METRORail University Line

[TheNiche]

Of course they do. They are much farther along with their overall transit plans than we are. We are just starting. I really don't understand your point in stating that Dallas and Atlanta have superior rail systems. That will always be the case until we start moving and completing our own rail.

You don't seem to get what I'm saying...I want rail, but I want it implemented differently. I want suburban connections, and I want them now.

In Dallas, DART was first implemented in 1996, with the Plano extension occurring in 2002. That's 6 years. It will take us from 2004 to 2012 (8 years) to get from the starter line to Uptown.

Frankly, I'll be amazed if we can pull off commuter rail by then...much less an airport connector.

Also, DART has 35 stations in 45 miles. That's 1.29 miles per station. We have 16 stations in 7.5 miles. That's 0.47 miles per station. You know which configuration I prefer.

[west20th]

You don't seem to get what I'm saying...I want rail, but I want it implemented differently. I want suburban connections, and I want them now.

In Dallas, DART was first implemented in 1996, with the Plano extension occurring in 2002. That's 6 years. It will take us from 2004 to 2012 (8 years) to get from the starter line to Uptown.

Frankly, I'll be amazed if we can pull off commuter rail by then...much less an airport connector.

Also, DART has 35 stations in 45 miles. That's 1.29 miles per station. We have 16 stations in 7.5 miles. That's 0.47 miles per station. You know which configuration I prefer.

Someone addressed the commuter rail issue earlier. Not everyone works downtown along the Main St. line. You get them from Katy on commuter rail to downtown, then what? Face it. People have an aversion to buses. If they can't complete their trip on rail they will not use the commuter lines. The urban lines need to go in first. If you are proposing they speed up the construction schedule to include the suburban heavy rail along with the urban lines, I'm all for that. But that just isn't going to happen.

And comparing the stops per mile to Dallas makes no sense. Dallas is a more complete system. The comparisons between Houston's system which barely exists to a more complete system like Dallas' are useless.

[TheNiche]

Heat and humity aren't a problem with the corporate set in Dallas or Atlanta? They seem to have overcome these obstacles and built "superior" transit systems to Houston. Doesn't Houston also rate a good transit solution? And, in general, the "corporate set" isn't the main target group for light rail.

You missed the point. My counterpoint was to the person who suggested that college students are willing to walk further than a 1/4-mile. College students do not comprise the perponderance of the ridership of LRT, and thus should not be considered as representative of the population of riders.

If the "corporate set" (and I use that term very loosely) aren't a main target group for light rail, then what's with all these stops downtown? For that matter, what's with the long line out to Plano? And if they aren't then shouldn't they be?

Btw, is there an echo on this forum?

[west20th]

You missed the point. My counterpoint was to the person who suggested that college students are willing to walk further than a 1/4-mile. College students do not comprise the perponderance of the ridership of LRT, and thus should not be considered as representative of the population of riders.

If the "corporate set" (and I use that term very loosely) aren't a main target group for light rail, then what's with all these stops downtown? For that matter, what's with the long line out to Plano? And if they aren't then shouldn't they be?

Btw, is there an echo on this forum?

Yes I did miss your point. Houston's corporate set won't use light rail and Dallas' and Atlanta's will? And what does corporate ridership have to do with college students? Counterpoint or not one has nothing to do with the other. And yes of course there are a lot of stops Downtown. That is where they put the first line. Main Street is the starter line. Do you propose they put in all proposed lines in at once? They have to start somewhere and there will be inefficiencies in the system until it is complete.

Edited August 8, 2006 by west20th

[TheNiche]

Someone addressed the commuter rail issue earlier. Not everyone works downtown along the Main St. line. You get them from Katy on commuter rail to downtown, then what? Face it. People have an aversion to buses. If they can't complete their trip on rail they will not use the commuter lines. The urban lines need to go in first. If you are proposing they speed up the construction schedule to include the suburban heavy rail along with the urban lines, I'm all for that. But that just isn't going to happen.

And comparing the stops per mile to Dallas makes no sense. Dallas is a more complete system. The comparisons between Houston's system which barely exists to a more complete system like Dallas' are useless.

You're right that not everyone works Downtown. Only about 7% of all Houston area employees, in fact. And I'm in favor of implementing light rail that connects the major employment centers to the commuter rail system, BUT only if the light rail connectivity is efficient. That means higher average speeds, less interaction/disruption of automotive traffic, and stops only where there is very high ridership. More efficient LRT will induce even more demand for the commuter rail, thus getting more people off our freeways.

Take a look at the DART system map. Even though the Trinity Express adds a lot of miles per station, the general pattern is still to have fewer stops per mile than are in Houston.

My bottom line is this: I'm willing to spend many hundreds of millions of more dollars to make the system more complete and effective, and to do it NOW instead of later. If this is nothing more than a marginally-more-effective bus-replacement system for people who can't stand 'uncool' forms of transit, then I say screw it.

[TheNiche]

Yes I did miss your point. Houston's corporate set won't use light rail and Dallas' and Atlanta's will?

Without nitpicking over the details of your assertion for many paragraphs, I'm going to say yes. Because OUR system is not like THEIR systems in the here and now.

And what does corporate ridership have to do with college students?

Nothing. That's my point. They're incomparable.

Counterpoint or not one has nothing to do with the other. And yes of course there are a lot of stops Downtown. That is where they put the first line. Main Street is the starter line. Do you propose they put in all proposed lines in at once?

They have to start somewhere and there will be inefficiencies in the system until it is complete.

By all means, yes. The sooner, the better.

I've never liked the concept of a 'starter line' because it creates more inefficiencies than it solves. The SYSTEM is what is going to create synergistic efficiency. Why wait if the opportunity can be exploited now?

[musicman]

Musicman, it is your belief that 48 percent of Houston's voting public is against rail going down Richmond avenue SPECIFICALLY? I don't believe that. Just from casual conversation I have found that at least 1 resident of northwest Houston, 3 residents of Southwest Houston, and 1 resident in Clear Lake couldn't care less whether rail is specifically on Richmond Avenue or not, they just agree that the most logical route should be taken. I am speaking of the specific Richmond avenue route. If you are making the argument that everyone who voted against rail during the election must automatically be against rail on Richmond then that is a different animal. Those people more than likely don't want rail anywhere at at anytime in Houston. If they are against rail on Richmond, it is because they are against rail in general.

I'm just saying that you can't make the assumption that only Afton Oaks is against light rail on richmond. When the election was held, people all over the METRO service area were eligible to vote, including those you spoke to in NW houston, SW houston, and clear lake. There were also people in those areas that were against the METRO solutions program. And when all the votes were counted 52 percent voted for and 48 votes against and those were all over the city. I don't have any other data to base anything on. Because Afton oaks residents are vocal doesn't mean that they are the only ones against it. If you have any valid data that says AO residents are the only ones against rail it would definitely be an eye opener for me.

Burningng gasoline and electricity may both be expensive, but at this point using an electric alternative would be the wisest thing for us, and I think there are a number of reasons we can point out to why that is.

METRO is slowly obtaining alternate fuel buses. Should that be a priority as well? I see both as depleting a natural resource. Why is one better than the other?

No, I meant Sugarland Town Square and the developments around the Woodlands mall. I am not talking about the entire Woodlands development or the entire city of Sugarland. Those residents love the urban style of those new developments. Being able to live, work and play in a single area has become very attractive. Have you been to the Sugarland Town Square on a Saturday or Sunday evening? Plus, you mentioned this could happen in Houston at the expense of homes and businesses? Are you kidding me? You know you don't sound like a Houston resident right now don't you? The city that has lost half of it's history to new development? A city where someone would even consider the destruction of the River Oaks Theater? A city that will fell mature oak trees and thick forests for a strip center? Now businesses and homes are a concern for more urban development along a rail line? And of course most people wouldn't want a Town Center in the middle of Memorial park, but the sad thing about that is, in Houston it's probably possible. Oh well, at least we know the River Oaks is safe for at LEAST another year.

It is clear that that "town squares" dont require buses nor light rail to develop from your examples. We just have to remember that they were developed when the land is empty. In order for us to achieve something like that we have to work around what we already have or else destroy other structures and vegetation. I HATE LOSING TREES more than losing structures.

Musicman, you didn't answer the question. Can it be said that most opponents to Mass transportation tend to be supporters of the Republican party? I didn't say all Republicans are against it, I said most of it's opposers tend to be.

I know many from both parties that are against it. In general, i think it is related to socioeconomic status as to who supports it and who doesn't. From the low income to the rich who were rewarded contracts. AND those who live close to it.

Lastly, I think it's short-sighted to think this line on Richmond would provide relief to our transportation woes......at the moment. A full network, which we are trying to achieve, will provide the maximum benefit of this particular line. We are trying to achieve a goal. We are trying to complete a puzzle to make a beautiful picture. We can't do that with only two pieces. Those pieces will reach their full potential when the other pieces are added and the picture is complete.

Concur that a full network would be optimal. But we need one that would benefit the most people by nature of its design. We don't need an expensive bus replacement but rather one that actually does save people time.

How much money was spent on the I-10 project? The one that will obsolete and beyond design capacity in a few years, requiring another billion or so people don't have to get out of their cars.

Again it isn't a matter of money in my mind, but rather will the expense actually provide relief. I just guess there were many here who never saw our freeway system in the early and mid 70's

{psssst...he's a she }

LOL.......you did that so eloquently.

Of course they do. They are much farther along with their overall transit plans than we are. We are just starting. I really don't understand your point in stating that Dallas and Atlanta have superior rail systems. That will always be the case until we start moving and completing our own rail.

My you are petty. Can we just debate this w/o personal attacks.

Niche points out the clear DESIGN difference between the Houston system and that of Dallas. That is what makes their system superior, not that it is further along.

And comparing the stops per mile to Dallas makes no sense. Dallas is a more complete system. The comparisons between Houston's system which barely exists to a more complete system like Dallas' are useless.

Niche, west20th just doesn't get the design differences.

Edited August 9, 2006 by musicman

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

I believe they would call your system a dictatorship, we live in a democracy where people are free to express their opinions. You in turn are free to consider our opinions garbage, which speaks volumes to your maturity level.

As for not being a politician, clearly that isn't your calling stay in your present career, and remember to smile when you ask people, "Can I Super-Size that for you?"

Do you really want negative attention from me? Are you absolutely sure thats what you want? Think long and hard about that............

I look forward to the rail on Richmond. The whining group in AO will be its own down fall. The "have nots" will not be pushed around by having thier land and homes taken in order for a few people to not "see" the LRT down Richmond.

[musicman]

My bottom line is this: I'm willing to spend many hundreds of millions of more dollars to make the system more complete and effective, and to do it NOW instead of later. If this is nothing more than a marginally-more-effective bus-replacement system for people who can't stand 'uncool' forms of transit, then I say screw it.

Amen

[west20th]

My bottom line is this: I'm willing to spend many hundreds of millions of more dollars to make the system more complete and effective, and to do it NOW instead of later.

I agree completely. The only thing is it is not going to all happen NOW. You are living in a dream world.

Niche, west20th just doesn't get the design differences.

No. I guess not. I'm just so thankful Niche and yourself are here to enlighten us.

[TheNiche]

I agree completely. The only thing is it is not going to all happen NOW. You are living in a dream world.

I don't expect that it's going to happen NOW.

I frankly don't expect that it's going to happen. Not the way I want it.

[GovernorAggie]

You know, it's mighty funny--

From the anti-METRORail-as-is folks, I keep hearing the same things...at-grade, traffic nightmare, etc. I also keep hearing how Dallas has a better set up.

Do we care to refresh our memories? How much of Dallas' system was built completely on their own dime? Who in Dallas' congressional delegation actually made it against the law to fund rail projects in Dallas? And are we talking about the same Dallas that just got ANOTHER $700 million in funding from the Feds for more rail projects? And are we talking about the same Dallas that can do more with less money because they already own a good chunk (if not all) of the ROW to be used (through buying abandoned RRs years ago on the cheap--something that I think Houstonians would have had a problem with METRO doing if given the opportunity).

Also, did anyone see the editorial in Sunday's paper, stating how the late Sen. Bentsen had $200 million ready for a rail system that I believe would have been grade-separated back in the early 80s (IIRC) the same system that Houstonians voted down?

Look at it this way, if Houston got the funding help that Dallas did, imagine what could have been done with the Red Line. If METRO spent $300 million alone, then imagine if that line was matched with $300 million from the Feds. What would a $600 million Red Line have looked like? If we have so many people who agree with rail but disagree with how METRO builds it, then why aren't those same ones on the phone with Culberson telling him to make sure METRO has enough money to build an aerial system? Seems to me that this would get rid of the traffic concerns and speed complaints all at once. And while everyone is at it, how about prodding Culberson for money to construct a subway underneath the Red Line with stations only at Fannin South, TMC, Wheeler, DTC, Main Street Square, and the Intermodal Terminal? There's your time savings.

Don't even get me started on places like Charlotte, who actually only have to contribute 25% to LRT construction, because the Feds pay half and the State of North Carolina has agreed to pay 25%. In case anyone was wondering, that's a big reason (along with an aggressive station-area planning process) why they will likely have no problems getting FTA funding in the future. And they operate on a 1/2 cent sales tax.

Lastly, regarding my comments of nearly 600 passengers carried on LRT...I am well aware that 3-car trains are unfavorable due to downtown's block lengths. HOWEVER, since I was referring to the University Line, I don't think that any of the blocks along Richmond, Westpark, or Alabama are nearly as short as downtowns--thus, they could possibly accomodate 3-car trains.

Edited August 9, 2006 by GovernorAggie

[nmainguy]

If we have so many people who agree with rail but disagree with how METRO builds it, then why aren't those same ones on the phone with Culberson telling him to make sure METRO has enough money to build an aerial system?

That was a great post but to answer the above question, there are people in power as well as some on this board who simply do not want rail and have no interest in a serious, factual discussion about it. Period. They may dance around with a lot of excuses and misinformation but when it comes right down to it we have been plagued with people like DeLay, Culberson and others who just have other priorities. You have people on this board who question majority rule and you have people like the AOer's and the antis who will say anything to get their way regardless of the facts. If you have any ideas that will propel the debate over the head of these obstructionists, I'm all ears.

[H-Town Man]

Would the trains run faster in the Westpark right of way than they would on Richmond? If one were to go from the Galleria to downtown, would the trip be quicker if the train were mostly on Westpark, even though the actual distance would be further?

Just curious what the experts have to say.

[CE_ugh]

I personally think Metro needs to be much more aggresive with its expansion plans than it is today.It should probably at least play at the possibility of a rail line down Bellaire towards the Meyerland and Sharpstown areas and at the very least an express bus service. It should include the Inner Katy line as part of phase 2 (They at least have a right of way to work with already). Also it should extend bus service to Pasadena and integrate local services with its park and rides to make for faster connections for long local bus routes and to boost midday ridership.

Also maybe it should start advertising, since , you know, they do have to generate revenue.

[citykid09]

Heat and humity aren't a problem with the corporate set in Dallas or Atlanta? They seem to have overcome these obstacles and built "superior" transit systems to Houston. Doesn't Houston also rate a good transit solution? And, in general, the "corporate set" isn't the main target group for light rail.

I'm saying,

I have been to Atlanta's and have seen Dallas' they are nice systems and from my experince in Atlanta and what I have seen in Dallas, many different types people ride them. I enjoyed riding Atlanta's MARTA so much that me and the group of people I went with stayed on and rode the thing all over so that we could view the city and it took us everywhere we needed to go. Honestly the way theres is designed its much more urban than the street car design that Houston has in mind. Why do people want it on the streets? Thats like being in a car anyways. I think they should give the new lines there own pathways with stations that are more sophisticated then the original railline.

Whats so good about having the line down Richmond anyways? I can see if this was an urban area, but there are just single family houses. Not the type of area for this kind of project.

I think METRO should scrap the old design of the new rail lines to come, and upgrade the trains and the locations of the rail. They should upgrade to a more heavyrail look with the bigger trains etc.

METRO acts like they will die if they have to put a rail above or below ground.

I really don't care what yall say, I don't like the Main street line. To me its like its in the way. Well, as part of Houston's main city rail I don't like it, but as a futuristic street car that seprate from rail that is to come, its ok.

I think of METRO Rail in Houston as something like the Mckinney Avenue Transit street car in Dallas. I don't think of it as DART in Dallas.

This is what I think METRO should do for now. Build the commuter rails into the city and then build the the inner city rail, that way there will be enough time for the plainning of the inner city rail. I guess the 30 years they had for planning the inner city rail wasn't enough. Besides they need to plan hard, because who wants another rail line like Main Street? No one!

Edited August 9, 2006 by citykid09

[CE_ugh]

Would the trains run faster in the Westpark right of way than they would on Richmond? If one were to go from the Galleria to downtown, would the trip be quicker if the train were mostly on Westpark, even though the actual distance would be further?

Just curious what the experts have to say.

Westpark for sure. But does that make it a better route. Not necessarily. The fact is, for commuters from sugar land and points Southwest, the fastest way to Downtown or Greenway for that matter will be still the P & R buses, until some super fast magnetic levitation train or whatever zips us from way out in Wharton to Downtown in five minutes. However, the inner loop is slowly but surely growing more dense and the street arent going to be getting any less crowded, rail or no rail. At some point in time there will come a point when no left turns will be allowed on most streets on Richmond, eight or nine cycles will past before being able to make it through a single light, and the road surface will be need a complete and total overhaul.

Now, residents of Afton Oaks and anyone on the street for that matter, say you want to go to Quizno's at Weslayan. Would you rather sit in your car for 15-30 minutes to drive a 3/4 mile, wait 15 minutes if your lucky for a bus that will take even longer to reach Weslayan, *gasp* walk, or hop on an air-conditioned train and be there and back in less than 15-minutes

[musicman]

Would the trains run faster in the Westpark right of way than they would on Richmond? If one were to go from the Galleria to downtown, would the trip be quicker if the train were mostly on Westpark, even though the actual distance would be further?

Just curious what the experts have to say.

Engineering hasn't been done on either line. Travel times will be based on how much they attempt to integrate it into vehicular traffic and how many stations they ultimately prefer.

[AftonAg]

Do you really want negative attention from me? Are you absolutely sure thats what you want? Think long and hard about that............

I look forward to the rail on Richmond. The whining group in AO will be its own down fall. The "have nots" will not be pushed around by having thier land and homes taken in order for a few people to not "see" the LRT down Richmond.

Oh please- spare me your wrath oh mighty one. I tremble at the very prospect of having you pummel me with clever repartee. AO is not the only group against rail - just the most vocal, and the most often identified by the media - remember the vote was only 52% to 48% - a mere 4% of the voters that actually voted, not 4% of the population of Houston - so we will see. I thought Metro was supposed to announce their decision on the route yesterday . . . . or am I mistaken?

Westpark for sure. But does that make it a better route. Not necessarily. The fact is, for commuters from sugar land and points Southwest, the fastest way to Downtown or Greenway for that matter will be still the P & R buses, until some super fast magnetic levitation train or whatever zips us from way out in Wharton to Downtown in five minutes. However, the inner loop is slowly but surely growing more dense and the street arent going to be getting any less crowded, rail or no rail. At some point in time there will come a point when no left turns will be allowed on most streets on Richmond, eight or nine cycles will past before being able to make it through a single light, and the road surface will be need a complete and total overhaul.

Now, residents of Afton Oaks and anyone on the street for that matter, say you want to go to Quizno's at Weslayan. Would you rather sit in your car for 15-30 minutes to drive a 3/4 mile, wait 15 minutes if your lucky for a bus that will take even longer to reach Weslayan, *gasp* walk, or hop on an air-conditioned train and be there and back in less than 15-minutes

Surely you jest - The Upper Crust of Afton Oaks eating at Quiznos? (So there isn't any doubt when you read this, read it dripping with sarcasm.)

[musicman]

I thought Metro was supposed to announce their decision on the route yesterday . . . . or am I mistaken?

that changed after the John Culbertson announcement.

[AftonAg]

I'm saying,

I have been to Atlanta's and have seen Dallas' they are nice systems and from my experince in Atlanta and what I have seen in Dallas, many different types people ride them. I enjoyed riding Atlanta's MARTA so much that me and the group of people I went with stayed on and rode the thing all over so that we could view the city and it took us everywhere we needed to go. Honestly the way theres is designed its much more urban than the street car design that Houston has in mind. Why do people want it on the streets? Thats like being in a car anyways. I think they should give the new lines there own pathways with stations that are more sophisticated then the original railline.

Whats so good about having the line down Richmond anyways? I can see if this was an urban area, but there are just single family houses. Not the type of area for this kind of project.

I think METRO should scrap the old design of the new rail lines to come, and upgrade the trains and the locations of the rail. They should upgrade to a more heavyrail look with the bigger trains etc.

METRO acts like they will die if they have to put a rail above or below ground.

I really don't care what yall say, I don't like the Main street line. To me its like its in the way. Well, as part of Houston's main city rail I don't like it, but as a futuristic street car that seprate from rail that is to come, its ok.

I think of METRO Rail in Houston as something like the Mckinney Avenue Transit street car in Dallas. I don't think of it as DART in Dallas.

This is what I think METRO should do for now. Build the commuter rails into the city and then build the the inner city rail, that way there will be enough time for the plainning of the inner city rail. I guess the 30 years they had for planning the inner city rail wasn't enough. Besides they need to plan hard, because who wants another rail line like Main Street? No one!

Here! Here! City kid - the whole point is to take cars off the freeways, save gas etc, etc, ad nauseum - and light rail just does not accomplish that goal. One Difference between MARTA, DART, and METRO is that the RT in MARTA and DART stands for Rapid Transit - METRO is not capable of thinking in those terms.

[Houston19514]

My bottom line is this: I'm willing to spend many hundreds of millions of more dollars to make the system more complete and effective, and to do it NOW instead of later. If this is nothing more than a marginally-more-effective bus-replacement system for people who can't stand 'uncool' forms of transit, then I say screw it.

And yet you promote commuter rail to the suburbs. Note to The Niche: Houston has already invested hundreds of millions of dollars in HOV lanes and Park & Ride lots and buses and as a result already has a relatively efficient, effective and popular transit system to the suburbs. It seems like building commuter rail would indeed be little (or nothing) more than a "marginally-more-effective bus-replacement system for people who can't stand 'uncool' forms of transit."

[nmainguy]

Honestly the way theres is designed its much more urban than the street car design that Houston has in mind.

METRO's plans don't involve "streetcars".

Whats so good about having the line down Richmond anyways?

Because Richmond on the west of Wheeler Station and Wheeler on the east allows the line to connect not only 4 universities but large employment centers like Greenway and the Galeria.

I can see if this was an urban area, but there are just single family houses.

See above

Besides they need to plan hard, because who wants another rail line like Main Street? No one!

Except for the 52% majority that voted for it.

[TheNiche]

And yet you promote commuter rail to the suburbs. Note to The Niche: Houston has already invested hundreds of millions of dollars in HOV lanes and Park & Ride lots and buses and as a result already has a relatively efficient, effective and popular transit system to the suburbs. It seems like building commuter rail would indeed be little (or nothing) more than a "marginally-more-effective bus-replacement system for people who can't stand 'uncool' forms of transit."

Point well taken.

[RedScare]

In Dallas, DART was first implemented in 1996, with the Plano extension occurring in 2002. That's 6 years. It will take us from 2004 to 2012 (8 years) to get from the starter line to Uptown.

Frankly, I'll be amazed if we can pull off commuter rail by then...much less an airport connector.

Also, DART has 35 stations in 45 miles. That's 1.29 miles per station. We have 16 stations in 7.5 miles. That's 0.47 miles per station. You know which configuration I prefer.

Perhaps that explains why DART has 1311 riders per mile (59,000 daily riders) and METRORail has 5,333 riders per mile (40,000 daily riders)?

BTW, METRO will have the N. Main extension, Intermodal, Harrisburg, Southeast, Uptown and U-Line by 2012. I consider that good progress, considering the concerted opposition to everything METRO does.

Systems that run to to mini-downtowns from the burbs make more sense.....but only if people are willing to walk a few blocks. If a station went to Uptown, how many would actually be willing to risk thunderstorms and 98 degrees on a 1/4+ mile hike to work?

Considering it has only hit 98 degrees ONCE all year, I expect a few people will walk a quarter mile.

In fact I really think any rail is useless here, Houstonians like there cars and really don't like walking. IMO its just a huge waste of money.....no matter where they put it.

Speak for yourself. I walk everywhere in Downtown every day...in a suit. And, I am not alone. There are not many unwalkable days in Houston...and when there are, only parts of the day are unwalkable. It is a myth that one cannot walk in Houston.

[Highway6]

Houstonians can't walk a quarter mile ?

Its not like we're the only city that suffers from less than optimal weather.

New Yorkers and Chicagoans walk through wind , snow, ice, and bitter cold to get to a subway or EL station... as do i'm sure other commuters in the Northeast cities. And this includes professionals on their daily commute to work.

Houstonians, if you build it, they will come. If they have the options, im sure people here can learn to do the same.

Plus, as someone else mentioned... it's not stifling 105 at 7 in the morning or 6 in the evening when work commuters would be walking. I think ya gotta have a little bit more faith in what Houstonians would be willing to do.

[AftonAg]

Considering it has only hit 98 degrees ONCE all year, I expect a few people will walk a quarter mile.

Speak for yourself. I walk everywhere in Downtown every day...in a suit. And, I am not alone. There are not many unwalkable days in Houston...and when there are, only parts of the day are unwalkable. It is a myth that one cannot walk in Houston.

I have worked downtown also and when I did I frequently walked to lunch, and other destinations. Myth or not I would love to see a poll on "Joe or Bubba Houston's" perception of walking in Houston. Regardless of your position, as well supported as it might be, and as green as it might be, I seriously doubt that it is the perception of the MAJORITY of Houstonians. Many walk because they have to, or because it is easier than waiting on Metro.

[RedScare]

I have worked downtown also and when I did I frequently walked to lunch, and other destinations. Myth or not I would love to see a poll on "Joe or Bubba Houston's" perception of walking in Houston. Regardless of your position, as well supported as it might be, and as green as it might be, I seriously doubt that it is the perception of the MAJORITY of Houstonians. Many walk because they have to, or because it is easier than waiting on Metro.

I wouldn't disagree with you on perception. Just look at all the crying on this forum about how terrible it is, in spite of the fact that you and I know better. However, 40% of Downtown workers take transit (Park&Ride, bus, rail) and obviously, ALL of them walk, whether it be on the sidewalks or in the tunnels. So, my guess would be that a large portion of Downtown workers would poll favorably to walking, whereas those who live and work in the suburban markets would poll less favorably.

It is amusing to see Houstonians fall for the bad weather propaganda, since they live here. Anyone who has lived in Northeastern and Midwestern cities can attest that our heat is 10 times better than their cold. Even when I lived in Fort Worth, on those days when the temperature was in the 20s with the wind blowing, I thought I would die. But, the perception continues.

[VelvetJ]

Walking to the bus stop in icy cold freezing snowy weather in St. Louis to go to school is something I will never forget. Not to mention walking back to the bus stop on a clear sunny blue sky 15 degree afternoon to get home. If I can survive that, I can survive walking to mass transit stops during the summer in Houston.

Besides, I wonder if $5, $6, or $7 per gallon gas would prompt Houstonians to be willing to walk a few blocks to a rail stop?

[VelvetJ]

You know, it's mighty funny--

From the anti-METRORail-as-is folks, I keep hearing the same things...at-grade, traffic nightmare, etc. I also keep hearing how Dallas has a better set up.

Do we care to refresh our memories? How much of Dallas' system was built completely on their own dime? Who in Dallas' congressional delegation actually made it against the law to fund rail projects in Dallas? And are we talking about the same Dallas that just got ANOTHER $700 million in funding from the Feds for more rail projects? And are we talking about the same Dallas that can do more with less money because they already own a good chunk (if not all) of the ROW to be used (through buying abandoned RRs years ago on the cheap--something that I think Houstonians would have had a problem with METRO doing if given the opportunity).

Also, did anyone see the editorial in Sunday's paper, stating how the late Sen. Bentsen had $200 million ready for a rail system that I believe would have been grade-separated back in the early 80s (IIRC) the same system that Houstonians voted down?

Look at it this way, if Houston got the funding help that Dallas did, imagine what could have been done with the Red Line. If METRO spent $300 million alone, then imagine if that line was matched with $300 million from the Feds. What would a $600 million Red Line have looked like? If we have so many people who agree with rail but disagree with how METRO builds it, then why aren't those same ones on the phone with Culberson telling him to make sure METRO has enough money to build an aerial system? Seems to me that this would get rid of the traffic concerns and speed complaints all at once. And while everyone is at it, how about prodding Culberson for money to construct a subway underneath the Red Line with stations only at Fannin South, TMC, Wheeler, DTC, Main Street Square, and the Intermodal Terminal? There's your time savings.

Don't even get me started on places like Charlotte, who actually only have to contribute 25% to LRT construction, because the Feds pay half and the State of North Carolina has agreed to pay 25%. In case anyone was wondering, that's a big reason (along with an aggressive station-area planning process) why they will likely have no problems getting FTA funding in the future. And they operate on a 1/2 cent sales tax.

Lastly, regarding my comments of nearly 600 passengers carried on LRT...I am well aware that 3-car trains are unfavorable due to downtown's block lengths. HOWEVER, since I was referring to the University Line, I don't think that any of the blocks along Richmond, Westpark, or Alabama are nearly as short as downtowns--thus, they could possibly accomodate 3-car trains.

Very well stated and true post that I see no one has addressed to counter.

Edited August 9, 2006 by VelvetJ