Parking near Light Rail Stops? (Houston, Elgin: transfer, neighborhood, live in)

[LindaIL]

Is there a parking lot at the Pressler st./TMC Rail stop? Cost?

[Oildog]

Med center? Many parking ramps, expensive though.

[NickelsTX]

IMO one of the many failures of this silly boondoggle is the lack of affordable parking near the rail lines. Free or cheap parking near the end of the rail lines would significantly increase riders and decrease traffic. That would have took a little logic though. Something our worthless city leaders don't possess.

[tebor79]

3$ for 24 hours at Fannin south parking. Only a few stops from Pressler. It's also the end of the red line. Nickels hasn't a clue. Why would he want to increase ridership on lines that are usually standing room only.

[NickelsTX]

Originally Posted by tebor79

3$ for 24 hours at Fannin south parking. Only a few stops from Pressler. It's also the end of the red line. Nickels hasn't a clue. Why would he want to increase ridership on lines that are usually standing room only.

LOL Standing room only? I work on Main & Rusk and I can see who and how many are on the train all day. 1/5 or less full most of time. Half of those are sleeping bums.

$158 million per mile BOONDOGGLE

[astrohip]

Originally Posted by NickelsTX

IMO one of the many failures of this silly boondoggle is the lack of affordable parking near the rail lines.

This has always been a complaint of mine, and something I've brought up in previous rail-line threads (along with how ridiculous street level rail is).

Without parking available near the stops, how are locals supposed to use rail? I understand the bus feeders and how they work, but if Metro ever wants actual locals (as vs transit riders) to use rail, you MUST provide some sort of parking. We live near the mid-town/Museum stops, and would love to use it to get to the Dome area or downtown. But without a place to park, you think we're going to walk in 98 degree weather for a mile just to take rail? No thanks, I'll drive.

Originally Posted by NickelsTX

Something our worthless city leaders don't possess.

Just a small nit... Metro has its own board. The city, while it has significant influence, does NOT control what Metro does.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by NickelsTX

LOL Standing room only? I work on Main & Rusk and I can see who and how many are on the train all day. 1/5 or less full most of time. Half of those are sleeping bums.

$158 million per mile BOONDOGGLE

The original Red line is the 2nd most used light rail line in the country. And #3 in San Francisco isn't really close. Only Boston's Green line does better.

Maybe the new extensions aren't great, but the first line has been very successful. And it does have parking at the end of the line. Its not really designed for distant commuters and does what it was designed for very well.

[Svensk08]

Originally Posted by astrohip

This has always been a complaint of mine, and something I've brought up in previous rail-line threads (along with how ridiculous street level rail is).

Without parking available near the stops, how are locals supposed to use rail? I understand the bus feeders and how they work, but if Metro ever wants actual locals (as vs transit riders) to use rail, you MUST provide some sort of parking. We live near the mid-town/Museum stops, and would love to use it to get to the Dome area or downtown. But without a place to park, you think we're going to walk in 98 degree weather for a mile just to take rail? No thanks, I'll drive.

My neighbors and I want to take light rail too, but we live in a neighborhood that's halfway between stops on the Green and Purple lines and not within comfortable walking distance from either one. There's parking at the Eastwood Transit Center and room to add more. Unfortunately, Metro's planners didn't see fit to run a short spur down Elgin/Lockwood to the TC from Scott St. at the UH campus. Taking a bus from the TC to the rail station on Scott and Elgin can be done but is way too time-consuming.

[astrohip]

Originally Posted by bu2

The original Red line is the 2nd most used light rail line in the country. And #3 in San Francisco isn't really close. Only Boston's Green line does better.

Maybe the new extensions aren't great, but the first line has been very successful. And it does have parking at the end of the line. Its not really designed for distant commuters and does what it was designed for very well.

Very misleading statistic. First, the Med Center has most of its workers use it, but just for a very short hop. The workers either park at the end (Fannin stop), or in the Med Center lots along the rail line. So that pads ridership incredibly.

Second, Metro has many bus lines feed the rail stops, and intentionally not take you directly where you're going. So unlike other cities where rail can actually get you somewhere, here it's just fed by bus lines that used to run downtown or Med Center anyway.

[dalparadise]

Originally Posted by bu2

The original Red line is the 2nd most used light rail line in the country. And #3 in San Francisco isn't really close. Only Boston's Green line does better.

Maybe the new extensions aren't great, but the first line has been very successful. And it does have parking at the end of the line. Its not really designed for distant commuters and does what it was designed for very well.

I think you need to check your facts.

The entire MetroRail system (including new extensions) has a weekday average of 43,900 boardings. That is indeed an impressive number, but as stated above, the fact that the line is used as a bus transfer system and a parking shuttle on a couple of points inflates its numbers some.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METRORail

But the single N Judah line in San Francisco has a weekday average of 41,439 boardings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_Judah

So, I doubt the Red Line in Houston is, in fact, as highly ranked as you think it is, relative to other cities. It's also important to note that neither of these is a pure rapid transit solution.

In Houston, it's a full street car situation where the rail mixes in traffic.

The San Francisco example is subway and separated right of way for the most congested half of its run, but switches to a street car in the less congested, residential portion of its run. Even so, it's too crowded to be very effective as a commuter solution. It's better for runs up and down the portion of the line that is separated from traffic, and during off-hours. In fact, it is so busy that it is known as the least desirable of the light rail lines for commuters from outlying residential areas (which in SF are only 5-6 miles away from the Financial District). The ride can take 30-40 minutes at rush hour!

High ridership on street cars is not necessarily a measure of "success". They still mix in traffic and add to congestion. In contrast, a BART ride (a rapid transit commuter option) of the same distance as the N Judah to the identical destination in the Financial District (They overlap downtown) will take about 10-12 minutes.

BART has many stations with parking available--it's a commuter solution. The Muni METRO N Judah does not have parking-- it's primarily a street car. Many of its street-car boardings (as opposed to subway boardings) aren't even made from platforms. The trains simply stop at intersections out in the residential part of the run.

Light rail can be a commuter solution if it is subway/grade separated, as is the case in LA, Boston and some others. In SF it's even a hybrid for the portion where it's impossible to run it on the surface. In Houston, light rail is a street car. BRT makes a lot more sense for a commuter solution, IMO.