Houston's long-term future is bleak without serious mass transit and efforts to lure young professionals (Austin: houses, law school)

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by westhou

I would put up with all of that just to use my car less. I rode the subway in NYC for a week earlier this year and it really wasn't that bad. I disagree with most of what the OP said and I'm happy with the steps the city is making to improve transit here by extending the light rail, but more should be done. Looking at the plans for metro rail is a bit disappointing.

Were you on a work assignment? Was this during the summer? What was the length of your work commute in NYC? Did you travel during rush hour? Let me put it this way. I like the London Underground. But then again, I mostly use it during off hours. And I live close to the major attractions when I'm in London, so I'm not traveling far.

[Spade]

Originally Posted by Zhang Fei

Have you spent a significant amount of time in an urban area with mass transit? Because I can say, based on decades of experience, that in NYC, mass transit is anything but high-speed. The typical door-to-door commute is 40 minutes to 1 hour, including walking time, waits for trains and train changes. This stuff about relaxing is ludicrous. In the summer, you're waiting on standing-room only train platforms where the temperature hits 95 degrees Fahrenheit for three months, and then getting into trains where one out of three cars in non-conditioned, along with vagrants who smell like fish that's been left out for a week. In winter, you're freezing on unheated train platforms, and then having to hold your heavy winter coat in one hand while grabbing onto some metal strap while pressed on all sides by other commuters in trains where the heated temperature is about 85 degrees or huddled up with no heat. The reason people who work in New York City put up with it is because that's where the lucrative jobs are, for purely historical reasons (given that a lot of major financial institutions have their roots in New York City), and some people grew up there and know of no other existence. But why would Houstonians want to subject themselves to this outmoded command-and-control type of geographical organization? And the kicker? NYC transit runs a $1b deficit that has to be subsidized by tax revenues.

Yet New York has one of the most efficient mass transit systems in all of the world and the city is still growing at a nice clip. But the system is old and Houston should never try to get that. What Houston should look at is Washington DC's system. Nice air conditioned or heated stations with clean trains. It is one of the cleanest systems in the nation. The OP is correct that Houston needs to improve on it's infrastructure. Paving your way is not going to make anyone jealous over the way Houston has grown. There needs to be alternatives and young professionals are using mass transit more and more than they ever have. This is why they want to live in the middle of the action.

Also, it's just better. I don't hate the car (I plan to get one) but the train is more reliable and it fits most budgets. You can read the newspaper, listen to your music, and relax on a train like the OP said instead of sitting behind somebody's car getting frustrated choking on the fumes from their exhaust pipe.

[killer2021]

I plan on moving to the Texas region after I get out of school. Mainly because of jobs and low cost of living.

I take it many companies like to set up shop here because wages are lower and there are more business friendly measures in place.

[Trae713]

Originally Posted by westhou

I would put up with all of that just to use my car less. I rode the subway in NYC for a week earlier this year and it really wasn't that bad. I disagree with most of what the OP said and I'm happy with the steps the city is making to improve transit here by extending the light rail, but more should be done. Looking at the plans for metro rail is a bit disappointing.

How are the Metro rail plans disappointing exactly?

[Zhang Fei]

Originally Posted by Spade

Yet New York has one of the most efficient mass transit systems in all of the world and the city is still growing at a nice clip. But the system is old and Houston should never try to get that. What Houston should look at is Washington DC's system. Nice air conditioned or heated stations with clean trains. It is one of the cleanest systems in the nation. The OP is correct that Houston needs to improve on it's infrastructure. Paving your way is not going to make anyone jealous over the way Houston has grown. There needs to be alternatives and young professionals are using mass transit more and more than they ever have. This is why they want to live in the middle of the action.

In 1940, New York City's population was 7.5m. In 2008, it's 8.3m. It's grown at a nice 0.1% annual clip over the past 68 years. Washington DC's system is nice for two reasons - it charges higher fares and runs bigger deficits on a per-rider basis than New York City's transit service. That's another way of saying that Federal taxpayers subsidize Washington DC's luxe transit. If Houston can get DC to subsidize its mass transit, it's a workable proposition. Otherwise, property, gasoline or sales taxes would have to go up.

Originally Posted by Spade

Also, it's just better. I don't hate the car (I plan to get one) but the train is more reliable and it fits most budgets. You can read the newspaper, listen to your music, and relax on a train like the OP said instead of sitting behind somebody's car getting frustrated choking on the fumes from their exhaust pipe.

No offense, but how do you read the paper standing up when everyone's squished shoulder-to-shoulder during rush hour? Do you essentially prevent new riders from coming on board? How do you relax when riding trains means making way for people coming on and getting off every couple of minutes? Is walking 5-10 minutes to the train station, waiting 5-10 minutes for trains, changing trains and physically bumping into random strangers while getting on and off them really all that relaxing?

[Huckleberry3911948]

houston wont increase public transit any more than we will here.
if crime stats on public transport were openly shared with the public (and they are not--- detroit atlanta San Francisco BART) people would not ride public transport and not invest in them.
streets got a whole lot more mean in the last 40 years. which is safer a subway seat or a locked ford.

a former houston resident
ps france is having the same problem. trains didn't change they are fine, the streets got mean.

[txguy2009]

Originally Posted by Zhang Fei

Have you spent a significant amount of time in an urban area with mass transit? Because I can say, based on decades of experience, that in NYC, mass transit is anything but high-speed. The typical door-to-door commute is 40 minutes to 1 hour, including walking time, waits for trains and train changes. This stuff about relaxing is ludicrous. In the summer, you're waiting on standing-room only train platforms where the temperature hits 95 degrees Fahrenheit for three months, and then getting into trains where one out of three cars in non air-conditioned, along with vagrants who smell like fish that's been left out for a week. In winter, you're freezing on unheated train platforms, and then having to hold your heavy winter coat in one hand while grabbing onto some metal strap while pressed on all sides by other commuters in trains where the heated temperature is about 85 degrees or huddled up with no heat. The reason people who work in New York City put up with it is because that's where the lucrative jobs are, for purely historical reasons (given that a lot of major financial institutions have their roots in New York City), and some people grew up there and know of no other existence. But why would Houstonians want to subject themselves to this outmoded command-and-control type of geographical organization? And the kicker? NYC transit runs a $1b deficit that has to be subsidized by tax revenues.

The Fed Gov't will start subsidizing public transit, and rightly so.

As for heat.... there are these neat devices called indoors and air-conditioning now. You can sit in a place when it's hot outside and remain nice and cool

We don't worry about freezing temps here.

40 to and hour commute times will start to look wondrous once we get to be like L.A. where it can take 3 hours to go 2 miles. Buses can take that long and longer too.

Houston is one of the most in-the-black cities financially. We can do this without incurring masses of debt. If you do it the stupid way, and just sprawl out (like somebody said we could b/c we have no mountains etc. blocking us) the metro will just be a giant suburb, very unattractive to educated people. People want to be near a dense exciting urban core, not someplace where every store is a cheescake factory and best buy.

For Houston's long term future we need these creative class people - not just engineering majors/accountants/lawyers who come here because energy happens to be booming. We need to lure artists, filmmakers, musicians, etc. to our city like SF and even L.A. do so much better than we do.

[Trae713]

Now I agree with that. Houston needs more of those types of people (filmmakers, artists, etc.), as well as more techy people (the trendy people they are).

[latetotheparty]

Originally Posted by Mom2Feebs

This thread sounds mighty familiar...sounds like stuff we all heard 20 years ago...yet we continue to grow and grow and grow...!

It's too bad Houston didn't have the foresight to keep all the streetcars they had, though. That would be kinda nifty.

i remember these discussions amongs the adult when **I** was a kid 35-40 years ago... and living within the 610 loop between richmond and westheimer.....

[oceangaia]

I couldn't disagree with the OP more. Excluding NYC, there isn't a city in the U.S. where more than 10% of commuters are using mass transit. The transit systems are insanely expensive and fares are highly subsidized. The average farebox recovery for transit systems is 18%. That just covers operating expenses and doesn't cover capital infrastructure costs.

As for the feds subsidizing it, they already do but subsidies only work as long as the subsidizers vastly outnumber the recipients. 9 people can subsidize 1 person and allow that person to pay 10% of the true cost, but 9 people cannot subsidize 9 people and have all 9 paying 10%. The numbers don't work, rail is not a scalable solution.

You can't rail your way out of congestion anymore than you can pave your way out of it. The cities who have built rail systems over the last 20 years have seen the most increased congestion. No rail system has ever solved the congestion problem, anywhere.