Rail down Richmond

So to summarize your argument, you're willing to spend billions on trains because people have a "rail bias". Buses deliver the exact same functionality as trains do, for a fraction of the cost of trains. Let's spend a few million to educate the masses on how great buses are and save the billions on building trains and destroying business owners in the process.

 

why not before suburban rail? people ride the park and ride through the HOV lane as it is. the greater improvement that needed to happen yesterday was the widening of the freeway, itself.

i don't believe "almost all of the lanes" will be toll or fee-based. there are two on each side, i believe, which will be. but this is going to be a huge freeway.

 

it's not a matter of education. people like riding trains more than buses. studies have shown people will be more likely to give up their cars for trains than for buses...and it's not really even close.

 

There are 34 buses that run from the Kingsland park and ride (west of BW 8 on I-10) that run into downtown every morning before 9am. Why do we need a suburban rail? We already have rapid transit into downtown.

 

In my opinion

Our highest priority should be a suburban rail system.

This rail system should not be at ground level and thus subject to standard traffic situations. This is the key...

Buses are subject to traffic speeds, traffic accidents, pedestrians, red lights, and other factors that apply to standard traffic.

An elevated or underground (or both) rail system is not affected by such limitations. For that reason, I believe people would ride rails much more than current bus ridership numbers show.

Additionally more people could be moved downtown much faster than buses could provide, decreasing the need for widening freeways.

 

as someone who has used mass trans in nyc, i totally agree....buses suck....trains are a much better option

 

Sure, in an ideal world we would have super speed trains into downtown from the burbs. In reality, that costs a poopload of money. We have HOV lanes that insulate the park and ride buses from the bulk of the traffic.

But I'll agree, putting trains at ground level has been another failure of this system we have now.

 

I always thought the ground down here wasnt suitable enough to have an underground system.....same reason why there are no basements...if it is doable, id rather see an underground transportation system

 

I've used mass transit in NYC extensively, as well. I used to take the LIRR in from Garden City into Brooklyn and have taken the PATH trains out to NJ as well as many subway rides in NYC proper. Those are not what we're talking about in Houston. We are talking about very slow trains that move on street level with traffic in Houston. Not much different than a bus.

 

Have you ever ridden Metro? Insanely slow, travelling with the dregs of society through all sorts of barrio's before you get to your destination. They are complete crap.

I'll take a cab before I ever set foot on a bus.

OTOH, the Park-n-Ride is a completely different beast. It goes from one location straight to downtown, and uses the HOV lane. Much more convenient for travellers, and not nearly close the amount of unwanteds.

For this reason alone, we don't need rail to suburban areas. Y'all get it way too good, as it is.

 

Oh, it's doable, baby. Just give metro a trillion dollars or two and we're there!

 

fair point...like I said above, the underground rail is the best way to go...im just not sure if its physically possible down here

 

And I agree that, yes, we have quite a lot of buses for people to use. But our freeways are still over-crowded (either because people can't or don't want to use the buses).

I also believe that we could build elevated rails at a fraction of the cost of what we're doing:

The primary costs of ground-level rail is in clearing away area for the rail. Expanding roads, annexing property, closing down traffic arteries, etc.

How about if we just build an elevated rail that runs directly over the existing HOV lanes.

 

I am for any solution that reduces traffic for a reasonable cost. If elevated rail can be built in an efficient, cost-effective manner, do it if they can prove that all these folks with rail bias will switch from driving their cars to taking the train. I doubt that can be done in a cost-effective manner, although I haven't seen the economics of building these elevated rails.

 

The HOV's are closed at night, right? And the HOV runs down the center of the freeway. So, at night, we close down the two freeway lanes that face the HOV (one inbound, one outbound). That should be plenty of space for the construction crew to work. During that time. we install the supports for the elevated trains (imagine an up-sidedown U ). Just before morning, we shut off construction and open all lanes. Traffic is completely unaffected (except middle-of-the-night traffic, which will lose one lane in each direction) and the rail gets installed.

Sounds cheap, fast, and efficient.

 

Ask Stack24 about the pains involved when the train was built (his business is on Main St. downtown).

 

While you are at it, ask him how he likes having a train stop about 20-30 feet away from the front door of his business now that it is up and running.

 

I believe mono-rail or above ground subway is the way to go like in LA and Chicago. We can't dig because much of the city/county is below sea level, and mono-rail takes care of the "traffic problems" seeing as how traffic won't stop when the trains go by.