Jump to content

Dream Light Rail Service


IronTiger

Recommended Posts

Why would people oppose a system that didn't disturb traffic? Is it the locals or the Federal Government? Again I go back to the question why is it funded for cities like Dallas, Charlotte, Seattle, etc and not Houston. On another note, I just realized that San Fransisco has more than just the BART and the street cars, they also have light rail that is in a subway.

The DART also has light rail at grade, elevated, and underground. It constantly changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply
The DART also has light rail at grade, elevated, and underground. It constantly changes.

AND Houston can't really go deep underground because of its proximity to sea level. Remember the big floods of the early 2000s? But elevated...that might work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would people oppose a system that didn't disturb traffic? Is it the locals or the Federal Government? Again I go back to the question why is it funded for cities like Dallas, Charlotte, Seattle, etc and not Houston. On another note, I just realized that San Fransisco has more than just the BART and the street cars, they also have light rail that is in a subway.

I believe many have discussed the reason Dallas got rail, and we expanded freeways. Seattle & San Francisco are nothing to question as to why they have more (& more funding for), rail. They are two very urban & very liberal cities. San Francisco has a current crises of transportation over the bay, which is why they're getting that fancy new bridge, and the BART travels under the bay.

AND Houston can't really go deep underground because of its proximity to sea level. Remember the big floods of the early 2000s? But elevated...that might work.

It doesn't have much to do with proximity to sea level. Look at Amsterdam, New York, Tokyo, etc. I think it has more to do with our soft, usually clay soil.. It can be done, but would be much harder compared to the rock that is Manhattan. I don't see a need to go underground in Houston (excluding tunnels at certain locations), except for Downtown... Elevated would make more sense. It would take a lot to figure out where exactly the lines would go, I don't think hoovering over the streets (except for denser, commercial areas like Uptown, TMC), and blocking sun light would look good. But being elevated would make it less flood prone. Hm...

This is why I think we need those Disney Monorails instead of light rail. The track is just a concrete beam with wires for christ's sake. They could go underground, travel high speeds, and would be cheaper. But this is a dream LR thread...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dream Light Rail in Houston:

If I can't get heavy rail in the city, I at least want something close. I like the look and the design of this Light Rail Line in Los Angeles. It has that big city urban rail look, its fast and for the most part has its own right of way. METRO Houston should look to Los Anegeles as an example for its light rail. Take a look at it running in the middle of the freeway.

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object>">
name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object>" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350">

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object>">
name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object>" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350">

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dream Light Rail in Houston:

Take a look at it running in the middle of the freeway.

...which was my ORIGINAL idea, which was to have it paralleling I-45.

I still don't get why the light rail at-grade bothers so many people. It's by far the cheapest, and trains pass quickly through railroad crossings, no slow, long, chugging trains blocking traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...which was my ORIGINAL idea, which was to have it paralleling I-45.

I still don't get why the light rail at-grade bothers so many people. It's by far the cheapest, and trains pass quickly through railroad crossings, no slow, long, chugging trains blocking traffic.

You said it! Its the cheapest. Doesn't Houston, one of America's largest metropolitan areas deserve better than the cheapest of rail systems? As you can see the one in LA crosses streets, but very few. But there Light Rail system is what I thought Houston's would be, more like an urban heavy rail system.

Its hard to show people that haven't gotten the chance to ride a true transit system the value of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that Houston needs better transit and lots of it, y'all are mixing up two different types of transit. The LA light rail is largely a suburb-to-city system, while this next phase of METRORail is designed to be more of an urban circulator, providing transportation within the city. It is entirely possible that future phases of METRORail will extend to the suburbs along freeways. And note that the Westpark portion of the University will be in its own ROW.

As for the "look" of the system, that's just a function of the vehicles. Portland MAX's old cars look more like heavy rail, and they are replacing them with S70 LRVs like ours.

As for why Houston is so far behind, ask your present and past elected officials *COUGH* DeLay.

And no, I don't work for METRO. This info is out there if you look for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that Houston needs better transit and lots of it, y'all are mixing up two different types of transit. The LA light rail is largely a suburb-to-city system, while this next phase of METRORail is designed to be more of an urban circulator, providing transportation within the city. It is entirely possible that future phases of METRORail will extend to the suburbs along freeways. And note that the Westpark portion of the University will be in its own ROW.

As for the "look" of the system, that's just a function of the vehicles. Portland MAX's old cars look more like heavy rail, and they are replacing them with S70 LRVs like ours.

As for why Houston is so far behind, ask your present and past elected officials *COUGH* DeLay.

And no, I don't work for METRO. This info is out there if you look for it.

And the next question I was going to ask was how can I get a job with METRO, until I read your last sentence.

I would like to be an urban planner for the city of Houston or for METRO (if they have such a position).

I guess I will cool of on METRO a bit. After all the light rail that the city is building is 100 times better than the guided bus plan they had. Guided buses that look like rail is something I would like to see in Bryan/College Station. I look forward to the commuter rail lines that METRO will bring in. Those are the ones that would benefit me most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that the commuter rail isn't entirely a METRO issue. It would extend outside their service area, so either that would have to be expanded or the commuter rail run by a different agency. Right now, HGAC is spearheading the commuter rail, albeit slowly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that the commuter rail isn't entirely a METRO issue. It would extend outside their service area, so either that would have to be expanded or the commuter rail run by a different agency. Right now, HGAC is spearheading the commuter rail, albeit slowly.

Do you have a map of the current plans? Are there any? Are they active plans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said it! Its the cheapest. Doesn't Houston, one of America's largest metropolitan areas deserve better than the cheapest of rail systems? As you can see the one in LA crosses streets, but very few. But there Light Rail system is what I thought Houston's would be, more like an urban heavy rail system.

Its hard to show people that haven't gotten the chance to ride a true transit system the value of it.

Since when is $1.46 Billion cheap? And how many transit systems have YOU ridden? I'll bet I have ridden every system you've been on...and then some.

It's hard to explain mass transit to people who don't pay taxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since when is $1.46 Billion cheap? And how many transit systems have YOU ridden? I'll bet I have ridden every system you've been on...and then some.

It's hard to explain mass transit to people who don't pay taxes.

Don't pay taxes, LOL

Here are a few: Long Island Rail Road also MTA NYC, MARTA, BART, Boston T and Subway, MBTA Subway.............shall I go on............METRO Houston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks James, It seems as if that website was left abandoned about 2 years ago. Everything is from 2007. So I guess that answers my question, there are no current plans for commuter rail.

Oh, and RedScare, $1.46 Billion is considered very cheap. Dallas is paying over $47 for its current expansions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being our nations color's is good and all, but those just seem like the generic American colors and that doesn't help Houston who has an image/identity problem. Why not come up with a new name, logo, and color scheme that is uniquely Houston.

Form follows function, and following is uncool. Therefore obsessing over names, logos, and colors is extremely uncool. It is beneath us.

Why would people oppose a system that didn't disturb traffic? Is it the locals or the Federal Government? Again I go back to the question why is it funded for cities like Dallas, Charlotte, Seattle, etc and not Houston.

Good question. My hypothesis is that it is a combination of 1) poor public accountability of METRO's leadership, 2) fanatics internal and external to METRO that place a priority on rail-based transit as quickly as possible that recognize that public debate is a higher barrier to implementation than is functionality or cost, 3) bad PR between METRO, its constituents, other public entities, and especially legislators, and 4) FTA funding guidelines that are based only on initial cost and ridership, excluding any other impacts to the broader transportation system.

AND Houston can't really go deep underground because of its proximity to sea level. Remember the big floods of the early 2000s? But elevated...that might work.

False. We can actually go pretty deep underground, even well below the water table. Dealing with flooding only requires sealable entrances like we now have on the downtown tunnel system and sumps like we have at nearly every below-grade section of road in our freeway system (that doesn't naturally drain into a bayou by force of gravity. Subways are physically feasible, and in fact could be kept dry even when street flooding disables LRT that runs at grade level, just like occurred in Midtown a couple years ago. There are only two downsides to subways: construction takes longer, and they are more expensive.

Since when is $1.46 Billion cheap? And how many transit systems have YOU ridden? I'll bet I have ridden every system you've been on...and then some.

It's hard to explain mass transit to people who don't pay taxes.

When it yields a crappy end result. This forum is rife with threads in which people complain about all the cheaply-built McMansions. Same concept.

Oh, and RedScare, $1.46 Billion is considered very cheap. Dallas is paying over $47 for its current expansions.

It's not about the total amount spent. It's about bang for the buck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and RedScare, $1.46 Billion is considered very cheap. Dallas is paying over $47 for its current expansions.

Whoa, that costs less than what a tank of gas cost last summer! ;)

And maybe I'm just stupid, but when I think commuter rail, I think Amtrak. While light rail would be great, in say, Katy, College Station is not fit for light rail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa, that costs less than what a tank of gas cost last summer! ;)

And maybe I'm just stupid, but when I think commuter rail, I think Amtrak. While light rail would be great, in say, Katy, College Station is not fit for light rail.

Billion that is.

It would really be perfect if we had service from College Station to Houston.

Believe it or not, the city of Bryan has talked about light rail not to long ago.

There use to be commuter rail in Bryan 80+ years ago. It went from Downtown to TAMU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Billion that is.

It would really be perfect if we had service from College Station to Houston.

Believe it or not, the city of Bryan has talked about light rail not to long ago.

There use to be commuter rail in Bryan 80+ years ago. It went from Downtown to TAMU.

I don't believe it, maybe you mean streetcar/trolley?

Still, my Line 45 is an expansion of METRO, which parallels I-45 more-or-less until Galveston.

For example, here, the "Mall of the Mainland" stop is a mere mile away from "North La Marque" (which is near the Factory stores). The North La Marque station is the last real stop of Line 45. Near the intersection of Delaney and Highway 6 is "Delaney" and the terminus of Line 45. Similar of how the "South Conroe" station also holds the Conroe Amtrak, Delaney is the La Marque/Texas City Amtrak. The Amtrak continues to Galveston, where it links into the trolley system of Galveston. This makes the Galveston trolley system also a viable way to get around the city as well.

Of course, because of Conroe's location, it would require another Amtrak line separate from the BCS/Waco line.

As for a BCS Amtrak stop, the original Amtrak "stop", if you could call it that...

You can even see the original guard rails.

So, my dream plan involves them building an underpass under the railroad tracks connecting West Luther to East Luther. On West Luther, just before it goes under the grade, there will be an Amtrak station. If you were to go on the College Station Amtrak, further down the line, it would take you to Navasota, Hempstead, and Cypress.

Or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still have a hard time believing that people would think a line down the middle of 45 would not be beneficial. Its use would far exceed that of the current HOV lanes a few hours a day..........in one direction............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still have a hard time believing that people would think a line down the middle of 45 would not be beneficial. Its use would far exceed that of the current HOV lanes a few hours a day..........in one direction............

You and others keep harping on the benefit of bidirectional commuter transit and I keep on explaining why the benefit of bidirectionality is severely limited. Is this just a rhetorical device or were you ever planning a rebuttal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Niche is right. I've ridden P&R buses in the non-peak direction before and been the only rider on board. You need someplace significant to anchor the other end of the commuter line in order for serious bidirectional service to make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You and others keep harping on the benefit of bidirectional commuter transit and I keep on explaining why the benefit of bidirectionality is severely limited. Is this just a rhetorical device or were you ever planning a rebuttal?

serverly limited how? The current state of our HOV lanes are severly limited and a waste of space if its limited to only a few individuals riding in a bus, service is only used for 10 hours in a day.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

looks like metro has other plans

Metro officials are moving forward with plans to convert 83 miles of high-occupancy vehicle lanes to toll lanes that solo drivers would pay to use.

The Metropolitan Transit Authority expects to begin the conversion of the HOV lanes later this year on one of five heavily traveled commuter corridors along the Northwest, North, Southwest, Eastex and Gulf freeways. According to Metro, the first corridor, as yet undetermined, would be converted by next year, and a new corridor would be added each quarter thereafter.

The agency

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been a proponent of commuter rail along 59 south and I-10 (I was pretty mad that the old Missouri Pacific rail ROW was being used to expand I-10 instead of being used as a commuter rail line even when I was working on multiple groundwater and soil remediation projects to prepare for the expansion). I guess the time I have spent on commuter trains in Japan makes me partial to train travel. However, theniche's arguments really give me reason to rethink this position. Really not that many people use P&R now, paying for a commuter rail system would not be a good investment, might if it is lucky only attract a few more people than P&R, and is less flexible than P&R.

Now I am more focusing on the need for heavy passenger rail between Houston and Dallas. I really think it is time to supplant the use of regional air travel between places like that with rail travel. The skys are becoming more and more crowded with smaller aircraft like inefficient Embraer jets, causing more delays, plus air travel has become so much more of a hassle since 9-11. It's time for rail travel again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been a proponent of commuter rail along 59 south and I-10 (I was pretty mad that the old Missouri Pacific rail ROW was being used to expand I-10 instead of being used as a commuter rail line even when I was working on multiple groundwater and soil remediation projects to prepare for the expansion). I guess the time I have spent on commuter trains in Japan makes me partial to train travel. However, theniche's arguments really give me reason to rethink this position. Really not that many people use P&R now, paying for a commuter rail system would not be a good investment, might if it is lucky only attract a few more people than P&R, and is less flexible than P&R.

Now I am more focusing on the need for heavy passenger rail between Houston and Dallas. I really think it is time to supplant the use of regional air travel between places like that with rail travel. The skys are becoming more and more crowded with smaller aircraft like inefficient Embraer jets, causing more delays, plus air travel has become so much more of a hassle since 9-11. It's time for rail travel again.

Why do you think the P&R has low usage? I don't use it, but work with many that do. Many times the buses are standing room only. I often hear them say "I hope I get a seat today". Also, judging from the queues at the pickup spots, I would say that alot of people use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

serverly limited how? The current state of our HOV lanes are severly limited and a waste of space if its limited to only a few individuals riding in a bus, service is only used for 10 hours in a day.........

See posts #2 and #8. The latter post was a response to you which you apparently didn't read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Niche is right. I've ridden P&R buses in the non-peak direction before and been the only rider on board. You need someplace significant to anchor the other end of the commuter line in order for serious bidirectional service to make sense.

You could say the same thing about freeways, so I don't think it matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...