Future Houston- What will she look like?

[marc]

Hey Everybody,

What is your take on the future of Houston transportation? AND will this change the external mini-cities which help make up our great city?

Here is the bait- SO, as we know, gasoline is a billion dollars a gallon, conventional wisdom seems to indicate that it will only increase in price. SO, what does that mean for our fair city.

As many of you know, i am condemned; oops, sorry, stationed in LA for yet another year but still frequent Houston as much as i can. LA seems to be going through a Mass Transit transformation because of gas prices. Is it the same for Houston? AND will that mean that urban centers will become more dense because people will stay around the location in which they live? In other words, in 10-20 years, will we not be able to tell a difference between UT, MT, DT and other urban areas or do you all think in time looking at the H-Town horizon will be like looking at the movie "Brazil"- It all just morphs into one big megapolis? Give me your thoughts.

m.

PS- By the by, yes i am back. Had to take care of some personal, family shite, but back in the cyber swing these days.

[houstonmacbro]

When I lived in Los Angeles, without a car, I was amazed that I could get around so easily by train or bus. I cannot do the same thing here in Houston.

Perhaps METRO should camp out in LA for a couple of months to see first-hand what works and doesn't in a city with similar geographic dimensions and even bigger population.

[musicman]

When I lived in Los Angeles, without a car, I was amazed that I could get around so easily by train or bus. I cannot do the same thing here in Houston.

i thought you lived in unincorporated harris county?

[houstonmacbro]

i thought you lived in unincorporated harris county?

Yea, Houston nevertheless. We do have buses out here (METRO ones in fact!) but they just have a piss poor schedule.

[TheNiche]

When I lived in Los Angeles, without a car, I was amazed that I could get around so easily by train or bus. I cannot do the same thing here in Houston.

Perhaps METRO should camp out in LA for a couple of months to see first-hand what works and doesn't in a city with similar geographic dimensions and even bigger population.

LA is geographically constrained and seems to be densifying pretty much everywhere. This makes it easier for transit to be more ubiquitously available, and with more consistent service. But densification is a slow process, and its population growth rate reflects that; Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, Phoenix, and many other cities whoop LA's ass. LA's growth has primarily been shifting to the Riverside area. Slow growth is easier for transportation agencies to manage. I know practically nothing about the Riverside area except that it's in the next valley over to the east and that its real estate market is totally messed up, so I certainly don't know anything about it's transit system, but I would speculate that it isn't up to par compared with what LA has.

[Trae]

LA is geographically constrained and seems to be densifying pretty much everywhere. This makes it easier for transit to be more ubiquitously available, and with more consistent service. But densification is a slow process, and its population growth rate reflects that; Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, Phoenix, and many other cities whoop LA's ass. LA's growth has primarily been shifting to the Riverside area. Slow growth is easier for transportation agencies to manage. I know practically nothing about the Riverside area except that it's in the next valley over to the east and that its real estate market is totally messed up, so I certainly don't know anything about it's transit system, but I would speculate that it isn't up to par compared with what LA has.

The Riverside area (Inland Empire). has a few commuter rail lines though. They have their own transit agency out there, too. The Inland Empire is one big suburb of 4 million+, that is growing faster than Houston's metro. Just recently has growth been at just 10,000 per year in LA. I think people are moving back in to the urban areas there.

Still, no metro area in California does real transit right except for San Francisco.

Edited June 9, 2008 by Trae

[TheNiche]

The Riverside area (Inland Empire). has a few commuter rail lines though. They have their own transit agency out there, too. The Inland Empire is one big suburb of 4 million+, that is growing faster than Houston's metro. Just recently has growth been at just 10,000 per year in LA. I think people are moving back in to the urban areas there.

Still, no metro area in California does real transit right except for San Francisco.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

First, you miss the point. Nobody said that Riverside doesn't have transit. We're comparing quality, quantity, and reliability of service.

Secondly, Riverside is not growing faster than Houston's metro. I don't know where you're getting that from.

And 10,000 new people per year in LA is pitiful. Anybody bragging on that has got their head lodged firmly up their ass. In fact, the LA metro area is losing jobs, and I suspect that that will translate to the number of warm bodies before too long.

[dmoneybangbang]

Hey Everybody,

What is your take on the future of Houston transportation? AND will this change the external mini-cities which help make up our great city?

Here is the bait- SO, as we know, gasoline is a billion dollars a gallon, conventional wisdom seems to indicate that it will only increase in price. SO, what does that mean for our fair city.

As many of you know, i am condemned; oops, sorry, stationed in LA for yet another year but still frequent Houston as much as i can. LA seems to be going through a Mass Transit transformation because of gas prices. Is it the same for Houston? AND will that mean that urban centers will become more dense because people will stay around the location in which they live? In other words, in 10-20 years, will we not be able to tell a difference between UT, MT, DT and other urban areas or do you all think in time looking at the H-Town horizon will be like looking at the movie "Brazil"- It all just morphs into one big megapolis? Give me your thoughts.

m.

PS- By the by, yes i am back. Had to take care of some personal, family shite, but back in the cyber swing these days.

I personally think Houston is on the right track with its transportation. Unlike many metros, the Houston metro is basically growing all over. I think the continued upgrading and building of new freeways, along with the addition of the inner loop light rail will set Houston on the right path. I would support commuter rail in the westpark and 290 corridor, but feel that Houston should really overhaul it's park and ride system and bus. It will just take time for this to happen. Overall, I feel like the best transit system would provide options for the commuter.

I think Houston will continue to become more dense near the core and out in the growing employment centers (Westchase, Energy corridor and Memorial City area). However, I believe Houston will still sprawl out.

I don't really know LA too well to compare it to Houston, but it seems Houston has the advantage of having a stronger inner core.

[Trae]

.

Houston: http://recenter.tamu.edu/data/popm00/pcbsa26420.html

Inland Empire: http://recenter.tamu.edu/data/popm00/pcbsa40140.html

And like I said, LA only recently has added just about 10,000 people per year. Look here: http://recenter.tamu.edu/data/popm00/pcbsa31100.html

The Inland Empire's transit is just fine for what it serves. Adequate bus service and commuter rail. Pretty good for just one large suburban blob with no center. It also as good freeways and tollways.

Edited June 25, 2008 by dbigtex56
Deleted quoted post

[marc]

OK, OK, thanks for all the views.

Here is what i am REALLY asking. i have enjoyed a mass transit lifestyle here in LA (i live in North Hollywood and commute to the Valley for work) and am trying to make my way back to Houston (TX boy at heart).

i teach at high school level (private) and want to relocate back to my hometown. (am SO homesick i can envision the Westheimer Arts Festival in my frigging sleep! yeah, yeah, i know it is now the Bayou City Arts Festival, but when i was a sappling, it was called that) ANYWAY, how is Houston's transit system condusive to me wanting to live either in DT or UT and commute to some of the best private/parochial schools? HELP????!!!!!

Do you all think that Houston will cave to the mass transit way of life, OR will she hold out on the car dominated society until the bitter end?

And finally- if i stay in a rent free situation in Copperfield for a year or so, HOW do i get around my favorite stomps? (Museum District, Heights, RO, DT, and UT) i need some help.

thanks,

m.

[Montrose1100]

And finally- if i stay in a rent free situation in Copperfield for a year or so, HOW do i get around my favorite stomps? (Museum District, Heights, RO, DT, and UT) i need some help.

thanks,

m.

Light Rail & Westheimer Bus Route...

[musicman]

i teach at high school level (private) and want to relocate back to my hometown. (am SO homesick i can envision the Westheimer Arts Festival in my frigging sleep! yeah, yeah, i know it is now the Bayou City Arts Festival, but when i was a sappling, it was called that) ANYWAY, how is Houston's transit system condusive to me wanting to live either in DT or UT and commute to some of the best private/parochial schools? HELP????!!!!!

sounds like the decision is yours. you can commute to the best private/parochial schools, but you have to be in the right location.

[dmoneybangbang]

Houston will probably never be completely mass transit orientited. I think the most optimistic percentage would be 50% in my lifetime (I'm 22). Houston will live by the car and die by the car.

[N Judah]

Technology will eventually make up for the gas-price increase, so I don't consider that an issue.

So all that matters is densification, and in that respect I think LA will definitely beat Houston in the long run. They can't expand their freeways quite like we can, and LA is surrounded by mountains.

At present moment I wouldn't consider Houston's transit system conducive to going between UT or DT and the private/parochial schools in the area.

Edited June 14, 2008 by N Judah

[jfre81]

Houston will probably never be completely mass transit orientited. I think the most optimistic percentage would be 50% in my lifetime (I'm 22). Houston will live by the car and die by the car.

It doesn't have to be entirely dependent on mass transit, nor is Houston doomed to "die" by the car. People are driving less already and are making the most of the public transit options we have.

Remember that this city was a railroad hub before it became the oil-fueled car-centric metropolis we've all come to know and love...for all its faults...things can and do change.

I was driving down Westheimer last Saturday night in front of the Galleria, noticing how relatively little traffic was around there and how packed the 82 Metro line and stops were. And how that big wide road would be perfect for an el-train or something like that.

[TheNiche]

It doesn't have to be entirely dependent on mass transit, nor is Houston doomed to "die" by the car. People are driving less already and are making the most of the public transit options we have.

Remember that this city was a railroad hub before it became the oil-fueled car-centric metropolis we've all come to know and love...for all its faults...things can and do change.

Yep, and this is true of all the major American metropolitan areas. Even places that have an extensive commuter transit infrastructure, like San Francisco/San Jose and New York City would see their systems totally overwhelmed if it got so bad that any other city was 'dying by the car'. Those places would be rushing to replace and upgrade their existing systems even as places without any would rush to build them. Some cities have a minor pre-existing advantage due to sheer density levels, but for all intents and purposes at a regional level comparison, it would be a pretty level playing field during a total paradigm shift to transit.

[houstonmacbro]

I agree. I see less people on the freeway. I drove into the city on I45 N at 7:00a on Friday and it was a breeze. I made it 288/Reed in about 30 minutes from Richey/I45. Not bad.

[Ethanra]

I agree. I see less people on the freeway. I drove into the city on I45 N at 7:00a on Friday and it was a breeze. I made it 288/Reed in about 30 minutes from Richey/I45. Not bad.

I've noticed this as well. I think it a combination of things. School is out is one. Workers such as plumbers, painters etc.. have been working four long days instead of five now to save on fuel. I have also noticed people from all levels of jobs riding their bike to bus stops....

[jfre81]

On Monday morning I got on 610 from Stella Link and headed toward 59 at 7AM. Exited 610 onto 59 toward downtown. Exited at Greenbriar/S. Shepherd. Took a left on Shepherd, onward to Westheimer, then traveled the same route back home (well, Farnham/Greenbriar to get back on 59)

Total time: 30 minutes.

Traffic was flowing.

People are changing already. $4 was the magic number after all.

If there was ever a time to do one of those ridiculously expensive mass transit usage studies for the purposes of getting Uncle Sam's money for it, now is the time to do it.

[houstonmacbro]

On Monday morning I got on 610 from Stella Link and headed toward 59 at 7AM. Exited 610 onto 59 toward downtown. Exited at Greenbriar/S. Shepherd. Took a left on Shepherd, onward to Westheimer, then traveled the same route back home (well, Farnham/Greenbriar to get back on 59)

Total time: 30 minutes.

Traffic was flowing.

People are changing already. $4 was the magic number after all.

If there was ever a time to do one of those ridiculously expensive mass transit usage studies for the purposes of getting Uncle Sam's money for it, now is the time to do it.

Yeah, I am agreeing. We drove to church (Lakewood) this morning on I45N and it was like no-man's land out there. We did encounter traffic when we hit the Pierce elevated, but it was nothing.

Now, agree ... this was Sunday morning, but the traffic is lighter.

I would like to drive Monday morning into town (but have no reason to) so would love to hear other people's feedback on this.

[TheNiche]

If there was ever a time to do one of those ridiculously expensive mass transit usage studies for the purposes of getting Uncle Sam's money for it, now is the time to do it.

Every other city will probably do the same thing, but you're right that now is a good time because if we don't do one of those studies we can't compete effectively for limited FTA funds.

Of course, the truth of the matter is that those studies are pretty consistently lacking in validity...but that doesn't matter. It's all about politics.

EDIT: And I agree, traffic is flowing better.

Edited June 16, 2008 by TheNiche

[N Judah]

Houston will probably be even more sprawled out and car-dependent, but with a semi-decent mass transit system primarily serving the inner loop area, which will be built up nicely. To expand it out farther would be too expensive.

This is bad if you are living in Copperfield in 2008, but good if you are living in-town about 5-10 years from now. So given a similar choice I'd stick with L.A., at least in the short-term.

Edited June 16, 2008 by N Judah

[jfre81]

Houston will probably be even more sprawled out and car-dependent, but with a semi-decent mass transit system primarily serving the inner loop area, which will be built up nicely. To expand it out farther would be too expensive.

You don't suppose commuter rail can work here?

[TheNiche]

You don't suppose commuter rail can work here?

It is less of a question of whether it can be made to work. It is a question of whether it ought to be made to work (and in what form) in light of its advantages and disadvantages relative to other forms of transit.

[jfre81]

Well, they plowed under the tracks along I-10 for more concrete so Katy's gonna have to wait....they're already talking now about getting it to Cypress and Galveston (and everything in between of course).

Personally I think we should at least have one to Sugar Land since it could easily connect at the Fannin Park and Ride, where people could ride the existing light rail line from there to Downtown or TMC. I suppose you could then have a bus line going straight from there to Uptown and other work destinations. This stuff needs to be done now, because although I do think the price of gas will come down some it won't be by a whole lot. >$3/gal gas is probably here to stay.

The suburbs will remain sustainable only if there's another way to get there and back besides driving.

[wxman]

Yeah, I am agreeing. We drove to church (Lakewood) this morning on I45N and it was like no-man's land out there. We did encounter traffic when we hit the Pierce elevated, but it was nothing.

Now, agree ... this was Sunday morning, but the traffic is lighter.

I would like to drive Monday morning into town (but have no reason to) so would love to hear other people's feedback on this.

You go to Lakewood? Sweet, so do I! Usually sit toward the front on the floor on the left side.

[TheNiche]

Well, they plowed under the tracks along I-10 for more concrete so Katy's gonna have to wait....they're already talking now about getting it to Cypress and Galveston (and everything in between of course).

Personally I think we should at least have one to Sugar Land since it could easily connect at the Fannin Park and Ride, where people could ride the existing light rail line from there to Downtown or TMC. I suppose you could then have a bus line going straight from there to Uptown and other work destinations. This stuff needs to be done now, because although I do think the price of gas will come down some it won't be by a whole lot. >$3/gal gas is probably here to stay.

The suburbs will remain sustainable only if there's another way to get there and back besides driving.

The inner city that would be the greater beneficiary. Without effective spokes out to the suburbs (regardless of whether they are handling single-occupant autos, carpools, vanpools, P&R busses, or trains) it makes more sense for most companies to move to where their people are than to expect that their people will relocate to where the company is.

But you're missing my point. As we've been discussing extensively in another thread, commuter rail really and truely has only sparse advantages over far less expensive alternatives such as P&R service. Also, Sugar Land is no longer really in the running for commuter rail service.

[houstonmacbro]

You go to Lakewood? Sweet, so do I! Usually sit toward the front on the floor on the left side.

I'm not a regular. I was herded into the left on the 2nd level section (towards a 45 angle to the right of stage).

[N Judah]

You don't suppose commuter rail can work here?

I personally think that, in the shorter run, the cost of commuter rail could be better spent on stuff like park and rides and buses.

For now I prefer to focus on a more compact mass-transit footprint that is more likely to spur development. That way, people who are truly serious about ditching their car can just move in closer to town. Hopefully in doing so they will contribute to a more vibrant urban core.

Commuter rail is a great idea for the long run but I personally am really holding out for a serious heavy-duty "subway" style line (the extremely expensive kind) not those sloooow Amtrak trains.

[Trae]

Commuter rail is also good because it is run on weekends. P&R isn't. For example, this past Saturday, me and some friends wanted to go to The Galleria. It would have been a lot cheaper to just take the commuter rail to say the Northwest Transit Center, then the Uptown Line on into The Galleria (dumb Katy Tollway takes that option away). Instead, we had to drive in on I-10. No other option except for the 82 Westheimer (I think that's the one that goes to The Galleria), but we didn't want to ride the bus.

The inner city that would be the greater beneficiary. Without effective spokes out to the suburbs (regardless of whether they are handling single-occupant autos, carpools, vanpools, P&R busses, or trains) it makes more sense for most companies to move to where their people are than to expect that their people will relocate to where the company is.

But you're missing my point. As we've been discussing extensively in another thread, commuter rail really and truely has only sparse advantages over far less expensive alternatives such as P&R service. Also, Sugar Land is no longer really in the running for commuter rail service.

That Southwest Line is suppose to go to at least Missouri City, so not too far away from Sugar Land.

Edited June 17, 2008 by Trae