Traffic; it's getting worse. Have you noticed?

[desirous]

Mayor White's already started the initiative:

http://www.houstontx.gov/flexworks/flexinthecity/index.html

http://www.houstontx.gov/flexworks/index.html

Smart. The best way to utilize roadway capacity is to average out the demand. Road and rail are different - train length and frequency can be modulated, whereas a freeway that's crowded during 4 hours and empty during the other 20 is a missed opportunity.

[Houston19514]

Smart. The best way to utilize roadway capacity is to average out the demand. Road and rail are different - train length and frequency can be modulated, whereas a freeway that's crowded during 4 hours and empty during the other 20 is a missed opportunity.

Not sure they are quite as different as you are suggesting. If you can average out the demand on a rail system, you don't have to invest in as many rail cars. Isn't a rail system that's crowded 4 hours and empty the other 20 is just as much of a missed opportunity as the same situation in a freeway?

[northbeaumont]

Worsening traffic is one of those things that creeps up on you slowly, like aging.

My evening commute for going on 3 years, from I-10 and Shepherd-Durham to Gulf Fwy at Broad , has noticibly worsened. Baring traffic events, the front part of the commute seems to have started backing up before I get on recently, whereas I used to have clear sailing until close to DT and the Gulf Fwy. portion is now backing up between Telephone and Wayside, whereas it used to start backing up between Woodridge and 610. School sessions only seem to make a minor difference. That's 3 exits in less than 3 years. At this rate, it'll be bumper to bumper for me by 2010.

So we're all going to likely live to see the day when rush hour means stop and go the whole way, in most cases, all across town. Will we get more rail, buses, freeways or just higher inner-loop housing prices and less free time? I'd say none of the above will make much difference.

Do any of you actually believe that the traffic will IMPROVE??? The more lanes that are constructed, the worse it will get. Too many people simply have love affairs with vehicles.

[desirous]

Not sure they are quite as different as you are suggesting. If you can average out the demand on a rail system, you don't have to invest in as many rail cars. Isn't a rail system that's crowded 4 hours and empty the other 20 is just as much of a missed opportunity as the same situation in a freeway?

Monetarily, yes. Physically, no. A rail line always occupies the same space, none if underground, whereas the new Katy Freeway will be a lifeless expanse of concrete vast enough to give Josef Stalin an erection.

[mumbles]

I could drive to the park and ride and take the bus to the park and ride at post oak. Then what? I suppose there might be another bus or two to get me over to 11th st. Then I would still have a ways to hike to get to my office. Wouldn't be much fun in the rain and the heat. The only way I could see it working would be if I bought an old car that I could leave in the park and ride. Just use to to get from there to work. But it would probably be stolen. I don't see public transportation as an option for a lot of people. And what about the stops I make to get things on the way home?

So why do people live way out here in the boon docks anyways? Cheaper? Safer? All the wonderful parks? Better schools?

[desirous]

So why do people live way out here in the boon docks anyways? Cheaper? Safer? All the wonderful parks? Better schools?

All of the above. The biggest issue is why that has become so, i.e. to what degree are our entire livelihoods are dictated by development itself. Last night, I went on a pleasure drive around McKinney (a suburb of Dallas), and marvelled at the vanity of it all: megachurches, fitness centres, identical strip malls, identical homes, all occupied by singularly self-righteous people... all to be repeated again in ten years, ten miles down the turnpike.

We need cars. We really do. There is no denying it, regardless of how much of a transit fetish one has. This indispensable need arises from the situation we are in; it wasn't the situation that adapted to a pre-existing need for car travel. By now, there is no way to change these facts, at least without obviating 90% of our infrastructure; we are far beyond the point of no return. Not without 30 million people can we build our existing city to transit-viable density. The best we can do now is simply bite the towel and not wince too much during traffic jams.

Edited April 6, 2007 by desirous

[Houston19514]

Monetarily, yes. Physically, no. A rail line always occupies the same space, none if underground, whereas the new Katy Freeway will be a lifeless expanse of concrete vast enough to give Josef Stalin an erection.

Yes, but we weren't talking about the possibilities for expanding either roads or rail lines. We were talking about maximizing the usage of the existing infrastructure. In both freeways and rail lines, you can handle more passengers with the same infrastructure if you spread the usage throughout the day, rather than bunching the bulk of it into two 2-hour windows. (And FWIW, there is a limit to how many passengers a single rail line can handle; there is a limit to the number of cars each train can have, and there is a limit to how closely they can travel.)

[musicman]

(And FWIW, there is a limit to how many passengers a single rail line can handle; there is a limit to the number of cars each train can have, and there is a limit to how closely they can travel.)

there is a limit to everything, but a design that doesn't comingle with traffic would allow for more capacity.

[desirous]

Yes, but we weren't talking about the possibilities for expanding either roads or rail lines. We were talking about maximizing the usage of the existing infrastructure. In both freeways and rail lines, you can handle more passengers with the same infrastructure if you spread the usage throughout the day, rather than bunching the bulk of it into two 2-hour windows.

I completely agree. It's funny - in my field, people already work three shifts; now, non-financial firms need to follow suit. That'll take a bit of convincing.

(And FWIW, there is a limit to how many passengers a single rail line can handle; there is a limit to the number of cars each train can have, and there is a limit to how closely they can travel.)

Yes, definitely. I know well, having toured Shanghai; it gladdened me that our country isn't so overpopulated. Better get stuck in a traffic jam than attempt a subway commute with 400 people jammed into each car -- and that was with six-car trains running at 3 minute intervals! However, this upper limit is irrelevant in Texas. Hell will freeze over before we have an urban rail line maxed out to the brink.

[houstonmacbro]

Worsening traffic is one of those things that creeps up on you slowly, like aging.

My evening commute for going on 3 years, from I-10 and Shepherd-Durham to Gulf Fwy at Broad , has noticibly worsened. Baring traffic events, the front part of the commute seems to have started backing up before I get on recently, whereas I used to have clear sailing until close to DT and the Gulf Fwy. portion is now backing up between Telephone and Wayside, whereas it used to start backing up between Woodridge and 610. School sessions only seem to make a minor difference. That's 3 exits in less than 3 years. At this rate, it'll be bumper to bumper for me by 2010.

So we're all going to likely live to see the day when rush hour means stop and go the whole way, in most cases, all across town. Will we get more rail, buses, freeways or just higher inner-loop housing prices and less free time? I'd say none of the above will make much difference.

Agreed. I think if Houston is going to keep growing and not melt down into a molten pile of concrete, rubber and steel on our freeways, mass transit is going to have to become a reality and not a dream.

Folks stop fighting it (quite the NIMBY issues and get the damned thing built ... imminent domain if necessary).

On a similar issue, I often talk with my mother (imagine, me talking ... I mean, really talking, not typing in a newsgroup) and she always likes to go riding out to different parts of town. Funny thing, she will often take back streets and side roads.

So often in our advancement we forget about those old routes. Perhaps it would do well for all of us to rediscover some of them.

[mumbles]

I already use the old route, never go near the freeway in the morning. Clay road all the way into town. Trouble is so do lots of others, we crawl along just like the hwy.

It was only one lane when I moved out here. Now it is two lanes and so many more people have moved out here, traffic is just as bad as when it was one lane.

Same thing will happen with the Katy Fwy. It will never get better, making the roads wider just keeps it from getting worse.

[houstonmacbro]

Yeah, I am thinking the Katy freeway widening project is just going to cause more cause to go slowly for greater distances at rush hours.

[desirous]

Agreed. I think if Houston is going to keep growing and not melt down into a molten pile of concrete, rubber and steel on our freeways, mass transit is going to have to become a reality and not a dream.

Folks stop fighting it (quite the NIMBY issues and get the damned thing built ... imminent domain if necessary).

On a similar issue, I often talk with my mother (imagine, me talking ... I mean, really talking, not typing in a newsgroup) and she always likes to go riding out to different parts of town. Funny thing, she will often take back streets and side roads.

So often in our advancement we forget about those old routes. Perhaps it would do well for all of us to rediscover some of them.

Transit is only viable for dense employment centers though. How is anybody going to commute from Sugar Land to the Energy Corridor, or Jersey Village to Greenspoint? The very idea of dispersion, to have jobs scattered around the city to be closer to suburbs, is anathema to transit.

[ricco67]

Transit is only viable for dense employment centers though. How is anybody going to commute from Sugar Land to the Energy Corridor, or Jersey Village to Greenspoint? The very idea of dispersion, to have jobs scattered around the city to be closer to suburbs, is anathema to transit.

With our varied "business locations" (Energy Corridor, Sugarland, Greenspoint, Greenway, Med Center, 1960/45, Woodlands, Ship Channel, and Uptown) people are commuting from all over houston (and even from neighboring cities!) which is making our traffic patterns a little insane. There are also people that are leaving from THOSE centers to OTHER centers for meetings (i.e. Sugarland to Downtown, or from Uptown to greenspoint) AND back! A comprehensive and a redundant transit system (rail and bus) needs to be put in place.

while many people in business will likely drive or take a cab to and from those locations the way things currently stand (time IS money, afterall) it would make an additional option palatable for when the day ends as well as to the every day schlubs that live within the city and surrounding metro areas to move around.

Yes, rail capacity can only be improved so much, that's a given. It won't reach the point where men in white gloves will shove people into the trains, but I believe the transit (as well as other forms) infrastructure needs to be formed now while it's relatively cheap and construction isn't is intrusive in everyday life.

To wait until we reach a certain density would be complete folly and to those who don't wish to do it now are simply not looking to the long term necessities of a city that is expected to almost double within 30 years.

[CDeb]

all occupied by singularly self-righteous people

Oh, the utter irony of this statement.

[Houston19514]

Oh, the utter irony of this statement.

Glad to see I wasn't the only one to notice that...

[desirous]

Oh, the utter irony of this statement.

I'm glad you noticed. 't would be disappointing if nobody did.