The future lies in rail

[mfastx]

Sure it does, since roads are a vital part of transit. Besides, you can't just make people who never come inside the Loop pay for rail. They need to get somethoing for their tax dollars. The alternative is that the far reaches of the County drop out of Metro, and that money is lost completely

 

Roads are essential, but they should be funded through other avenues than public transportation tax dollars.  Yes, technically roads are public transportation, but the METRO tax was created to operate a bus system and construct/operate a rail system.  Because of the GM payments, METRO is now having to operate a transit system on less money than most other agencies in large cities. 

 

And the surrounding areas are already getting something for their tax dollars in the HOV lanes/P&R buses.  They weren't cheap. 

[livincinco]

Roads are essential, but they should be funded through other avenues than public transportation tax dollars. Yes, technically roads are public transportation, but the METRO tax was created to operate a bus system and construct/operate a rail system. Because of the GM payments, METRO is now having to operate a transit system on less money than most other agencies in large cities.

And the surrounding areas are already getting something for their tax dollars in the HOV lanes/P&R buses. They weren't cheap.

The voters established the 1 cent sales tax and then decided to divert a portion of it to general mobility. They have since extended that decision two additional times. That indicates to me that the voters don't feel like they should be funded separately.

[JamesL]

Just to clarify, the voters were not asked to approve the start of the GM payments, just to continue them.

[livincinco]

Just to clarify, the voters were not asked to approve the start of the GM payments, just to continue them.

I can't find the text of the actual initiative, but what I've found on the Internet is that it was initiated by a ballot measure in 1988 and then renewed in 2003 and 2012. Are you aware of something different?

[Slick Vik]

The voters established the 1 cent sales tax and then decided to divert a portion of it to general mobility. They have since extended that decision two additional times. That indicates to me that the voters don't feel like they should be funded separately.

Because for some odd reason the suburbs are anti city though they don't realize that a light rail system is the first step in making an overall rail system. They see short term not long term. And the irony is a lot of suburban people come into the city to work every day but still have this hostility.

Also many people were confused by the last ballot. They thought voting yea meant more rail.

Also do the results of the 2003 referendum that mandated the uptown and university line not matter to you? I'm pretty sure if one neighborhood shut down Katy freeway expansion people such as yourself would be up in arms.

[Ross]

Because for some odd reason the suburbs are anti city though they don't realize that a light rail system is the first step in making an overall rail system. They see short term not long term. And the irony is a lot of suburban people come into the city to work every day but still have this hostility.

Also many people were confused by the last ballot. They thought voting yea meant more rail.

Also do the results of the 2003 referendum that mandated the uptown and university line not matter to you? I'm pretty sure if one neighborhood shut down Katy freeway expansion people such as yourself would be up in arms.

 

You would be shocked at the number of people in the suburbs who never come into the city. Rail has little benefit for them.

 

[Slick Vik]

You would be shocked at the number of people in the suburbs who never come into the city. Rail has little benefit for them.

It goes both ways. The HOV lanes and park and ride serve little use for many people in the city as well.

The point is a properly built comprehensive system would serve everyone well.

[mfastx]

The voters established the 1 cent sales tax and then decided to divert a portion of it to general mobility. They have since extended that decision two additional times. That indicates to me that the voters don't feel like they should be funded separately.

 

I am aware of how the GM payments came about and how most people in the region feel about them.  What I said still stands however. 

 

The voters have also voted in favor of rail on three separate occasions, yet only a fraction of it has actually been or will be built in the near future. 

[livincinco]

I am aware of how the GM payments came about and how most people in the region feel about them. What I said still stands however.

The voters have also voted in favor of rail on three separate occasions, yet only a fraction of it has actually been or will be built in the near future.

Not sure which three elections you're referring to, but it seems like we usually focus on 2003. Last estimate that I heard was that the U line was estimated at $1.3 billion. Right or wrong, that money isn't there from the 2003 referendum which means that some type of plan needs to be put forth to fund it. How would you suggest?

[Slick Vik]

Not sure which three elections you're referring to, but it seems like we usually focus on 2003. Last estimate that I heard was that the U line was estimated at $1.3 billion. Right or wrong, that money isn't there from the 2003 referendum which means that some type of plan needs to be put forth to fund it. How would you suggest?

The money wasn't there for Katy freeway expansion either but even thought it went significantly over budget it was found. How about that.

[livincinco]

The money wasn't there for Katy freeway expansion either but even thought it went significantly over budget it was found. How about that.

It's pretty easy to determine where the money came from for the Katy Freeway cost overruns, because that's history. It's easy to figure out where the money for the toll roads comes from.

This is an honest question and a real world scenario. How would you fund this? I think it's pretty reasonable to put it back in front of the voters as a bond measure to cover the cost. I think mfastx brings up reasonable point about the GMF, but that requires a ballot measure to change.

Drawing maps with train tracks is easy, figuring out the details of how to fund them isn't.

[JJxvi]

Ideally, some of the funds we sent to Washington DC in taxes would come back to us to fund transportation projects. Well, ideally, the funds would just be given back to us.

[mfastx]

Not sure which three elections you're referring to, but it seems like we usually focus on 2003. Last estimate that I heard was that the U line was estimated at $1.3 billion. Right or wrong, that money isn't there from the 2003 referendum which means that some type of plan needs to be put forth to fund it. How would you suggest?

I know for a fact that the referendum that created the GM payments was also for the construction of a rail line. So 1988 was one.

I personally liked board member Christof Spieler's plan, which was to issue bonds to start construction of the university line while allowing the GM payments to continue. If the voters voted "no," then GM payments would cease and monies would be put into an escrow fund for future use.

This makes sense because GM payments and rail are tied together. The original referendum included rail, the whole point of the GM payments was to please the surrounding areas who whined about monies being spent on rail inside the loop.

[livincinco]

I know for a fact that the referendum that created the GM payments was also for the construction of a rail line. So 1988 was one.

I personally liked board member Christof Spieler's plan, which was to issue bonds to start construction of the university line while allowing the GM payments to continue. If the voters voted "no," then GM payments would cease and monies would be put into an escrow fund for future use.

This makes sense because GM payments and rail are tied together. The original referendum included rail, the whole point of the GM payments was to please the surrounding areas who whined about monies being spent on rail inside the loop.

 

I think that plan makes sense because it acknowledges fiscal realities.  For whatever reason, we now understand that the costs for building rail are higher than were expected.  It should be validated by the voters based on the updated costs.

 

I've got no issue with utilizing the GM payments in that kind of fashion because it's real money, it's not speculative.  I'm just very concerned with replicating the kind of runaway spending that we've seen in Dallas.

[nativehoustonion]

Katy Freeway cost 2.1 billion? We did not get a vote on that. With that money, all the rail lines would have been completed. Sorry they are fools to live out there. Now 290 is next with the Hempstead Tollway.

[livincinco]

Katy Freeway cost 2.1 billion? We did not get a vote on that. With that money, all the rail lines would have been completed. Sorry they are fools to live out there. Now 290 is next with the Hempstead Tollway.

 

Ah, the legendary liberal tolerance.  So...the fools got the transportation that they wanted while you didn't get the transportation that you wanted.

 

I'm trying to understand why they're fools...

[Slick Vik]

Ah, the legendary liberal tolerance.  So...the fools got the transportation that they wanted while you didn't get the transportation that you wanted.

 

I'm trying to understand why they're fools...

 

You missed the point. It's not about wanting or not wanting, but the fact is freeway projects are built with little public input, but rail projects have to fight tooth and nail to get built. And yes, if you choose to live in the outlying areas, there are consequences to that. There is a reason property values are highest in the loop.

[livincinco]

You missed the point. It's not about wanting or not wanting, but the fact is freeway projects are built with little public input, but rail projects have to fight tooth and nail to get built. And yes, if you choose to live in the outlying areas, there are consequences to that. There is a reason property values are highest in the loop.

 

Actually, there don't appear to be consequences to living in outlying areas because the transportation projects for those areas get funded. 

[august948]

You missed the point. It's not about wanting or not wanting, but the fact is freeway projects are built with little public input, but rail projects have to fight tooth and nail to get built. And yes, if you choose to live in the outlying areas, there are consequences to that. There is a reason property values are highest in the loop.

 

No doubt that's because only 10% of the Houston MSA lives inside the loop and could realistically benefit from rail.  For the other 90% it's a no-brainer to expand the roads.  That inconvenient little fact is also why HOV/HOT and P&R bus service is far more important than laying light rail track.

 

[Slick Vik]

No doubt that's because only 10% of the Houston MSA lives inside the loop and could realistically benefit from rail. For the other 90% it's a no-brainer to expand the roads. That inconvenient little fact is also why HOV/HOT and P&R bus service is far more important than laying light rail track.

The outlying areas have a vested interest as well because light rail is the foundation for a commuter rail system. METRO has a piece of the old astroworld property as a station for fort bend commuter rail down 90 and the northwest transit center could connect future 290 rail to uptown. Houston is building from the inside out which is smart.

[august948]

The outlying areas have a vested interest as well because light rail is the foundation for a commuter rail system. METRO has a piece of the old astroworld property as a station for fort bend commuter rail down 90 and the northwest transit center could connect future 290 rail to uptown. Houston is building from the inside out which is smart.

 

 

And yet the only chance commuter rail has of being successful is if employment is mainly in the core of the city that could be served by rail. But, lo and behold, that's not the case here and it is less and less the case every passing day.

 

[nativehoustonion]

439,00 residents live inside the loop.  With 10,000 units under construction!  Were are choking here!  I cannot find any shortcuts.  Alabama, Kirby, Buffalo Speedway, Weslayen and Shepard are all clogged.    

439,000

[livincinco]

439,00 residents live inside the loop.  With 10,000 units under construction!  Were are choking here!  I cannot find any shortcuts.  Alabama, Kirby, Buffalo Speedway, Weslayen and Shepard are all clogged.    

439,000

 

Not sure whether you're trolling or not, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.  You call anyone that lives out on the fringes a fool and then you complain about how inside the loop is choking?

 

You realize that the population of the Houston metro area is 6.177 million, that the population inside the loop is 7% of the total population of the metro, and that the areas inside the loop aren't even the areas with the highest density in the metro?

[msteele6]

All of these monetary considerations are moot as long as the alternative is to move 150 lb people around the city in 3,500 lbs. of scrap metal while emiting gases that are moving us closer to destruction day by day.

 

The only people who adamantly oppose mass transit are the ones with vested interests in the automobile culture, car salesmen, insurance salesmen, gas station owners, etc. Of course, they are going to oppose it due to its "excessive costs" etc. not mentioning that the automobile itself has to be (and has been) subsidized by gargantuan outlays for its own infrastructure, roads, gas stations, traffic control systems, automobile repair facilities and the list goes on and on. 

 

Finally, I would say again that the issue is moot in the long run, the automobile culture that we have created simply isn't sustainable at the level that now exists in my humble opinion.

 

JMO

 

Cars delenda est. - Cato (revised)

[nativehoustonion]

I did not mean to call anyone a fool.  Sorry about that but it is crazy here.  The roads have pot holes and Richmond is a danger zone.  The city should at least repaved them.  With all the taxes I pay we should have better roads.  They are redoing Westheimer with wider sidewalks and trees, and landscaping from Shepard to Weslayan. 

[august948]

I did not mean to call anyone a fool.  Sorry about that but it is crazy here.  The roads have pot holes and Richmond is a danger zone.  The city should at least repaved them.  With all the taxes I pay we should have better roads.  They are redoing Westheimer with wider sidewalks and trees, and landscaping from Shepard to Weslayan. 

 

Now there's something we can agree on.  A lot of roads, inside and outside the loop, are in disrepair.  As are sidewalks across the city.  I am glad to see the city is doing some work on a few roads but wish they'd ramp it up.

 

[august948]

All of these monetary considerations are moot as long as the alternative is to move 150 lb people around the city in 3,500 lbs. of scrap metal while emiting gases that are moving us closer to destruction day by day.

 

The only people who adamantly oppose mass transit are the ones with vested interests in the automobile culture, car salesmen, insurance salesmen, gas station owners, etc. Of course, they are going to oppose it due to its "excessive costs" etc. not mentioning that the automobile itself has to be (and has been) subsidized by gargantuan outlays for its own infrastructure, roads, gas stations, traffic control systems, automobile repair facilities and the list goes on and on. 

 

Finally, I would say again that the issue is moot in the long run, the automobile culture that we have created simply isn't sustainable at the level that now exists in my humble opinion.

 

JMO

 

Cars delenda est. - Cato (revised)

 

Mass transit isn't the problem here.  It's the notion that building rail lines is going to do anything significant to reduce congestion and make Houston a better place to live.  The city is not, never has been, and never will be dense enough for that to even approach making sense.  The only practical and efficient way to move the 6 million and growing population is via the road system.  Mass transit here needs to be oriented on a first class bus system that can take advantage of the roads.  Congestion can be mitigated by distributing employment outside the core, eliminating the need for many of the 93% of non-inner loop residients to go inside the loop for their jobs.

 

Cars futuro sunt

 

[Slick Vik]

All of these monetary considerations are moot as long as the alternative is to move 150 lb people around the city in 3,500 lbs. of scrap metal while emiting gases that are moving us closer to destruction day by day.

 

The only people who adamantly oppose mass transit are the ones with vested interests in the automobile culture, car salesmen, insurance salesmen, gas station owners, etc. Of course, they are going to oppose it due to its "excessive costs" etc. not mentioning that the automobile itself has to be (and has been) subsidized by gargantuan outlays for its own infrastructure, roads, gas stations, traffic control systems, automobile repair facilities and the list goes on and on. 

 

Finally, I would say again that the issue is moot in the long run, the automobile culture that we have created simply isn't sustainable at the level that now exists in my humble opinion.

 

JMO

 

Cars delenda est. - Cato (revised)

 

Great post.

[Slick Vik]

And yet the only chance commuter rail has of being successful is if employment is mainly in the core of the city that could be served by rail. But, lo and behold, that's not the case here and it is less and less the case every passing day.

 

 

False. If a system is built properly you don't have to take it into town, you can just as easily take it around or out of town.

[Slick Vik]

Mass transit isn't the problem here.  It's the notion that building rail lines is going to do anything significant to reduce congestion and make Houston a better place to live.  The city is not, never has been, and never will be dense enough for that to even approach making sense.  The only practical and efficient way to move the 6 million and growing population is via the road system.  Mass transit here needs to be oriented on a first class bus system that can take advantage of the roads.  Congestion can be mitigated by distributing employment outside the core, eliminating the need for many of the 93% of non-inner loop residients to go inside the loop for their jobs.

 

Cars futuro sunt

 

 

The notion that expanding highways to bohemoths will ease congestion is false. Instead, it just encourages more people to get on the road, and congestion is just as bad, and actually worse over time.

 

A good mass transit system will make Houston a better place to live. Maybe you personally don't think so but survey after survey of the city's residents show that the majority of the population want good transit and walkable areas. Have you not been to any other city that has a great system? Your notion that houston isn't dense enough is false too, as I have named cities with similar or less density that are investing in mass transit heavily.

 

It doesn't even make sense to have a first class road bus system that shares roads with traffic, they are subject to the same traffic cars are. And BRT is a decent short term solution, but if the demand is high that's just a band aid too, and rail would cost more down the line. So the best solution is to build the best system now.

 

Your state of thinking is another generation's, and thankfully slowly people are realizing it's unsustainable. Honestly you sound like you have a vested interest in the entire automobile culture continuing.