Subways: Are They Possible?

[IronTiger]

post eaten

[IronTiger]

Have you been to gulfton? The area by 59 between 610 and beltway 8 is the densest part of the city.

Also the rails have to go down corridors people already travel, like westheimer and bellaire.

The reason I said why I think commuter rail will work is if light rail is in the city then when people take commuter rail then they will have a way around once they get into the city. Otherwise it's another DART.

No, it really wouldn't. I can't think of a city where commuter rail dumps people onto a slow light rail that stops every half mile, or a city where all the most major roads are narrow roads where you can't turn left due to a train.

[livincinco]

I gave LA as an example - not Vegas.  Don't get angry!  Don't yell - use big words to convey a point but not a whole sentence.  And why would we want asses in the seats?  We want people in the seats not donkeys!

 

Obviously Light Rail here has failed (that's a pretty clear statement you made - did I miss the point?).

 

You ignored my MARTA start-up question.  Clearly there are dense pockets in ATL now, but when Marta started how many pockets were there?  Houston suburbs will be prime areas for transit orriented developement.  A commuter rail line to Cypress needn't have 30 stops, more like 5-7 so how hard would it be to restructure transit to feed into that line?  Probably so hard we should just turn transit development over to NASA.  Would it be impossible to have a rail station in/around the current park and ride stations?

 

I think of a lot of things everyday - I seem to have trouble grasping how hard it would be for a metro area of 6.2+ million to have rail transit?  That's one of the things I fail to see.  I'll ask this:   How many of DC's METRO riders actually walk to the stations versus driving or taking a bus or carpool?  Speaking about the "suburban" stations.  Because if transit only survived off of commuters who walked to the stations then it would fail in 95% of the cities that currently have it.  NYC and maybe Inner Chicago would thrive, everything else... fail.

 

Part of my job is to be creative and imagine possibilities... transit isn't about getting riders on it today but building so that when tomorrow comes riders/commuters have other options.  A heavy rail/commuter rail system in Houston might take a decade to reach full ridership.  It might?  I'll bet if gas hits $5 a gallon and people have a chance to use it rather than spend $150 dollars per fill-up on the vehicles they will gladly use it.

 

Look, if you really love rail you would be clamoring to have it here even if you and I were the only people to ride it and we held each others hands in jubilation every day.  How many of Metro's Red Line South riders use the park and ride lot?  I did.  It was almost always full when I had the ability to use transit to get to/from work.

 

I think that it's relevant to point out that MARTA has had a lot of issues with declining ridership over the last decade and has had to elimiate planned rate increases for 2013 and 2014 because of projected impact on ridership.  I attribute a significant amount of those issues to the low percentage of jobs in the CBD, similar to Houston.  I really don't see anything that indicates that MARTA has done anything to minimize congestion or sprawl either.

 

The most recent data I could find on percentage of jobs in the CBD were 2010 census numbers that show Atlanta at 7.1% and Houston at 6.9%.  By means of comparison, the most successful rail cities are as follows:

 

New York - 22.1%

San Francisco - 14.4%

Chicago - 11.4%

Washington - 13.1%

Boston - 10.7%

 

Also, I do think that it's relevant to point out that a large percentage of transit oriented development is subsidized by government incentives similar to what is happening in Houston.  A perfect example of this is Atlantic Station which is one of the biggest examples of transit oriented development there.  Development at Atlantic Station was heavily dependent on the development of the Atlantic Station Tax Allocation District which provided government incentives to back the TOD that occurred there.  Very similar in pattern to the current residential growth that's happening in Downtown Houston.

 

I do tend to think that the impact of fuel prices is not going to be as dramatic as is generally imagined by transit advocates due to increases in government mandated CAFE standards.  Don't forget that US standards for 2025 vehicles is 54.5 mpg which is an approx. 60% increase from 2012 standards.  It's very reasonable to expect that there will be a continued shift to smaller, fuel-efficient (hybrid) cars during the next 10-15 years which will mitigate the impact of fuel price increases that are going to occur in the same time period.

[HoustonIsHome]

Arch its not how far the metro sprawls it is how it sprawls.

Do this for me. Go to google maps. Switch over to satellite or Google earth. Pay attention to Houston and keep that in mind.

Now compare it to DFW, ATL, DC or anywhere you want and then tell me what you see.

In Houston apart from a major park or flood zone, the density keeps up for 30 miles in each direction. In DFW it drops off for no physical reason and picks back up again as you encounter another city. In ATL the drops are more stark. You have the airport then lots of green, you have downtown then lots of green, you have sandy springs surrounded by lots of green.

Now I am not saying the development in the area drops to zero, what am saying is that there are ebbs and flows. In Houston the ebbs and flows are not noticeable. You hop unto Westheimer you drive for 30 miles and its constant development. You hop on Shepard, or Veterans Memorial and its miles and miles of similar density development. Houston is developed without breaks.

As for LA it makes my point too. LA has a lot of sprawl but it has quite a few areas where the density spikes above 15,000 or 20,000 people per square mile. So in LA a good commuter rail would connect these areas.

For your 4th point. The issue of density pockets is that you are connecting points. Sandy Springs is a small area, you connect that area to ATL. In Houston the sandy springs area would not be discernable from its neighbors. Downtown blends into midtown, midtown blends into montrose, montrose blends into upper kirby, upper kirby blends into river oaks, River Oaks Blends into Afton Oak, Afton Oaks blends into uptown, uptown blends into gulfton, Gulfton blends into Briar Meadow, Briar Meadow blends into Sharpstown, Sharpstown blends into Westchase, westchase blends into Briar forest, briar forest blends into Westside, before you know it you are in Clayton Trace hitting George Bush Park.

Without these breaks in the neighborhoods it is hard to imagine serving a lot of people because you don't have the drop off on population as you go away from the station. In the town's surrounding England if you go a mile or two away from the station you will be surrounded by sheep. In houston you travel 1/2 a mile the density is 4000 ppsm, you travel 1mile the density is 4020, you travel two miles the density is 3980, you travel 3 miles the density is 4400. Where is the drop off? You travel from the station in Harrow and go 2 miles in any direction and the density goes from 20,000 ppsm to darn near zero

[HoustonIsHome]

Have you been to gulfton? The area by 59 between 610 and beltway 8 is the densest part of the city.

Also the rails have to go down corridors people already travel, like westheimer and bellaire.

The reason I said why I think commuter rail will work is if light rail is in the city then when people take commuter rail then they will have a way around once they get into the city. Otherwise it's another DART.

yes I have. Rail of any sort would work well in gulfton. And I agree an urban system is needed in conjunction with a commuter system

[arche_757]

Arch its not how far the metro sprawls it is how it sprawls.

Do this for me. Go to google maps. Switch over to satellite or Google earth. Pay attention to Houston and keep that in mind.

Now compare it to DFW, ATL, DC or anywhere you want and then tell me what you see.

In Houston apart from a major park or flood zone, the density keeps up for 30 miles in each direction. In DFW it drops off for no physical reason and picks back up again as you encounter another city. In ATL the drops are more stark. You have the airport then lots of green, you have downtown then lots of green, you have sandy springs surrounded by lots of green.

Now I am not saying the development in the area drops to zero, what am saying is that there are ebbs and flows. In Houston the ebbs and flows are not noticeable. You hop unto Westheimer you drive for 30 miles and its constant development. You hop on Shepard, or Veterans Memorial and its miles and miles of similar density development. Houston is developed without breaks.

As for LA it makes my point too. LA has a lot of sprawl but it has quite a few areas where the density spikes above 15,000 or 20,000 people per square mile. So in LA a good commuter rail would connect these areas.

For your 4th point. The issue of density pockets is that you are connecting points. Sandy Springs is a small area, you connect that area to ATL. In Houston the sandy springs area would not be discernable from its neighbors. Downtown blends into midtown, midtown blends into montrose, montrose blends into upper kirby, upper kirby blends into river oaks, River Oaks Blends into Afton Oak, Afton Oaks blends into uptown, uptown blends into gulfton, Gulfton blends into Briar Meadow, Briar Meadow blends into Sharpstown, Sharpstown blends into Westchase, westchase blends into Briar forest, briar forest blends into Westside, before you know it you are in Clayton Trace hitting George Bush Park.

Without these breaks in the neighborhoods it is hard to imagine serving a lot of people because you don't have the drop off on population as you go away from the station. In the town's surrounding England if you go a mile or two away from the station you will be surrounded by sheep. In houston you travel 1/2 a mile the density is 4000 ppsm, you travel 1mile the density is 4020, you travel two miles the density is 3980, you travel 3 miles the density is 4400. Where is the drop off? You travel from the station in Harrow and go 2 miles in any direction and the density goes from 20,000 ppsm to darn near zero

Its a fair point to say that Houston is fairly consistent in our sprawl... True.  However we're also seeing for the first time (excluding Galveston) the rise of higher density and larger suburbs: The Woodlands/Spring and Sugar Land (for example).  Cypress is an unincorporated mess and who knows what/how that area will change over the years?  No clue.  The point is - Houston has always been a singular city surrounded by sprawl, we're now seeing the rise of suburban hubs and employment centers.  Perhaps a city-wide commuter rail line is out of the question?  At least for now.

 

Still, I would tend to think a grade seperated Light Rail running from points inside the loop to the suburbs wouldn't be out of the question.  I still will make the argument that LRT down Westhiemer all the way to Westchase and back to Midtown would be fantastic and would have a lot of riders.  I tend to blend the terms commuter rail and light rail together.  I guess there is a difference between them, but commuter to me = a person moving from home to work or vice versa.  So a rail line (any rail) that runs between those points of growth will be useful.

 

BRT and LRT are probably the future.  In 2025 or so (when a commuter rail line that's not even planned would open from say Hobby or Ellington Field to IAH and the Woodlands) we would I'll bet see a much higher density inside the loop.  Look at how much it has changed since 2004 or 1994!  The change has been huge and will continue to see that change.

 

I've said all along that Rail isn't the only way to go.  It is only an additional way for people to commute.  It will not end freeway congestion, it will merely allow people a way to commute that doesn't leave them stuck in traffic for 1 hour on a 24 mile commute into town.  There will come a time in 2030 when we have no other options.  Rail will have to be constructed and probably will be constructed.

[arche_757]

The most recent data I could find on percentage of jobs in the CBD were 2010 census numbers that show Atlanta at 7.1% and Houston at 6.9%.  By means of comparison, the most successful rail cities are as follows:

 

New York - 22.1%

San Francisco - 14.4%

Chicago - 11.4%

Washington - 13.1%

Boston - 10.7%

Every transit agency has problems - no one has a perfect solution.  MARTA was just an example because it still has riders and isn't a total failure.

 

I wonder what the percentage of jobs are inside Loop 610?  Would be interesting to know.  I would think the total percentage of all workers in Houston is quite high inside the Loop.  So the need to connect the work zones together via alternative means over the next 2 decades is there - and will continue to grow.

[cloud713]

Even LA, who some are hailing as some sort of leader, their sprawl is more conducive to commuter rail. 

 

From LA's downtown to Covina is solid sprawl, about 50 miles worth east. About 40 miles southeast to Irvine, 12 miles southwest to the Pacific, 30 miles to Santa Clarita, and nothing to the northeast--that's all mountains and very little development. In Houston, the "suburbs", like Texas City, The Woodlands, Katy, and Baytown--are 30 miles out from Houston but spread in every direction, meaning more lines total, and less ridership for each line. The way that the city sprawls is completely different, which is why the "but LA has similar density! we need to do it JUST LIKE THEM" argument is totally bunk.

 

while i agree, you dont think it would make sense if we just put "starter" commuter rail lines down some of the more congested/populated corridors first, like 290, 45N/Hardy, and 45S, before we go all out running lines out to Baytown, Tomball, ect. Houston doesnt exactly sprawl evenly in all directions.

i dont see a need for commuter rail down i10east, 59n, 59s, 288, 249, or the other freeways/rail corridors. at least not in the immediate future, though i think it would be smart to reserve ROW along some of those routes so that we can more easily install rail in the next few decades when Houston has over 10 million people.

but a line from an intermodal station in downtown or Hardy Yards up to IAH, The Woodlands and Conroe; a line from Cypress into said intermodal type station at the post office site downtown, or the Hardy Yards site; and a line from that same station out along Highway 3 to a stop at Nasa/Kemah (with streetcar line along Nasa Road 1, to serve those touristy attractions), before going on to Galveston (maybe with a couple other stops at densely populated areas along the route). i dont see the galveston line having as high of "commuter" ridership as the 290 or 45N/Hardy lines would, but it would be a great addition for making Houston more tourist friendly by providing rail out to some of the more popular tourist attractions in the city (and the potential new SpacePort at Ellington Field).. there could even be a branch down Broadway for an express route to Hobby. it could make less trips than the other routes during the week days when the line might not be as busy, and ramp up the number of trips on the weekends when more tourists are visiting and/or Houstonians want to make a trip to the beach.

 

No, it really wouldn't. I can't think of a city where commuter rail dumps people onto a slow light rail that stops every half mile, or a city where all the most major roads are narrow roads where you can't turn left due to a train.

while that is true, we would hopefully be getting a couple subway lines like we have been discussing in this thread, to provide more shorter distance inner city "express routes".

 

For your 4th point. The issue of density pockets is that you are connecting points. Sandy Springs is a small area, you connect that area to ATL. In Houston the sandy springs area would not be discernable from its neighbors. Downtown blends into midtown, midtown blends into montrose, montrose blends into upper kirby, upper kirby blends into river oaks, River Oaks Blends into Afton Oak, Afton Oaks blends into uptown, uptown blends into gulfton, Gulfton blends into Briar Meadow, Briar Meadow blends into Sharpstown, Sharpstown blends into Westchase, westchase blends into Briar forest, briar forest blends into Westside, before you know it you are in Clayton Trace hitting George Bush Park.

why cant we re route the busses that would be replaced by these trains, and have them spiderweb outward from each of the new commuter rail stations, serving the populations in the areas around these stations? i understand your point, but there are ways around that. the localized spiderweb bus networks are one idea, larger or new park and rides at the stations are another idea. B-Cycle sharing programs and bike racks are another remedy for people who dont live within walking distance.

i dont see a need for quite a few of those stops/places you mentioned. we definitely cant have commuter rail running on a similar system as the LRT with stops every half mile. and i think a lot of that route would easily be better served by a "hybrid" LRT (light rail doesnt need as dense of areas as commuter/heavy rail) line along the Westpark corridor, which theoretically shouldnt be much of an issue to build since the ROW is already owned by METRO.

[cloud713]

Every transit agency has problems - no one has a perfect solution.  MARTA was just an example because it still has riders and isn't a total failure.

 

I wonder what the percentage of jobs are inside Loop 610?  Would be interesting to know.  I would think the total percentage of all workers in Houston is quite high inside the Loop.  So the need to connect the work zones together via alternative means over the next 2 decades is there - and will continue to grow.

great point. how many people live in Atlanta the city? less than 450,000. while that would generally be a good thing for a commuter rail system, having most of the people living outside the city, but that number of residents probably correlates with the number of jobs in the inner city. i would imagine Houston has a MUCH greater percentage of jobs in the loop vs Atlantas number of jobs in its city. comparing downtowns alone, downtown Atlanta has around 26 million sq ft of office space. downtown Houston has almost twice that much (and 150,000 employees). Uptown Houston has around 24 million sq feet (almost as big as downtown Atlanta, with 55,000 employees), the Texas Medical Center has 46 million sq ft of floor space (over 100,000 employees), almost as much hospital space as the amount of office space in downtown. together just between those three districts, the area in/around the loop have over 110 million sq feet of work space and 300,000 employees. surely we could have a couple successful commuter rail or hybrid LRT lines extending out to some of the more populated suburbs, hitting Uptown and Downtown along the way (getting down to the TMC would be a little tricky [without building a subway extension between downtown/TMC] except for lines coming from a 288 route or the 90A Sugar Land route, which could get to the TMC via 288 or the Almeda median).

and so true (though some people will argue that connecting work zones isnt the way to building a successful system).. its definitely a great start. we need something better than the University Line between uptown and downtown. if a subway down Westheimer is too expensive i still say they should put a surface commuter line from the north side of Uptown/branch off the Post Oak LRT line, through the south side of Memorial Park and run along side Memorial Dr before hitting the end of the green/purple LRT lines in the theater district in downtown. it wouldnt need but maybe a stop at Shepherd if there were ever a subway line down Kirby (though the Kirby line could theoretically continue on down the Memorial Dr line into downtown so there wouldnt be a need for a transfer), and possibly one at Montrose if they ever build a streetcar system, and do follow through with putting a streetcar down Montrose. two stops in between downtown and uptown vs 10 stops and a transfer if you took the University Line over to the Main St line.

[HoustonIsHome]

1. TW density is dropping even though its population is booming because even TW is sprawling.

2. Houston was never a singular city surounded by sprawl. Houston was built in between preexisting small cities. It grew out to them and swallowed them in. Harrisburg, Acres Homes, and countless others were separate cities. Now if these had remained separate and each developed into individual dense pockets then yeah, all of these would simply be connected by rail. But there is no difference in density between the center of Cypress and the area between cypress and Houston.

3. I never said a grade separate rail down wherever would be out of the question. Nor did I say it didn't be fantastic. Stop painting me out to be a rail hater.

4. We have different definitions of commuter rail. To me a commuter rail could be light or heavy, the major difference being less frequent stops/ longer distances. To me the red line is urban rail, a commuter rail would be Hardy Rail yard to Greenspoint with one or two stops inbetween.

5. I disagree that any line connecting a person's work to his job us useful. Useful to him but to who else. The red line is great because it is fed by 75% of metro bus lines and it connects to important business centers.

Light rail is perfect for short distances with our type density. When you start talking 20-30 miles, it starts getting less useful. Try riding one of DART lines from end to end that green line is what? An hour and 15? And they have far less stops than we do.

6. Our density has not changed much in the last 20 years. In the loop the gains made on the west were countered by the loses in the east. Overall as a city the density went from what 3800 to 4000ppsm? In the next 20 years don't expect anything different. Families are fleeing the loop for the burbs and singles are taking their place. simple math, you buldoze a single family home that housed 4 people, you put up 4 town homes. Each one gets occupied by a single person. On first glance you say write this area got dense but truth is The building density change, population density stayed at 4.

[HoustonIsHome]

while i agree, you dont think it would make sense if we just put "starter" commuter rail lines down some of the more congested/populated corridors first, like 290, 45N/Hardy, and 45S, before we go all out running lines out to Baytown, Tomball, ect. Houston doesnt exactly sprawl evenly in all directions.

i dont see a need for commuter rail down i10east, 59n, 59s, 288, 249, or the other freeways/rail corridors. at least not in the immediate future, though i think it would be smart to reserve ROW along some of those routes so that we can more easily install rail in the next few decades when Houston has over 10 million people.

but a line from an intermodal station in downtown or Hardy Yards up to IAH, The Woodlands and Conroe; a line from Cypress into said intermodal type station at the post office site downtown, or the Hardy Yards site; and a line from that same station out along Highway 3 to a stop at Nasa/Kemah (with streetcar line along Nasa Road 1, to serve those touristy attractions), before going on to Galveston (maybe with a couple other stops at densely populated areas along the route). i dont see the galveston line having as high of "commuter" ridership as the 290 or 45N/Hardy lines would, but it would be a great addition for making Houston more tourist friendly by providing rail out to some of the more popular tourist attractions in the city (and the potential new SpacePort at Ellington Field).. there could even be a branch down Broadway for an express route to Hobby. it could make less trips than the other routes during the week days when the line might not be as busy, and ramp up the number of trips on the weekends when more tourists are visiting and/or Houstonians want to make a trip to the beach.

while that is true, we would hopefully be getting a couple subway lines like we have been discussing in this thread, to provide more shorter distance inner city "express routes".

why cant we re route the busses that would be replaced by these trains, and have them spiderweb outward from each of the new commuter rail stations, serving the populations in the areas around these stations? i understand your point, but there are ways around that. the localized spiderweb bus networks are one idea, larger or new park and rides at the stations are another idea. B-Cycle sharing programs and bike racks are another remedy for people who dont live within walking distance.

i dont see a need for quite a few of those stops/places you mentioned. we definitely cant have commuter rail running on a similar system as the LRT with stops every half mile. and i think a lot of that route would easily be better served by a "hybrid" LRT (light rail doesnt need as dense of areas as commuter/heavy rail) line along the Westpark corridor, which theoretically shouldnt be much of an issue to build since the ROW is already owned by METRO.

To answer your question you would have to look at my second worry for houston. I said houston

1 had uniform density fit as far as the eye can see

2 nothing to keep it in check from continuing to grow out in this manner.

A web would help somewhat but how long do we need to keep thus web going? That is why I suggested we focus on improving the core and let the burbs develop their own transportation system. If a core develops in a certain burb then we can connect them to our system. But this unchecked suburban sprawl is not conducive to rapid commuter transit.

Also, I didn't mention all those placesto imply each needed a stop, all I portrayed was the uniformity observed travelling down a particular road

[HoustonIsHome]

I wonder what the percentage of jobs are inside Loop 610? Would be interesting to know. I would think the total percentage of all workers in Houston is quite high inside the Loop. So the need to connect the work zones together via alternative means over the next 2 decades is there - and will continue to grow.

Downtown had between 150,000 to 200,000

TMC has 100,000

The colleges has about 40,000

Greenway should have over 40,000

Uptown had over 100,000

Considering the hospitality workers and the other smaller employment centers I works say the workforce in the loop is about 800,000to 1,000,0000

This is why we need an urban rail system. This is why we need more affordable housing stock in the loop. This is why we need more housing stock on the loop. This is why we more grocery,/retail in the loop

[arche_757]

1. TW density is dropping even though its population is booming because even TW is sprawling.

Actually "The Woodlands" is a controlled area defined by borders.

2. Houston was never a singular city surounded by sprawl. Houston was built in between preexisting small cities. It grew out to them and swallowed them in. Harrisburg, Acres Homes, and countless others were separate cities. Now if these had remained separate and each developed into individual dense pockets then yeah, all of these would simply be connected by rail. But there is no difference in density between the center of Cypress and the area between cypress and Houston.

Oh come on!  Acres Homes was never a big town.  Galveston and maybe I'll give you Conroe.  Everything else was small up until the mid-century.  You know what I meant - Houston (unlike Dallas with Fort Worth and Arlington, or LA with Long Beach etc.) is pretty much the only major city in this metro.  Sure Pasadena is big but its just a bedroom community, hardly a model city, hardly worthy of being mentioned as a sizeable town.

3. I never said a grade separate rail down wherever would be out of the question. Nor did I say it didn't be fantastic. Stop painting me out to be a rail hater.

I never said "you're anti-rail" I said you sound like you are anti-rail.

4. We have different definitions of commuter rail.

Apparently?

5. I disagree that any line connecting a person's work to his job us useful. Useful to him but to who else. The red line is great because it is fed by 75% of metro bus lines and it connects to important business centers.

So... ugh... we should build rail between other important business centers!  Light Rail, Fairy Rail, Heavy Rail, Floating Rail --- SOMETHING RAIL.  Again, I've said it before, rail of any kind takes years to plan and build, so lets start thinking about it now - build it in 5 years and in 10 years it might be open.  That's 2024.

6. Our density has not changed much in the last 20 years. In the loop the gains made on the west were countered by the loses in the east. Overall as a city the density went from what 3800 to 4000ppsm? In the next 20 years don't expect anything different. Families are fleeing the loop for the burbs and singles are taking their place. simple math, you buldoze a single family home that housed 4 people, you put up 4 town homes. Each one gets occupied by a single person. On first glance you say write this area got dense but truth is The building density change, population density stayed at 4.

Families fleeing the loop?  Not what I've seen.  Yes single family homes are being torn down and replaced by 4-6 townhomes.  Yes some of those buyers are singles.  Some amazingly decide to find someone else to live with, and even eventually start a family.  That adds density.  What areas "in the east" have lost population?  Pasadena?  Baytown?  We've added 3 million people in what 15-20 years?  Something like that?  Sure, the metro has sprawled, but there are neighborhoods that are now denser than before.  Midtown.  Rice Military.  The "greater" Heights.  Uptown.  TMC area.  Maybe the net gain hasn't been so high its off the charts, but growth has occured.

[arche_757]

Downtown had between 150,000 to 200,000

TMC has 100,000

The colleges has about 40,000

Greenway should have over 40,000

Uptown had over 100,000

Considering the hospitality workers and the other smaller employment centers I works say the workforce in the loop is about 800,000to 1,000,0000

This is why we need an urban rail system. This is why we need more affordable housing stock in the loop. This is why we need more housing stock on the loop. This is why we more grocery,/retail in the loop

 

So to sum up your whole argument:  Houston isn't dense enough for anything aside from Light Rail.  We should build Light Rail in as many areas as possible (that make sense) inside The Loop?

 

I agree with that stance.  My point - in regards to transit in general - is Houston's growth rate is high enough to consider building rail connections to the suburbs now.  The construction of said rail lines will take years.  So we build now (or at the very least set aside ROW) and in 2019 or 2021 when these first lines open we will be close to - maybe over the needed number of potential riders in some places.  Maybe not all, but some.

 

[nativehoustonion]

I did find some facts about the Los Angeles subway system, not including the light rail.  The purple line is 6.4 miles, and the red line is 16.4 miles.  The ridership is as of 2013 164,214 a day.  The cost of these two lines was $5.5 billion!  We cannot even build a light line.  I agree with Slickvick build inner city light rail that connect to commuter rail.  Subways are too expensive.  We need to be a world class city with all kinds of transit, but it is to late to build a extensive subway system.  

[HoustonIsHome]

together just between those three districts, the area in/around the loop has around 110 million sq feet of work space. surely we could have a couple successful commuter rail or hybrid LRT lines.

and so true (though some people will argue that connecting work zones isnt the way to building a successful system).. its definitely a great start.

What makes you think just creating lines will make people ride the raid and made it a successful system? You think that kust because the red line connects business centers that any line connecting to a business center will have riders? Talk to DART on that one.

Listen. The red line is successful because it replaced a taxed bus system. That area was already overflowing with riders. All Metro did was put those preexisting riders on rail. What DART did was create new transit corridors and just expected new riders to abandon their cars and use these new corridors instead. You have the same flawed thinking.

If zero people are boarding buses in Katy right now, what's gonna make them board after you spend 2billion on a rail out there?

[IronTiger]

while i agree, you dont think it would make sense if we just put "starter" commuter rail lines down some of the more congested/populated corridors first, like 290, 45N/Hardy, and 45S, before we go all out running lines out to Baytown, Tomball, ect. Houston doesnt exactly sprawl evenly in all directions.

290, 45S, and 45N all make the most sense for commuter rails, but they are hamstrung by several factors, namely placement of things: if 290 was a viable corridor, stations would have to be built up and down the railroad, either replacing existing industrial sites or going over with bridges. If we were to connect it with the Northwest Transit Center, the rail would have to parallel Old Katy Road and go basically dead slow on that road and UNDER 610.

45N's railroads don't interface with downtown at all, it will have to go down to EaDo and curl up to Commerce Street, defeating the purpose of a unified station.

45S's railroads have the same problem: they'll only reach EaDo.

Oh, and one more thing: Acres Homes was never incorporated, and after incorporation, CoH was slow to provide services to it. That's one reason why Cypress and The Woodlands (also unincorporated, defined by zip codes) weren't annexed because after Kingwood was annexed, new rules for annexation in Texas made it less desirable to annex developed areas.

[arche_757]

The idea is to build where ridership it highest.  Also, DART may not be a success right now, but I'll wager in 10 years the number of riders will have increased significantly.  Maybe it won't.  Maybe gas and cars will continue to be SO cheap that people will simply ellect to spend hours of their day behind a wheel, pay to park in a garage and pay for all the other associated costs of owning a car.

 

The assumption that traveling by car will continue to be really easy is also false.  We do know that for all intents and purposes Houston will in all likelihood continue to grow.  Maybe something happens and Google invents cold-cell fusion and we suddnely don't need petroleum based products any more for transportation or power - that would make a lot of our local economy useless... but that's unlikely to happen.  Even if something that grand and drastic did happen we would probably have diversified enough by that time that we would be ok.  Maybe our growth would taper off, but Detroit south we won't be.

[IronTiger]

What makes you think just creating lines will make people ride the raid and made it a successful system? You think that kust because the red line connects business centers that any line connecting to a business center will have riders?

That's been discussed on HAIF many times before, and part of the reason why the University Line, I think, is overrated.

Listen. The red line is successful because it replaced a taxed bus system. That area was already overflowing with riders. All Metro did was put those preexisting riders on rail. What DART did was create new transit corridors and just expected new riders to abandon their cars and use these new corridors instead. You have the same flawed thinking.

If that were true, wouldn't BRT be just as successful and a hell of a lot cheaper to build and ride?

[HoustonIsHome]

So to sum up your whole argument: Houston isn't dense enough for anything aside from Light Rail. We should build Light Rail in as many areas as possible (that make sense) inside The Loop?

I agree with that stance. My point - in regards to transit in general - is Houston's growth rate is high enough to consider building rail connections to the suburbs now. The construction of said rail lines will take years. So we build now (or at the very least set aside ROW) and in 2019 or 2021 when these first lines open we will be close to - maybe over the needed number of potential riders in some places. Maybe not all, but some.

You are half correct.

I do believe we should build as much rail as possible in the loop, but I never Saud it should only be light rail. I would prefer a subway down westheimer with heavy rail..

What I would like us to have between 1.5 to 2.5 million people in the loop and uptown. With a third of the metro in the core that lives more than enough space between the loop and 1960 for the rest of the metro to grow without spreading much further.

[HoustonIsHome]

If that were true, wouldn't BRT be just as successful and a hell of a lot cheaper to build and ride?

Ding ding ding. You won the goal medal.

That's what I've been saying all along.

BRT works. Don't F with it.

[cloud713]

My point - in regards to transit in general - is Houston's growth rate is high enough to consider building rail connections to the suburbs now.  The construction of said rail lines will take years.  So we build now (or at the very least set aside ROW) and in 2019 or 2021 when these first lines open we will be close to - maybe over the needed number of potential riders in some places.  Maybe not all, but some.

 

THIS.

 

What makes you think just creating lines will make people ride the raid and made it a successful system? You think that kust because the red line connects business centers that any line connecting to a business center will have riders? Talk to DART on that one.

Listen. The red line is successful because it replaced a taxed bus system. That area was already overflowing with riders. All Metro did was put those preexisting riders on rail. What DART did was create new transit corridors and just expected new riders to abandon their cars and use these new corridors instead. You have the same flawed thinking.

If zero people are boarding buses in Katy right now, what's gonna make them board after you spend 2billion on a rail out there?

the business centers in Dallas are spread randomly all across the city. in Houston there are a few individual districts, (in many cases 2 of the 3 districts happen to line up along the same potential rail paths) distinct from the areas around them (though you say all the areas are the same density and blend into each other seamlessly.. how does Afton Oaks blend into the urban canyon that is Uptown/Post Oak?). 

DART also built with the intention of attracting future development, not building where the potential ridership is and the lines are currently needed.

you really think that when there are 10 million people in Houston in 2040, and the roads are jam packed with traffic that more and more people wont be willing to give up their cars to take a much quicker, more efficient means of transportation? i get that commuter rail wouldnt be an instant success right now along most corridors, but if we at least set aside the ROW for when it is needed and will be successful, then we will have a lot easier time providing Houstonians a decent transportation system in the future instead of half assing it trying to come up with routes through a fully developed inner loop where imminent domain would be necessary, and costly, to acquire new ROW when the time comes for rail.

[arche_757]

You are half correct.

I do believe we should build as much rail as possible in the loop, but I never Saud it should only be light rail. I would prefer a subway down westheimer with heavy rail..

What I would like us to have between 1.5 to 2.5 million people in the loop and uptown. With a third of the metro in the core that lives more than enough space between the loop and 1960 for the rest of the metro to grow without spreading much further.

A subway is just rail running underground.. at least to me.  So we can build a LRT line down Westheimer that would work - above ground or underground it would be a successful line.

 

I would also love to see an additional 500,000 - 1,000,000 people inside the Loop.  I think we can get to the 1.5 - 1.75 inside the Loop if we develop things correctly, though to achieve that sort of density we would need a lot of additional rail.

 

[HoustonIsHome]

The idea is to build where ridership it highest. Also, DART may not be a success right now, but I'll wager in 10 years the number of riders will have increased significantly. Maybe it won't. Maybe gas and cars will continue to be SO cheap that people will simply ellect to spend hours of their day behind a wheel, pay to park in a garage and pay for all the other associated costs of owning a car.

DART has been around for 20 years. On that time the population has grown by over 2million. Do you know how much the numbers of people riding public transit in Dallas had grown? It hasn't. The number of people riding DART when it was a bus only system serving 4 million people is more than the number riding bus plus rail serving 6.8 million people.

DART is too slow, it was built on corridors that are new to transit and it is too expensive

[cloud713]

290, 45S, and 45N all make the most sense for commuter rails, but they are hamstrung by several factors, namely placement of things: if 290 was a viable corridor, stations would have to be built up and down the railroad, either replacing existing industrial sites or going over with bridges. If we were to connect it with the Northwest Transit Center, the rail would have to parallel Old Katy Road and go basically dead slow on that road and UNDER 610.

45N's railroads don't interface with downtown at all, it will have to go down to EaDo and curl up to Commerce Street, defeating the purpose of a unified station.

45S's railroads have the same problem: they'll only reach EaDo.

there was talk of extending the Post Oak/Uptown line to a new station/TC at Northwest Mall, so commuter rail could stay on  the same Hempstead ROW without any funky turns/slow segments. and while 45Ns railroads dont quite interface with downtown, if you follow the tracks on the map, the 290/Hempstead line leads into the Washington Ave area before branching off, with one line going through the Hardy Yards, and another line going through the Post Office site and UH-D. those same lines also connect in with the Hardy Tollroad rail lines going north, and there could probably pretty easily be a turn/split installed branching to the south/the line to Galveston. if not, the Galveston Line could end in the East End near or just past the rail yard, connecting to the Green or Purple LRT lines.

[HoustonIsHome]

A subway is just rail running underground.. at least to me. So we can build a LRT line down Westheimer that would work - above ground or underground it would be a successful line.

I would also love to see an additional 500,000 - 1,000,000 people inside the Loop. I think we can get to the 1.5 - 1.75 inside the Loop if we develop things correctly, though to achieve that sort of density we would need a lot of additional rail.

Okay you are confusing my terms again.

Light rail usually refers to rail transit that is slower and has less cars. Heavy rail is faster and has more cars. I said heavy rail works work here too. It doesn't have to be light. Boston has light rail running in a subway, but subways are usually heavy rail.

MARTA btw is heavy. Most trains I believe have 4 cars or more. Ours are one or two cars

[nativehoustonion]

This my off the topic.  Is there a way to find out Williams Brothers Construction Company how much money they donated to Culberson?   

[livincinco]

Every transit agency has problems - no one has a perfect solution. MARTA was just an example because it still has riders and isn't a total failure.

I wonder what the percentage of jobs are inside Loop 610? Would be interesting to know. I would think the total percentage of all workers in Houston is quite high inside the Loop. So the need to connect the work zones together via alternative means over the next 2 decades is there - and will continue to grow.

I'd love to see that data about number of jobs inside the loop, but I've never been able to find it. I don't think that its as high as is generally assumed though. I'm also not really sure that it's a fair barometer when considering potential impact of commuter rail. Commuter rail (like all rail) works great if you can move a large number of people from point to point, but overall transit time starts to become a factor if you're asking people to switch modes during their commute.

I agree with your comments about MARTA, I wouldn't consider it a complete failure, but I wouldn't necessarily consider it a success either. It's borderline in my opinion and definitely an interesting discussion as to how much value it has provided.

[arche_757]

DART has been around for 20 years. On that time the population has grown by over 2million. Do you know how much the numbers of people riding public transit in Dallas had grown? It hasn't. The number of people riding DART when it was a bus only system serving 4 million people is more than the number riding bus plus rail serving 6.8 million people.

DART is too slow, it was built on corridors that are new to transit and it is too expensive

 

And I'll still bet that in another 20 years when Dallas has grown by another 2 million it will be more successful.  Transit is about offering options to people so cars needn't be the only way to get around.  Look, Dallas built a system that it will grow into.  They could have done a better job, but in the long run (decades) the system will likely be judged a worthwhile system - not the best, not the worst, but something to help give people transportation options.

 

Transit construction takes time to come full circle - sometimes years, sometimes less.

 

subway - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subway

light rail - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/light-rail

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_rail_terminology

[HoustonIsHome]

All this MARTA talk is besides the point. MARTA is urban rail it is not a commuter rail system.

Like I said we need rail and lots of it in the core. So using MARTA as justification for commuter rail is off track