Why doesn't Houston consider building the rail system underground? Subway? (Katy: house, tornado)

[HookTheBrotherUp]

Originally Posted by XodoX

I honestly do not see any of this happening soon or in the future. Sure it would be great but I've heard the are thinking about 290 again and I was told they might not do it because it will be too expensive ? And it is needed very badly...290 just sucks.

Also I was told by someone they are planing on bulding a second freeway that would be over the current I 10. The lower part would go to Houston and the upper part would go to Katy. Highly doubt this but I was told this by someone. This is not true huh ? Never heard of this neither I have seen something like this in other countries.

Not true, of course. However, there are plans to convert the old Hempstead Highway into a tollway that would sort of parallel 290.

[XodoX]

Originally Posted by HookTheBrotherUp

Not true, of course. However, there are plans to convert the old Hempstead Highway into a tollway that would sort of parallel 290.

well great ! Another tollway here in Houston and more money out of my wallet!

[robertrulez]

subways are way better than light rail

[Alphalogica]

Low population density and probably for the same reason houses in Houston don't have basements. Mass transit is a concept that is still relatively new to Houston.

[Zhang Fei]

Because Houston is the equivalent of a large suburb. Suburbs don't generally have subway systems, because they're not crowded enough to justify them. Brooklyn has a subway. Population density? 35,000/sq mile. Houston's is 3,800/sq mile.

[hsw]

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

Let the damn companies, not taxpayers, pay for their own shuttle vans for workers if they choose

For ex., many cos. in SiliconValley like Google have own fleet of buses used to truck low-income yuppies from homes in SF 35 mis down to Google HQ in MtnView

Mysteriously, most of top (i.e., wealthiest taxpayers) execs and engineers in CA live in PaloAlto area, not SF, and drive self ~20mins to office, a rather casual, even scenic drive from up in leafy suburban hills...

[jfre81]

How is mass transit unsafe, hsw? As opposed to driving which is the most dangerous thing anyone ever does in this city, I mean. You're more likely to get killed in a traffic accident than in an act of crime of any kind. And why do people use the METRO park and ride service to the burbs if nobody uses them? And who pays for the roads? If you answer "taxpayers" then you're correct. And don't think that paltry gasoline tax that doesn't even adjust for inflation even comes close to paying for them. If it wasn't for taxpayer subsidy, fuel would cost enough after per-gallon or per-mile taxes that more people would use mass transit even here in Houston.

I understand the rich people in NYC have people drive them around in a Benz, but the average New Yorker is doing good to afford a place to park a Taurus let alone a Mercedes.

As for why we don't have subways - they could be done, but would be an unnecessary expense given the density figures in the Houston area. Light rail is the way to go for now.

[Trae713]

Originally Posted by robertrulez

subways are way better than light rail

Subways were never proposed here. Too expensive. Heavy rail was (same trains as subways). Light rail is just fine though.

Originally Posted by Alphalogica

Low population density and probably for the same reason houses in Houston don't have basements. Mass transit is a concept that is still relatively new to Houston.

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.

[jimmyev]

Originally Posted by hsw

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.

And, in other words...Personal transit is communist stuff used in places like Houston, LA or Dallas to provide multi-million dollar contracts to worthless friends of politicians and justify 10% state/city local+property+sales tax rates to rural and urban taxpayers who never use 28-lane super highways anyway.

[Alphalogica]

Originally Posted by Scarface713

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.

The Washburn Tunnel has a massive pump system that is used to pump out water during times of heavy rain. Okay, "new" isn't the word, but let's face it, most people in Houston don't ride the bus. There are park-and-rides and such (which people still drive to), but Houston is still very much a car-dominated city. Very, very, very, very few people get by without a car entirely in Houston.