Stop the Rail Plans!

[Trae]

It is still a lot of people. It is like adding a whole new freeway system in the inner loop alone.

[houstonmacbro]

I can't stand it when comparisons are made between total boardings on the whole Red Line and traffic volume at a particular cross-section of freeway because it is an apples/oranges comparison. The only way to compare use in the way that Red Line boardings are calculated is to count the total number of vehicles that enter a segment of freeway throughout the day and then to multiply that by the average number of passengers per vehicle. This would have to include all traffic entering from the mainlanes in both directions and every single ramp along a particular segment.

If you start thinking of transit and freeway use in ways that are comparable, then you'll quickly come to realize that 170,000+ persons is small potatoes as Houston freeways go.

You'd make a terrible currency speculator.

But gas is going up ... and up ... and up.

But honestly, I do not see rail becoming viable or attractive in Houston until it hits $5 a gallon. Y'all just ain't ready to give up driving.

But if it's costing $60 to fill up a 12 gallon tank, folks might think differently.

[wernicke]

You'd make a terrible currency speculator.

So instead of adding something constructive to the conversation by addressing anything specific, you feel your point is better made by just going negative by telling me that I would be bad at something that I don't pretend to be?

Regarding currency speculation, the dollar is going to continue to fall... so yes, the longer you delay starting on something the people of Houston voted yes on, the more it will cost in material value.

Edited April 8, 2008 by wernicke

[webdude]

All these cumbersome delay is nuts, after spending so much money for all the suv pickup drivers, its time rail riders get some action.

Edited April 8, 2008 by webdude

[jfre81]

I tend to agree with this. There is no point in pinching pennies on a transit system. It's funny that the Red Line is even considered rapid transit even though it takes 32 minutes to go 7 miles. I feel that Houston is well on its way (if not already) to become a world-class city. In order to do this there must be a world-class rapid transit system in place, and we have to build a system that can compete with the automobile. I think that if this system is built entirely at grade, it will be slow, and give little incentive to leave your car. I think that one of the biggest blunders the city has made already was not to use the rail corridor that ran along the Katy Freeway for some type of commuter rail service. Even when people make the argument that this city isn't dense enough or people will never leave their cars, I say that just like transit modes, land use is going to have to change drastically as well. I will leave it at that for now.

With the Red Line there wasn't any support to do anything but what they did (grade separations would be too expensive) but we still managed to make it a success. So it takes 32 minutes to go seven miles? It takes just as long if not longer to drive down Main or Fannin from 610. Just grab a book and get on the train. It's a hell of a lot less stressful than driving all the time. If nobody was doing it, nobody would be riding. Maybe later, after the rest of the system gets more built-out, they can redo the Red Line. Sure, it would be expensive and it would've been cheaper to do that originally, but this is a new thing we're trying to get people to do.

[TheNiche]

It is still a lot of people. It is like adding a whole new freeway system in the inner loop alone.

Not even close.

[TheNiche]

So instead of adding something constructive to the conversation by addressing anything specific, you feel your point is better made by just going negative by telling me that I would be bad at something that I don't pretend to be?

Regarding currency speculation, the dollar is going to continue to fall... so yes, the longer you delay starting on something the people of Houston voted yes on, the more it will cost in material value.

Is it? How do you know? Will it not rebound at some point? Will the world simply refuse to purchase increasing quantities of U.S. goods and services as they become ever less expensive? And if you're so sure of it, then are you buying up other currencies with high leverage? Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is?

There are certain kinds of transactions that can be made with currency valuation trends in mind. If you want to purchase some industrial equipment from overseas today because you're concerned that currency values in six months will continue to follow a trend, and can support that argument with export data which shows that growth in that area has been lagging for the last year or so in spite of conditions favorable for exports to ramp up, then that is an idea with merit. Of course, even if exports show symptoms of ramping up, currency speculators may make a big forward-looking move that causes your idea to actually have lost money. You also have to account for the opportunity cost of your outlays.

But going out into a time horizon of many years in the future, it is not at all reasonable to extrapolate short-term trends. To throw some unsupported statement out there such as that "we ought to make a capital investment today rather than tomorrow because it will cost more" does not make for a compelling case. Moreover, are you accounting for that the money being put to use could've been used for investment or consumption elsewhere in the economy?

With the Red Line there wasn't any support to do anything but what they did (grade separations would be too expensive) but we still managed to make it a success. So it takes 32 minutes to go seven miles? It takes just as long if not longer to drive down Main or Fannin from 610. Just grab a book and get on the train. It's a hell of a lot less stressful than driving all the time. If nobody was doing it, nobody would be riding. Maybe later, after the rest of the system gets more built-out, they can redo the Red Line. Sure, it would be expensive and it would've been cheaper to do that originally, but this is a new thing we're trying to get people to do.

I drive down Main and Fannin very frequently and always beat the train, even when I and other motorists get held up for grade-level crossings with railroad arms.

[Porchman]

East End Rail Route Back on Track

Monday, April 7, 2008

By: Jack Williams

After a weekend meeting of the minds, it appears Metro's plan to connect its planned East End light rail line with a key transit center is back on track. Houston Public Radio's Jack Williams reports.

Story here: http://app1.kuhf.org/houston_public_radio-...ticles_id=30070

[Trae]

^^From the link:

The plan had been stalled because Metro and Union Pacific couldn't agree to share the track crossing Harrisburg just a few blocks west of the Magnolia Transit Center. After a meeting on Friday brokered by Houston City Councilman James Rodriguez, the plan to extend the route is back. An expensive grade separation, with light rail going either over or under the freight rails, is now the likely end result.

Not even close.

Yes it is.

Edited April 8, 2008 by Trae

[TheNiche]

Yes it is.

OK, prove it.

[ricco67]

Is it? How do you know? Will it not rebound at some point? Will the world simply refuse to purchase increasing quantities of U.S. goods and services as they become ever less expensive? And if you're so sure of it, then are you buying up other currencies with high leverage? Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is?

There are certain kinds of transactions that can be made with currency valuation trends in mind. If you want to purchase some industrial equipment from overseas today because you're concerned that currency values in six months will continue to follow a trend, and can support that argument with export data which shows that growth in that area has been lagging for the last year or so in spite of conditions favorable for exports to ramp up, then that is an idea with merit. Of course, even if exports show symptoms of ramping up, currency speculators may make a big forward-looking move that causes your idea to actually have lost money. You also have to account for the opportunity cost of your outlays.

But going out into a time horizon of many years in the future, it is not at all reasonable to extrapolate short-term trends. To throw some unsupported statement out there such as that "we ought to make a capital investment today rather than tomorrow because it will cost more" does not make for a compelling case. Moreover, are you accounting for that the money being put to use could've been used for investment or consumption elsewhere in the economy?

While I agree with you overall on your statement, there is one minor thing you have yet to overlooked, rarely in the world of economics has the price of anything has remind the same or lowered (with the exception of Aluminum in the late 1800's and oil along with gold in the 1980's), there is are plenty of examples out there of prices going up for decades. Now granted, the prices have (if you chart it out) roller coastered (Is that a word now) up and down, but the upward trend would be obvious.

I drive down Main and Fannin very frequently and always beat the train, even when I and other motorists get held up for grade-level crossings with railroad arms.

Frequently and always, eh? Interesting.

Most of the time I beat the train as well, but that's usually when its not prime traffic time or when a game (with a bunch of idiot out of towners) going on at Reliant.

[TheNiche]

While I agree with you overall on your statement, there is one minor thing you have yet to overlooked, rarely in the world of economics has the price of anything has remind the same or lowered (with the exception of Aluminum in the late 1800's and oil along with gold in the 1980's), there is are plenty of examples out there of prices going up for decades. Now granted, the prices have (if you chart it out) roller coastered (Is that a word now) up and down, but the upward trend would be obvious.

Nominal inflation isn't real inflation. In real terms, the price of oil has historically been reduced over the long run. There's even a term for it, backwardation. The term for periods of time when oil reverses that trend are called contango.

[ricco67]

Nominal inflation isn't real inflation. In real terms, the price of oil has historically been reduced over the long run. There's even a term for it, backwardation. The term for periods of time when oil reverses that trend are called contango.

Bear with me as I am not an economic major, nor am I well versed in many of the subtleties of the marketplace.So bear with me.

"Nominal" inflation is the increase caused long term prices of goods, due to outside normal factors (Wages, Materials, etc).

"Real" inflation is when a spike occurs due to unexpected outside factors like a sudden shortage, a weather event, commodities speculations, etc?

[TheNiche]

Bear with me as I am not an economic major, nor am I well versed in many of the subtleties of the marketplace.So bear with me.

"Nominal" inflation is the increase caused long term prices of goods, due to outside normal factors (Wages, Materials, etc).

"Real" inflation is when a spike occurs due to unexpected outside factors like a sudden shortage, a weather event, commodities speculations, etc?

Nope.

Google is your friend.

[ricco67]

My apologies, I simply assumed you were knowledgeable enough to share your wisdom on the topic since you (tried to) correct me on the various definitions of inflation.

[TheNiche]

My apologies, I simply assumed you were knowledgeable enough to share your wisdom on the topic since you (tried to) correct me on the various definitions of inflation.

I've explained inflation on HAIF before, and it takes too much time to do so with an acceptable degree of accuracy.

[tierwestah]

I've explained inflation on HAIF before, and it takes too much time to do so with an acceptable degree of accuracy.

I respect your opinon, but I think myself and alot of other posters get frustrated with your posts involving Mass Transit because they don't suggest progress for the city. You can't rely on oil prices alone to hit low when we're talking long term. Rail is undeniably justifiable for the 4th largest city. If it were up to you, you'd be happy with the crappy buses.

[jfre81]

I respect your opinon, but I think myself and alot of other posters get frustrated with your posts involving Mass Transit because they don't suggest progress for the city. You can't rely on oil prices alone to hit low when we're talking long term. Rail is undeniably justifiable for the 4th largest city. If it were up to you, you'd be happy with the crappy buses.

Since you live in Third Ward, what do they think of the University Line plans?

We hear all the pissing and moaning from Richmond and Afton Oaks, but nobody pays attention to what people in the Third have to say...

I drive down Main and Fannin very frequently and always beat the train, even when I and other motorists get held up for grade-level crossings with railroad arms.

Well let's think of it this way - would you make that good of time without the train at all? Let's assume there's a new car on Main/Fannin for every 1.5 rail riders...

[TheNiche]

I respect your opinon, but I think myself and alot of other posters get frustrated with your posts involving Mass Transit because they don't suggest progress for the city. You can't rely on oil prices alone to hit low when we're talking long term. Rail is undeniably justifiable for the 4th largest city. If it were up to you, you'd be happy with the crappy buses.

The oil argument doesn't cut it, either. When oil gets truely expensive, then we can build transit. I don't have a problem with transit. I have a problem with inappropriate kinds of transit implemented incorrectly and at the wrong stage in a city's development. Btw, we're the nation's 4th largest City, but the 6th largest metropolitan area.

Spending lots of money on this kind of LRT at any point in time is not 'progress'. Spending lots of money on the right kind of LRT right now is not 'progress'. These are examples of waste.

[TheNiche]

Well let's think of it this way - would you make that good of time without the train at all? Let's assume there's a new car on Main/Fannin for every 1.5 rail riders...

I've got a different idea. Think of Main before LRT. Was it uber congested then? What would have changed so dramatically since 2004 that it would become so terribly congested today?

Here's the thing: just because people ride transit that is aligned along a particular street does not mean that they would drive on that street given the opportunity. They may have taken Almeda, Fannin, San Jacinto, Greenbriar, Kirby, or one of several freeways, to get from origin to destination.

Or they may have ridden a bus. A whole lot of them used to before LRT came along.

[Trae]

OK, prove it.

You're the one who questioned it.

[TheNiche]

You're the one who questioned it.

You're the one who put the completely unsupported assertion out there in the first place. If you want anybody to take that remark seriously, you're going to have to back it up.

Contact TXDOT and ask for maps indicating traffic counts. They'll help you get what you need to show you how very wrong you are.

[woolie]

I drive down Main and Fannin very frequently and always beat the train, even when I and other motorists get held up for grade-level crossings with railroad arms.

Good luck parking in the TMC. I'd say the average time for me to take the train to work vs. drive to work and park, desk-to-desk, is the same plus or minus one minute. One cost about $12 per day, one cost $2 per day (not accounting for gas, ownership costs, etc.)

[Trae]

You're the one who put the completely unsupported assertion out there in the first place. If you want anybody to take that remark seriously, you're going to have to back it up.

Contact TXDOT and ask for maps indicating traffic counts. They'll help you get what you need to show you how very wrong you are.

How is adding a ton of capacity into the Inner Loop not like adding in a new freeway?

[TheNiche]

Good luck parking in the TMC. I'd say the average time for me to take the train to work vs. drive to work and park, desk-to-desk, is the same plus or minus one minute. One cost about $12 per day, one cost $2 per day (not accounting for gas, ownership costs, etc.)

You ought to be thanking me for subsidizing your ride so very much.

$12 vs. $2 is not a fair comparison in any way whatsoever.

[woolie]

You ought to be thanking me for subsidizing your ride so very much.

$12 vs. $2 is not a fair comparison in any way whatsoever.

Oh, right, city roads are paid for by usage fees.... It seems in this case that I am providing an equal or greater subsidy to your own freeway and road usage, since I contribute minimally to their use but contribute my fair share of household income.

I wonder what other subsidies I am providing you... well, for one, I offer my labor at far below market rates for someone of similar expertise because my career is basically directed towards public good.

Edited April 8, 2008 by woolie

[TheNiche]

How is adding a ton of capacity into the Inner Loop not like adding in a new freeway?

As much as Houstonians whine about crappy sidewalks, we have a lot of them. Their daily pedestrian capacity is quite high. That our system of sidewalks could probably physically handle several times as many commuters as commute by any means of transportation on a daily basis does not equate to that sidewalks are several times better than the existing freeway system.

Capacity does not equate to benefit.

[TheNiche]

Oh, right, city roads are paid for by usage fees.... It seems in this case that I am providing an equal or greater subsidy to your own freeway and road usage, since I contribute minimally to their use but contribute my fair share of household income.

Gasoline tax.

Also, by building a new arterial, the value of adjoining land can be increased tremendously, and then that land can be taxed immediately. The City can then require that a developer form an In-City MUD to pay for a development's infrastructure, but is still able to tax what is developed on the site.

$12 vs. $2 is not a fair comparison in any way whatsoever, on either side of the equation. You shouldn't have bothered bringing it up.

Edited April 8, 2008 by TheNiche

[Trae]

As much as Houstonians whine about crappy sidewalks, we have a lot of them. Their daily pedestrian capacity is quite high. That our system of sidewalks could probably physically handle several times as many commuters as commute by any means of transportation on a daily basis does not equate to that sidewalks are several times better than the existing freeway system.

Capacity does not equate to benefit.

People use those sidewalks don't they? Add in more sidewalks (wide, etc.), and more people will use them. Group sidewalks in with normal freeways, roadways, buses, and rail transit, and you have a good system.

[houstonmacbro]

Wouldn't it benefit Houstonians to get this thing built?

Honestly, I think the red line is a joke and only serves a small portion of the city dwellers (inside and outside of the loop) that need high speed, reliable transport in, out and around the city.

What are we gaining by waiting, whining, and debating this thing to death?

I think if we built rail right up Westheimer, people would scream initially and then they'd adjust and then they'd love it.

I think if we built it a rail line from Katy to downtown, straight down I10 people would gripe and then adopt. And then love it.

If we did the same thing up I45 to Greenspoint, the same thing would happen.

So, why not get started, as planned or even with a modified plan. Maybe they've already started and we (I) just don't know?