METRORail University Line

[nmainguy]

This morning I drove on Westpark from Chimney Rock to Buffalo Spdwy. I noticed that there is very little room for any new development short of the power lines in the easement being removed.

From Chimney Rock to 610, there is no available land on the north side or south side well.

From 610 to Weslyan, there is the Chron, apartments, a city water station, Fox and a motel on the north and no developable land on the south unless you take out the dog park.

From Weslyan there are the backs of strip centers on the north and the walled back of inaccessible residential on the south.

From Edloe to Buffalo Spdwy, it's mostly the backs of strip centers on the north side and the Kroger center and a few townhouses on the south.

With only two stations proposed [Weslyan and Rice] between Greenway [Edloe] and the Hillcroft TC http://www.metrosolutions.org/posted/1068/...ay02.125975.pdf , where is the ridership and room for new development?

[ricco67]

This morning I drove on Westpark from Chimney Rock to Buffalo Spdwy. I noticed that there is very little room for any new development short of the power lines in the easement being removed.

From Chimney Rock to 610, there is no available land on the north side or south side well.

From 610 to Weslyan, there is the Chron, apartments, a city water station, Fox and a motel on the north and no developable land on the south unless you take out the dog park.

From Weslyan there are the backs of strip centers on the north and the walled back of inaccessible residential on the south.

From Edloe to Buffalo Spdwy, it's mostly the backs of strip centers on the north side and the Kroger center and a few townhouses on the south.

With only two stations proposed [Weslyan and Rice] between Greenway [Edloe] and the Hillcroft TC http://www.metrosolutions.org/posted/1068/...ay02.125975.pdf , where is the ridership and room for new development?

FYI:

The Dogpark would be taken out, i asked about it it's owned by the city.

Going from the TC to Chimney Rock would see some ridership. The area between Chimney Rock, Hillcroft, a street south of glenmont (i forgot the name), and Westpark is one of the highest density populations in the city due to all the apartments in the area. This can be adequately served with one stop near Chimney rock.

If the rail goes down by Rice/sage, it can serve the apartments/condos and offer a stop by windsor plaza (it's the old name and I'm sticking to it) and go from Richmond from there.

there is no real advantage of continuing to South Post oak aside from the ample space to allow for elevation over west park traffic before diving under the freeway to complete it's turn to richmond.

Continuing past 610 would allow for a station to for those located at the apartments near the area as well as the townhomes near on Wesleyan. would be a good place for additional parking for those wishing to do so before heading towards downtown/medical center before the turn from wesleyan which would prove to be interesting as the turn is relatively tight.

If it were to continue onto edloe would offer no additional ridership but would add speed before continuing on Edloe.

were it located on Richmond, it would simply speed past AO and breeze by to Greenway.

If the line continued onto kirby, a stop could be made to help access the kroger center, which would give people easier access to that center and surrounding apartments and hotels, while being able to provide parking for commuters.

A turn south on buffelo speedway would be able to meet the needs of those in the greenway plaza area as well as those heading towards church.

The options presented for this turn, while logical would be outragously costly, as opposed to just running down Richmond.

If it continued down Westpark to kirby, the turn would be tight and would offer no real benifits unless it flew straight to Shepherd where a station there would allow a stop for those living in the area along with some parking for commuters. For it to continue north on Shepherd would require two tight turns through a highly heavily traveled along with taking some land from the JCI on Richmond.

From there we all pretty much how it would go.

While both lines have their benifits and minuses, it should either turn north on sage or post oak, or further on down to wesleyan.

The cost benifit ratio would greatly favor a turn at post oak or sage.

however, if a line goes along westpark, a change in the development would change quite a bit over a period of time where those strip centers between Westpark and 59 might turn into high density housing. The Housing in West U near Wesleyan might be affected by such development in the future.

Additional development would be extremely limited due to the amount of the electrical infracture that's located along westpark.

Did I overlook anything? any counter arguments?

[AftonAg]

Yes Mass Transit should play an important role. We just need the best designed system we can afford which actually does alleviate a few problems. In my opinion, the worst problem is the travel time from one end to another which is basically as a result of the design. It is running at the same travel time as the buses it replaced. My hope would have been to cut the 30 min travel time to 20 minutes. This would result in less travel times which would attract the rider that won't ride the bus cause the travel times are currently too long. It is this type of NEW rider that mass transit in Houston needs.

METRO eliminated multiple bus routes and the medical center also eliminated their outlying lot buses which results in instant ridership. There is LOTS of potential NEW ridership in Houston for a system that WILL SAVE THE RIDERS TIME. At the same time you have to minimize disturbances in the current traffic by having dedicated right of ways in areas of particular congestion. If that means elevating the train in certain areas, then let's do it so that it will result in faster travel times. If the new system has the same travel times as the current bus system, it won't gain the NEW ridership that METRO is striving for.

nmainguy....sorry i couldn't repond directly to your response cause your last post freezes up my machine so i'll include it here

"Most professional organizations are non-profit-and many have lobbiests to lobby for their particular intrests. They exist to serve their chosen fields" I agree 100 % with your statements. I am aware what the varying lobby groups do. It would just be better if there was a neutral organization who did the data gathering instead of one who is lobbying the government for transit money. It's kind of like the insurance industry using facts generated by lobbyists for the insurance companies to determine that rates need to be raised. They are ALWAYS going to do what the insurance industry wants. It is the perception that I disagree with.

Musicman you have struck a perfect chord (pun intended of course). The real way to insure ridership and remove cars from the freeway is to provide mass transit that is faster and less expensive than driving. With the current gas prices and future projections the cheaper part is easier to see, but spending millions of tax dollars on transit that is no faster than the current bus system is ludicrous.

[bachanon]

i just noticed something while perusing afton oaks properties on HAR. the older homes are selling for 300k-500k. there are also 1-2 million dollar homes being built in the area. are the older homes being torn down for the new mansions?

one of the homes on richmond is 500k with a 10,350 square foot lot. couldn't rail bring those properties to where they are being sold by the square foot? wouldn't $7 a square foot be better than 500k?

it seems that the neighborhood is in transition currently. am i wrong?

[ricco67]

actually, you're correct. There have been a number of homes that are currently being built.

I'm kinda' wondering about the apartments on the east and west end of the neighborhoods, a few look okay, but a couple of them look like they only have a few years left.

In fact, AG, I know two of your neighbors are hookers.

[bachanon]

aftonag has put up with alot of snide comments and attacks. i appreciate his calm demeanor and the fact he's stuck with it thus far.

my hopes, aftonag, is that you will participate in other threads here on HAIF.

[ricco67]

I have to give that to him, as well.

Although, I would have just ignored the personal attacks and simply answered the meat of the matter.

[TheNiche]

Yes Mass Transit should play an important role...

Musicman, that was one of the most fundamentally sound discourses on public transportation that I've ever seen. Good post!

[Montrose1100]

My friends, I have found the answer to all your problems:

Houston Monorail

And to those who have any questions, or want additional information on why Monorail would be utopia for us:

The Monorail Society

[zaphod]

oh lord not the monorail people having a GOOD monorail system would be awesome though. but the city can barely get money to build what we have so moo..

Personally, after following this thread for a while i have a few questions. I havent lived in houston since i was 12 so beyond occasional trips and the net i dont know a whole lot about this area.

My questions

1. Will the proposed AO alignment require people's homes to be taken out? or just small parts of their yards? or not even anything at all?

2. If the answer to number #1 is that at the least nobody will have to loose their house, then why the heck are the AO people so up in arms to kill a very quiet and clean vehicle that will glide through their neighborhood with them not even noticing it or affecting them in any way

3. Besides going straight down richmond, are there any alternative routes that get good ridership that only stay on richmond for a while?

4. When are the engineers going to give us some real info?

5. If the whiners and the feds win, what next? Is rail in houston gonna get the same texas politics screw job or will metro get working on the northside line?

Edited July 31, 2006 by zaphod

[nmainguy]

oh lord not the monorail people having a GOOD monorail system would be awesome though. but the city can barely get money to build what we have so moo..

Personally, after following this thread for a while i have a few questions. I havent lived in houston since i was 12 so beyond occasional trips and the net i dont know a whole lot about this area.

My questions

1. Will the proposed AO alignment require people's homes to be taken out? or just small parts of their yards? or not even anything at all?

No homes will be taken but the city may take some of their easement if nessessary

2. If the answer to number #1 is that at the least nobody will have to loose their house, then why the heck are the AO people so up in arms to kill a very quiet and clean vehicle that will glide through their neighborhood with them not even noticing it or affecting them in any way

Good question. So far they've given no compelling case not to put it through AO. Maybe they just don't like rail and this is their attempt to kill it via putting it on a route with low ridership. The feds look at ridership when doleing out the $$.

3. Besides going straight down richmond, are there any alternative routes that get good ridership that only stay on richmond for a while?

Not really-not compared to what Richmond would bring.

4. When are the engineers going to give us some real info?

METRO is supposed to announce their alignment August 8th, I believe

5. If the whiners and the feds win, what next? Is rail in houston gonna get the same texas politics screw job or will metro get working on the northside line?

Good question. Who knows?

[mrfootball]

If Metro has to mislead the populace in order to try and boost their ridership numbers (which aren't great), is Metro's rail line really worth it?

Metro as a taxing body, ought to be transparent and held accountable or lose its ability to tax residents of Houston and its outlying suburbs. We don't deserve to be mislead by quasi-governmental agencies attempting to justify their worth.

Edited July 31, 2006 by mrfootball

[ricco67]

oh lord not the monorail people having a GOOD monorail system would be awesome though. but the city can barely get money to build what we have so moo..

Personally, after following this thread for a while i have a few questions. I havent lived in houston since i was 12 so beyond occasional trips and the net i dont know a whole lot about this area.

My questions

1. Will the proposed AO alignment require people's homes to be taken out? or just small parts of their yards? or not even anything at all?

2. If the answer to number #1 is that at the least nobody will have to loose their house, then why the heck are the AO people so up in arms to kill a very quiet and clean vehicle that will glide through their neighborhood with them not even noticing it or affecting them in any way

3. Besides going straight down richmond, are there any alternative routes that get good ridership that only stay on richmond for a while?

4. When are the engineers going to give us some real info?

5. If the whiners and the feds win, what next? Is rail in houston gonna get the same texas politics screw job or will metro get working on the northside line?

In post earlier (#940) addresses some of the questions you asked as far as ridership and alternatives.

If Metro has to mislead the populace in order to try and boost their ridership numbers (which aren't great), is Metro's rail line really worth it?

Metro as a taxing body, ought to be transparent and held accountable or lose its ability to tax residents of Houston and its outlying suburbs. We don't deserve to be mislead by quasi-governmental agencies attempting to justify their worth.

As far as I know, Metro has been honest about any numbers they have. The metrorail critics have pretty much been silenced in regards to ridership, and even the crash stat watchers have not been as active as they were in the begining. The same thing will happen when the University and east end lines are completed.

[CE_ugh]

In post earlier (#940) addresses some of the questions you asked as far as ridership and alternatives.

As far as I know, Metro has been honest about any numbers they have. The metrorail critics have pretty much been silenced in regards to ridership, and even the crash stat watchers have not been as active as they were in the begining. The same thing will happen when the University and east end lines are completed.

I dont know why people are up in arms about Metro's discontinuing of bus lines along Main Street. Four of the lines "eliminated" were the 2,4,8, and 10. The 2,4, and 8 are three of the busiest lines in the city. They use to go all the way downtown but now stop at the TMC. Even today the 2 Bellaire runs late during rush hour because it's so overburdened. I'd hate to think how long it would take to get downtown without the Red Line.

The 1 Hospital bus parallels the Red Line from Downtown to TMC as a local but guess how many use that bus while it follows this route.

I dont think anyone is fudging numbers. I think people are just patronizing and more reliable and frequent form of transportation.

Whoops I forgot the 8 does continue down Main to Wheeler but from my observations and TMC transit center, most leave the bus for the Red Line.

[TheNiche]

The metrorail critics have pretty much been silenced in regards to ridership...

Ridership numbers are very high, but the reason is not that the LRT is efficient, but that bus routes have been reconfigured to promote (or force) the use of LRT. Ridership vs. Cost is still very much a concern.

I don't think that we'll be hearing the same level of criticism, however, because the completion of the University Line will create a system that 'goes somewhere' and that has enormous ridership generators along each spoke eminating outward of Wheeler station. It even includes residential areas, of all things. Besides, there isn't another vote, so the issue won't make headlines or be politicized as heavily as it was the first time around.

I dont know why people are up in arms about Metro's discontinuing of bus lines along Main Street. Four of the lines "eliminated" were the 2,4,8, and 10. The 2,4, and 8 are three of the busiest lines in the city. They use to go all the way downtown but now stop at the TMC. Even today the 2 Bellaire runs late during rush hour because it's so overburdened. I'd hate to think how long it would take to get downtown without the Red Line.

Don't forget, however, that it takes time to transfer between different modes of transit.

[CE_ugh]

Ridership numbers are very high, but the reason is not that the LRT is efficient, but that bus routes have been reconfigured to promote (or force) the use of LRT. Ridership vs. Cost is still very much a concern.

I don't think that we'll be hearing the same level of criticism, however, because the completion of the University Line will create a system that 'goes somewhere' and that has enormous ridership generators along each spoke eminating outward of Wheeler station. It even includes residential areas, of all things. Besides, there isn't another vote, so the issue won't make headlines or be politicized as heavily as it was the first time around.

Don't forget, however, that it takes time to transfer between different modes of transit.

Usually 4 minutes to transfer to a train at peak times. 30+ sometimes to transfer to a bus.

[musicman]

Musicman, that was one of the most fundamentally sound discourses on public transportation that I've ever seen. Good post!

thanks.....438am was awfully late for me but i couldn't pass up the chance to respond. common sense is something that METRO lacks.

[musicman]

My questions

1. Will the proposed AO alignment require people's homes to be taken out? or just small parts of their yards? or not even anything at all?

Well NO ENGINEERING has been completed on the project PERIOD. I'd ask that each of you go to La Tapatia on Richmond and stand in the parking lot. The current configuration is 2 lanes of traffic each way. Now imagine the two lanes of traffic each way plus 2 corridors for the light rail and the median per METRO's proposal. It is obvious that some MAJOR acquisitions will be necessary if two lanes of traffic will remain going each way. I personally believe that eventually METRO will reduce Richmond to one lane each way because the current Main street is approximately the same width as Richmond is now with only one lane of traffic.

2. If the answer to number #1 is that at the least nobody will have to loose their house, then why the heck are the AO people so up in arms to kill a very quiet and clean vehicle that will glide through their neighborhood with them not even noticing it or affecting them in any way

John Sedlak, METRO VP, will tell you NO ENGINEERING has been done. ZAPHOD, i will say that the light rail is less noisy than the average freight train, however to say that is is VERY quiet and it will not be noticed is not true. You can clearly hear the horns when you are inside many buildings along Main. I was at the music festival earlier tonight and i could hear the horns inside. Definitely was a distraction to the music going on.

3. Besides going straight down richmond, are there any alternative routes that get good ridership that only stay on richmond for a while?

4. When are the engineers going to give us some real info?

This is a question everyone is wondering.

5. If the whiners and the feds win, what next? Is rail in houston gonna get the same texas politics screw job or will metro get working on the northside line?

Again it is a matter of common sense in my mind. Unfortunately, METRO is pursuing the path of replacing buses with rail with numerous stops. They aren't going for an improvement in travel times which would attract new ridership. In Europe, the transiit systems i've seen operate trains, buses and taxis on the same lane. The trains were fixed on the line and stopped less frequently while the buses and taxis could "get off" at anytime. We need to be more creative in Houston. It is obvious METRO doesn't have any new ideas.

I dont know why people are up in arms about Metro's discontinuing of bus lines along Main Street. Four of the lines "eliminated" were the 2,4,8, and 10. The 2,4, and 8 are three of the busiest lines in the city. They use to go all the way downtown but now stop at the TMC. Even today the 2 Bellaire runs late during rush hour because it's so overburdened. I'd hate to think how long it would take to get downtown without the Red Line.

The 1 Hospital bus parallels the Red Line from Downtown to TMC as a local but guess how many use that bus while it follows this route.

I dont think anyone is fudging numbers. I think people are just patronizing and more reliable and frequent form of transportation.

Whoops I forgot the 8 does continue down Main to Wheeler but from my observations and TMC transit center, most leave the bus for the Red Line.

No one is up in arms, you are just making a point that METRO discontinued bus lines in order to gain ridership.

Edited July 31, 2006 by musicman

[TheNiche]

...to say that is is VERY quiet and it will not be noticed is not true. You can clearly hear the horns when you are inside many buildings along Main. I was at the music festival earlier tonight and i could hear the horns inside. Definitely was a distraction to the music going on.

I was in the Sam's Club on Fannin earlier this week and kept hearing the train's horn (inside of a concrete box with no windows). It wasn't disturbing to me as a shopper, but I'd hate to live right next to it and can understand completely why AO folks are concerned...not that it changes my mind on the issue at hand. I still say Richmond is best.

The AO folks need to look for compromise at this point, because I really don't think that they're going to win the issue when it comes down to it. Perhaps they could try to get METRO to promise (in writing) to ban horns through AO and to ensure that Newcastle will remain an open intersection with four-way turns. For that matter, they could get METRO to promise to replace any trees that die and to compensate homeowners that lose shade.

[musicman]

I don't think that we'll be hearing the same level of criticism, however, because the completion of the University Line will create a system that 'goes somewhere' and that has enormous ridership generators along each spoke eminating outward of Wheeler station. It even includes residential areas, of all things. Besides, there isn't another vote, so the issue won't make headlines or be politicized as heavily as it was the first time around.

One question that i've asked METRO officials repeatedly is how many cross streets will remain open. With the abnormally high accident rate we have now, leaving streets open will create a nightmare situation. METRO's VP John Sedlak told me that they expect at least 85 percent to remain open. With so many closed between the Pierce Elevated and the Museum area you'd think the accident rate would be lower there. But it is actually higher because there are less paths over the rail so it forces more traffic over fewer intersections. I know that I make left turns off of Richmond frequently and many of those require a stop in the esplanade area to wait for traffic to clear. At that point, I would be blocking a train. This definitely would increase travel times for an oncoming train, which would increase travel times in general. The NEW ridership METRO is striving for would be lost.

Edited July 31, 2006 by musicman

[AftonAg]

actually, you're correct. There have been a number of homes that are currently being built.

I'm kinda' wondering about the apartments on the east and west end of the neighborhoods, a few look okay, but a couple of them look like they only have a few years left.

In fact, AG, I know two of your neighbors are hookers.

I don't recall the apartments in AO ever being much of a problem to the neighborhood, except for the residences immediately across the street - I think there has been a few episodes of un-neighborly conduct. You are right though some appear to be in pretty good shape but some are not so nice.

Only two of my neighbors are hookers? Hmm well that makes two neighbors, a representative . . . . .

aftonag has put up with alot of snide comments and attacks. i appreciate his calm demeanor and the fact he's stuck with it thus far.

my hopes, aftonag, is that you will participate in other threads here on HAIF.

Thanks for that endorsement Bachanon. I appreciate it, and I have browsed some of the other topics and posted on one or two - One was regarding 610 loop traffic around the Galleria, and I don't remember what the other one was.

[Montrose1100]

Why won't they build a Monorail?

Why do I want a Monorail over lightrail?

Monorails are safe. Whether they are of the straddle-beam or suspended variety, the nature of their design does not allow derailment. As monorail is elevated, accidents with surface traffic are impossible. Zero accidents translates to no system down time, less liability suits and most importantly, NO INJURIES OR DEATHS. Street rail systems with grade crossings (light rail, trams or trollies) can't offer this kind of safety unfortunately.

MONORAILS are cost effective. The Tokyo-Haneda Monorail has been operating since 1964. This eight-mile dual-beam system is privately owned and TURNS A PROFIT each year. The Seattle Center Monorail, built in 1962 for the Century 21 exposition, is run by a private corporation. In return for the concession to operate the 1.2-mile system, the corporation pays the city $75,000 every year. What private business would take on a contract like this unless profits were guaranteed? Profit is indeed an oddity in the transit world, as most transit technologies require enormous subsidies from taxpayers. Building monorail does not guarantee profit, but operating costs are almost always less.

So if monorails are so great, why aren't there more of them?

"There aren't any transit monorails, we shouldn't build something that hasn't been proven." It's a ludicrous reason, but it sticks for some reason This is despite the fact that there are dozens of successful transit monorails around the world. New monorails are being built too, even as you read this.

Monorails are perceived as new, experimental and untried. Not enough people are aware of the many transit monorails in operation today along with their proven track record.

Something some transportation experts have whispered to us over the years is that a lot more people can make a lot more money if light rail or subway is built. The conventional rail industry has established a stronghold and monorail is often discouraged by consultants.

Most manufacturers of monorails build all kinds of rail systems besides their monorail product. If your city wants a more expensive technology than monorail or if their consultant steers them in another direction, manufacturers are all-too-happy to oblige by selling them something more expensive.

I honestly do see us with a Monorail system. How about not having to worry about it tearing up the street & letting businesses go out of -business-. All it takes is one concrete beam to suport two track lines. I observed this "Monorail Society" site very closely, and sent a long letter to METRO. I havn't heard from them, it has been a week. I even asked about why the last system didn't go threw.

And another favorite of the Houston Monorail proposal was that they were going to look like the ones at Disney World, which IMHO, are the coolest looking.

[TheNiche]

Why won't they build a Monorail?

Why do I want a Monorail over lightrail?

I honestly do see us with a Monorail system. How about not having to worry about it tearing up the street & letting businesses go out of -business-. All it takes is one concrete beam to suport two track lines. I observed this "Monorail Society" site very closely, and sent a long letter to METRO. I havn't heard from them, it has been a week. I even asked about why the last system didn't go threw.

And another favorite of the Houston Monorail proposal was that they were going to look like the ones at Disney World, which IMHO, are the coolest looking.

The up-front costs are much higher. In a world where NPV is often the deciding factor for major public investments, there is a financial bias toward less expensive forms of transit.

[CDeb]

It seems like everyone here is accusing METRO of some nefarious plot to boost ridership numbers on the train by cutting back bus routes.

Now, I may be oversimplifying things here, but doesn't that just make plain ole' common sense not to duplicate services in a particular area?

[musicman]

It seems like everyone here is accusing METRO of some nefarious plot to boost ridership numbers on the train by cutting back bus routes.

Now, I may be oversimplifying things here, but doesn't that just make plain ole' common sense not to duplicate services in a particular area?

Of course it makes common sense not to duplicate services. But why build a light rail system that takes 30 minutes from end to end when the bus system it replaced took 30 minutes from end to end. We need to build something that actually helps alleviate the traffic congestion situation and reduces travel times.

[Highway6]

Of course it makes common sense not to duplicate services. But why build a light rail system that takes 30 minutes from end to end when the bus system it replaced took 30 minutes from end to end. We need to build something that actually helps alleviate the traffic congestion situation and reduces travel times.

What you want can basically only be fullfilled with subway or a fully elevated system.

1 ) If you want frequent stops in the urban core

2 ) If you want those stops to be where the people are

3 ) If you want the mode of transit to go very very fast in between stops

LRT fufills the first two, but ya gotta take it under or above ground to achieve the speed while still fufilling the first two requirements... and we don't have the money for that apparently.

Edited July 31, 2006 by Highway6

[ricco67]

The light rail in most major cities are organized to allow them to meet at the light rail stations. It's done in the united states, it's done in Europe, and Im sure it's done in Asia.

While this "forces" ridership on the train, it allows for traffic to be moved in a more effecient manner and allows resources to be allocated to those in more need without the need to purchase new buses or to simply retire the older buses.

As far as the horn goes, the only only blasts when it comes to an intersection that will cross it's path. At AO there's probably 3 and two of those will be cut off from going ACROSS, but still be able to make a right turn.

There are 3 horns on a train, there's a simple "chime" that let's pedestrians that a train is coming to the station. A regular horn, and an "ALERT" horn for those idiot cars/pediastrians to get out of the way.

Being in a couple of the buildings along the train route BEFORE and after the construction made no appreciable different in the level of noise. Before the rail was put in, there was ALWAYS a metro bus rumbling down main street. now it's the occasional horn. To me it's just another sound of the city that blends in, after you're exposed for awhile, you get used to it.

just like the residences of AO were probably used to (but annoyed) by the freight train horns.

Once again, Aftagg you take the context of what I written totally out of line, I merely said there were 2 hookers (two of them NOT living in the apartments, btw) living in your community. I did not state that they were representitive of the community.

They ARE, however, the equal of what Culberson is.

Almost forgot:

Light rail was proposed in the late 80's or early 90's and if I remember correctly, the AO residences were againt that as well.

besides, monorail isn't necessarily a good technology for a heavy use system. The one in seattle has been having some problems as of late.

Edited July 31, 2006 by ricco67

[TheNiche]

What you want can basically only be fullfilled with subway or a fully elevated system.

1 ) If you want frequent stops in the urban core

2 ) If you want those stops to be where the people are

3 ) If you want the mode of transit to go very very fast in between stops

LRT fufills the first two, but ya gotta take it under or above ground to achieve the speed while still fufilling the first two requirements... and we don't have the money for that apparently.

Good points, but that's why I never really backed the LRT concept. Busses are able to fulfill the first two just as easily and at the same speed. Moreover, the precise location of stops can be changed very easily as ridership conditions change.

If we were going to build LRT, we should've at least done it right so as to enjoy the only real competitive advantage that it has over the less expensive busses...that is, aside from 'coolness'.

[AftonAg]

Wait just a second there Ricco -

Once again, Aftagg you take the context of what I written totally out of line, I merely said there were 2 hookers (two of them NOT living in the apartments, btw) living in your community. I did not state that they were representitive of the community.

They ARE, however, the equal of what Culberson is.

And my response:

I don't recall the apartments in AO ever being much of a problem to the neighborhood, except for the residences immediately across the street - I think there has been a few episodes of un-neighborly conduct. You are right though some appear to be in pretty good shape but some are not so nice.

Only two of my neighbors are hookers? Hmm well that makes two neighbors, a representative . . . . .

I'm kinda' wondering about the apartments on the east and west end of the neighborhoods, a few look okay, but a couple of them look like they only have a few years left.

In fact, AG, I know two of your neighbors are hookers.

And my response:

I don't recall the apartments in AO ever being much of a problem to the neighborhood, except for the residences immediately across the street - I think there has been a few episodes of un-neighborly conduct. You are right though some appear to be in pretty good shape but some are not so nice.

Only two of my neighbors are hookers? Hmm well that makes two neighbors, a representative . . . . .

In the last line I am joking you see . . . I am inferring that I probably have many neighbors that are hookers - (some hook for money and some for material goods/security). And then I further joke that I have two neighbors that are hookers and a representative that is a hooker. As usual you have tried to read something into my post that just isn't there. I understand what happened you read representative and thought that I was chiding you for saying that two hookers were not representative of the neighborhood when in fact I was referring to a political Representative as in a Congressman - all ploiticians are little more than hookers IMO. (Present Company accepted GovernorAggie). Note that I also never inferred nor implied that the Hookers lived in the Apartments.I accept your apology Ricco if you will actually admit you were wrong.

Edited July 31, 2006 by ssullivan

[Highway6]

Good points, but that's why I never really backed the LRT concept. Busses are able to fulfill the first two just as easily and at the same speed. Moreover, the precise location of stops can be changed very easily as ridership conditions change.

If we were going to build LRT, we should've at least done it right so as to enjoy the only real competitive advantage that it has over the less expensive busses...that is, aside from 'coolness'.

I disagree.

The dedicated lane factor is the difference maker. Yes bus fufills the first two needs, but much slower. I've ridden both numerous times, getting it out of the traffic helps tremendously.

I would never commute to work on a bus.. i've looked it up the routes i would have to take, the tranfers.. it would be tripling the commute time. I've also been in midtown traffic and see the filled train wiz by unobstructed.

I do agree though, if we could even furthre separate it from the cars while still fufilling the first two, that would be great. Maybe future lines, more consisderation should be given to bridging over main intersections more often.

I don't see the reason for rail is its cool factor.. i semi-agree in that some of the benefits arent tangible but are psychological.

Bus systems can be scary for new riders, which is what we are trying to achieve - new riders. Having a inner-city system that is fixed, that some tourist can grasp easily in a little travel brochere, that a naitve houstonian can see once and instantly know which POI's each color line goes to.. that is what will have everyday houstonians that normally wouldnt ride transit change their mind.

Also, i think if the overall purpose is to eventually give us a system that gets cars off the road, and bascially changes the lifestyle of a big chunk of the city.. you almost need a re-branding.. you do need something new.

______________________________________________________________________________

Totally unrelated.. but i can't find the correct thread.

The grayhound station at Main and Gray.... is that supposed to move to the new Intermodal station Metro is proposing ?

Or does metro want to keep it there next to its BusBarn next to its HQ and the LRT stop right there ?

Is it ever slated to move ?

Edited July 31, 2006 by Highway6