Thread: Houston: Bus vs light rail train (twice)

Originally Posted by laggyNgroovy

damn, the med center alone would make it worthwhile. I think they are charging the patients $15/day to park now, no in and out privileges.

I'm sure obamacare covers parking.

Originally Posted by Alundil

Originally Posted by jason_jinx

Do you think they should keep expanding that light rail?

No, but then I didn't think that they should've spent 7 billion on 7 miles of track in the first place either. I also didn't think that it needed to be at street level. If you're gonna do mass transit on a rail line, in a busy damn city, then make it elevated. There are only 10-15 really good examples of how to do it the right way in this country and many more than that "across the pond". But, alas, I didn't have the ear to our illustrious former mayor or Metro Authorities either.

:3

So you don't like it, because it was too expensive, but you also wanted them to elevate the rail, which would have caused the price to skyrocket? That makes sense.
I would like to see your idea of the 10-15 "really good examples" of mass transit in the US.
As for Dallas, one problem many transit agencies have are trying to do "too much with too little". Baltimore has a similar problem - trying to have one train operator for large trains, with long headway, instead of more operators for single (non-articulated) streetcars on a shorter headway, such as you see in Philadelphia or Toronto. The problem is you have a limit on how many people you can put on each train, an inability to increase train size, and an inability to decrease headway because of the larger size of the trains.
Expansion of light rail is always cheaper than the initial cost of start-up, because you don't need most of the infrastructure when you expand (power supply, railcars, trained staff, etc). And rail transit has always proven more effective and popular than expansion of bus transit. People like the security of knowing where a rail train is going to go, as to the psychological question of if the bus will go where you think it will. Buses are seen as "dirty", while lightrail / streetcars are considered "clean" (no diesel exhaust). Traditionally, rail transit will take longer to return the cost of investment, but the equipment will last longer, and give a larger return on investment over the term of the vehicle usage.
Just remember, since the 1960's, very few, if any, transit agencies offer a positive return on investment. Fare prices simply cannot cover the costs of operations. The benefit of transit is the convenience for the population for transportation, and removal of vehicles from the roads offering more convenience for those who cannot use the transit services.