[Transit Nut]

OK, I just found this on the METRO website. METRO tells the public where it stands regarding the University Line, and they also give a timetable.

http://www.ridemetro...leases/pr51.asp

Also, there are public meetings coming up for the North and Southeast Lines, as well as some newsletters.

http://www.ridemetro...ns/meetings.asp
http://www.ridemetro...s/corridors.asp

[dp2]

The Voice of University Oaks, on Wednesday, February 15th, 2006 @ 11:53am, said:

METRO and STV engineers have already said that they cannot put a rail junction at street level. It would kill the Richmond / Wheeler intersection. Also, nowhere in the United States do two actual light rail systems cross perpendiculalrly at grade. The operational issues involved are enormous.

And yet Portland is planning to build several more of these in the middle of their downtown with their next LRT extension. With their streetcar line already crossing the existing LRT line downtown. Going from the current 4 downtown intersections with an at-grade rail crossing to 12, while also adding auto lanes to the currently bus only transit mall the new line will run down. Yeah, must be such a traffic nightmare that they decided to go from 4 to 12. I can see why similarly gridded midtown Houston can't handle a single one of these intersections.

Good thing that the experienced light-rail pioneers at Metro know better those urban and transit novices in Portland.



Perhaps they can claim a streetcar exemption in the fine print?




So I guess what appears to be an even more complicated at grade junction and crossing of the Chicago El doesn't exist?




And quick, someone alert the Germans that this type of junction won't work. Metro says so.




Such an honest and well-informed staff Metro has there. They'd never spout any BS pulled out of their arse simply to justify whatever they want to do.

This post has been edited by dp2: Thursday, February 16, 2006 at 2:35 AM

[nmainguy]

dp2, on Thursday, February 16th, 2006 @ 1:20am, said:

And yet Portland is planning to build several more of these in the middle of their downtown with their next LRT extension. With their streetcar line already crossing the existing LRT line downtown. Going from the current 4 downtown intersections with an at-grade rail crossing to 12, while also adding auto lanes to the currently bus only transit mall the new line will run down. Yeah, must be such a traffic nightmare that they decided to go from 4 to 12. I can see why similarly gridded midtown Houston can't handle a single one of these intersections.

Good thing that the experienced light-rail pioneers at Metro know better those urban and transit novices in Portland.



Such an honest and well-informed staff Metro has there. They'd never spout any BS pulled out of their arse simply to justify whatever they want to do.

I think I'm smellin' a trouble maker!!!

[dbigtex56]

dp2, on Thursday, February 16th, 2006 @ 1:20am, said:

Such an honest and well-informed staff Metro has there. They'd never spout any BS pulled out of their arse simply to justify whatever they want to do.

Forgive me for going off on a slight tangent, but here's an example of the brilliant minds at Metro.

Yesterday I had to consult the schedule for the #8 South Main bus. It lists times of arrival for southbound buses at San Jacinto & Prairie, San Jacinto & Jefferson, San Jacinto & Elgin, etc.

One problem: San Jacinto is a northbound one-way street. At no point does a southbound South Main bus go down San Jacinto. It travels down Fannin, which is one-way southbound.

Metro needs to improve its accountability at every level.

[CE_ugh]

I hope that they are still considering the line along Weslayan to Westhiemer. Sure it would be costly but it would bring riders to the front door of Houston's largest shopping center and business district.

Since HISD is selling Will Rogers Elem. and its administration buildings a turn on to Weslayan from Richmond could be accomplished with minimal expense at this point. Traveling down Weslayan may require either a lane width reduction or a slight increase in right of way. Along Westhiemer would be tricky but could be done.

Central Market has a nice wide open parking lot. With some concessions, a section of this lot can be acquired and the line placed from the median of Weslayan to the south side of Westhiemer. A station could be placed either here or in Highland Village. Highland Village may have to give up the symmetry of it landscaping but since there are numerous eateries nearby, a short train ride is all that is neccesary to bring Greenway Plaza workers here. (Plus, some Galleria bound shoppers may stop here instead of continuing down Westhiemer but dont tell the Galleria that.) Past Highland Village it gets expensive.

The UP tracks must be either negotiated by going under or over. Going over creates a aestheticly unpleasing situation and a steep grade to clear the tracks with the minimum 20 ft. vertical clearance. Going under is probably more expensive, but could be tied into an undercrossing for westhiemer as well. Only a 15ft. vertical clearance (maybe less) would be required. From here the line would go underground. Im not sure which side of the street the major utility lines are on but I wouldn't think that in this relatively new area that they would be more than 20 feet below street level. Also this strech of Westhiemer is narrow and busy. A surface line would just cause congestion. The line would pass a few apartment complexes and small businesses, which are planned to be converted into a mixed use development of some kind. A station may be placed in this area.

If any place in Houston shouldn't have any at grade crossings with a rail line, it would be the intersections at 610 and Post Oak. Since were already underground we dont have to worry about a 40 foot high flyover at 610. At the intersection of Westhiemer/Post Oak would be the terminus of the University line. This subterrainian station would probably include the Post Oak line, either also underground above the University Line or elevated above Post Oak. Again, no at-grade crossing at Post Oak/Westhiemer. A direct walking connection with the Galleria would ensure very high passenger volumes.

There are two, possibly three, stations along this alignment. From Weslayan along Richmond or Westhiemer, there is probably only one, the University line terminus. Even if the University line was projected to extend along westpark to say Hillcroft TC. there is nothing stopping the post oak line from doing the same.

All in all, ridership volume and return on investment are key here. This alignment provides the most choice of destinations and highest potential for development. At least, in my opinion.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Put it down Richmond. Westheimer would be a nightmare. Where would all that traffic be re-routed while construction is underway?

[Houston19514]

Houston1stWordOnTheMoon, on Thursday, February 16th, 2006 @ 10:49am, said:

Put it down Richmond. Westheimer would be a nightmare. Where would all that traffic be re-routed while construction is underway?

We're trying to build a system to handle Houston's transportation needs for the next 20-50-75-100 years. If it gets us to the best system for the long term, the pain endured during construction will be worth it, and it would be foolish in the extreme to decline to build the best system because we can't handle a couple years of construction.

[westguy]

They could add a few lanes to Westpark. Between 610 and Weslayan why would Metro need that ROW?

[Houston19514]

The Voice of University Oaks, on Wednesday, February 15th, 2006 @ 11:53am, said:

METRO and STV engineers have already said that they cannot put a rail junction at street level. It would kill the Richmond / Wheeler intersection. Also, nowhere in the United States do two actual light rail systems cross perpendiculalrly at grade. The operational issues involved are enormous.

Do you have a source for this alleged statement by METRO and STV engineers?

[The Great Hizzy!]

Houston19514, on Thursday, February 16th, 2006 @ 11:28am, said:

Quote

METRO and STV engineers have already said that they cannot put a rail junction at street level. It would kill the Richmond / Wheeler intersection. Also, nowhere in the United States do two actual light rail systems cross perpendiculalrly at grade. The operational issues involved are enormous.

Do you have a source for this alleged statement by METRO and STV engineers?

That might have been a potential issue downtown due to limit space (that is, more densely inhabited blocks), which is why they were considering a subway at the proposed Harrisburg and Main Street lines, but it is all too easy to build two cross-directional stations at grade level. The Wheeler Station is set up to accomodate just that.

[nmainguy]

I just returned from the board meeting so here is some of what I observed.
The setting:
The room was overflowing with anti-rail people handing out buttons to everyone in sight. One woman actually shoved one in my hand so I politely-with no comment-dropped it back in the bag of buttons she was carrying. She gave me a withering look and huffed off. Initially, it seemed like it was more a rally for anti-rail folks than a METRO board meeting.
The Meeting:
Frank Wilson, METRO President and CEO opened with a statement that ALL viewpoints would be considered and nothing would be taken off the table. There were 31 speakers starting with Martha Wong who basiclly parroted Culberson's letter [who didn't show]. When she finished the room erupted with applause. Wilson told the audience there would be no more of that-and later when another anti-rail speaker recieved applause, Wilson suggested if you need to applaud, take it outside. I would say there was an equal number of pro and anti speakers. The anti speakers basicly did their rant about This Is America and those Federal tax dollars are OURS [and Oregon's and Florida's etc...<my insert]and we voted to put this rail on Westpark and if you try to put it on Richmond, we have the power and the money to stop you. The majority of them were fairly inflexible. One man even brought his 10 or 11 year old son to the podium and insinuated if the rail went on Richmond, he would go out of buisness and his son would be left with nothing.
[I always have a problem with grown men dragging in their children to hide behind] All and all, if these are the people they have chosen to speak for the anti side, I think they'll need to develope some better "people skills".
On the pro side it was a much more measured response. No one threw out any ultimatums. A few expressed a preference for Richmond but agreed ALL options need to be studied. Our fellow HAIFer Christof Spieler was
eloquent and sane; Tory Gaddis http://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/ spoke last and best-offering REAL solutions to offset the hardship to buisness owners during construction. All in all, a good meeting.

On a personal note, as I stepped off the platform to cross Main a HUGE white bus turned left onto Main from Calhoun, bounced over the buttons separating the tracks from the street and PARKED in the only lane on S. bound Main where a group of about 75 anti-railers leisurly disembarked. You heard me right-they didn't park under the bus shed on Travis. They didn't park on Pierce. They BLOCKED Main street. I found this very telling.

I don't know if any of you guys were there because quite frankly we are all invisible to one another but I could feel your spirit and I could feel your LOVE [I wish I knew how....oh never mind.]


PS:I was the guy in a blue longsleeve shirt with my red MFA sticker still on the chest]

This post has been edited by nmainguy: Thursday, February 16, 2006 at 5:51 PM

[bachanon]

many thanks to nmainguy and christof spieler for taking of your time to be voices of reason. i appreciate your activism and wish i were more like you.

[VicMan]

I want all of the names and e-mails of the businesses who spoke against. I want them to know my side of the view.

[nmainguy]

VicMan, on Thursday, February 16th, 2006 @ 7:19pm, said:

I want all of the names and e-mails of the businesses who spoke against. I want them to know my side of the view.

Vic:
I can give you names but not emails as they were not on the list.
State Rep. Martha Wong is the only one I know you could contact. Some of the anti's on the list did not show but sent surrogates instead therefore their names were not on the list. Maybe METRO could supply the info as they spoke on the tax-payer's dime.
If you want my first-hand opinion, any emails to the vast majority who were anti-rail would have no effect on them as they appear to be dug in to their position. I understand, however that it might make people like you and myself feel better to at least vent. I would suggest that any emails be sent to both sides-just to keep things on the up and up.
I'll post the info I have when I get a chance. Give me a day or so, OK?.

And as for you, bachanon...you may not want to be JUST like me-and vise versa but in any event: X 3

This post has been edited by nmainguy: Thursday, February 16, 2006 at 8:56 PM

[VicMan]

nmainguy, on Thursday, February 16th, 2006 @ 7:45pm, said:

Vic:
I can give you names but not emails as they were not on the list.

I still would like to have the names

And I e-mailed Miss Wong.

[bachanon]

would it help to write metro in support of a richmond line? who would be a good contact at metro?

[Jeebus]

nmainguy, on Thursday, February 16th, 2006 @ 4:48pm, said:

The anti speakers basicly did their rant about This Is America and those Federal tax dollars are OURS [and Oregon's and Florida's etc...<my insert]and we voted to put this rail on Westpark and if you try to put it on Richmond, we have the power and the money to stop you. The majority of them were fairly inflexible. One man even brought his 10 or 11 year old son to the podium and insinuated if the rail went on Richmond, he would go out of buisness and his son would be left with nothing.

How's that old saying go? Oh yeah: "You have to break a few eggs if you want to make an omelette." Anti-rail protesters are going to be the eggs in our "light-rail omelette".


Oh well, at least I'll get an omelette out of it all.

This post has been edited by Jeebus: Friday, February 17, 2006 at 12:06 AM

[Saddleman]

I think letters/emails need to be sent to the Chronicle, the Press, and any other Houston paper or magazine that might publish them.

[RedScare]

Nmain and Christof:

Thank you so much for speaking up for those of us that could not make it. As it were, I was at the other end of Downtown arguing a trial (got a hung jury...that's a victory for a defense lawyer ). I promise that next time the anti-railers come to town, I'll be there to wow them with common sense.

Thanks again.

BTW, did anyone make a sensible argument that we should rebut in our letters to the editor? "My taxes" arguments need no rebuttal. They pay no more than we do, and METRO knows it.

This post has been edited by RedScare: Friday, February 17, 2006 at 1:40 AM

[Christof Spieler]

nmainguy, on Thursday, February 16th, 2006 @ 4:48pm, said:

Our fellow HAIFer Christof Spieler was eloquent and sane

I hope I was brief, too; that was a LONG meeting.

bachanon, on Thursday, February 16th, 2006 @ 10:32pm, said:

Would it help to write metro in support of a richmond line? who would be a good contact at metro?

I don't see any sign that the METRO board is about to drop Richmond. They heard loud and clear that there are lots of people who want them to study all the options.

• Talking to businesses isn't a bad idea.
  
  
• Letters to the Chronicle are always useful.
  
  
• If anybody lives near the line, you should get involved in your civic group's discussions. The anti-Richmond folks are trying to show that they represent all of Richmond by getting the local neighborhood groups on board.
  
  
• Writing your city council member is probably a good step -- they have the ability to have a lot of influence in the process, and they've been hearing a lot from anti-rail people.
  
  
• If any of you are represented by Martha Wong or John Culberson, write them.
  
  
  
• Keep paying attention to this issue -- this isn't over yet, and there are a lot of very passionate people trying to block rail on Richmond.

[GovernorAggie]

I think that Richmond would be the best option, but let's think about what can be done with Westpark if that's where the line ends up going. I'm not as familiar with Westpark, but the only thing I can think of is the Centerpoint field that runs along it.

In the world of zoning, Westpark would be digestable because you could just rezone several areas along it in a more transit-friendly zoning category. The Centerpoint field may present some limitations...the more I think about it, the better Richmond looks.

I think in the end, Richmond will be the route. I just hate that Culberson and Wong are getting involved like they are. Isn't this close to election season??

[bachanon]

Quote

In the world of zoning, Westpark would be digestable because you could just rezone several areas along it in a more transit-friendly zoning category. The Centerpoint field may present some limitations...the more I think about it, the better Richmond looks.

zoning? what's that?

[ssullivan]

Thanks nmainguy and Christof for the report on the meeting yesterday. Sounds like it was rather chaotic to say the least.

I really hope Metro is able to overcome the opposition and pick the route that is the best for the city's long-term future. Three or four years of inconvenience on the part of a very small number of Houston's millions of residents if it benefits the entire city in the long run is worth it in my opinion. If it costs more so that these people are fairly compensated for their troubles, that's fine. I think Westpark makes a fine route for the line farther out -- I could see a Westpark/Alief Clodine routing in the old railroad ROW from the Hillcroft Transit Center west out past the Gessner and Westchase Park and Rides to the Mission Bend Park and Ride. That would make a fine extension of the University line to serve commuters in west and southwest Houston. But from the Uptown area east to Wheeler Station this route really needs to hit the major employment, residential and shopping areas, and that requires a routing not on Westpark. Yes, there are some businesses between Main and Kirby on Richmond that will be affected. The street is pretty narrow there. But there's also quite a lot of urban blight in that area too. There are only a few stretches where there are buildings right up against the street that might have to be totally demolished. In many cases there are large parking lots that could be slightly reduced in size to accommodate four lanes of traffic on Richmond plus the rail line and sidewalks. The majority of the businesses in this area rarely, if ever, need all of the parking they have now. Maybe the funding estimates for the project need to include the cost of not only acquiring the necessary property for the line, but also to assist business owners who wish to relocate off Richmond before the project starts.

I'm glad that Metro has publicly stated that they are going to study all possible routings, and that the vocal opposition at this point will not stop the study process from happening. I really like this statement at the end of their press release on this issue:

Quote

The bottom line is that because there is no hard data on the pros and cons of either Richmond or Westpark, both streets should be included in the study process. No party, no matter how vocal, should be allowed to force an outcome at this early stage in the process that trumps the legitimate interests of other segments of our community.

I just hope that they can continue the planning process without it being thrown off track before all the facts are in.

[new major on the block]

Houston19514, on Thursday, February 16th, 2006 @ 12:24pm, said:

We're trying to build a system to handle Houston's transportation needs for the next 20-50-75-100 years. If it gets us to the best system for the long term, the pain endured during construction will be worth it, and it would be foolish in the extreme to decline to build the best system because we can't handle a couple years of construction.

Yes Houston is in dire straits of a transportation system. One that includes the metro area. But as far as building a system to handle the needs for 2026 to even 2126 than we definitely tripped out of the gate. Metro and TxDot are terrible at what they do. But they aren't the only ones to blame, the politicians, both parties, and finally Houstonians. That is right, our selves. We all "broke the dam". We want to have our cake and eat it too. We want a reliable transportation system but we dont want to pay for it. I am very suprised that the mayor hasn't requested FEMA to help pay for the rail expansion because of the influx of evacuees in the city and how it is hurting our traffic. And the number of people that live in the city but don't carpool, walk, or take the bus. Along with the ongoing debate of the ever widening freeways that probably won't last long because they will need to be expanded again. The many streets neglected. Does anyone ever wonder if METRO and for that matter TxDot in bed with both the automotive and oil industry. They all meet in a secret bunker underground and discuss how they are going to screw the taxpayers over for the next 20 years. A little electric train that takes up a lane of traffic that averages 35mph and stops every 20ft for 30 seconds that is then held up by red lights also. Along with the frequent occurance of running over people and hitting cars(clearly the faults of the the pedestrians, drivers, and yo-yos who planned the route) is not going to cut it. It only services a select group of citizens. What about the 3 million + that live outside the city limits, and drive 20-40 miles to work, burning gas, clogging freeways. And we are actually arguing about which road the little trolly will take to get to the mall??*%#* That is exactly why this transportation system will and forever fail. We are not Dallas nor Los Angeles. We are the most unique in terms or our city and or our situation. The largest major city in the country in terms of square miles(540),fourth in population, no zoning, and no clue on a transportation solution. The direction this is going the government will find WMD's in Iraq and the middle east will have alreadysubmitted to democracy.. oh and the cubs would have already won the world series before it is solved. Change starts at the bottom.

[Houston19514]

new major on the block, on Friday, February 17th, 2006 @ 11:57am, said:

Yes Houston is in dire straits of a transportation system. One that includes the metro area. But as far as building a system to handle the needs for 2026 to even 2126 than we definitely tripped out of the gate. Metro and TxDot are terrible at what they do. But they aren't the only ones to blame, the politicians, both parties, and finally Houstonians. That is right, our selves. We all "broke the dam". We want to have our cake and eat it too. We want a reliable transportation system but we dont want to pay for it. I am very suprised that the mayor hasn't requested FEMA to help pay for the rail expansion because of the influx of evacuees in the city and how it is hurting our traffic. And the number of people that live in the city but don't carpool, walk, or take the bus. Along with the ongoing debate of the ever widening freeways that probably won't last long because they will need to be expanded again. The many streets neglected. Does anyone ever wonder if METRO and for that matter TxDot in bed with both the automotive and oil industry. They all meet in a secret bunker underground and discuss how they are going to screw the taxpayers over for the next 20 years. A little electric train that takes up a lane of traffic that averages 35mph and stops every 20ft for 30 seconds that is then held up by red lights also. Along with the frequent occurance of running over people and hitting cars(clearly the faults of the the pedestrians, drivers, and yo-yos who planned the route) is not going to cut it. It only services a select group of citizens. What about the 3 million + that live outside the city limits, and drive 20-40 miles to work, burning gas, clogging freeways. And we are actually arguing about which road the little trolly will take to get to the mall??*%#* That is exactly why this transportation system will and forever fail. We are not Dallas nor Los Angeles. We are the most unique in terms or our city and or our situation. The largest major city in the country in terms of square miles(540),fourth in population, no zoning, and no clue on a transportation solution. The direction this is going the government will find WMD's in Iraq and the middle east will have alreadysubmitted to democracy.. oh and the cubs would have already won the world series before it is solved. Change starts at the bottom.

The "little electric train" is not the entire plan. Next time why not try looking at the Metro Solutions plan before boring us with a ranting paragraph with no point and seemingly no end. Metro Solutions (For your convenience, the plan includes commuter rail.) And, in case you hadn't noticed, Houston already has probably the most extensive and successful system of park and rides/express buses/HOV lanes in the world. No, they are not trains, but they are very effective and efficient mass transit.

(and FWIW, no, Houston is not Dallas or Los Angeles... neither of those cities has or had a starter rail line with anywhere near the ridership that Houston's "little electric train" has.

[ssullivan]

I just drove down Richmond from Montrose to 610 earlier this afternoon. West of Kirby, I really don't think Metro would have to acquire much, if any right of way. Maybe a small trip here and there, but the median through that area is wide enough to probably allow for the rail line to be built while still preserving the existing six lanes of traffic.

Also, Afton Oaks has tied orange ribbons around all the trees in the median of Richmond through the neighborhood, as well as many of the trees in the front yards of the houses on Richmond. They have signs up in many of the yards criticizing Metro. Several of the businesses between Afton Oaks and 610 have similar signs and banners as well.

[nmainguy]

new major on the block, on Friday, February 17th, 2006 @ 11:57am, said:

Yes Houston is in dire straits of a transportation system. One that includes the metro area. But as far as building a system to handle the needs for 2026 to even 2126 than we definitely tripped out of the gate. Metro and TxDot are terrible at what they do. But they aren't the only ones to blame, the politicians, both parties, and finally Houstonians. That is right, our selves. We all "broke the dam". We want to have our cake and eat it too. We want a reliable transportation system but we dont want to pay for it. I am very suprised that the mayor hasn't requested FEMA to help pay for the rail expansion because of the influx of evacuees in the city and how it is hurting our traffic. And the number of people that live in the city but don't carpool, walk, or take the bus. Along with the ongoing debate of the ever widening freeways that probably won't last long because they will need to be expanded again. The many streets neglected. Does anyone ever wonder if METRO and for that matter TxDot in bed with both the automotive and oil industry. They all meet in a secret bunker underground and discuss how they are going to screw the taxpayers over for the next 20 years. A little electric train that takes up a lane of traffic that averages 35mph and stops every 20ft for 30 seconds that is then held up by red lights also. Along with the frequent occurance of running over people and hitting cars(clearly the faults of the the pedestrians, drivers, and yo-yos who planned the route) is not going to cut it. It only services a select group of citizens. What about the 3 million + that live outside the city limits, and drive 20-40 miles to work, burning gas, clogging freeways. And we are actually arguing about which road the little trolly will take to get to the mall??*%#* That is exactly why this transportation system will and forever fail. We are not Dallas nor Los Angeles. We are the most unique in terms or our city and or our situation. The largest major city in the country in terms of square miles(540),fourth in population, no zoning, and no clue on a transportation solution. The direction this is going the government will find WMD's in Iraq and the middle east will have alreadysubmitted to democracy.. oh and the cubs would have already won the world series before it is solved. Change starts at the bottom.

You will never be taken seriously if you offer no solutions.
You will never be taken seriously when you talk about an imaginary "trolly" that travels at 35 MPH and stops every 20'. [How is Metro handling all the whip-lash lawsuits?]
You will never be taken seriously when you talk about imaginary bunkers.
When you are ready to be taken seriously, come back.

[VicMan]

This should be easy to solve. Why not have the train switch between Westpark and Richmond at one or more points?

E.G. have the train make a turn towards Richmond right before it hits Afton Oaks. Then the train goes through Westpark past 610 and goes back to Richmond.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

VicMan, on Saturday, February 18th, 2006 @ 12:28am, said:

This should be easy to solve. Why not have the train switch between Westpark and Richmond at one or more points?

E.G. have the train make a turn towards Richmond right before it hits Afton Oaks. Then the train goes through Westpark past 610 and goes back to Richmond.

I think that would really help drive up the cost. Take her down Richmond. Its already wide enough and familiar to most. Wouldnt require much disruption to the point of impossible unlike it would if it were to go down Westheimer.

[zaphod]

It really sucks how the monorail was never built

[VicMan]

I would like to see it for the most part down Richmond, BUT I could stand for a diversion just before the train hits the Afton Oaks subdivision. The train could go to Westpark and then go back to Richmond once it goes past 610

[GovernorAggie]

Maybe it's skepticism, but do any of you think that the Afton Oaks "save our trees" campaign may have some elements of "we don't want those (trainriding) people" involved in the mix? Then again, it may not be if there's currently a bus route down through Afton Oaks.

[VicMan]

The 25 bus line goes through Afton Oaks.

[nmainguy]

GovernorAggie, on Sunday, February 19th, 2006 @ 12:38pm, said:

Maybe it's skepticism, but do any of you think that the Afton Oaks "save our trees" campaign may have some elements of "we don't want those (trainriding) people" involved in the mix? Then again, it may not be if there's currently a bus route down through Afton Oaks.

At Thursday's board meeting it appeared some are sincere and others are using the trees as a cover for their own anti-rail agenda. When the final route is announced, look for these faux "tree huggers" to find another excuse to kill the line.
I'm for saving the trees and turning north on Weslyan-but I would feel that way regardless of the trees.

[ssullivan]

Torchlight, the train only needs a minimal amount of property to make a 90 degree turn. Drive down to the intersection of North Braeswood and Fannin, or the North Braeswood and Greenbriar intersection. The traffic flow for autos is pretty much in the same configuration as it was before MetroRail was built at both intersections. A very small piece of property on one corner of each intersection is used for the train to make the turn. Adding a turn in the rail line at both of these intersections had no impact on existing businesses or buildings, nor did it adversely change the flow of automobile traffic. A Richmond to Weslayan turn would require a small piece of the current HISD property at that corner, but we're talking about only a small piece of the grass there. Same thing with the Weslayan/Westheimer intersection. A small piece of the northeast corner of the Central Market parking lot would be needed, but that's it. At most, Central Market might be losing a dozen parking spaces, if that many. I really don't see how this is a problem.

[Transit Nut]

METRO says: "METRO will study thoroughly all alignment alternatives, including Westpark, Richmond and variations combining the two and adjacent streets."

Although people will continue to make guesses and suggestions on the alignment until METRO comes up with the final alignment supported by technical research and facts, and reasonable comments by stakeholders, there are some things to consider when throwing out ideas.

First, excessive turns slow down any vehicle, whether it be a car, bus, or light rail train. You may drive along a street at 35 mph, but you don't make a right turn at 35 mph. You don't want to have to switch between Westpark and Richmond multiple times just because some people don't want it here, and some others want it there. One or two turns might be fine, but four or five may be too many.

That also brings up another point; practically any vehicle, including a bicycle, car, bus, 18-wheeler, or light rail train can make a 90, 180, 270, or 360-degree turn. The only factor to consider is what is the minimum radius of the turn. The longer the vehicle, the larger the minimum radius needs to be because of physical constraints. Also, the larger the radius, the faster the vehicle can make the turn and the smaller the acceleration forces on the people inside the vehicle. The goal is to be able to make the largest radius turn while acquiring the least amount of land.

Another thing to think about is interconnectivity and future extensions. METRO already has a Transit Center at Hillcroft and Westpark and will have another one at Westpark and S. Rice. There are also Park and Rides further down Westpark near Beltway 8 and Highway 6. If METRO is able to extend light rail beyond S. Rice at some point in the future (like after 2025), you want the current terminus of the line to be in a position to accommodate that. Outside of 610, the light rail line would probably serve more lower density areas than medium-to-high density areas. Therefore, the stations may be further apart and have more parking. METRO already has a ROW and existing transit facilities along Westpark, so it may be better than Richmond (or Westheimer) for any future extensions outside 610. Depending on how METRO designs the junction at Westpark and 610, trains may also eventually be able to go directly from Greenway Plaza to the Galleria (but bypass Afton Oaks) as well.

While the HISD property offers an opportunity for the light rail to be directly integrated into the development, that cannot be the deciding reason for the alignment to turn north from Richmond to Weslayan.

Taking all these things into consideration, a potential ideal route may be west on Richmond from Main to west of Greenway Plaza, then south along Weslayan or the existing railroad, then west on Westpark to S. Rice.

I understand many of us are impatient for something tangible (like construction) to happen soon. However, it takes time for engineers and planners to determine what's best and do things right. These people have years of experience, but we just have to be patient and let the people who have the knowledge do their jobs.

[dbigtex56]

Transit Nut, on Sunday, February 19th, 2006 @ 3:24pm, said:

Also, the larger the radius, the faster the vehicle can make the turn and the smaller the acceleration forces on the people inside the vehicle.

There's been a radical approach to this problem. Some high speed trains actually tilt to compensate for lateral forces on passengers. Currently this seems impractical at slower speeds, yet we're made some great strides in engineering. Cost effective, reliable technology could open up some alternatives in the proposed route.

I know that's asking for a lot, but a person can dream.

[ssullivan]

Torchlight, on Sunday, February 19th, 2006 @ 3:20pm, said:

Actually, there's a small Shell gas station at the southwest corner of Westheimer and Weslayan. They'd probably have to take out the whole thing, huh? Still, it's good to know that the train can make those turns. The proposed Weslayan route is therefore a viable option, if only in theory.

I forgot about the Shell station. It would have to go.

Transit Nut, on Sunday, February 19th, 2006 @ 3:24pm, said:

Another thing to think about is interconnectivity and future extensions. METRO already has a Transit Center at Hillcroft and Westpark and will have another one at Westpark and S. Rice. There are also Park and Rides further down Westpark near Beltway 8 and Highway 6. If METRO is able to extend light rail beyond S. Rice at some point in the future (like after 2025), you want the current terminus of the line to be in a position to accommodate that. Outside of 610, the light rail line would probably serve more lower density areas than medium-to-high density areas. Therefore, the stations may be further apart and have more parking. METRO already has a ROW and existing transit facilities along Westpark, so it may be better than Richmond (or Westheimer) for any future extensions outside 610. Depending on how METRO designs the junction at Westpark and 610, trains may also eventually be able to go directly from Greenway Plaza to the Galleria (but bypass Afton Oaks) as well.

I agree, and have said before I really think a Westpark routing makes sense west of the Uptown area. That would allow the line to run at faster speeds and be more of a commuter service. If you look at a map you'll see the future transit center at Rice and Westpark, the Hillcroft Transit Center, and the existing park and rides at Gessner, Westchase, and Mission Bend line up in almost a perfect line along the former railroad right of way. An extension of the University line west in the former railroad right of way that Metro owns, with stops at the Hillcroft Transit Center and three park and rides, with maybe one or two additional stops in between those facilities, would allow for a very fast and efficient park and ride light rail service from Westchase, Alief, and the Mission Bend/West Oaks area to Uptown and Greenway Plaza. Downtown commuters could then continue downtown with a transfer at Wheeler. Commuters who live in town and work in West Houston and Westchase could use the line as well by taking it in the opposite direction, provided Metro links up the park and ride lots with some good local circulator bus routes through areas like Westchase.

Transit Nut, on Sunday, February 19th, 2006 @ 3:24pm, said:

I understand many of us are impatient for something tangible (like construction) to happen soon. However, it takes time for engineers and planners to determine what's best and do things right. These people have years of experience, but we just have to be patient and let the people who have the knowledge do their jobs.

Very good point, and I totally agree. The problem is that the vocal, well-funded anti-rail groups refuse to allow this to happen. Rather than trust Metro's engineers and planners to do their job, they are trying to gt Richmond out of play before the route studies even get underway.

[infinite_jim]

i really hope Houston & Metro can develop this project
i've been reading the cynicism on other blogs (http://www.bloghoust...pic.php?id=2634)
and to honest, as a young adult, I'm more inclined to vote with my feet than to live here after graduation and have to deal with the current transportation system.
Also I'd like to show my greatest appreciation to N.MainGuy and Christof Spieler for being the voices of reason in this hard spin zone.

[H-Town Man]

Someone needs to go out in the middle of the night and chainsaw those damn trees. That'll take the wind out of their sails real quick.

[zaphod]

Quote

Someone needs to go out in the middle of the night and chainsaw those damn trees. That'll take the wind out of their sails real quick.

\

now thats a plan!

[nmainguy]

From today's Chronicle: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metrop...an/3671366.html


From the ballot:
1. NORTH HARDY

**A. UH-Downtown to Northline Mall

B. Northline Mall to Greenspoint

C. Greenspoint to Bush IAH Airport


2. SOUTHEAST

**A. Downtown/Bagby to Dowling

**B. Dowling to Griggs/610

C. Griggs/610 to Park & Ride in the vicinity of Hobby Airport

D. Sunnyside: Southeast Transit Center to Bellfort

E. Sunnyside: Bellfort to Airport Blvd.


3. HARRISBURG

**A. Dowling to Magnolia Transit Center

B. Magnolia Transit Center to Gulfgate Center

C. Gulfgate Center to Telephone Road


4. WESTPARK

**Wheeler Station to Hillcroft Transit Center


5. UPTOWN/WEST LOOP

Westpark to the Northwest Transit Center


6. INNER KATY

Downtown/Bagby to Northwest Transit Center


7. SOUTHWEST COMMUTER LINE

Fannin South Park & Ride to Harris County line

So if we use the anti's argument The North Hardy line can only be built on Hardy? But A, B, and C are not on Hardy...
Uptown/West Loop can only be built on the West Loop or is Uptown a loose enough designation to allow it to be built anywhere in Uptown?
The Westpark line can only be on Westpark...but Westpark doesn't go to Wheeler...so do we go by the letter of the ballot...but if the ballot has flawed language [because Westpark does not go to Wheeler]...do we take it all literally or do we...man! I am one confused guy here!!!

This post has been edited by nmainguy: Monday, February 20, 2006 at 1:47 PM

[MidtownCoog]

Rail on Westpark?

Westpark is crying for Super Buses, but rail? No freaking way.

[ssullivan]

Well the letters concerning rail on Richmond are finally showing up in the Chronicle. There are four of them in today's edition -- one against rail on Richmond proposing an elevated line above the Southwest Freeway, one pushing a line on Westpark, one against all rail (calling the current Main St. line a "dismal failure" and having nothing positive to say about it), and one pushing for rail on Richmond. I'm thinking it's time to fire off a pro-Richmond e-mail to the editor, in hopes that it might get published and even out the debate a little.

You can read today's letters to the editor by clicking here.

[Houston19514]

Transit Nut, on Sunday, February 19th, 2006 @ 3:24pm, said:

METRO says: "METRO will study thoroughly all alignment alternatives, including Westpark, Richmond and variations combining the two and adjacent streets."

First, excessive turns slow down any vehicle, whether it be a car, bus, or light rail train. You may drive along a street at 35 mph, but you don't make a right turn at 35 mph. You don't want to have to switch between Westpark and Richmond multiple times just because some people don't want it here, and some others want it there. One or two turns might be fine, but four or five may be too many.

It seems like putting stations at those 90 degree turns (and both Weslayan-Richmond and Weslayan-Westheimer seem like ideal locations for stations), would substantially ameliorate, if not totally eliminate the slow-down caused by the turns. (Because the trains have to slow down for stations anyway.)

Transit Nut, on Sunday, February 19th, 2006 @ 3:24pm, said:

METRO says: "METRO will study thoroughly all alignment alternatives, including Westpark, Richmond and variations combining the two and adjacent streets."

Another thing to think about is interconnectivity and future extensions. METRO already has a Transit Center at Hillcroft and Westpark and will have another one at Westpark and S. Rice. There are also Park and Rides further down Westpark near Beltway 8 and Highway 6. If METRO is able to extend light rail beyond S. Rice at some point in the future (like after 2025), you want the current terminus of the line to be in a position to accommodate that. Outside of 610, the light rail line would probably serve more lower density areas than medium-to-high density areas. Therefore, the stations may be further apart and have more parking. METRO already has a ROW and existing transit facilities along Westpark, so it may be better than Richmond (or Westheimer) for any future extensions outside 610. Depending on how METRO designs the junction at Westpark and 610, trains may also eventually be able to go directly from Greenway Plaza to the Galleria (but bypass Afton Oaks) as well.

Taking all these things into consideration, a potential ideal route may be west on Richmond from Main to west of Greenway Plaza, then south along Weslayan or the existing railroad, then west on Westpark to S. Rice.

I think bypassing Afton Oaks makes a great deal of sense as well, and your points about interconnectivity and future extensions are very wise. However, I think you can achieve that AND have a better system in the second phase, by turning North on Weslayan, instead of South, and then go down Westheimer, through Uptown, then loop back down to the South Rice Transit Center, and then in future expansions, on out Westpark. I'll repeat some of my earlier comments in this regard: I think we'd be missing out on too many existing and future transit-oriented developments by not running through that stretch of Westheimer. Also, I think it's important to be able to get from downtown to Uptown with a maximum of one transfer. And, I think the Uptwon area is plenty big (bigger than downtown Denver, etc etc, etc) to handle service from two intersecting transit lines, both running through the core of Uptown.

[nmainguy]

ssullivan, on Monday, February 20th, 2006 @ 1:42pm, said:

Well the letters concerning rail on Richmond are finally showing up in the Chronicle. There are four of them in today's edition -- one against rail on Richmond proposing an elevated line above the Southwest Freeway, one pushing a line on Westpark, one against all rail (calling the current Main St. line a "dismal failure" and having nothing positive to say about it), and one pushing for rail on Richmond. I'm thinking it's time to fire off a pro-Richmond e-mail to the editor, in hopes that it might get published and even out the debate a little.

You can read today's letters to the editor by clicking here.

I agree regarding pro-Richmond emails to the Chronicle. There are so many positve suggestions just from this thread alone-imagine them bundled together in an intellegently written response.
A last resort tact would be to insist that the antis be consistant in regards to what they call following the ballot language word for word. Once other areas of town that want rail see the entire proposed system at risk because a very small but vocal group is trying to take ownership of the debate with fear and false information-it may rally those groups.

But again I emphasize the word "positive". I think it is important to avoid the type of shrillness displayed at last Thursday's board meeting.

[MidtownCoog]

If we can destroy a neighborhood to build 288, we can surley build rail down Richmond.

It's called progress, folks.

[scarface]

Agreed ^^^

But i will say this, while many of you may disagree with me, i still think if we're going to put ANY kind of transit system near 610 going into uptown, i think a portion of it should go underground. Face it folks! That's the safest and most sensible option! That would deter business opponents real easily because they wouldn't have to worry about rail jeapordizing their business. While a subway might be more expensive, it's better to do the system right the first time and not have to learn mistakes by the cost of traffic accidents and lost lives. Build a subway folks. Monorail could work too but not for asthetics!

[ssullivan]

Yes, but scarface, building a subway is often just as disruptive as building an at-grade system. It depends on the method of construction. If a subway line is bored through the ground, the negative affects to businesses and homes at street-level are somewhat minimalized. But if a cut-and-cover construction method is used (which may be a more likely scenario), the end result is probably a longer, messier construction period.

I'd love to have subways in Houston, especially where right of way is limited. But outside of a few places, like downtown and maybe through parts of the Galleria area, I don't really see it happening due to the enormously higher costs.