Houston's Own Grand Central Station-Downtown Transit Hub

[musicman]

The worst potential problem I see with the commuter line out South Main to Fort Bend County is what's going to happen at Fannin South, where many maps show the line terminating. The current MetroRail line is already getting very crowded during rush hour, and that's without commuter trains dumping several hundred people at the line's southern terminus several times an hour. Metro can make all Red Line trains two cars, and possibly consider reducing headways between trains (I think the current line was engineered for a maximum frequency of every three minutes) but that's about it. I really hope Metro is looking at a long-range plan that would somehow have the Fort Bend commuter line stop at Fannin South, but then continue on to the inter-modal transit center just north of downtown.

Remember that the line already goes farther south than the Fannin south station due to the test track that METRO built. The test track is already parallel to the tracks leading to ft Bend. I supposed METRO could add another station farther south so that the transfer will not be as difficult.

For the commuter lines they are using already existing lines to save money. There is NO way the Ft. Bend train would ever go to the proposed intermodal transit center.

Of course that's another big potential choke-point, but at least there the passengers going to downtown destinations would have a very short ride, and would not have to be packed in with all the Medical Center passengers like they would if everyone got off the commuter line at Fannin South.

That is why I'd prefer a design that that is more commuter oriented vs. a bus replacement system. You could actually get somewhere and it would be worth your time. integrating the existing system with the ft bend commuter rail would be a GREAT partnership and would DEFINITELY attract the new riders that METRO is looking for.

[Guest Plastic]

No no we need each line to go Downtown. Onl problem with commuter rail is can it be elevated. We'd eather have to run them alobg freeways or elevates them cause I wouldn't want them going through intersections or lights.

[cosmo]

Also, it would be interesting to write our city council members and ask them why they feel the need to put the Greyhound bus terminal on the border of the Hardy Rail Yard project and tie this in to the rail system. Is that supposed to make our city livable or humanitarian? People in Midtown would be extremely happy to see the Greyhound bus terminal leave the area as this has only attracted street people and local drug pushers to easily blend into the already down and out crowd at the bus station. Now we want to take this bus crowd and happily bring them into the Hardy Rail Yard developement where city council wants low income housing. Have you ridden on the Metro Rail ? It's primarily a glorified bus whose ridership depends on low income groups of people to make transfers from the bus to the rail. Now we want to tie this into a Grand Central transportation hub for.....more low income people? I feel that the bus terminal needs to be relocated to an area away from the dynamic core of the city....perhaps around hwy 59 and 610 and tie this into the city with an existing bus route from that area. I feel that the Hardy Rail Yard should be developed for middle to upper income people and that the Metro Rail should pursue an elevated system or pursue something on the scale of Atlanta's Marta system , though to be honest with you, Marta has not made that much of a dent in the transportion problems in that city and has actually caused some major demographic shake ups.

[TheNiche]

Remember that the line already goes farther south than the Fannin south station due to the test track that METRO built. The test track is already parallel to the tracks leading to ft Bend. I supposed METRO could add another station farther south so that the transfer will not be as difficult.

For the commuter lines they are using already existing lines to save money. There is NO way the Ft. Bend train would ever go to the proposed intermodal transit center.

That is why I'd prefer a design that that is more commuter oriented vs. a bus replacement system. You could actually get somewhere and it would be worth your time. integrating the existing system with the ft bend commuter rail would be a GREAT partnership and would DEFINITELY attract the new riders that METRO is looking for.

I really don't care all that much for a Fort Bend line unless TXDoT has a change of heart and suddenly becomes willing to fund intrastate high-speed commuter rail so that the route becomes a SA/Houston connection. Otherwise, we've already rebuilt US 59, built the Fort Bend Parkway, and are working on turning most of US 90A into a mini-freeway of sorts. I think Fort Bend County is already the most connected suburban area in the Houston region. Even if you were leaving from downtown Rosenberg, the commute on the train could easily take 45 minutes to an hour just to get to Fannin-South if there are as many stops as METRO initially proposed. Then you've got at least another 30 minutes to get downtown.

If commuter rail is implemented, I think that higher speeds and ridership would come from northwest, north, and southeast lines if they are made to converge downtown. A west line seems to be entirely out of the picture, unfortunately.

EDIT: Having said this, if we could overload the Red Line with suburban commuters, we'd be able to justify implementing the old pre-rail bus routes. Doing so would shift the demographic of the rail ridership to one that is comprised of much wealthier riders. This would create opportunities for the land speculators of Midtown. If you want to see vibrant Transit Oriented Development, this is a way we could get it.

No no we need each line to go Downtown. Onl problem with commuter rail is can it be elevated. We'd eather have to run them alobg freeways or elevates them cause I wouldn't want them going through intersections or lights.

I'd love to see more grade-seperations. Elevation/freeway-routing would be cost-prohibitive, however.

[nmainguy]

Also, it would be interesting to write our city council members and ask them why they feel the need to put the Greyhound bus terminal on the border of the Hardy Rail Yard project and tie this in to the rail system.

The decision is METRO's. Why would you contact a different government entity?

Is that supposed to make our city livable or humanitarian?

It's to make our transit system more efficient.

People in Midtown would be extremely happy to see the Greyhound bus terminal leave the area as this has only attracted street people and local drug pushers to easily blend into the already down and out crowd at the bus station. Now we want to take this bus crowd and happily bring them into the Hardy Rail Yard developement where city council wants low income housing. Have you ridden on the Metro Rail ? It's primarily a glorified bus whose ridership depends on low income groups of people to make transfers from the bus to the rail.

Really? My experience is that it carries all kinds of people. Bums, lawyers, doctors, homeless, nurses, lab technicions, engineers, whiney, annoying teens, retirees, teachers, students, idiots, bigots-the list goes on and on...

Now we want to tie this into a Grand Central transportation hub for.....more low income people?

No. For everyone using transit, METRO taxpayers and non; stupid and smart [see above list]

I feel that the bus terminal needs to be relocated to an area away from the dynamic core of the city....perhaps around hwy 59 and 610 and tie this into the city with an existing bus route from that area. I feel that the Hardy Rail Yard should be developed for middle to upper income people

Everyone from the bum who buys a cheap T-shirt to the doctor who buys a Lexus pays into the METRO fund. How do you decide who gets the crappier service? Who decides? Someone like yourself perhaps?

and that the Metro Rail should pursue an elevated system or pursue something on the scale of Atlanta's Marta system , though to be honest with you, Marta has not made that much of a dent in the transportion problems in that city and has actually caused some major demographic shake ups.

Icky poor people are so....icky.

[DJ V Lawrence]

Also, it would be interesting to write our city council members and ask them why they feel the need to put the Greyhound bus terminal on the border of the Hardy Rail Yard project and tie this in to the rail system. Is that supposed to make our city livable or humanitarian? People in Midtown would be extremely happy to see the Greyhound bus terminal leave the area as this has only attracted street people and local drug pushers to easily blend into the already down and out crowd at the bus station. Now we want to take this bus crowd and happily bring them into the Hardy Rail Yard developement where city council wants low income housing. Have you ridden on the Metro Rail ? It's primarily a glorified bus whose ridership depends on low income groups of people to make transfers from the bus to the rail. Now we want to tie this into a Grand Central transportation hub for.....more low income people? I feel that the bus terminal needs to be relocated to an area away from the dynamic core of the city....perhaps around hwy 59 and 610 and tie this into the city with an existing bus route from that area. I feel that the Hardy Rail Yard should be developed for middle to upper income people and that the Metro Rail should pursue an elevated system or pursue something on the scale of Atlanta's Marta system , though to be honest with you, Marta has not made that much of a dent in the transportion problems in that city and has actually caused some major demographic shake ups.

Not too sure I understand what you're saying here.

We have another thread specifically for the Hardy Rail Yards. Within that thread are a few renderings of the proposed project, and none of them seem to show any kind of low-income development. If those are low-income buildings, then they'll be the beautiful low-income buildings I've ever seen.

I'm confused. You're saying that you want to push the low-income people away from Midtown, and should be pushed away from Hardy Rail as well? Why would we not have the Greyhound termimal in the Grand Central hub if we were to have a Grand Central hub? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? Metro's trying to build an all-in-one hub. And why can't Hardy Rail still be a middle/upper class-designed area with Greyhound as one of the terminals in the hub nearby?

[TheNiche]

Also, it would be interesting to write our city council members and ask them why they feel the need to put the Greyhound bus terminal on the border of the Hardy Rail Yard project and tie this in to the rail system. Is that supposed to make our city livable or humanitarian? People in Midtown would be extremely happy to see the Greyhound bus terminal leave the area as this has only attracted street people and local drug pushers to easily blend into the already down and out crowd at the bus station. Now we want to take this bus crowd and happily bring them into the Hardy Rail Yard developement where city council wants low income housing. Have you ridden on the Metro Rail ? It's primarily a glorified bus whose ridership depends on low income groups of people to make transfers from the bus to the rail. Now we want to tie this into a Grand Central transportation hub for.....more low income people? I feel that the bus terminal needs to be relocated to an area away from the dynamic core of the city....perhaps around hwy 59 and 610 and tie this into the city with an existing bus route from that area. I feel that the Hardy Rail Yard should be developed for middle to upper income people and that the Metro Rail should pursue an elevated system or pursue something on the scale of Atlanta's Marta system , though to be honest with you, Marta has not made that much of a dent in the transportion problems in that city and has actually caused some major demographic shake ups.

Although your input is very much elitist and classist, and it gives me a gnarling feeling in my gut, I understand what you're trying to get at. Your approach is pragmatic (hence the verbalized annoyance of nmainguy).

[RedScare]

Even if you were leaving from downtown Rosenberg, the commute on the train could easily take 45 minutes to an hour just to get to Fannin-South if there are as many stops as METRO initially proposed. Then you've got at least another 30 minutes to get downtown.

Could you provide a link to METRO's proposal with too many commuter rail stops? I have never seen a proposal, other than their original plan to run 8 miles of rail to the Fort Bend County line. That proposal has not even been studied yet, to the best of my knowledge.

[TheNiche]

Could you provide a link to METRO's proposal with too many commuter rail stops? I have never seen a proposal, other than their original plan to run 8 miles of rail to the Fort Bend County line. That proposal has not even been studied yet, to the best of my knowledge.

I recall that there was a Chronicle article written up about the idea well over a year ago. Last December, I asked a METRO executive about it and they said that things were coming along nicely on it and went on to list all the stations that they had in mind. I later saw something about the 8-mile plan that you mention here, but that didn't jive with anything else that I'd heard before.

The proposed stops that come to mind are Fannin-South, Stafford, Sugar Land (possibly two in SL), Richmond, and Rosenberg. There might also be one around S. Post Oak.

[RedScare]

I recall that there was a Chronicle article written up about the idea well over a year ago. Last December, I asked a METRO executive about it and they said that things were coming along nicely on it and went on to list all the stations that they had in mind. I later saw something about the 8-mile plan that you mention here, but that didn't jive with anything else that I'd heard before.

The proposed stops that come to mind are Fannin-South, Stafford, Sugar Land (possibly two in SL), Richmond, and Rosenberg. There might also be one around S. Post Oak.

So, it is your belief that an 8 mile commuter rail line on dedicated track with 5 or 6 stops will take an hour, versus the 7.5 mile LRT with 16 stops that takes 32 minutes?

[cosmo]

Icky poor people are so....icky.

It is good to get some kind of response to this issue because most people who would not freqent the downtown area feel pretty much the way I do yet they would never think to respond or even know of this web site. No one is calling people icky because they are low income and eveyone needs a chance to be who they are and grow however when the city is constantly inviting this demographic into the dynamic core of the city...and who pays into this metro system....? surely not the person who constantly jumps on the train for free. surely not the unemployed youth or the homeless person walking the fringes of the city, nor the drug dealer or the greyhound bus passenger. Regarding who takes the bus, you are greatly exaggerating the demographic market and makeup by stating such an egalitarian list of people who use the Greyhound bus terminal. Again , the constituents in Midtown would ...love ....to see this business be relocated , but if I had to go to the Hardy Rail Yards on the Metro Rail that would hardly be a destination for me, a middle class person to wind up in the Greyhound bus station completely surrounded by low income people....who are not icky as you would put it but who are not my peers or people I have association with on any level. Most people in Houston feel this way and if you think that this rail system is some day going to be efficient you haven't been taking the rail. It is the most inefficient way to get around the city as past articles in the Houston Chronicle have stated. An at grade rail sytem is not efficient for Houston as spread out as it is and only an elevated or subterranean system would actually be efficient, Grand Central Hub or not. As an aside, Atlanta seems to have corralled the funding to do what they wanted to do with their system, at grade or elevated but of course that was before the competition for federal funding really kicked in and now Houston is stuck with an at grade system.

[TheNiche]

So, it is your belief that an 8 mile commuter rail line on dedicated track with 5 or 6 stops will take an hour, versus the 7.5 mile LRT with 16 stops that takes 32 minutes?

No. Eight miles won't get you to Rosenberg. I'd also bet that acceleration/deceleration is slower and that stops will be somewhat longer.

[TheNiche]

It is good to get some kind of response to this issue...

You're just giving him ammo...

[RedScare]

...but if I had to go to the Hardy Rail Yards on the Metro Rail that would hardly be a destination for me, a middle class person to wind up in the Greyhound bus station completely surrounded by low income people....who are not icky as you would put it but who are not my peers or people I have association with on any level. Most people in Houston feel this way and if you think that this rail system is some day going to be efficient you haven't been taking the rail.

Judging by your remarks, you are not qualified to comment on what "most" Houstonians feel, since 63% of Houstonians are ethnic minorities, who apparently are not your peers or people you have association with. Additionally, the median household income is about $44,000, which is borderline lower middle class.

What you probably meant to say is that most of the people that YOU associate with are creeped out by the patrons at the Greyhound Station. My question to you is, what makes you think that METRO would spend $150 million on an intermodal transit center and not provide any security or maintenance? Of course, if the mere sight of poor people bothers you, I (nor METRO) can't help you there.

[DJ V Lawrence]

Again , the constituents in Midtown would ...love ....to see this business be relocated , but if I had to go to the Hardy Rail Yards on the Metro Rail that would hardly be a destination for me, a middle class person to wind up in the Greyhound bus station completely surrounded by low income people....who are not icky as you would put it but who are not my peers or people I have association with on any level.

So what if you're a middle class person that wants to use the Metro transportation or Greyhound? Either way, there will be low income travelers there as well as middle and upper class. I don't get it. It's like not wanting to go to a McDonald's because there's a better chance at seeing low-income people eating there then at Hard Rock Cafe.

Regardless of the location, all classes of people will go to the Greyhound hub. And all classes will be at the Grand Central terminal too, 'cause not all Metro riders are upper-class...

[The Great Hizzy!]

Most people in Houston feel this way and if you think that this rail system is some day going to be efficient you haven't been taking the rail

Good lord. It's already efficient. The most efficient in the U.S. currently. Oh well. Perception is so, so much more important to people. If it doesn't benefit them directly then it can't be useful.

Oh well, I guess you could counter-argue that our freeways, OTOH, are very efficient. I mean they carry gazillions of cars per mile every day. Not a bad use of tax dollars, baby!!

But enough with the wisecracks. The fundamental problem with almost all public works projects in today's urban society (be it suburban or dense urban) is that people don't really know enough about the projects themselves and judge them solely on how it affects them personally rather than in terms of how it affects the community at large.

And I'm looking forward to your poll results that show "most people in Houston" feel one way or the other. Nobody knows. They (people who presume to have a pulse no the sociopolitical sensibilities of your average Houstonian) mostly know what the people with whom they more commonly associate feel, which, in a city this size, is about the same as saying that you more or less only know how all of your aunties and or uncles feel a certain way. Hardly scientific or useful, quite frankly.

My apologies. I sense that I've become a bit ornery while sick. Not my intention.

[TheNiche]

Judging by your remarks, you are not qualified to comment on what "most" Houstonians feel, since 63% of Houstonians are ethnic minorities, who apparently are not your peers or people you have association with. Additionally, the median household income is about $44,000, which is borderline lower middle class.

What you probably meant to say is that most of the people that YOU associate with are creeped out by the patrons at the Greyhound Station. My question to you is, what makes you think that METRO would spend $150 million on an intermodal transit center and not provide any security or maintenance? Of course, if the mere sight of poor people bothers you, I (nor METRO) can't help you there.

Jeez man, cosmo gave you plenty of threads to tug on but you missed nearly all of them.

Where did he make mention of minorities, ethnicities, or anything else of that nature? Where did he mention security or maintenance? Also, class level is defined by more than just income.

What matters is not so much the income level or class as psychographic strata. Go here. You'll note that race is a factor in these categorizations, but you'll also notice that many subcultures from diverse demographic origins fit well into the same social group, while others are like oil and water. You may personally find the oil/water concept to be disgusting, but many people thoughtlessly let issues like these rule their lifestyles. And the full potential of LRT to stimulate Transit Oriented Development cannot be realized if such folks aren't comfortable.

[nmainguy]

and who pays into this metro system....? surely not the person who constantly jumps on the train for free. surely not the unemployed youth or the homeless person walking the fringes of the city, nor the drug dealer or the greyhound bus passenger.

Anyone who buys anything-short of food-in METRO's jurisdiction pays for METRO. They are more than willing to take your $$ regardless of race, color or creed...or predilection for drugs.

Regarding who takes the bus, you are greatly exaggerating the demographic market and makeup by stating such an egalitarian list of people who use the Greyhound bus terminal.

Initially you asked: "Have you ridden on the Metro Rail ? It's primarily a glorified bus whose ridership depends on low income groups of people to make transfers from the bus to the rail." If you are asking who rides the bus, I'm clueless. However, I stand by my list of who rides the Red Line.

Most people in Houston feel this way and if you think that this rail system is some day going to be efficient you haven't been taking the rail.

Well, it depends on how you define "Most people in Houston..." I'm about as Caucasian as you can get but "most" people in Houston are not. I'm probably a little more well off than "most people" and I ride the bus [#8] occasionally and the Red Line often so I guess I might be representative of "most people " who use METRO.

As for the rest, you're doing a good job at digging your own grave without my assistance.

Seriously, you'd come off sounding better if you got some facts on who funds METRO and who rides METRO.

[musicman]

My question to you is, what makes you think that METRO would spend $150 million on an intermodal transit center and not provide any security or maintenance?

METRO didn't provide REAL security at their park and rides either. They had so many cars being broken into that people were calling METRO to complain. And i'm not sure they are providing security at all of them or only the ones people were complaining about. I know my neighbor had a window broken out at the Monroe lot and had mentioned that he had seen broken glass there before.

[zaphod]

heh i remember when they were testing. went down there to see the trains run. it was pretty cool, they had them running at top speed which was cool to see.

im curious about that. i havent been down there in a while. metro has rails connecting with the UP tracks right? as for the parralel test track, a long time ago i talked to my uncle about that(he works for UP) and he said that the rairoad owns that track and planned on using as a siding once metro's mandatory testing was finished. Are the wires still up down there?

[RedScare]

Jeez man, cosmo gave you plenty of threads to tug on but you missed nearly all of them.

No, I didn't miss any of them. I chose to ignore a few, while dancing around others. The fact is, cosmo dislikes virtually everything about the urban core except for the dense living and the trains. He even dislikes who may ride the trains. He/she dislikes them so much that he actively searches them out. I seldom see the people cosmo describes, despite riding the train often.

Urban living is not for the person who recoils at poverty or homelessness. Any development of Hardy Yards will include security features, but since it is a redevelopment of an industrial site, it is and will continue to be abutted by low income areas. Those persons, like cosmo, who are creeped out by that should look elsewhere, because those areas will not gentrify overnight.

Now, THAT is pragmatism. I feel sorry for people that fear or are disgusted by those who do not carry Prada, but I can do little to help them, other than suggest where they may be happier. The Woodlands and Sugarland are building relatively dense approximations of urban settings, sans lower class shoppers, for those that do not want ALL of the urban experience. Cosmo would probably be happier there. That would leave more room in Downtown for you and I to solve the world's problems over a beer, right, Niche?

Note to musicman: We're talking METRO's crown jewel, here, not outlying lots. And, they didn't spend $150 mil on those lots.

[musicman]

heh i remember when they were testing. went down there to see the trains run. it was pretty cool, they had them running at top speed which was cool to see.

me and my uncle(he works for UP) talked about that once. He said that track is a siding and belongs to UP and they just let metro use it. The wires arent up anymore are they?(havent been that way in a while). I sorta guessed they took all that apart and reused it for the main street line? Im not for sure on any of this and things probably have changed, but yeah...I might ask the guy again next time i have a chance.

i thought it was there to be honest but haven't been down there in over a year. please try and get more info from your friend.

[musicman]

Note to musicman: We're talking METRO's crown jewel, here, not outlying lots. And, they didn't spend $150 mil on those lots.

Why is the light rail METRO's crown jewel? Just remember more people use the HOV system daily than use the light rail. You can call it a crown jewel but others might call it a rock.

[RedScare]

Pssst. Musicman. Read the thread title.

Oh, and according to METRO:

The booming ridership on METRORail mirrors a continuing surge throughout METRO

[TheNiche]

No, I didn't miss any of them. I chose to ignore a few, while dancing around others. The fact is, cosmo dislikes virtually everything about the urban core except for the dense living and the trains. He even dislikes who may ride the trains. He/she dislikes them so much that he actively searches them out. I seldom see the people cosmo describes, despite riding the train often.

Urban living is not for the person who recoils at poverty or homelessness. Any development of Hardy Yards will include security features, but since it is a redevelopment of an industrial site, it is and will continue to be abutted by low income areas. Those persons, like cosmo, who are creeped out by that should look elsewhere, because those areas will not gentrify overnight.

Now, THAT is pragmatism. I feel sorry for people that fear or are disgusted by those who do not carry Prada, but I can do little to help them, other than suggest where they may be happier. The Woodlands and Sugarland are building relatively dense approximations of urban settings, sans lower class shoppers, for those that do not want ALL of the urban experience. Cosmo would probably be happier there. That would leave more room in Downtown for you and I to solve the world's problems over a beer, right, Niche?

Note to musicman: We're talking METRO's crown jewel, here, not outlying lots. And, they didn't spend $150 mil on those lots.

What you're saying makes a kind of sense, but my personal preference would be to try and clean house, at least in a few select neighborhoods, so that we can take back a big share of the fake-urbs and justify the further redevelopment of Downtown and Midtown, at the very least.

[The Great Hizzy!]

Others are also patently biased, regardless of numbers. The one thing that is common among people who are anti-rail (and not just anti-METRO Rail) is that they work very hard to minimize every number associated with rail, negating ridership figures, limiting the impact of per mile operation over the long haul versus bus, limiting the effect of travel time for people using the rail over the same distance as someone riding a bus, etc.

And yet there seems to be all sorts of passes, considerations and the like given to building of freeways that are routinely overbudget, limited in impact and the like (and I'm saying this as someone who is not anti-freeway).

Again, people often come to the party with their biases and they argue in favor of that bias to hell freezes over. It's almost pointless now.

Though, I agree with musicman that METRO's light rail, though a great achievement given the number of obstacles placed against it, isn't so much a crown jewel in general, but it's nothing to shake off when you consider that it's ridership is almost three times as great as any single bus line (2 Bellaire, 163 Fondren, 82 Westheimer, etc). That's not insignificant considering that METRO Rail's length of service is no greater than any of the aforementioned bus routes.

It would be nice if, at a mimum, anti-Rail people would at least acknowledge impact on transit, even in its limited scope. I don't expect them to be pro-rail but it would at least give me the hope that we aren't completedly immune from fair analysis.

Also, please don't take this post as to suggest that only anti-rail people are bias. It is clear that pro-rail people have their biases too, and much of it is just as discouraging in my view when you look at the needs of the community at large.

[RedScare]

What you're saying makes a kind of sense...

Did I just feel the earth move?

And, to keep the warm fuzzies going, I agree that some house-cleaning would be nice in some of the close-in neighborhoods, including yours. However, I do not advocate house-cleaning at the expense of the neighbors. Bringing the Greyhound terminal into the Intermodal would do some of that. It would take it out of it's somewhat crappy Midtown location, and put it into a new location that would be newer, cleaner, and more secure. Those kinds of things keep troublemakers in check.

[Highway6]

Question for anyone that actually uses Metro.

I havent ridden the LRT in 6 months, and a Metro bus in 16 years.

However, Im moving soon and this will soon change.

Does Metrorail and metro busses use the same ticket system. If i buy a monthly pass, that gets me on anything, including rail, right ?

I only ask becasue I remember hearing wierd stories about transfers when the LRT started up, and when i did use the rail, it was a completely different payment system than i remember from using the bus oh so long ago.

[RedScare]

Yes, a monthly pass lets you ride anything but the Park&Rides.

http://www.ridemetro.org/Fare_Information/fare_guide.asp

[TheNiche]

Others are also patently biased, regardless of numbers. The one thing that is common among people who are anti-rail (and not just anti-METRO Rail) is that they work very hard to minimize every number associated with rail, negating ridership figures, limiting the impact of per mile operation over the long haul versus bus, limiting the effect of travel time for people using the rail over the same distance as someone riding a bus, etc.

And yet there seems to be all sorts of passes, considerations and the like given to building of freeways that are routinely overbudget, limited in impact and the like (and I'm saying this as someone who is not anti-freeway).

Again, people often come to the party with their biases and they argue in favor of that bias to hell freezes over. It's almost pointless now.

Though, I agree with musicman that METRO's light rail, though a great achievement given the number of obstacles placed against it, isn't so much a crown jewel in general, but it's nothing to shake off when you consider that it's ridership is almost three times as great as any single bus line (2 Bellaire, 163 Fondren, 82 Westheimer, etc). That's not insignificant considering that METRO Rail's length of service is no greater than any of the aforementioned bus routes.

It would be nice if, at a mimum, anti-Rail people would at least acknowledge impact on transit, even in its limited scope. I don't expect them to be pro-rail but it would at least give me the hope that we aren't completedly immune from fair analysis.

Also, please don't take this post as to suggest that only anti-rail people are bias. It is clear that pro-rail people have their biases too, and much of it is just as discouraging in my view when you look at the needs of the community at large.

In the same sense that you are not steadfastly anti-freeway, I do not consider myself anti-rail. Having said that, I am very much anti-Red Line. I don't like its design, I don't like its cost/benefit calculus, I don't like its path, and I don't like the concept of a "starter line" in principle. Had it been implemented as part of an integrated LRT system, I'd have been cool with it. Had it been partially- or fully-elevated, I'd have strongly supported it. As it is, however, I find it mediocre at best.

I'm sorry that I can't give that inch of compromise that you were looking for, but these are my genuine thoughts on the issue.