Feb. 17, 2004, 1:10AM
Half-million rode rail in first month
Critics claim free rides, Super Bowl skew figures
By LUCAS WALL
Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle
Take a tour: Explore Houston's new light rail system.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More than a half-million people boarded MetroRail during its inaugural month, the transit authority reported Monday.
Metro released its first monthly statistics on train ridership, which show 558,257 boardings on the Main Street line in January. That averages to 18,008 boardings per day (9,004 people making round trips), more than halfway toward the projected 33,000 daily boardings by the end of this year.
"These figures indicate MetroRail has been very well received by our customers," Shirley DeLibero, Metropolitan Transit Authority president and chief executive officer, said in a prepared statement. "We are very encouraged that rail will be a key part of our transit system, as expected."
Rail opponents, noting that 9,004 people is not even half a percent of Houston's population, argue that the new train does nothing to alleviate traffic congestion.
Two major events in January boosted the first-month ridership numbers: the four-day grand opening, beginning New Year's Day, during which free rides were offered; and several days of parties and activities leading up to the Feb. 1 Super Bowl.
Both events attracted so many riders that trains were stuffed to capacity and some people had to wait for less-crowded trains.
Houston's first-month train ridership numbers exceed the monthly totals recorded lately by light rail systems in Cleveland, Ohio, and San Jose, Calif., which have been running since 1920 and 1987, respectively.
Metro reported January bus ridership of 7.2 million, a daily average of 232,514. That is a 4 percent drop from January 2003, said spokesman Ken Connaughton, who attributed part of the decrease to people switching from buses to the new train. Overall transit ridership was up 3 percent over last January, according to Metro's data.
The transit authority expects train ridership to go up by several thousand per day after bus routes are modified to better tie in with the 7 1/2-mile light rail line. Those changes were scheduled to take effect this week but have been postponed at least a month until a study on rail safety is concluded.
Twelve collisions have occurred between trains and private vehicles since full testing began last fall. In the latest crash, Metro police cited Nathan Earle, 38, a welder from Groesbeck, saying he ran a red light Sunday night at Main and Pierce.
Earle's truck collided with Train 111 near the Downtown Transit Center, damaging the train's brakes, skirts and face, police said.
Eight of Metro's 17 trains have been in collisions with vehicles, requiring tens of thousands of dollars in repairs, agency officials said. Most of the automobiles were seriously damaged, but no one has been killed.
Metro has made more changes recently along the light rail line in response to the collisions.
On Fannin and San Jacinto in the Museum District, illuminated signs prohibiting turns while trains are approaching have been repositioned for better visibility.
Also, a second sign box with a lighted no-turn symbol and an attached flashing yellow light has been added at those streets' intersections with Southmore.
Houston Rules!
<b>Twelve collisions have occurred between trains and private vehicles since full testing began last fall.</b>
This is pretty scary. I really don't know how they will be able to make it safer where it runs through the med center and shares a lane with cars trying to make left turns.
what are dart's light rail ridership figures... okay, i guess i could go to their website and find out myself...
wow, those are excellent numbers!
“We shape our Cities, thereafter they shape us.”
You know, this is such a Houston & Dallas thing...the lack of vision, the “too little too late” syndrome. Houston is a nice city, but the damn thing is just too big geographically for me to ever want anything to do with living there, and there are a lot of people who share my opinion. Who wants to spend 45% of their life in a car?
Light rail is something Houston should have done about twenty years ago when the city was beginning to show signs of getting too big for its britches. Of course, seeing how there are still opponents of it (probably the same jackasses who probably are somehow associated with freeway contractors), I can see why this has been an uphill battle for the city. But it’s sad that Cleveland and San Jose have had light rail longer than both Houston and Dallas. Why did those cities have the vision to build them when we didn’t?
It’s seems like Houston and Dallas refuse to change unless someone presents a big plan (Victory, Trinity) that’s going to make a handful of people really rich.
Just a product of our environment. Housing is cheap here and in Houston. So cars are affordable with the extra income. Notice San Jose's metro. Notice how much housing costs there. Or Cleveland's compared to our housing. It's a cycle here. First, it was to move away from downtown where the housing was cheapest. Then you can buy a car with that extra income. That makes it easier to live a little further out. Then outside of LBJ is hot. Housing is cheapest. Cars are affordable. Hey let's move out past 190. Houses are even less per sq ft. Then everyone starts comparing homes they really can't afford over their lifetime. But they can buy cars. Businesses get incentives to move closer to them.
Keep in mind, that is one of three factors. The smallest factor in my mind why it took so long. And that is choice. The other 2 are government regulation, and a little bit of escapism. The escapism explains why only north and not south, east or west AND the fact that such projects are routinely voted down with the usual "will bring crime to my neighborhood" mantra. Seems Lower Greenville has done a good job of that without rail.
Government regulation is the biggest reason. I know some have problems with this, but it's documented that sprawl was encouraged, and was done racially to begin with. Such practices like redlining are still being found out. With such policy of sprawl (through loan discrimination, lots of automobile company lobbying, lax pollution regulation, and generous highway dollars) you create an atmosphere that would be anti-rail. People don't want contact with certain people or things. They live solitary lives relative to a northeasterner. They live far away from each other. In a sunbelt city such as Houston or Dallas this governmental policy is exacerbated because of the swaths of cheap available land. With so many factors against it, DFW is absolutely shocking me by passing such great projects. Despite what many say, you simply are not seeing the sheer progress that DFW is making in the oopposite direction of policy in other sprawlers. Atlanta is the other acception, and Houston is beginning to see the light itself(I know Houstonites you have the better downtown, but I'm talking city as a whole and metro. Your rapid highway expansions and slower urban development still make me wonder)
Anyways, it is no wonder we were so late to the game. But the atmosphere is changing here. I think many simply have to see something alternative because of our lifetimes and generation of being spoonfed the "American Dream". As that changes over to a societal goal rather than individual because our economy isn't allowing so much individualism in the middle classes, you'll see a renaissance as we have to start sticking together. It's already happening.
P.S. Sorry about the long-windedness. This is just something I was clueless about until college, and once I found out things I couldn't stop reading.
No no, that's good ranting! I've finallly started taking an active interest in what shapes the city around me, so it's good to hear all the perspectives and opinions on this forum.
By the way, what is "redlining?"
it's an insurance practice. Red lines were literally drawn around areas on a map. People in these areas would be denied home loans or certain insurance coverage types. Or it could work the opposite way. It's illegal, and discriminatory. A company in Austin was caught doing this in east Austin in the late 90s.
From the examples I read, basically they would rank the races and their area of town A to B, and outline the lowest ranked areas in red, and give them nothing. The highest ranked areas would be allowed the biggest loans. Keep in mind, this was government subsidized. Part of this was to allow the flexibility of these new suburbs to create incentives for home builders and businesses. So the results were, mainly white and jewish suburbs, and poor inner-cities of blacks, hispanics, italians, and irish. At first these inner cities were fine as factory jobs were there. Then the Garlands of the world began to arise thanks to incentives and subsidies. Factory jobs began leaving the inner-cities for the burbs, leaving poor inner cities with rare exception. Today, this is happening more and more with white collar jobs. See Frisco, Plano. Hence, the government subsidized new inner-cities(see TIFs, rail funding), as suburban efficiency begins to decline. The fear though is total gentrification by more redlining back to the inner-city. Endless cycle.
You mean that 7.5 miles of rail isn't going to take a huge amount of people of the road?Originally Posted by MontroseHood
Let me build a 7.5 mile freeway in Frisco and wonder wh DTD is still congested. That arguement is so stupid.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks