Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Houston
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-31-2010, 04:10 PM
 
Location: ✶✶✶✶
15,218 posts, read 30,418,861 times
Reputation: 10846

Advertisements

Until private companies start building roads, railways or whatever, it all might as well all be called "communist stuff." But that term is being thrown around in the same post that is advocating sticking to freeways in the name of safety, kind of calling the intellectual honesty of the whole viewpoint into question. People die on the roads here so often it doesn't even make the news a lot of the time.

Reason why they don't is because transportation infrastructure just isn't profitable. But it's still necessary. Yes, even freeways are necessary. But they're not the only way to go.

I stillhaven't been on the redone Katy Freeway that cost something like a billion dollars, that likely created future flood problems that will have to be addressed later with public funds (remember that huge flood in '08 right after it opened from a hardly extraordinary storm?) and converted a public freeway into a partial toll road while expanding daily capacity by some 35,000. You know how they say we could've bought all the LRT riders a Prius? Well, we probably could've bought those 35,000 extra drivers on the Katy a Rolls-Royce and a gas card to go with it, when you add all startup and future costs to that expansion of a freeway. Not even a new freeway either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-31-2010, 04:35 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
20,501 posts, read 33,335,740 times
Reputation: 12109
Quote:
Originally Posted by hsw View Post
mass transit is communist stuff used in places like nyc or chic or sf to provide $100k+/yr unionized jobs to worthless gvt workers and justify 10%+ state/city income tax rates to suburban taxpayers who never use unsafe/uncomfortable mass transit anyway

...
rotfl
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2010, 04:38 PM
 
Location: TX
867 posts, read 2,965,983 times
Reputation: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface713 View Post
Subways were never proposed here. Too expensive. Heavy rail was (same trains as subways). Light rail is just fine though.



It's a common myth that Houston couldn't have subways, but it can. Amsterdam is below sea level, and it has subways. The Washburn Tunnel on the east side has only flooded once in its many decades of life (and it was during Ike). The Downtown Tunnels only flooded during Allison because a parking garage wall failed (wasn't designed to hold water). For Houston, there can be certain segments of a subway with the light rail, but not an overall subway system.

And I wouldn't say mass transit is a new concept in Houston either. Maybe rail, but not transit overall.
Also, let me add that flooding isn't the issue that I brought up. There is little underground development (i.e. basements) in Texas due to the, expanding soil, clay and hard rock underground. The Downtown Tunnels are of course a notable exception. (which was necessary for people to beat the heat during lunchhour) I would imagine a Subway system would cover a vast area that could have much more potential issues with respect to the soil, water table and hard rock underground.

Also real estate developers and the energy industry are very influential in local politics (many city officials have worked in either industry before public service), and therefore, don't see a need to cater to the public transportation crowd. (why mass trans. in Houston is very much half-assed, that's slowly changing with expanding the Rail, though, thank Goodness)

Last edited by Alphalogica; 01-31-2010 at 04:51 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2010, 06:51 PM
 
1,474 posts, read 4,976,907 times
Reputation: 557
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertrulez View Post
subways are way better than light rail
better for those who can only afford a $45k house in the ghettos
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2010, 02:22 AM
 
Location: Houston
2,023 posts, read 4,170,458 times
Reputation: 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alphalogica View Post
Also, let me add that flooding isn't the issue that I brought up. There is little underground development (i.e. basements) in Texas due to the, expanding soil, clay and hard rock underground. The Downtown Tunnels are of course a notable exception. (which was necessary for people to beat the heat during lunchhour) I would imagine a Subway system would cover a vast area that could have much more potential issues with respect to the soil, water table and hard rock underground.

Also real estate developers and the energy industry are very influential in local politics (many city officials have worked in either industry before public service), and therefore, don't see a need to cater to the public transportation crowd. (why mass trans. in Houston is very much half-assed, that's slowly changing with expanding the Rail, though, thank Goodness)
Even the tunnels have leaking problems. They're very difficult to maintain, but ultimately they seem to be worth it. There's a lot more problems that the civil engineers would have to work out for a subway (like humidity, soil expansion, flooding, etc.) to the point that it would probably be more expensive than it's worth to build a subway system. I think for now, the LT lines and maybe a heavy rail system in the future will be fine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2010, 02:39 AM
 
Location: TX
867 posts, read 2,965,983 times
Reputation: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpmeads View Post
There's a lot more problems that the civil engineers would have to work out for a subway (like humidity, soil expansion, flooding, etc.) to the point that it would probably be more expensive than it's worth to build a subway system. I think for now, the LT lines and maybe a heavy rail system in the future will be fine.
Completely agree.

Last edited by Alphalogica; 02-01-2010 at 02:47 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2010, 03:22 AM
 
739 posts, read 2,254,254 times
Reputation: 356
That depends on your defination of mass transit. Houston does have an excellent park and ride system I use it instead of having to hunt for a parking spot downtown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2010, 09:47 AM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,668 posts, read 4,688,150 times
Reputation: 3037
We could put ferry boats in the bayous & float people into the city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2010, 12:38 PM
 
Location: Now in Houston!
922 posts, read 3,850,971 times
Reputation: 671
It's obviously a cost/benefit/utilization issue. The costs for digging and outfitting subway tunnels and stations can run into billions per mile. In NYC, the 7 Line is being extended about one mile west and the cost is more than $2 Billion.

One way to efficiently build commuter rail (used in many other cities), is to lay the tracks down the medians or sides of the freeways.

Speaking of flooding, surprisingly, the NYC subway is very prone to flooding and has been completely shut down three times in the last 10 years after heavy rains. On an ongoing basis, a network of high-capacity pumps is constantly removing water from the tunnels. The system is designed to handle rain amounts of up to 1.5 inches per hour. When an unusually heavy rainstorm passes by and dumps more than that, the system floods and has to be shut down for at least several hours. This last occurred in July of 2007 when a big line of thunderstorms went through at about 7AM and disrupted millions of commuters. The same storm also spawned a tornado in Brooklyn!

Quote:
Originally Posted by hsw View Post
Mass transit is communist stuff used in places like NYC or Chic or SF to provide $100K+/yr unionized jobs to worthless gvt workers and justify 10%+ state/city income tax rates to suburban taxpayers who never use unsafe/uncomfortable mass transit anyway
Pretty much 100% of this statement is factually wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2010, 12:38 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
20,501 posts, read 33,335,740 times
Reputation: 12109
A heavy rail system does not have to primarily be a subway. I believe Chicago only has a subway under it's very large downtown. I think that can be done in Houston. But the majority of Chicago's system is at grade, elevated, or in the middle of the freeway. Even downtown Chicago has a couple lines that are elevated. Light Rail is perfect for what Houston is doing right now though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Houston

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top