Dallas Vs. Houston

[MontroseNeighborhoodCafe]

July 18, 2005, 1:18AM

DALLAS VS. HOUSTON

Where safety, design collide

DART system's track location helps it log fewer accidents than Metro's Main Street line

By RAD SALLEE

Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

Read More...

[RedScare]

Saw that. Interesting, that the rail in Dallas is not as close to the people and the businesses. Could this be why their ridership is dropping?

Is that the tradeoff? Keep it away from people, but have fewer riders, or put it close to people and have more accidents? Houston's accident rate does look to be way down, though. People starting to figure out it is there, I guess.

[kjb434]

The accident rate will go down further. There is nothing wrong with street level transit. Europed has been doing it for a long tim and don't forget that San Fransico, New Orleans, and San Diego have it. Also, Galveston has one for tourist (people who don't come in contact with it all the time.

Dallas also had a jumpstart for the miles of rail they have. I would also rather Houston move slower and put in systems that have sufficient ridership.

Instead of us investing taxpayer dollars for something that doesn't produce results.

[SpringTX]

Considering rail lines are so expensive and deliver so little benefit, and considering Houston has such major transportation and environmental problems, I think Houston needs to use more judgement, more creativity, and focus on actual results...not just mileage of the rail lines or how impressive it looks on a map. Big, expensive projects impress people, but we should focus on low-cost solutions that actually IMPROVE OUR CITY more, so that we're not continually ranked last in environmental quality and lose new businesses like the Toyota plant.

We need to invest in things like HOV lanes and commuter buses.

We should focus on commuter rail lines, not light rail, and look to utilize existing railroad lines for them. It looks like METRO is planning this for Sugar Land already. Probably because it's on the existing AmTrak route. But there are rail lines along I-10 west out to Katy, along I-45 south to Clear Lake, and along the Hardy Toll Road up to The Woodlands. The commutes from Katy and Clear Lake are MISERABLE these days! Is it just a matter of a ticketing station and some railcars? We don't have to build a gazillion dollar new ticketing station. I don't care if I have to park on the street, walk a block in the rain, enter the railyard through a fence gate, and sit on an old seat in an unmarked old train, it still lets me sit back and read a newspaper and snooze for an hour rather than fight road rage and start-and-stop traffic. It won't impress visiting dignitaries, but it makes the city a better place!

Here's a map showing existing railroad lines in Houston:

http://www.trainweb.org/jssand/Houston/A-HoNuMasFrw.pdf

[kjb434]

nice railroad map.

[VelvetJ]

RedScare, don't be so quick to judge WHY the numbers have fallen (if they have fallen). The numbers falling due to design is something I don't think you can pin on Dallas' rail system.

kjb434, your last paragraph suggests Dallas didn't not do a good job in building their rail system and Houston did the best thing by being the largest city in America without rail for so long. We were the laughing stock of the American mass transit systems due to all of the crashes into the train, yet we have the best designed system in the country because we waited so long, correct? And creating legislation to block rail funding from our own "kin" was the best thing for Houston, right?

My God, I have to say one of the most frustrating things about living in this city is the bubble we place ourselves in. A developer can come in and build a 50 story turd, and we will fool ourselves into thinking it's a good thing.

I'm totally starting to believe that Houston is always a step behind because we deserve to be. WE continue to vote these people into office. WE continue to allow neighborhoods to be ruined because it cuts into someone's profits. WE continue to allow our freeways to look like junkyards because it "shows free-enterprise". WE continue to allow the northside's precious pine trees to be decimated at an INCREDIBLE rate because one more strip center and large parking lot means more tax money. Let our counterparts outpace us, we will wait 50 years from now and do it correctly, right?.

And the worst part of it is, once again, we will convince ourselves that everything is fine and Houston is already the best it can be. Sigh.

[RedScare]

Take a pill, VelvetJ.

I didn't judge, quickly or slowly. I asked a question. kjb didn't suggest anything in his last paragraph. He stated he would rather Houston do things right as opposed to quickly. I think you were just pining for a fight, but it's not here.

Now, if you'd like to see someone being judgmental, try reading your post.

[sevfiv]

A developer can come in and build a 50 story turd, and we will fool ourselves into thinking it's a good thing.

i don't know whether to laugh or cry...because you're right

WE continue to vote these people into office. WE continue to allow neighborhoods to be ruined because it cuts into someone's profits. WE continue to allow our freeways to look like junkyards because it "shows free-enterprise". WE continue to allow the northside's precious pine trees to be decimated at an INCREDIBLE rate because one more strip center and large parking lot means more tax money.

well, apparently, we (as in me and you, perhaps) are not the voting majority

double sigh

[The Great Hizzy!]

Dear god, Velvet J, as hard as it might seem, sometimes the leaders in Houston DO take the right approach to something. No one said that not having rail for the last 20 years when there was ample opportunity is/was a GOOD thing. Far from it. What IS being said, and what I agree with (and the numbers support the notion), is that at this stage of the game, the absolute WORST thing that Houston could do is put in a rail line/rail service that is highly inefficient. I lived through that. Miami put in an elaborate, over-wrought 21 mile HRT system in 1983 and caught absolute HELL funding ANY kind of transit improvement for the next 15-plus years, partly because the opening line SO underperformed that the FTA guys didn't trust MDTA with any large sums of money. Hell, they had to have two different referendums to raise the tax rate in Miami-Dade Co. just to have enough money to buy new buses (they were operating with vehicles that were nearly 15 years old in some cases).

Transit agencies nationwide are feeling the wrath of FTA regarding underutilized transit properties (and not just rail properties) that cost excessive amounts to build and implement.

Look, I am in no way saying that the evolution of rail in Houston has been a great thing but now that we're in the game, it does us (and the nation at large) no good to be throwing rail projects wily-nily.

I'll go ahead and say it, the DT to Northline rail service would've been one of the bigger disasters in transit history. The segment would've been nearly five miles long yet carried less than a third of what the current Red Line does. Not only that, but the travel time for the average north line user would've been longer IN EVERY CASE than if they had taken existing bus service.

That's not efficient.

This concludes Part 1 of my rebutting rant.

[The Great Hizzy!]

Tom DeLay--I repeat, Tom DeLay--along with Bob Lanier have been the two biggest obstacles over the last 17 seven years in Houston receiving federal funding for rail service. It's a sore subject that will indeed evoke passions but I dare say that it is in no way fair to make determinations about the mindset, class and intentions of 2-plus million people based on the rogue actions of two politicians.

As far as embarrassments, I don't care what anyone says, the biggest calamity, IMO, in terms of built or unbuilt transit projects in the U.S. is the Big Dig in Boston. It is rep-re-freakin-hensible to blow that much money on a public works project. $14 billion dollars for a tunnel that's less than five miles long.

Meanwhile, the hicks in Houston built the nation's most efficient rail line for $320 million, and, as usual, gets treated as assbackwards. Tell that to the people at DART who were laid off because the rail lines didn't quite bring in the expected revenue to cover operating costs.

Tell that to the people in the Twin Cities, who striked because of work/pay disagreements with Twin Cities Transit (who was being hamstrong by operating costs and the costs of building new rail lines).

It's not easy, and if we have a realistic chance of doing ANYTHING useful with our rail system and TRULY changing the landscape of public transit not only in Houston or Texas but the entire Sunbelt, we need to be doing it smartly.

[Gary]

Man Hizzy, that was very well said. You need to think about stepping into politics.

[713 To 214]

Meanwhile, the hicks in Houston built the nation's most efficient rail line for $320 million, and, as usual, gets treated as assbackwards. Tell that to the people at DART who were laid off because the rail lines didn't quite bring in the expected revenue to cover operating costs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Source(s) please?

Man Hizzy, that was very well said. You need to think about stepping into politics.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

or writing fiction.

[Nakatosh]

Source(s) please?

or writing fiction.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Could you present sources that would prove him/her wrong?

[713 To 214]

Could you present sources that would prove him/her wrong?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sure, as I have provided to support my comments in many other posts. However, this time I'm not going to do your research for you. If you're really interested in the issue, you'll do a little research yourself. However, if you are more interested in accepting statements as true, without first confirming their veracity, just because they sound good to you, then there is no amount of sources I could provide that would change your mind anyway.

[Nakatosh]

Sure, as I have provided to support my comments in many other posts.  However, this time I'm not going to do your research for you.  If you're really interested in the issue, you'll do a little research yourself.  However, if you are more interested in accepting statements as true, without first confirming their veracity, just because they sound good to you, then there is no amount of sources I could provide that would change your mind anyway.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm sorry but your previous posts from my short tenure on this forum has shown that you haven't proved anything but being pro Dallas.my opinion is that you are as sensitive about negative comments about Dallas as the one's here about Houston. You're no different....but that's okay.

[YakuzaIce]

Considering rail lines are so expensive and deliver so little benefit, and considering Houston has such major transportation and environmental problems, I think Houston needs to use more judgement, more creativity, and focus on actual results...not just mileage of the rail lines or how impressive it looks on a map.  Big, expensive projects impress people, but we should focus on low-cost solutions that actually IMPROVE OUR CITY more, so that we're not continually ranked last in environmental quality and lose new businesses like the Toyota plant.

We need to invest in things like HOV lanes and commuter buses.

We should focus on commuter rail lines, not light rail, and look to utilize existing railroad lines for them.  It looks like METRO is planning this for Sugar Land already.  Probably because it's on the existing AmTrak route.  But there are rail lines along I-10 west out to Katy, along I-45 south to Clear Lake, and along the Hardy Toll Road up to The Woodlands.  The commutes from Katy and Clear Lake are MISERABLE these days!  Is it just a matter of a ticketing station and some railcars?  We don't have to build a gazillion dollar new ticketing station.  I don't care if I have to park on the street, walk a block in the rain, enter the railyard through a fence gate, and sit on an old seat in an unmarked old train, it still lets me sit back and read a newspaper and snooze for an hour rather than fight road rage and start-and-stop traffic.  It won't impress visiting dignitaries, but it makes the city a better place!

Here's a map showing existing railroad lines in Houston:

http://www.trainweb.org/jssand/Houston/A-HoNuMasFrw.pdf

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you just not like the current setup as it does not help you? All your solutions would only help people who live further out, and even then only be fully utilized during rush hour times. As I doubt people will hop on a rail line from out in katy to go grocery shopping in the city. I think this plan works well as it provides a fair amount of good transportation for the city for everyday and rush hour, but also includes commuter lines for rush hour type traffic.

[713 To 214]

I'm sorry but your previous posts from my short tenure on this forum has shown that you haven't proved anything but being pro Dallas.my opinion is that you are as sensitive about negative comments about Dallas as the one's here about Houston. You're no different....but that's okay.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The only thing I have a problem with, on this forum, is people passing their opinions off as truth. If it's your opinion, that's fine. That's what forums like this are for. However, when one attempts to influence other people by peddling erroneous statements, then that's where I draw the line. Yes, I'm pro-Dallas, and Pro-Houston!

[RedScare]

Sure, as I have provided to support my comments in many other posts.  However, this time I'm not going to do your research for you.  If you're really interested in the issue, you'll do a little research yourself.  However, if you are more interested in accepting statements as true, without first confirming their veracity, just because they sound good to you, then there is no amount of sources I could provide that would change your mind anyway.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Last time I saw you here, I was blasting your butt out of the water with your unsupported comparison of Houston to Seattle. In fact, in all of your posts, I've never seen you support one yet, including today. Too bad, too. You can't imagine how much fun it is shutting down a bigmouth so bad that he doesn't post for another 2 weeks, like I did to you.

But, if you want to give it a try, we're all here waiting.

BTW, I'm starting to figure out why you moved up there. You're as full of sh_t as some of their residents. We don't suffer fools as gladly.

[713 To 214]

Last time I saw you here, I was blasting your butt out of the water with your unsupported comparison of Houston to Seattle.  In fact, in all of your posts, I've never seen you support one yet, including today.  Too bad, too.  You can't imagine how much fun it is shutting down a bigmouth so bad that he doesn't post for another 2 weeks, like I did to you.

But, if you want to give it a try, we're all here waiting. 

BTW, I'm starting to figure out why you moved up there.  You're as full of sh_t as some of their residents.  We don't suffer fools as gladly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

More fiction!! It's clear from your post that you are a little too emotional right now. Why don't you take a step back from your monitor, take three deep breaths, and try again. . .this time be civil (that means no profanity or name calling). If you think you "blew me out of the water" there's nothing I can do to change your mind. You're entitled to YOUR OPINION!

[HOUCAJUN]

Last time I saw you here, I was blasting your butt out of the water with your unsupported comparison of Houston to Seattle.  In fact, in all of your posts, I've never seen you support one yet, including today.  Too bad, too.  You can't imagine how much fun it is shutting down a bigmouth so bad that he doesn't post for another 2 weeks, like I did to you.

But, if you want to give it a try, we're all here waiting. 

BTW, I'm starting to figure out why you moved up there.  You're as full of sh_t as some of their residents.  We don't suffer fools as gladly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I remeber that.

[713 To 214]

Are you referring to the following post?

http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...indpost&p=33169

You need help.

[SpringTX]

Do you just not like the current setup as it does not help you?  All your solutions would only help people who live further out, and even then only be fully utilized during rush hour times.  As I doubt people will hop on a rail line from out in katy to go grocery shopping in the city.  I think this plan works well as it provides a fair amount of good transportation for the city for everyday and rush hour, but also includes commuter lines for rush hour type traffic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The reason I say Houston should focus first on commuter traffic is because, if I'm not mistaken, commuter traffic is the bulk of all automobile traffic. Remember there is a boatload of people in the burbs, and many of them are driving 20 or more miles each way, 5 days a week...which makes 200 miles a week. I would think that an average person only spends a fraction of that on errands and so on during an average week. In our household, probably 70% of our mileage occurs while commuting to work, and we live 25 miles from downtown, and we're considered by many to be in the "inner" suburbs.

I'm not concerned with helping certain people, or even the most people per se. I'm concerned with reducing the maximum number of miles driven, for dollars spent. Our air quality is a mess. We need to get more cars off our roads, any way we can. I believe commuter rail is a much more efficient way financially of doing that than light rail.

Here are some links to articles saying how commuter rail is much cheaper than light rail, per miles of track served:

http://www.fortbendstar.com/062205/n_$...ree%20years.htm

http://www.texansfortruemobility.com/press_news32.shtml

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/m...an/wall/2752651

[rantanamo]

I think the design of DART is genious. This statement is key: In Dallas, DART's president and executive director, Gary C. Thomas, who also helped design the system as an engineer, played guide on a recent tour, pointing out often how the tracks skirt residential and commercial areas but stay close enough to lure riders. This has allowed some incredible development opportunities at stations. There are current examples like the West Village/Cityplace development that any system would love to have in its future. The most prime example of the genious placement is the future Parkland/UT Southwestern station. The placement of this station was hotly debated for years. Run west of Parkland, right through Parkland or above the street northeast of the Parkland and UT Southwestern complex. If you ran it east, it would serve the hospital and the parking lot as does the TRE currently. It obviously boosts numbers when it opens. If you run it through the complexes, you serve the hospital greatly. Definitely boost numbers when it opens. Many favored this option. But then there was the last option to run it on the northeast edge of the complexes. Of course, it will boost ridership. Its a large complex of hospitals. What was different about this alignment was that it has lots of developable land to the northeast. Some owned by the hospitals, some by private developers. Well, voila, this week a new TOD called CityVille at Southwestern is officially announced to break ground in the winter that will have hundreds of various urban units, retail and office space. None possible if you run the rail directly through Parkland. Pretty much the whole system outside of downtown has been designed in this way. Its genious. Dallas is pretty suburban in most areas and landlocked. If you just run the rail stops right in existing suburban commercial or residential areas you have a little better current ridership. But if run it on the 'edges' you open yourself up to mold the city and create a much much greater future ridership. I will take smaller current ridership if it allows a future filled with West Village, Victory, Park Lane Place or CityVille at Southwestern. Huge projects that can change the landscape of a city for the future. Creating an environment that is more conducive for more people to ride the rail This is even the plan in the suburbs. Look at Las Colinas. The rail will run on the undeveloped side of Lake Carolyn. This has provided a great opportunity for urban planning, and developers are building like crazy already even though they are 4 years from opening. I'm glad that DART actually thought about this. It really makes sense in the long term. In 5 years, you'll land at DFW or Love Field and have TODs at every stop on the system because of the station placement. And to say that placement is away from business is false.

BTW, ridership dropped by 1,000. Very small number considering no hockey and a few corporations moving to other metroplex locations.

[The Voice of University Oaks]

Commuter rail is substantially cheaper than light rail because it uses existing tracks on existing railroad right-of-way, stops at fewer stations, and doesn't need expensive overhead catenary wiring, electrical substations, stray current control, and the like because it's pulled by diesel locomotives. But just because it's less complicated and therefore cheaper doesn't mean it's easy to do. Dealing with the owners of the railroad right-of-way (i.e. Union Pacific) is notoriously difficult; they're in the freight-moving business, and they exactly welcome anything on their tracks that might affect or impede that service (not to mention the liability issues involved). In the case of the commuter rail line paralleling 90A, a second track will need to be added in order for the line to handle both freight and passenger traffic. There's also the issue of the condition of the track; just because they can carry freight doesn't mean that they'll be able to safely or comfortably carry commuters, especially at speeds that would make rail competitive with buses or even private cars for suburb to central city commutes. Oftentimes the track needs to be upgraded.

Light rail, on the other hand, is better suited as an urban collection and distribution system. Once the commuter rail train reaches its terminal station, passengers can transfer to light rail to complete their journey, which in Houston's case could be one of the many activity centers served by the Main Street line, such as downtown or the Texas Medical Center. (You could also make commuters finish their trip by having them transfer from commuter rail to buses, but the transfer penalty is much higher.)

In that regard, I think the strategy of limiting light rail to run between major activity centers inside the loop (and using bus rapid transit on some alignments as an interim step) and serving the suburbs with commuter rail is a sound one. Future commuter rail lines can be built along the Westpark Tollway to Fulshear, along 249 to Tomball, along Highway 3 to Galveston, along Mykawa to Pearland, etc. and tie into this inside-the-loop light rail network. Houston doesn't need, nor will it ever have the money, to build light rail out to the suburbs like Dallas did.

Let me say that, from a purely technical standpoint, I really like DART's light rail system. DART started buying up railroad rights-of-way shortly after its inception and, with the exception of the downtown mall and the street-running portion of the red line in south Dallas, they have a network that operates entirely in its own right of way, meaning higher travel speeds and fewer collisions with cars. The thing METRO built down Main Street, by contrast, is essentially a glorified streetcar.

But consider this: according to APTA's first-quarter 2005 ridership report, the DART red and blue lines carried an average of 58.7 k passengers/day over the first three months of this year. That's 58.7 k passengers / day over roughly 45 miles of light rail which = 1,304.4 passengers / mile / day. Compare that with METRO's red line, which carried an average of 32.6 k passengers per day during the same time period over 7.5 miles which = 4,346.7 passengers / mile / day. Based on this measurement, the glorified streetcar running down Main Street is over three times as efficient in terms of the number of passengers carried over the length of the line than Dallas's system.*

I'm not pointing this out to demean Dallas's system in any way. I'm just noting that, as far as light rail is concerned, you'll get more bang for your buck using it as a collector-distributor system along high volume corridors rather than a far-flung suburban system that will only be heavily used during the AM and PM peaks. If you're going to build rail to the suburbs, commuter rail makes more sense because it's better suited to serving that market.

By the way: the Chronicle map comparing Houston and Dallas is very illustrative, but it's technically incorrect when it says that no commuter rail is currently being planned in Dallas. The Denton County Transit Authority is about to begin preliminary engineering on a commuter rail line running from Carollton through Lewisville to Denton. It would connect to DART's northwest extension in Carrollton. Again, it is considerably cheaper to build commuter rail to Denton (and provide people an alternative to the parking lot that is I-35E) than it is to extend the light rail line up there.

* I realize that passengers per mile isn't the best measurement for determining transit system efficiency. A better measurement is traffic density, which is measured in passengers-mile per route-mile, but that requires knowing the average passenger travel distance and I don't have that data for either METRO or DART. DART probably has a longer ATD than Houston due to its suburban orientation, but I still doubt that it has higher traffic density than the Main Street line.

[The Great Hizzy!]

skip

[The Great Hizzy!]

Source(s) please?

or writing fiction.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jan. 17, 2005, 1:15AM

Rail ridership breezes past other cities

Report has officials glowing, but critics point to total usage and high collision rate

By LUCAS WALL

Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

One year into passenger operation, ridership on the Main Street light rail is the highest in the United States per route mile...

...In fact, Houston's ridership is No. 1 in the country when measured by route mile, according to the APTA survey and calculations by the Houston Chronicle.

MetroRail's 4,053 average daily boardings per route mile rank way ahead of cities such as Baltimore (670), Philadelphia (930), Pittsburgh (980), Denver (1,200) and Dallas (1,290)....

In other words, the people who COULD be writing fiction is Lucas Wall, the Houston Chronicle and APTA.

The original article is archived but can be found by using the article heading or the key words rail + ridership.

http://www.chron.com/content/archive/ysear...se=2005%3B2004%

[rantanamo]

* I realize that passengers per mile isn't the best measurement for determining transit system efficiency. A better measurement is traffic density, which is measured in passengers-mile per route-mile, but that requires knowing the average passenger travel distance and I don't have that data for either METRO or DART. DART probably has a longer ATD than Houston due to its suburban orientation, but I still doubt that it has higher traffic density than the Main Street line.

Glad you pointed that out. Its not really a valid comparison. DART ridership per mile was very high when the line was much shorter. Now its just serving its much more intended role as a larger scale commuter transport systerm. You can't take out the whole picture with DART either and the amount of development it spurs and how many employment centers and transportation options it does/will serve. It really is like a teenager now that's making good grades and doing whatever else it needs to do to be a successful adult. Great future. Great planning, and they take their time and get lots of citizen input.

[SpringTX]

Light rail, on the other hand, is better suited as an urban collection and distribution system. Once the commuter rail train reaches its terminal station, passengers can transfer to light rail to complete their journey, which in Houston's case could be one of the many activity centers served by the Main Street line, such as downtown or the Texas Medical Center. (You could also make commuters finish their trip by having them transfer from commuter rail to buses, but the transfer penalty is much higher.)

In that regard, I think the strategy of limiting light rail to run between major activity centers inside the loop (and using bus rapid transit on some alignments as an interim step) and serving the suburbs with commuter rail is a sound one. Future commuter rail lines can be built along the Westpark Tollway to Fulshear, along 249 to Tomball, along Highway 3 to Galveston, along Mykawa to Pearland, etc. and tie into this inside-the-loop light rail network. Houston doesn't need, nor will it ever have the money, to build light rail out to the suburbs like Dallas did.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Great information. Regarding light rail being used, as you say, as a means of transferring from downtown's Union Station to various employment centers (The Galleria area, the Texas Medical Center, etc.), I have only 2 caveats:

* If the light rail rides too slowly, it can really add time to the overall commute, which can hurt ridership. No one wants to ride 35 minutes in from the suburbs to Union Station...and then spend another 26 minutes on the light rail just going from Union Station to the Galleria. This kind of thing happens in other cities when their light rail stops at every single block to let passengers off, stops at traffic lights, etc.

* Since every mile of light rail track costs so much money, I say focus on connecting the employment centers first, and don't yet route the lines to all the museums, stadiums, and shopping districts. That may boost the economy of downtown, but I think Houston should focus on air quality and getting cars off the roads.

[RedScare]

Glad you pointed that out.  Its not really a valid comparison.  DART ridership per mile was very high when the line was much shorter.  Now its just serving its much more intended role as a larger scale commuter transport systerm.  You can't take out the whole picture with DART either and the amount of development it spurs and how many employment centers and transportation options it does/will serve.  It really is like a teenager now that's making good grades and doing whatever else it needs to do to be a successful adult.  Great future.  Great planning, and they take their time and get lots of citizen input.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is true. Transit systems tend to build the busiest routes first. These tend to be the central routes. As you get away from the core, ridership will go down along with population density.

If you look at METRO's future lines, they predict lower ridership on them than the Main St line.

[Gary]

Yes, I'm pro-Dallas, and Pro-Houston!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pro Houston???????? When? Where?