Well, today Mayor White announced a new federally funded plan. Basically, they'll run BUSES ONTOP of new dedicated lanes with pre-installed light-rail tracks. They'll also built train stations where the buses will use instead. The buses costs 1 mil as opposed to 3.5 mil for the trains. At some later point (15 years or whatever) when more money is available, they'll install the electrical to full light-rail. With the saved money, they'll run commuter rail down 290 and Gulf Freeway as well as the previously planned commuter line to Sugarland. They will go ahead and build one complete light rail line from UofH to the Galleria crossing the existing line at the halfway point near 59. So all you guys b****ing about Rapid Transit Buses, you got your wish. We'll see how it works. I'd venture to say the ridership will be higher on light-rail than the buses since people inherently don't like buses...myself included. Now we'll know for sure. Buses won't change people's habbits dramitically like trains do. Those that use buses will continue to do so but trains attract new ridership. Therefore, I predict urban development along "bus" lines will be non-existent while the train lines will see more development. With development, people have more housing alternatives and move in from the burbs thereby reducing traffic. Buses don't spur development and won't ease traffic. It'll just be a nicer ride for those that already use buses. Chron's website just died. I'll add the link when the site is back up. Edit: Link
bigtexxx will be first in line to ride these new buses - as an assistant hairstylist trainee in Curitiba, Brasil, he has had much hands-on exposure to this wonderful mass transit system.
Without knowing more about Houston's financing situation I at least salute them for thinking creatively. Buses aren't as good as trains but using the dedicated lines with pre-built rails until they can afford trains is an interesting half way situation that still improves the transit situation.
More info is available this morning. The buses they're using are specially designed buses and look very similar to light-rail itself. If that is true, perhaps more people will use them BUT that means we're still spending money on these things that we'll scrap once we go to full light-rail. So I'm not really sure it is a good use of funds. The nice part about this, all parts of the plan will be done by 2012 as opposed to 2020. I definately applaude that. I'm curious the know the thoughts of all the nay-sayers about this plan. Do you like it or not? Note: I can't link the picture of the buses but there is a link to a graphic on the right this newer article.
In a new study released today found that Houston residents pay the largest proportion of their housing budgets on transportation related costs (such as car notes, gas, insurance, service, etc). Link That coorelates with another study I heard about last year that says Houstonians pay the highest car notes on average in the country. Since I moved in town and got a job downtown, I spend about $30-$40 on gas a month and am very happy NOT replacing my 5 year old car that is fully paid off. I'm happy to know that I'm well under that 21% cost.
trust me, i'm not arguing with you. it's called rail bias. it exists. they won't ride buses...they will ride rail.
Well, well, well. I've been in Chicago on business the past week and missed this good news. Sam, I was attending a conference in the Gleacher Center. Perhaps you're familiar with the facility. I might add that the Peninsula Hotel was fabulous, although probably out of your desired price range. I take this extremely positive development in the city's mass transit system as proof positive of my previous argument's VINDICATION. I have long supported the Curitiba-style bus system in Houston, and I would like to think that my well reasoned analysis and insights have made their way from this forum into Metro hq.
rail bias is real. it just is. it isn't a concern for EVERYONE...but you're more likely to get people out of their cars to ride rail than you are buses, even with all other things being equal.
I don't really understand why people keep saying this as if it is some grand conspiracy. It's just a crummy comback in a losing argument...sorta like the old: well....my dad can beat up your dad...when you don't have anything else to say. Naysayers, don't be mad because people use the trains. If we spent the money, you should be happy that people use it. It wasn't a waste of money (or as much of a waste) than you originally thought. So quit using the lame argument that Metro rerouted people onto the trains. What would you expect them to do after spending that kind of money. If you build a pool in your backyard, you gonna keep using the neighborhood pool? No. You spent the money and you're gonna use it!
Yeah, those trains are so popular that they're redoing the plan that was voted upon and replacing the trains with a high speed bus system....as I have advocated all along.
Where is all this development along the rail line? All the main street bars were there before the train (actually probably more were there before the extended construction took out a lot of them...). Please cite some concrete examples of private development along the rail line. Metro sidewalk improvements don't count. Thanks in advance.
