Rail In Houston, Vote Today

[Tony]

Ok Houston JREFers. Are you for or against the rail initiative? I am conflicted over the issue. But I want to hear your opinions first.

[Phil]

Originally posted by Tony
Ok Houston JREFers. Are you for or against the rail initiative? I am conflicted over the issue. But I want to hear your opinions first.
For. Simply because we terribly need some kind of rail system, and I have not heard a valid alternate plan by those opposed.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Phil

For. Simply because we terribly need some kind of rail system, and I have not heard a valid alternate plan by those opposed.


I agree, but the proposed rail system is horrible. It lack ambition, vision and service to the burbs. The implementation time table is way to long, and IMO, light rail is stupid. Even thought I dont agree with their stance, I am inclinded to agree with "Texans for True Mobility"'s slogan, "Costs Too Much, Does Too Little.

Am I against rail? No. I just think the proposal is bad. I guess its better than the alternative.

[richardm]

Originally posted by Tony
IMO, light rail is stupid.

Why?

[Luke T.]

Do you have a link for us non-Houstoners who happen to have light rails where we live? Might be able to give you some perspective.

When I lived in Virginia Beach, a light rail was proposed. The idea was to have a light rail run from downtown Norfolk to the oceanfront in Virginia Beach, and also with service to the military bases.

There was a lot of opposition. The chief complaint being that it would enable gang members in Norfolk to terrorize the tourists at the oceanfront more easily.

Whatever.

Where I live now, there is a light rail. It is heavily used and favorably looked upon by everyone. My wife and I have used it many times. It saves a lot of hassle driving into the city and dealing with all the traffic and then trying to find a place to park, and costs less than parking and gas. It's great, and it goes everywhere you would want to go. Travelling within the center of the city is free.

The downside is that the fares are heavily subsidized by tax dollars.

[Tony]

Originally posted by richardm


Why?


It is slow, it has to compete with cars on the road, and it requires sacrificing a lane of traffic to facilitate the tracks. I would much prefer a heavy rail, monorail or a subway system.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Luke T.
Do you have a link for us non-Houstoners who happen to have light rails where we live? Might be able to give you some perspective.

When I lived in Virginia Beach, a light rail was proposed. The idea was to have a light rail run from downtown Norfolk to the oceanfront in Virginia Beach, and also with service to the military bases.

There was a lot of opposition. The chief complaint being that it would enable gang members in Norfolk to terrorize the tourists at the oceanfront more easily.

Whatever.

Where I live now, there is a light rail. It is heavily used and favorably looked upon by everyone. My wife and I have used it many times. It saves a lot of hassle driving into the city and dealing with all the traffic and then trying to find a place to park, and costs less than parking and gas. It's great, and it goes everywhere you would want to go. Travelling within the center of the city is free.

The downside is that the fares are heavily subsidized by tax dollars.

Where do you live Luke? Dont get me wrong, I favor rail. I just wish the Houston plan was more comprehensive.

I'll see if I can dig up some links.

[Tony]

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/page1/2199358
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2198056
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/2196582
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2195152
http://www.texansfortruemobility.com
http://www.uptownwestloop.org/pdf/newsletter2.pdf (pdf)

[richardm]

Originally posted by Tony



It is slow, it has to compete with cars on the road, and it requires sacrificing a lane of traffic to facilitate the tracks. I would much prefer a heavy rail, monorail or a subway system.

Thanks. Of course, one of the reasons for introducing light rail is to reduce the number of cars on the road, so ...!

I'm not aware of any city that has installed a light rail system that hasn't enjoyed it once it gets it. You might like it too!

[Tony]

Originally posted by richardm


Thanks. Of course, one of the reasons for introducing light rail is to reduce the number of cars on the road, so ...!


In the case of Houston, all its going to do is cause more traffic. It isnt going to get a significant number of cars off the road.

I'm not aware of any city that has installed a light rail system that hasn't enjoyed it once it gets it. You might like it too!

I might like it, and I am optimistic that I will. Im also optimistic that it will spur growth and inner city development. But like I said, I dont think it is comprehensive enough and it isnt being implemented fast enough.

[Michael Redman]

What's going on down there? When I left Houston last year, they were well on the way to completing the first leg. Did they stop? What's the deal with this vote?

I always thought the "it doesn't go to . . " argument was extremely silly. You obviously can't build the entire system at once. It may not got there first, but it'll go there eventually.

[Tmy]

I take it the Gang member voting block is in favor of the rail!!!


Whats the difference tween light and heavy rail?

[Tony]

Originally posted by Michael Redman
What's going on down there? When I left Houston last year, they were well on the way to completing the first leg. Did they stop? What's the deal with this vote?


The vote is on a 22 mile expansion that will only service the inner loop.

I always thought the "it doesn't go to . . " argument was extremely silly. You obviously can't build the entire system at once. It may not got there first, but it'll go there eventually.

I agree.

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by Tony



It is slow, it has to compete with cars on the road, and it requires sacrificing a lane of traffic to facilitate the tracks. I would much prefer a heavy rail, monorail or a subway system.

The light rail here doesn't take up a lane. It runs parallel to the highway. Inside the city limits, it does take up a lane in some places, but for the most part doesn't interfere with traffic except when crossing roads. A lot of the rail has its own path.

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by Tmy
I take it the Gang member voting block is in favor of the rail!!!


Whats the difference tween light and heavy rail?

Heavy rail is for freight trains as well as passenger trains. Requires a much deeper and heavier contructed road bed.

[c0rbin]

Maybe I don't understand all the angles, but I think it's a big waste of money.

I commute into downtown Houston from Cypress (about 40 miles and ttwo highways away). All told, about 40-45 minutes.

I take the buss.

I think Houston should amp up the Bus system it has. The infrastructure as already there, HOV lanes, Park and Rides, and metro schedules.

All of the job training and personel expirience, and buracracy is in place for bus. All of this will need to be duplicated for the trains that won't help Houston for at least another 5 years anyway.

Further, all of the money wasted on building light rail in Houston can go to all of the problems that Micheal Redman has detailed in threads past.

Vote no!

[Michael Redman]

Buses are a lot easier to redirect when commuting patters change, as they do often in a city as young as Houston, but I wonder if they are not a lot more expensive over the long run to operate.

I was more for rail than against when I was in Houston, but something outsiders probably don't realize is just how low the population density is in almost the entire city. I don't think the benefits would be realized for many years, until more density grew up along the lines. Meanwhile, like c0rbin says, more emphasis needs to be put on getting people out of cars, and into buses. I don't think it should be an either/or, but rather long term and short term.

(By the way, how's that new stadium? Anyone been there yet?)

[c0rbin]

My folks live four blocks away from it and they can't see it. Which is good I guess, because it's kind of unattractive from the outside. Big, but not very svelt.

The inside though...[whistles]. That sucker can get rowdy.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Michael Redman
Buses are a lot easier to redirect when commuting patters change, as they do often in a city as young as Houston, but I wonder if they are not a lot more expensive over the long run to operate.



Right, I just typed a ten billion word essay on this and lost it all when I got disconnected :angryasf-ckinghellsmillie:

So firstly, are you talking about something like the DLR http://www.tfl.gov.uk/dlr/about/ or trams? The DLR is a robotic (no driver) light railway that runs on raised pylons and so doesnt interfere with traffic at all. Its been an unmitigated success and is being expanded as fast as the money can be found. Its helped immensely in the redevelopment of east london and has played a votal role in keeping London at the centre of world finanace.

Mike, In London they tore up all the tramways and put buses in their place. Its been an absolute disaster and we are only now getting our trams back and thats a tooth and nail fight.

The thing with buses is that a bus with 60 people on board can be held up for ages by a single inconsiderate car driver. In order to combat this, we have had to have designated bus lanes where cars are forbidden to venture and have had to fit cameras to buses to catch those who stray from the straight and narrow. So why not just get a tram system?

Of course trams are much more expensive initially than buses but probably are cheaper in the longer run. The alternative is underground railways but these are MUCH more expensive to install and maintain, plus, is something goes wrong you can end up stuck in a smelly overheated, overcrowded tunnel for hours on end.

Public transport crime? CCTV and a few police officers are the answer!

My advice WRT trams: Look how well they work in European cities. In my experience, trams are fantastic!!!

{Ill add to this later as Im getting disconnected every 30 seconds}

[c0rbin]

Jon_in_london,

Houston streets were never constrained by the horse and carriage as the primary transportation source.

Imagine flat disk 120 miles in diameter with a couple shallow ditches running from NW to SE.

That is Houston.

There are Interstate cross roads here.

[Michael Redman]

Jon, we had streetcars and rail in most American cities, too, and all ripped up for shiny new buses and blacktop. The result was a decline and abandonment of cities which is just now starting to really be reversed.

But cities were a great deal denser then. London is still very dense, as is the eastern megalopolis in the US, but for a lot of the rest of the US, the cities are now so spread out that set-place mass transit doesn't make sense, unless you assume land will be redeveloped to take advantage of it. (Houston has about 2500 people per square mile, versus New York's 5000, or London's 11,000) I think that's a safe assumption in older cities, like Minneapolis, where I am now, which originally developed along streetcar lines, and still have higher density in those corridors.

However, almost the entirety of Houston was build in the last 50 years, and it's very spread out. You really have to assume a lot of redevelopment to invision a Houston where rail makes sense on a large scale, but if any city can so reinvent itself, it's Houston.


c0rbin - That's a great description of Houston geography!

[Luke T.]

If Houston is spread out over a large area, I would think a light rail would be a quicker way to get around than a bus.

You guys are lucky. Most cities are choking on their own growth. Not enough lanes in the highways. Longer and longer traffic jams.

The only problem with a light rail system is that people who live more than a mile away from a stop tend not to use it.

There has to be a significant savings in travel time before people will give up their cars. And during non-rush hours, it is always quicker to get around by car.

Time, not money, is the issue for people. And availability. We Americans like to be able to get up and go at a moment's notice. We have no patience for schedules. We are too accustomed to spontaneity.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Originally posted by Luke T.
Heavy rail is for freight trains as well as passenger trains. Requires a much deeper and heavier contructed road bed.

I'm surprised more of our big city folk aren't weighing in on this. The full sized passenger trains used for commuting are referred to as "commuter rail." We have one between downtown Dallas and downtown Fort Worth.
http://www.trinityrailwayexpress.org/

I was so glad when the converted the old Interurban line into DART Light Rail (http://www.dart.org/riding.asp?zeon=howlrt). As far as I'm concerned, I will never ever drive downtown on a weekday, and probably not on weekends either.

[a_unique_person]

Speaking as a resident of Melbourne, Australia, all I can say is vote yes. We have an extensive tram (light rail) system. You can talk a lot about the faults it has, such as sharing the road at many points or its speed, but the fact is it is very popular. As such, it it keeps a lot of cars off the road, and in the central part of the city of Melbourne, as in all busy cities, the less cars the better.

Why tram and not bus? Maybe it is a psychological thing, but people like the rails and the lack of pollution. There is something much more palpable about a tram. Either way, a tram is more popular than a bus.

The Melbourne tram system is so popular it is even being extended. In an age where the car is king, to see a public transport system being extended is a sign that the public wants more of it.

A new tramway is usually designed to be built on it's own roadway these days, and not share with the cars. Sharing is a hassle. But it is not the end of the world.

Either way, one tram can carry the equivalent of 40 cars worth of road space. So every tram in peak hour is making your car journey quicker, not slower. Well worth the subsidy when you consider the cost of a new freeway.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Luke T.

The downside is that the fares are heavily subsidized by tax dollars.

Oh, I'm sure that'll change when some politician decides that transport is a means itself, rather than a means to an end.

Melbourne tram system kicks @$$. I never had to wait more than 10 minutes for a ride.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


Oh, I'm sure that'll change when some politician decides that transport is a means itself, rather than a means to an end.

Melbourne tram system kicks @$$. I never had to wait more than 10 minutes for a ride.

You don't catch the tram enough. But it is good.

[Zep]

Sydney city has a small raised monorail loop.
http://www.storybridge.com.au/Personal/Sydney/Monorail.jpg

It also has a light rail running to some of the more ritzy close-in suburbs.

http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/sydney/images/sydney1.jpg

Plus it has an extensive heavy rail suburban rail network.

http://www.gamesinfo.com.au/postgames/pa/images/para/02_operations_and_management/41_transport/01_transport/41-00_transport.jpg

Not to mention the bus network...

http://www.angelfire.com/co4/busaust/3b.jpg

...nor the ferries.

http://www.hillsfar.demon.co.uk/images/holidaypicsnew/ferry.jpg


We are spoiled for choice of public transport! Aaaaah!

[a_unique_person]

Just think how many dollars you have cost private enterprise by having those public transport systems. There would be many more freeways (or linear parking lots, as they are sometimes called), and cars on them, and taxes to pay for them, and the land they take, and the cars of the people that would have been on the one tram, or bus, or ferry.

[Zep]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Just think how many dollars you have cost private enterprise by having those public transport systems. There would be many more freeways (or linear parking lots, as they are sometimes called), and cars on them, and taxes to pay for them, and the land they take, and the cars of the people that would have been on the one tram, or bus, or ferry. :confused: Ummm...exactly??

[UnrepentantSinner]

I hear San Francisco has an extensive fairy system named Bart.

Unfortunately ferries are not an option in Dallas, at least until after Planet X hits I suppose.

[Zep]

Look, Houston is in Texas, and if Texans want something REAL BAD then they will get it, by God!

So you had better go get your floaties on quick, because the Gulf will be a lot closer very shortly! :)

[richardm]

Originally posted by UnrepentantSinner
I hear San Francisco has an extensive fairy system

Yes, I've heard about that (http://www.sfpride.org/) too :D

[Mr Manifesto]

Zep: in the interests of journalistic integrity, you may wish to disclose that the monorail is a glorifyed theme park ride for the easily amused, rather than a legit mode of transport. I mean, if the monorail breaks down... OMG! I have to walk 1km to Darling Harbour!

[NightG1]

It looks like the bond election has been approved by the voters. Nice choice.

[NightG1]

Originally posted by Zep
Not to mention the bus network...

Hey, wait a minute. The steering wheel on that bus is on the wrong side.... Err. Never mind.

[Michael Redman]

I'm impressed. This is really an ambitious project for a city that is known as a libertarian paradise. I'm going to have to come for a visit in a few years and see how the old town has changed.

http://www.localvoter.com/exhibita.asp

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Michael Redman
I'm impressed. This is really an ambitious project for a city that is known as a libertarian paradise. I'm going to have to come for a visit in a few years and see how the old town has changed.

http://www.localvoter.com/exhibita.asp

This can only mean the anti-christ has arisen. What shall be his form?

[Luke T.]

Well, congratulations, Houston. I think you will be pleased.

[c0rbin]

I'll be curious to see how it works out.

Although I will still be on the bus, since I live in the boonies :)

[Tony]

Update:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/ec/nov4/2201398 ..full article

By a narrow margin, voters resisted a multimillion-dollar campaign to reject rail expansion and approved Metro's ambitious $7.5 billion regional transit plan.

With all precincts reporting, Metropolitan Transit Authority's proposition passed 51 percent to 48 percent.

Metro officials declared victory to supporters at the Magnolia Hotel downtown at 12:45 this morning. The transit authority has scheduled a news conference for later today to discuss how its plan will be implemented.

"Tonight we celebrate victory," said Mayor Lee Brown. "It's a victory for our city, it's a victory for the next generation and generations to come. Tonight Houston joins the ranks of the truly great cities of the world."

Metro board Chairman Arthur Schechter said, "This is going to completely change the nature of Houston, especially the core of the city."

Anti-rail group Texans for True Mobility broke up its party at midnight but refused to concede defeat until the final precincts report. Rail foes acknowledged likely defeat, however, while maintaining the narrow margin shows voters were skeptical of Metro's plan.

"This is far from a mandate," said Michael Stevens, chairman of TTM.

Paul Bettencourt, Harris County tax assessor-collector, said "Metro needs to heed that there are serious concerns in the community that their plan doesn't fix the problem."

The next step for Metro is to obtain federal matching funds. Otherwise it won't be able to afford to build the rail lines. U.S. Rep. John Culberson and fellow rail critic House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, vowed during the campaign to fight for federal dollars on behalf of Metro if voters endorsed the plan.

"This vote does reflect the desperation of Houstonians for immediate traffic relief," said Culberson, R-Houston, one of Metro's harshest critics. "The closeness reflects deep flaws in Metro's plan."

But Culberson said despite his dissatisfaction, he will follow the voters' will.

"My job now is to move forward with this new instruction from the voters," Culberson said. "I've got my marching orders."

Back in 1988, voters approved a transit proposition that included 20 miles of rail, but that plan was rejected by Mayor Bob Lanier after his election in 1991. The mayor of Houston appoints five of the nine members of the Metro board, which is tantamount to controlling the transit authority.

Metro advocates are cheering for Bill White, a rail supporter, to win the mayoral runoff against Orlando Sanchez, who opposes Metro's plan.

The centerpiece of the "Metro Solutions" program authorized by voters Tuesday is the expansion of Houston's nascent light rail system to include 73 more miles by 2025. It is the largest mass-transit proposal adopted in Houston since the creation of Metro in 1978.

Voters approved a $640 million bond issue to accelerate construction of the next 22 miles of light rail, extensions to the 7 1/2-mile Main Street line nearing completion between downtown and Reliant Park. They also authorized 44 new bus routes, a doubling of HOV lanes, and extending Metro's participation in local road projects for another five years.

Metro's proposal sparked a heated campaign, with the transit authority spending $3 million to advertise the plan and promote light rail. Two political action committees, Texans for True Mobility and pro-rail group Citizens for Public Transportation, spent almost another $3 million combined.

The bottom line, according to interviews with voters Tuesday, was that Houston commuters need another alternative to driving alone on the freeways. The region is the only one of the top 10 populated U.S. metropolitan areas without rail, a topic that has been debated dating back to a 1973 failed rapid-transit referendum.

Houston boomed as a car-oriented city but is now the place in America where residents drive the most miles per capita per day, pay the third highest transportation costs per family, breathe some of the most polluted air, and endure traffic congestion ranking in the top 15.

Many voters said it's time for a change.

"I don't understand what the big issues are about not wanting to have trains," said Bill Taylor of northwest Harris County, riding to work recently on a Metro commuter bus. Motioning to gridlocked 8:15 a.m. traffic on the Northwest Freeway, he added, "This obviously hasn't worked."

Fran Schaeffer, also a commuter-bus rider, said the region can't continue building big highways that soon become congested as growth follows the new concrete.

"I'm not crazy about it," Schaeffer said of Metro's expansion plan. "But if we don't start somewhere, we're just going to be on top of each other. If we keep accommodating people to drive their own cars by themselves, then we're going to defeat ourselves. It can't go on like that."

[Zep]

Originally posted by NightG1

Hey, wait a minute. The steering wheel on that bus is on the wrong side.... Err. Never mind. But ... it doesn't fit on the outside ... The driver would get wet ...


Oh, I get it!

[Zep]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
Zep: in the interests of journalistic integrity, you may wish to disclose that the monorail is a glorifyed theme park ride for the easily amused, rather than a legit mode of transport. I mean, if the monorail breaks down... OMG! I have to walk 1km to Darling Harbour! Looks like you already have! And I won't mention that it DOES break down more often than it should ... whoops.