Houston's long-term future is bleak without serious mass transit and efforts to lure young professionals (Texas City: transfer, quality of life)

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by coog78

I don't have kids and pay school district tax. What's your point moderator cut: personal attack ?

I don't have kids either. If I had my druthers, schools would be financed via charging school fees to the parents of the kids who attend.

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by wazmoot

If it were as obvious as you make it sound, why does every major city of any repute thoughout the world create mass transit systems and plan their cities with a dense central core? The anecdotal evidence is there.

Because municipal bureaucrats have one thing in common - a yen for personal aggrandizement* via creating physical monuments to their own egos combined with bureaucratic empire-building. Think about it - transit bureaucracies are the gift that keeps on giving.

Besides, the biggest cities in the world speak Mandarin. Should Houston make Mandarin the official language?

* Private sector bureaucrats do have the same tendency. However, the difference is that private sector bureaucrats can't tax you to pay for their personal enthusiasms.

[wazmoot]

Yes, I see your point Zhang Fei. Mandarin should be the official language. I also see DiverTodd62's point. Stop all future proposed mass transit projects. Build more roads and freeways only...preferably concrete ones without sidewalks or bike lanes (it is more cost effective that way). Oh yeah, let's not forget beautiful frontage roads. You both have convinced me. It all makes sense now.

[jfre81]

Originally Posted by Zhang Fei

* Private sector bureaucrats do have the same tendency. However, the difference is that private sector bureaucrats can't tax you to pay for their personal enthusiasms.

No, they just lobby to bend the public bureaucrats to their will and direct "your" tax money toward benefiting them. It's a little more indirect, but in the end the differences are negligible.

[oceangaia]

I gave you the facts and figures that clearly showed the road building approach has been far more effective at mitigating traffic congestion than "mass transit". Sorry if the facts get in the way of some people's theories.

And let's be honest and quit calling it "mass transit". Most transit agencies and their supporters are all about rail and couldn't care less about buses or carpools. I just showed you the numbers that Metro actually reduced the number of buses by 200 over the last 5 years. And the number of HOV lane miles increased by 4 whole miles in that time. The bitter truth is that most "mass transit" advocates are all for anything that involves steel wheels on steel rails and against anything that involves rubber tires on concrete, regardless of facts, economics, or demographics.

[jfre81]

Originally Posted by Zhang Fei

Besides, the biggest cities in the world speak Mandarin. Should Houston make Mandarin the official language?

Actually, the largest urban area in the world speaks Japanese (supposing for a second that urban areas themselves speak a language as opposed to the people who live there), and down at #14 on such a list is Shanghai, below NYC and LA.

Todd, maybe part of the reduction of METRO buses had partly to do with the construction of the rail line and the consolidation of routes/elimination of redundant ones. I've heard a lot of whining about how the routes were changed to route people to the rail, but what kind of sense does it make to have a bus route regularly going parallel to the rail? Wouldn't that be a senseless waste that would cost money? I guess there's no pleasing some people.

And I'm not against buses, which are very much rubber tire on concrete. I think the buses should be used to link people from the neighborhoods where the rail might not go through directly, to take them to major destinations, downtown, Galleria and so forth.

If I have the choice between rail or a bus I'll take rail. If you have actually rode on a METRO bus here, the sorry conditions of many roads here make it a rather bumpy ride which is also noisy, to say nothing of the noise from the bus itself (especially noticeable in the back seats). The Red Line is quiet and smooth in comparison. You can even stand without holding onto anything if you know how to lean when it stops and takes off. Not that I won't ride the bus, but I find this to be quite a bonus with rail.

Rail is also better for high-volume routes, as there's the option of attaching multiple cars. When a bus gets full, you need more buses which require their own drivers (who don't work for free), their own fuel, their own tires....you get the idea. Reserve the buses for lower-level service and put rail in the main transit corridors, having the buses link people to the rail. That's the way to go.

[Trae713]

Originally Posted by DiverTodd62

Main Street is how Metro themselves originally referred to it during planning and construction. Red Line didn't come into widespread usage until later in order to make people think it was just one segment of a large system rather than the only segment. (If there is a Red Line then there must be a Blue Line and a Green Line, right?)

Yep, and they are coming. The Blue Line will be what is dubbed now as the "North Line" and the Green Line will be what is dubbed now as the "Southeast Line". All transit agencies call their new rail lines different names (mostly regional or in the direction they go) before giving them official names.

Red Line is what is on every single train station.

I refer to it as Main Street for the purposes of communication and understanding. Only those familiar with the issue or Metro would know where the Red Line is. Most everyone, even if they have never boarded a bus or train, know where Main Street is. Even you knew exactly what I was talking about.

I knew what you were talking about because I hear so many people use "Main Street Line" and try to use it against Metro later.

Originally Posted by DiverTodd62

So you're confining the discussion to "inside the loop"? I thought the preferred concept was "regional" planning.

The area of growth is constantly expanding and even city limits expand with annexation so a rising population does not necessarily indicate a rising density. Back to Metro's 2007 Annual Report, near the end is a chart of Demographic Statistics for the last 10 years, showing regional population rising from 3.9 million in 1998 to 4.8 million in 2007. (Don't like the numbers, argue with Metro.) That's a 2% growth rate. At that rate it'll take 70 years to reach 20 million, 40 years to reach 10 million.

Also of interest in that report is a table at the end showing Operating Statistics over the last 5 years. In 2003 they had 1447 buses, in 2007 they had 1211.

Light rail will only work in the core for Houston. Only two branches will be further out (to Hobby and to IAH). Commuter rail will come in from most suburbs and connect with the light rail in the Inner City. Some major thoroughfares are having their own "Quickline" (basically BRT) service (for example, Westheimer, Gessner, etc.).

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by jfre81

No, they just lobby to bend the public bureaucrats to their will and direct "your" tax money toward benefiting them. It's a little more indirect, but in the end the differences are negligible.

Not really. Corporations pay taxes - from which some of these tax breaks are deducted. Government agencies use up tax money, not pay it.

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by jfre81

Actually, the largest urban area in the world speaks Japanese (supposing for a second that urban areas themselves speak a language as opposed to the people who live there), and down at #14 on such a list is Shanghai, below NYC and LA.

You're looking at Metro areas. I'm just looking at cities. Tokyo is 30 miles away from Yokohama. Tokyo and Yokohama have different mayors. Beijing, Shanghai and Chongqing each have one mayor.

[jfre81]

Originally Posted by Zhang Fei

You're looking at Metro areas. I'm just looking at cities. Tokyo is 30 miles away from Yokohama. Tokyo and Yokohama have different mayors. Beijing, Shanghai and Chongqing each have one mayor.

And as if you had a point to begin with, what does any of this have to do with mass transit?