Houston Metro's proposition for extension of light rail was approved by area votes in yesterday's election. This was no easy win, as Metro's been widely criticized for, among other things, inaccurate budget estimates and the snail's pace of construction. Without getting too much into whether or not I'm happy about the proposition passing (I am), I'll merely point out something an angle rail supporters should have considered.
Now, I have no idea if the rail line running to Reliant Stadium will be completed in time for next year's Super Bowl. I do know that one of the reasons the people of Houston were told we had to fork over money to build it (as well as Enr...er, Minute Maid Park and the Toyota Center) was that these facilities would help Houston become a "world class city."
I remember first hearing this argument back in the late 1990's, and trying to come up with a list of such cities. I think I decided on New York City, London, Paris, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Beijing, Barcelona, Washington DC, Mexico City, and Los Angeles, though those I'm not going to argue too vehemently for those last few. Now, what's one thing all these cities have in common? Could it be...rail? Why didn't Metro take a page from Texans owner Bob McNair's playbook and use the rail proposition as a way to guilt us for not being cosmopolitan enough?
Whatever. I'm just glad it passed. I'm looking forward to being the first guy to carve some profanity in one of those trains.
I never said it was a comprehensive list, o sensitive one.
I'm not sensitive, just bi-polar.
And don't forget to vote Quimby in the December runoffs.
I would guess that the odds of the rail line being finished by next year's Super Bowl (I assume that means next season -- Jan/2005) are pretty slim. One of the things that always amazed me about Texas is the inability of contractors to finish street improvements. In Austin I watched them take over four months to replace one side of one block of sidewalk on Congress Ave. And the alley behind my office (at 6th & Congress) was under continual construction for over two years -- in that time they should have been able to excavate the whole thing to a depth of 50 feet and rebuild the entire thing, utilities and all.
Now that's Austin, and you're talking Houston, but how long was downtown ripped up around the Brown Center? Every time I came to Houston for some two years or more it was a mess.
Uh, no. The line to Reliant Stadium is supposed to be finished in time for the 2004 Super Bowl.
Heh.
The line will be done.
No 'heh' about it.
The Powers that Be have written their contracts with the contractors in such a way that, should that schedule be missed, the contractors will be obliged to sever the left arm of every worker and executive, and leave them in a steaming, jerking pile on the front steps of City Hall.
The rail will open on time.
"the contractors will be obliged to sever the left arm of every worker and executive, and leave them in a steaming, jerking pile on the front steps of City Hall."
I'll bet tourism from THAT would bring in $20 million.
When they're done, they can flense the remaining flesh and use the bones to construct a secret chapel under Minute Maid Park to Lee Brown...
I was tremendously disappointed that Houston chose to go the downtown light rail route *first.* This city is a veritable poster child for radial commuter rail design and I'm really amazed that the folks who have to drive in on the bad highways (10, 45, 59 south) haven't been bitching and screaming about it for years.
I live off 59 north (Eastex) and it's a fine stretch of road that should be adequate for oh... six to eighteen months. But I cannot believe that while they went to the trouble to widen it to as many as 15 lanes in places (counting HOV and access roads), there isn't a lovely wide strip in the middle for the rail line that will shoot into the downtown hub.
I'm equally amazed that they're still not planning to do the same thing as they rip up I-10 on the west side.
There should be a line that parallels each of the major highways including 288 and the Hardy Toll road. Light rail and busses could be used for connections on the periphery and to hit the major destination areas that weren't on the main line routes.
Light rail - especially urban light rail - has never been something that I have found to be either useful or timely. When I lived in the Bay area it took significantly longer to use light rail than busses that served the same area, even with transfers. To make it worse, the light rail stop was right by my house and it was still less convenient than virtually any other form of transport. I never got a chance to compare it to a Segway, though.
All of the "world-class" cities you mention don't use light rail to my knowledge; they use trains and subways (although I can't admit to having ever seen the L.A. rail system...). Light rail should be used as a supplementary, secondary system that feeds the larger trains.
I once figured out exactly how long it would take me to get to work using public transport in the South Bay area. My normal commute was 18 miles and took between 24 and 50 minutes door-to-door depending on the time of day. Public transportation would have involved four busses and a train, and would take one hour and 34 minutes.
That's why public transportation doesn't work in the South Bay. What do they have? A bunch of disparate bus systems, a single major rail line that's primarily useful for going into San Francisco, and a highly touted and publicized light rail line that was slower than pretty much everything else. At least for my needs it was. I'm the Santa Clara County light rail folks will tell you it works for some folks.
The DC metro system, on the other hand, was a beautiful thing and a joy to use. It goes where most people need to go, serves not only tourists but residents, is clean, safe, and fast. New York's is kind of scary, but for the most part effective. Rail use in Europe is wonderful, but would be difficult to make popular here because we're so spread out.
Houston doesn't need light rail as much as it needs commuter trains, subways, and a coherent bus system that feeds it. Instead we got a model train system that smacks of cronyism and back-room political deals. I'm a huge fan of trains and wish they were more popular, but they won't be if cities keep building half-assed systems like Houston's light rail seems to be.
I hope I'm wrong about it and that it creates a groundswell of demand. Somehow I don't think it will.
I am mortified that San Francisco did not make your list, but Los Angeles did. The product of innocent oversight? Perhaps. But that's some shabby list making, nonetheless, sir.
And in case any of you were wondering, yes, San Franciso does have a rail system.