some light rail stops. In Japan many vending machines serve pedestrians at street corners, so METRO could introduce this concept to Houston. I'm not sure if the machines would require extra electronic surveillance, though.

Edited April 3, 2008 by VicMan

[woolie]

Light rail is just semantic sugar for streetcar/tramway/trolley. But really I think that's how you should start the system -- local service first, add express service later.

Aggie: the democratic process is unfixably messy and prone to corruption, it's true. Of course, we could be like China. They have two invisible hands. Things get done very quickly. There are costs, of course.

Edited April 3, 2008 by woolie

[houstonmacbro]

I don't know anything about Miami, but yes a subway is what I am talking about. Keep in mind that most "subways" have an above-ground portion. I am guessing that would be the case with ours, if we ever do get one. And why shouldn't we?

I think you guys are really splitting hairs on the definitions.

Can't we just agree that rail = subways.

[houstonmacbro]

So is METRO's deal to get people in and out of the city more efficiently or getting people across town more efficiently.

If they (and we) are smart, we'd be really looking at how to get people in and out of Houston easier and faster. Otherwise we're gonna continue to have nightmares known as 288 to Pearland, I10 to Katy, and I45 North or South.

And it's getting worse each year.

[Trae]

Light rail is just semantic sugar for streetcar/tramway/trolley. But really I think that's how you should start the system -- local service first, add express service later.

Aggie: the democratic process is unfixably messy and prone to corruption, it's true. Of course, we could be like China. They have two invisible hands. Things get done very quickly. There are costs, of course.

I don't think so. Light rail is used in many cities. Streetcars are different. For example, Portland has light rail and a streetcar. Same with San Fran. Light rail and streetcar/trolley (also has heavy rail).

[musicman]

Regarding your first point--this would be a key point except we can't act as if act-grade "bus replacement" LRT is the be-all-end-all for rail transit in Houston. Is it unreasonable to believe that at some point in the future, an at-grade Red Line and a subterranean heavy rail line running along the same or similar path with higher speeds and fewer stations can't be implemented? Why can't all the LRT lines, acting as "bus replacements" be analogous to arterial streets supplanting local streets, and future underground heavy rail lines be analogous to freeways? Houston doesn't have the pedestrian suitability to build heavy rail and call it a day. The Houston of today (and especially of 2040) is going to NEED several types of rail and road transportation types. Maybe you can consider our at-grade LRT as a beefed-up streetcar system. That way, maybe we'll look like we're being more aggressive in that area.

not sure i ever said at grade LRT is the be all end all for rail transit in houston. i agree we need options, but when a system affects vehicular traffic, is it helping or hurting the traffic situation overall? check out the intersection of main/richmond sometime is LRT helping or hurting the traffic situation? now add in the richmond line, what do you think will happen?

For your second point--my guess is that your definition of cost effectiveness will make an aggressive rail implementation next to impossible. Also, I don't know if METRO may have made "deals" (although I wasn't here then), but we just saw another poster allude to Dallas' ballooning Orange Line costs, and I know for a fact that Charlotte's Blue Line's costs increased almost 100%. And I know that at least Charlotte's isn't getting the bang for its bucks for ridership on its LRT that Houston is. By the way, Charlotte is also "forcing" their bus riders to use the Blue Line (as has been the plan for at least 5 years). The truth is that good 'ol private consulting firms are getting a lot of extra sauce from all public projects--from LRT to freeways. Everyone has to have steak and potatoes paid for by the taxpayers of these jurisdictions. Like I said, it would be much easier if we didn't have messy public involvement, whiny mom and pop consultant firms wanting their slice of bread, and greedy suppliers and contractors.

if various transit agencies were honest with residents, a good portion of the projects wouldn't be built due to public outcry. one thing that is being implemented that costs little, is allowing cars to make left turns as long as they yield to oncoming traffic. this cut ~5 min off my commute home and i only make one left turn. i agree that the added involvement of consultants adds to the costs and should be limited.

Where can I find the useless drinking fountains? Next time I go downtown I would like to find them, take photos, hold water samples, etc.

If I was METRO instead of having water fountains in Downtown I would put vending machines selling soft drinks at some light rail stops. In Japan many vending machines serve pedestrians at street corners, so METRO could introduce this concept to Houston. I'm not sure if the machines would require extra electronic surveillance, though.

i believe there's one on the block where live is. (east side of main between preston and prairie)

the pedestrian level here is nowhere near that of japan. can you say rancid food?

Edited April 3, 2008 by musicman

[GovernorAggie]

not sure i ever said at grade LRT is the be all end all for rail transit in houston. i agree we need options, but when a system affects vehicular traffic, is it helping or hurting the traffic situation overall? check out the intersection of main/richmond sometime is LRT helping or hurting the traffic situation? now add in the richmond line, what do you think will happen?

if various transit agencies were honest with residents, a good portion of the projects wouldn't be built due to public outcry. one thing that is being implemented that costs little, is allowing cars to make left turns as long as they yield to oncoming traffic. this cut ~5 min off my commute home and i only make one left turn. i agree that the added involvement of consultants adds to the costs and should be limited.

i believe there's one on the block where live is. (east side of main between preston and prairie)

the pedestrian level here is nowhere near that of japan. can you said rancid food?

I know all about the Richmond intersection. You get no disagreement with me about the impacts to traffic. Many other cities with at-grade LRT have no type of barrier separation between the LRVs and regular motor vehicles. Though this would make moving around easier for cars, I can't say that I have faith in Houston drivers to co-exist with an LRT vehicle in that type of environment. Think about it--many people can't even co-exist with tractor-trailers that they are used to seeing.

Regarding the water fountains, I believe the Downtown District paid for all the pavers, water fountains, plantings, benches, etc. just as the the Midtown folks paid for the plantings in Midtown.

[musicman]

Regarding the water fountains, I believe the Downtown District paid for all the pavers, water fountains, plantings, benches, etc. just as the the Midtown folks paid for the plantings in Midtown.

on the stations no from what one of the artists told me. she had to go to pete marzio to bypass the METRO paver requirement. she said she put the saved money to good use on another portion of her station (museum dist). from METRO's own website Rebuilding and replacing sidewalks along the rail line is part of METRORail construction. This includes replacing the city's aging underground water and sewer system along the Main and Fannin alignment. METRORail construction on Main Street is timed to coincide with METRO's Downtown/Midtown Transit Streets Project, a more than $250 million program to repave streets and to add lighting, sidewalks, bus shelters and landscaping. the DD did do some of the work from what i was told, but METRO had a significant hand in the process.

[T 2 THA C]

Yea traffic is getting worse we need to build now and continue to build and plan for the future. I agree that the trains will hurt traffic at some intersections, but IMO I think Houstonians will adapt to the the trains. Its hard to compare Semis to the trains because trains are on dedicated ROW, and semi drivers are not thus bad drivers can result in more accident's.

[woolie]

Perhaps we can relax some of the signalling limitations now that people are finally used to the trains. e.g. let them run through on green again without four-way red, and take out the swing arms. The four-way red and swing arms are the principle thing hurting Wheeler/Fannin.

[musicman]

Perhaps we can relax some of the signalling limitations now that people are finally used to the trains.

unfortunately the only ones that frequent the area are familiar with the setup. most houstonians don't interact with the system on a regular basis.