Jump to content

Metro approves $1.46 Billion for 20 miles of light rail


editor

Recommended Posts

Ddi they give any kind of time line for when construction would begin or complete?

ABC News said that the construction on the East End line would begin in 30 days, the rest a bit later, as they are not as far along on the planning of those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

60,000 jobs with 1.46 billion dollars. Those must be some low paying jobs. I've worked on billion dollar projects that only created around 1000 jobs and only about 30-40 of those were not temporary.

I think its referring to the operational jobs that it will create a need for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These new lines will be more like modern streetcars running on the streets, right? The newer vehicles will be smaller and slower... does this mean they will sell off the current vehicles and replace them with the new ones?

What's the status on the faster regional service lines in the city?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These new lines will be more like modern streetcars running on the streets, right?

no

The newer vehicles will be smaller and slower... does this mean they will sell off the current vehicles and replace them with the new ones?

no speed will be slower due to design criteria set by city. vehicular traffic will have priority.

What's the status on the faster regional service lines in the city?

are you talking county rail?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no

no speed will be slower due to design criteria set by city. vehicular traffic will have priority.

are you talking county rail?

Ok, I was looking at this post that compared the new, smaller vehicles with the existing ones. Because they are lighter vehicles (similar to modern streetcars) running on roads it could be one reason the construction cost for all 4 lines is low. Since these trains won't be going faster than 40mph, I was wondering what progress has been made on the 28 miles of Commuter Rail discussed on Metro's Website, which would offer faster service to commuters travelling from farther out.

Edited by njjeppson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

60,000 jobs with 1.46 billion dollars. Those must be some low paying jobs. I've worked on billion dollar projects that only created around 1000 jobs and only about 30-40 of those were not temporary.

The way that these estimates work is that METRO hires a third-party consultant to evaluate how many jobs would be created/saved both directly for project-specific work (such as day labor, foremen, project engineers, administrative personnel, etc.) and also indirectly (such as those that work for materials suppliers, those that did wholesale for the materials suppliers, those that milled raw materials into intermediate products, those that transported the feedstock to the milling facility, and those that harvested the raw material). Then the consultant tries to estimate how many new or saved jobs the wages that are paid to directly or indirectly saved/created jobs will translate to when the wages are used for household consumption using some assumption about the velocity of money.

It won't matter whether a job that gets counted is that of a specialist called out to work on a specific issue for one day or whether it is an administrative job that lasts the length of the project and then onward into operation. It would be more meaningful to try and report job savings/creation using hours of labor, but the results would be more difficult to inflate.

A good consultant will also be sure to identify the total number of individual workers hired during the life of the project, including incidences of employee turnover which don't affect any bottom line economic impact dollar amounts but do inflate politically-important job stats.

Basically, though, it's just empty trivia perpetrated by a hired third party for political purposes. METRO gets to shift criticisms based on conflict of interest away from itself and the consultant has a clause in their contract to completely nullify legal responsibility; and the more incredible the top-line figures, the more press the study gets and the more work the consultant gets for other economic impact studies conducted for political purposes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its referring to the operational jobs that it will create a need for.

Part of it, yes. According to the Chronicle article:

Metro officials said the contract, which was approved by an 8-0 vote, will create 60,000 jobs, including 25,000 during the initial phase of construction.

That makes the estimate for operational jobs at 35,000 people. To put that in context, that's enough jobs to fill positions for half of the Texas Medical Center. ...but as I just explained, the way that these jobs are being counted is intentionally misleading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I was looking at this post that compared the new, smaller vehicles with the existing ones. Because they are lighter vehicles (similar to modern streetcars) running on roads it could be one reason the construction cost for all 4 lines is low. Since these trains won't be going faster than 40mph, I was wondering what progress has been made on the 28 miles of Commuter Rail discussed on Metro's Website, which would offer faster service to commuters travelling from farther out.

not sure one is more modern than the other. they have the same look overall. the plan always had them running on the streets. as for construction costs, i think that is still quite subject to change.

not sure any progress has been made on commuter service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way that these estimates work is that METRO hires a third-party consultant to evaluate how many jobs would be created/saved both directly for project-specific work (such as day labor, foremen, project engineers, administrative personnel, etc.) and also indirectly (such as those that work for materials suppliers, those that did wholesale for the materials suppliers, those that milled raw materials into intermediate products, those that transported the feedstock to the milling facility, and those that harvested the raw material). Then the consultant tries to estimate how many new or saved jobs the wages that are paid to directly or indirectly saved/created jobs will translate to when the wages are used for household consumption using some assumption about the velocity of money.

It won't matter whether a job that gets counted is that of a specialist called out to work on a specific issue for one day or whether it is an administrative job that lasts the length of the project and then onward into operation. It would be more meaningful to try and report job savings/creation using hours of labor, but the results would be more difficult to inflate.

A good consultant will also be sure to identify the total number of individual workers hired during the life of the project, including incidences of employee turnover which don't affect any bottom line economic impact dollar amounts but do inflate politically-important job stats.

Basically, though, it's just empty trivia perpetrated by a hired third party for political purposes. METRO gets to shift criticisms based on conflict of interest away from itself and the consultant has a clause in their contract to completely nullify legal responsibility; and the more incredible the top-line figures, the more press the study gets and the more work the consultant gets for other economic impact studies conducted for political purposes.

In other words it's total B.S. There is no way it's going to create anywhere near 60,000 jobs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 miles divided into 4 lines? And if they are gonna put automobiles in the "right of way" why even bother? And how slow they are/will go. What's wrong with the buses?

I am all for rail but this project seems like a waste of time. It shouldn't have to be a "commuter" rail yet, but it seems ridiculous to put so much money into it and it not be more effective in reducing commuter time & competing with car traffic. This system would make more sense on Galveston, as a touristy thing. Oh wait, they already have that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this article incredibly annoying, not for what it said, but for what it didn't say, ie what is happening with the University Line. Seems to me that there is inherent synergy in building this line first since by almost perfectly bisecting the existing line, it suddenly opens up access to BOTH lines to riders in a substantial area of the city. Most of the other lines either tag onto the end of the existing line or, worse still don't connect to it at all (the Uptown line). Seems to me the University Line, running as it does through more affluent areas less inclined to ride rail, bore the brunt of the onslaught from the ant-light railers when they were at their most strident (Afton Oaks etc) and is languishing far behind as a result. Culberson has every right to wear that smug grin I saw in his campaign posters. As far as I can tell from the lack of information from METRO, and the lack of actual, y'know, reporting by the Chronicle, the University Line is dead on the table.

Edited by sidegate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this article incredibly annoying, not for what it said, but for what it didn't say, ie what is happening with the University Line. Seems to me that there is inherent synergy in building this line first since by almost perfectly bisecting the existing line, it suddenly opens up access to BOTH lines to riders in a substantial area of the city. Most of the other lines either tag onto the end of the existing line or, worse still don't connect to it at all (the Uptown line). Seems to me the University Line, running as it does through more affluent areas less inclined to ride rail, bore the brunt of the onslaught from the ant-light railers when they were at their most strident (Afton Oaks etc) and is languishing far behind as a result. Culberson has every right to wear that smug grin I saw in his campaign posters. As far as I can tell from the lack of information from METRO, and the lack of actual, y'know, reporting by the Chronicle, the University Line is dead on the table.

Nope, it's just a separate contract. METRO has stated in the past that they wouldn't move forward with the Uptown Line unless the University Line were going to be in place as a connector to the rest of the system. ...I should know better than to trust them at anything they say by now, but this just seems like such a no-brainer that even they couldn't find a way to muck it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the fact that it's a separate contract doesn't excuse METRO from being up front with taxpayers about what's happening. I mean, I'm as pro-light rail as they come and I'm steamed about it, so I can only imagine what rail sceptics are thinking when they see METRO acting in this way. I know they have had to do battle with powerful anti-rail interests, but scattering sections of rail all over the city with little apparent thought to how they might best relate to each other in terms of the order in which they are built, is a waste of everyone's time, whether they are for light rail or against it.

Edited by sidegate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

a sad day truly.............all this time of trying to figure out the university line, and now its not even included?? what a joke. Its also hard to believe that METRO still thinks they will have these lines running by 2012!!! I also dont like the idea of having the city having the say on the traffic signals and giving right-of-way to no one..........you simply wait based ont eh traffic light. going to take forever to get around town!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Trains to be Nation's First Low-Floor Model

Yesterday's board approval of our contract to build four-light rail lines includes the purchase of 29 rail cars from CAF USA Inc., a subsidiary of the Spain-based CAF Group, a $7.5 billion company with 34 projects in 20 countries.

These sleek trains feature one level inside, from front to back, with no steps.

"This is a 100 %, low-floor model. And this is the first time it will be in the United States," said Jitendra S. Tomar, vice president of marketing and business development at CAF USA Inc. "Other cars, you have 70 percent low floor. This one is all one level. You have better mobility from one end to the other."

Scott Grogan, senior director of rail operations, said the 100 percent low-floor feature sets this model apart.

Low-floor trains like this are currently operating in Seville and Malaga, Spain; Edinburg, Scotland; and Antalya, Turkey.

The new trains will also have six doors per side - two double doors and two single doors. METRO's current Siemens trains have four doors.

The new cars will be the same width as the Siemens but slightly longer - 102.5 feet compared to 96 feet for our current cars.

"With six doors, it's going to expedite boarding and deboarding," said Scott Grogan, METRO's senior director of rail operations.

"Currently, on the Main Street line, we have a capacity issue. What this new vehicle will allow - when you have 200 people waiting on the platform - it will allow quicker boarding and deboarding."

Inside, the layout of the seats can be changed. They can all flip up for standing room only stadium crowds, for example.

Several of you asked if METRO's Siemens train can be hooked up to a CAF USA train. Yes, but only to use one to tow the other. However, the two cannot be hooked up together to run service.

"They have two separate operating parameters. It's like a Mac communicating to a PC - totally different operating parameters on the software side," explained Grogan.

METRO plans to keep its 18 Siemens trains and may eventually use them on a commuter rail line.

Several of you have asked if the new trains will be able to accommodate bike racks. "That's being looked into," said Grogan.

The CAF USA trains come with the industry standard of a 30-year lifetime. However, what makes this deal unique is the way the contract is structured.

"The risk elevation is more on the private side. In this case, the onus is on the private side, so risk allocation is shared by all of us. It's good for the taxpayers - and METRO has the least risk," said CAF's Tomar. "It's not a public-private partnership. It's beyond that. This is a unique approach, and I commend METRO for this approach."

Typically, trains come with a two-year warranty. In this case, the system must function fault-free for five years.

"With this process, CAF USA will be responsible for any fleet defects in a five-year window. They will have to redesign or fix whatever the failure is and alleviate that. That's unique," said Grogan.

Our initial "Notice to Proceed" - a notice we give to the train manufacturer indicating we are ready to order - calls for 29 cars. Ten will be used for the East End line, and 19 for the Main Street line.

METRO expects delivery of the trains in April 2012.

http://blogs.ridemetro.org/blogs/write_on/...loor-Model.aspx

More pics of the Train.

NRail_05.jpg

NRail_03.jpg

NRail_023.jpg

Here's a youtube video of the new trains (they are currently in Seville,Spain).

The new map for Metro rail:

metro2012diagram_09-31.jpg

Edited by UpuPUp!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are the METROExpress and METRO Airport Direct Rail (commuter) or just buses? That will be really cool if its Rail, I could get everywhere without having to drive. Park the car at the Cypress station on the way in from Bryan/College Station and get where I need to go without thinking about it.

Also will the Uptown line run at street level? If so How? It will make traffic worst!

Edited by citykid09
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are the METROExpress and METRO Airport Direct Rail (commuter) or just buses?

Christof's schematic, posted above, shows how the METRO rapid transit system will probably look in 2012. The METROExpress and Airport Direct services are bus routes that operate today. There are no immediate plans to replace them with rail, but I assure you they work well as they are.

That will be really cool if its Rail, I could get everywhere without having to drive.

It's interesting you say that. Even though they are buses, you can still park at Cypress and get most places very easily, provided it is a weekday. The park and ride buses are comfortable and quick and use the HOV lanes during rush hour in the peak direction.

Also will the Uptown line run at street level? If so How? It will make traffic worst!

The Uptown line will run at street level on Post Oak Blvd. They will probably use the median space and narrow the travel lanes slightly. It will most likely disrupt traffic flow a bit, but on the other hand almost no one presently uses transit in that area and light rail may lure them aboard. I would imagine many Galleria shoppers wouldn't mind parking elsewhere and riding light rail rather than deal with that traffic and parking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new design seems pretty good and the additional doors would speed up loading, I am curious what the load capacity will be.

another issue I have is that we don't need a train with two dricing positions, but rather, two trains that will back into each other. The way it currently is designed, you have a bit of space that could be able to nudge about another 20 people in there.

I expect that they will be running double cars almost immediately after the lines open, why have two cockpits that arent going to be needed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christof's schematic, posted above, shows how the METRO rapid transit system will probably look in 2012. The METROExpress and Airport Direct services are bus routes that operate today. There are no immediate plans to replace them with rail, but I assure you they work well as they are.

It's interesting you say that. Even though they are buses, you can still park at Cypress and get most places very easily, provided it is a weekday. The park and ride buses are comfortable and quick and use the HOV lanes during rush hour in the peak direction.

The Uptown line will run at street level on Post Oak Blvd. They will probably use the median space and narrow the travel lanes slightly. It will most likely disrupt traffic flow a bit, but on the other hand almost no one presently uses transit in that area and light rail may lure them aboard. I would imagine many Galleria shoppers wouldn't mind parking elsewhere and riding light rail rather than deal with that traffic and parking.

You must work for METRO, so I will ask you these questions. Please help me to understand why cities like Dallas, Los Angeles, & Charlotte can build light rail lines with their own right of ways, subways, and overhead lines etc, and Houston has to settle for pretty much street car lines? Is Houston not worth a world class system? You guys wanted the Olympics and other big events to come to town, but you don't care to build the proper infrastructure to get the people to even look at Houston. Having tracks placed on streets interfering with traffic is not the answer. Take a look at the video above from Spain of the same trains METRO will use. That is how you do urban transit. I would expect the street car style system in a small METRO area not the 4th largest city/top ten Metro in America. At least place the rails in the HOV lanes like the majority of people are suggesting, since you say subways, overpasses and any other alternative is too expensive (even though somehow other cities are still affording theses features on there systems). Come on METRO THINK!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect that they will be running double cars almost immediately after the lines open, why have two cockpits that arent going to be needed?

so they can move both ways without having to build a more expensive system to turn around. metro doesn't always run double cars. more are done at peak only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You must work for METRO, so I will ask you these questions. Please help me to understand why cities like Dallas, Los Angeles, & Charlotte can build light rail lines with their own right of ways, subways, and overhead lines etc, and Houston has to settle for pretty much street car lines? Is Houston not worth a world class system?

Will the whining never cease?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You must work for METRO, so I will ask you these questions. Please help me to understand why cities like Dallas, Los Angeles, & Charlotte can build light rail lines with their own right of ways, subways, and overhead lines etc, and Houston has to settle for pretty much street car lines? Is Houston not worth a world class system? You guys wanted the Olympics and other big events to come to town, but you don't care to build the proper infrastructure to get the people to even look at Houston. Having tracks placed on streets interfering with traffic is not the answer. Take a look at the video above from Spain of the same trains METRO will use. That is how you do urban transit. I would expect the street car style system in a small METRO area not the 4th largest city/top ten Metro in America. At least place the rails in the HOV lanes like the majority of people are suggesting, since you say subways, overpasses and any other alternative is too expensive (even though somehow other cities are still affording theses features on there systems). Come on METRO THINK!

Is the street-level rail still that much of a problem? There was definitely a learning curve when the Main St. rail was built, but I hardly even notice the occasional disruption caused by a passing train when I'm crossing Main, if that's the concern you're referring to. And I actually think there's something more pleasant about riding a train at street level vs. being in a dark, dingy subway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the street-level rail still that much of a problem? There was definitely a learning curve when the Main St. rail was built, but I hardly even notice the occasional disruption caused by a passing train when I'm crossing Main, if that's the concern you're referring to. And I actually think there's something more pleasant about riding a train at street level vs. being in a dark, dingy subway.

Well if that's the case just keep the buses. Subways and rails that do not run on the street are much faster. What METRO is building in Houston is something smaller cities want. A city the size of Houston deserves better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the street-level rail still that much of a problem? There was definitely a learning curve when the Main St. rail was built, but I hardly even notice the occasional disruption caused by a passing train when I'm crossing Main, if that's the concern you're referring to. And I actually think there's something more pleasant about riding a train at street level vs. being in a dark, dingy subway.

Main Street isn't as much of a problem, though, as any other part of the proposed light rail system. There are multiple parallel streets with plenty of capacity, and they're just one block over. There are also some disruptive aspects about crossing the Red Line, such as that the LRT disrupts traffic signal synchronization in Downtown and Midtown, and that it frequently obstructs already-congested intersections such as Fannin & Braeswood and Fannin & 610. The latter can get especially bad during rush hour traffic, particularly in the afternoon. Traffic on Richmond, Post Oak Blvd., or Scott Street just isn't as easy to displace or disrupt as it is on the Main Street portion of the Red Line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please help me to understand why cities like Dallas, Los Angeles, & Charlotte can build light rail lines with their own right of ways, subways, and overhead lines etc, and Houston has to settle for pretty much street car lines? Is Houston not worth a world class system?

Well Dallas and Atlanta used under utilized freight tracks, Houston doesn't have that advantage. Also, their rail's function is different than ours. Our LRT connects Houston's inner activity centers and has many stops. Houston's LRT serves park&riders the function of the last leg of the commute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You must work for METRO, so I will ask you these questions. Please help me to understand why cities like Dallas, Los Angeles, & Charlotte can build light rail lines with their own right of ways, subways, and overhead lines etc, and Houston has to settle for pretty much street car lines?

METRO made the mistake of asking for exactly what they wanted, not expecting people to negotiate them down just for the sake of being obstructionist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

They're demolishing the large warehouse building today where Metro's Intermodal is going to be. I had read where they had been doing asbestos abatement recently and to not be shocked or scared by workers wearing what looked to be space suits. :lol:

It looks like they've gotten about half the building knocked down just today. I'll be they finish before dark. It seems like there were two other buildings that will be coming down too.

Please move to correct topic, here - http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...showtopic=14474

Edited by rsb320
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
It's good to see 3 lanes in the galleria rendering.

Honestly, the other two photos I see are the only ones that make since for rail in Houston (they are off the streets). The one in The Galleria area I think is a stupid Idea. You don't put rail on a crowded street like that. It will be difficult to turn, uturn, etc. I think that they should at least consider above ground or below ground stations for this area.

They are being so Cheap with METRO Rail that I hear that it will have the first ever (world or nation???) rail line crossing that is not separated. Meaning that trains going east and west will have to stop and wait for trains going north and south to pass by and the other way around. You guys can criticize me if you want, but I think Houston is getting the crappiest passenger rail system ever built. When rail was first approved for Houston, I expected a World-Class rail system on par with other major cities, not a 2 car street train scooting along streets and not in its own right of way. I just watched a video of one of the new lines going right down the middle of a street in a suburban style neighborhood with ranch style housing, WTF! That doesn't even look right. I don't blame the people for the NIMBY stuff. It seems as if the people that work for METRO have never been outside of Houston and have never seen an actual passenger rail system work. With all hope completely lost of Houston being a true urban city (You can't be truly urban without the proper rail infrastructure), I can still have hope for other Texas cities like Austin and San Antonio to build world class rail systems in the future. Dallas' has done in right. The only thing I can say about DART Rail is that it is light rail and not a Heavy Rail System, but other than that, its perfect.

I think all construction that has started on the new lines should stop and there should be a complete redesign of the entire system. If I had it my way, the Main street line would be completely removed and moved underground, where a rail system should be in a city the size of Houston.

Okay, where are my critics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, the other two photos I see are the only ones that make since for rail in Houston (they are off the streets). The one in The Galleria area I think is a stupid Idea. You don't put rail on a crowded street like that. It will be difficult to turn, uturn, etc. I think that they should at least consider above ground or below ground stations for this area.

They are being so Cheap with METRO Rail that I hear that it will have the first ever (world or nation???) rail line crossing that is not separated. Meaning that trains going east and west will have to stop and wait for trains going north and south to pass by and the other way around. You guys can criticize me if you want, but I think Houston is getting the crappiest passenger rail system ever built. When rail was first approved for Houston, I expected a World-Class rail system on par with other major cities, not a 2 car street train scooting along streets and not in its own right of way. I just watched a video of one of the new lines going right down the middle of a street in a suburban style neighborhood with ranch style housing, WTF! That doesn't even look right. I don't blame the people for the NIMBY stuff. It seems as if the people that work for METRO have never been outside of Houston and have never seen an actual passenger rail system work. With all hope completely lost of Houston being a true urban city (You can't be truly urban without the proper rail infrastructure), I can still have hope for other Texas cities like Austin and San Antonio to build world class rail systems in the future. Dallas' has done in right. The only thing I can say about DART Rail is that it is light rail and not a Heavy Rail System, but other than that, its perfect.

I think all construction that has started on the new lines should stop and there should be a complete redesign of the entire system. If I had it my way, the Main street line would be completely removed and moved underground, where a rail system should be in a city the size of Houston.

Okay, where are my critics?

6 months ago I would have disagreed with you. Not now, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope they modify the design slightly for the uptown stations; it doesn't go well with the existing arches/bus stops in the area. The colour scheme should at least match that of those new bus stops (satin/grey metal, green glass).

Edited by UrbaNerd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, the other two photos I see are the only ones that make since for rail in Houston (they are off the streets). The one in The Galleria area I think is a stupid Idea. You don't put rail on a crowded street like that. It will be difficult to turn, uturn, etc. I think that they should at least consider above ground or below ground stations for this area.

They are being so Cheap with METRO Rail that I hear that it will have the first ever (world or nation???) rail line crossing that is not separated. Meaning that trains going east and west will have to stop and wait for trains going north and south to pass by and the other way around. You guys can criticize me if you want, but I think Houston is getting the crappiest passenger rail system ever built. When rail was first approved for Houston, I expected a World-Class rail system on par with other major cities, not a 2 car street train scooting along streets and not in its own right of way. I just watched a video of one of the new lines going right down the middle of a street in a suburban style neighborhood with ranch style housing, WTF! That doesn't even look right. I don't blame the people for the NIMBY stuff. It seems as if the people that work for METRO have never been outside of Houston and have never seen an actual passenger rail system work. With all hope completely lost of Houston being a true urban city (You can't be truly urban without the proper rail infrastructure), I can still have hope for other Texas cities like Austin and San Antonio to build world class rail systems in the future. Dallas' has done in right. The only thing I can say about DART Rail is that it is light rail and not a Heavy Rail System, but other than that, its perfect.

I think all construction that has started on the new lines should stop and there should be a complete redesign of the entire system. If I had it my way, the Main street line would be completely removed and moved underground, where a rail system should be in a city the size of Houston.

Okay, where are my critics?

Great post, The City of Houston nor METRO are'nt thinking clearly at all, I think these new above-ground rail lines will cause more traffic, havoc and make everything worse on the streets, intersections etc. than making things better. Its pretty sad. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, the other two photos I see are the only ones that make since for rail in Houston (they are off the streets). The one in The Galleria area I think is a stupid Idea. You don't put rail on a crowded street like that. It will be difficult to turn, uturn, etc. I think that they should at least consider above ground or below ground stations for this area.

They are being so Cheap with METRO Rail that I hear that it will have the first ever (world or nation???) rail line crossing that is not separated. Meaning that trains going east and west will have to stop and wait for trains going north and south to pass by and the other way around. You guys can criticize me if you want, but I think Houston is getting the crappiest passenger rail system ever built. When rail was first approved for Houston, I expected a World-Class rail system on par with other major cities, not a 2 car street train scooting along streets and not in its own right of way. I just watched a video of one of the new lines going right down the middle of a street in a suburban style neighborhood with ranch style housing, WTF! That doesn't even look right. I don't blame the people for the NIMBY stuff. It seems as if the people that work for METRO have never been outside of Houston and have never seen an actual passenger rail system work. With all hope completely lost of Houston being a true urban city (You can't be truly urban without the proper rail infrastructure), I can still have hope for other Texas cities like Austin and San Antonio to build world class rail systems in the future. Dallas' has done in right. The only thing I can say about DART Rail is that it is light rail and not a Heavy Rail System, but other than that, its perfect.

I think all construction that has started on the new lines should stop and there should be a complete redesign of the entire system. If I had it my way, the Main street line would be completely removed and moved underground, where a rail system should be in a city the size of Houston.

Okay, where are my critics?

I use to think you were crazy. Now I agree with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing in the plans or expectations of what these rail lines are going to be have changed in the past few years - Why some of you are now "seeing the light" and siding with the official Haif Urban-Elevated-and-Atlanta spokesman, I don't know.

Edited by Highway6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing in the plans or expectations of what these rail lines are going to be have changed in the past few years - Why some of you are now "seeing the light" and siding with the official Haif Urban-Elevated-and-Atlanta spokesman, I don't know.

LOL! So you're the one responsible for this rail. How long have you been working for METRO?

I wonder if the heads of METRO read HAIF? And if so are they listening to peoples concerns?

Edited by citykid09
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing in the plans or expectations of what these rail lines are going to be have changed in the past few years - Why some of you are now "seeing the light" and siding with the official Haif Urban-Elevated-and-Atlanta spokesman, I don't know.

The costs have risen significantly since first proposed and with all the funding delays there is no chance that we would have this built in 2013 or even 2014 for that matter.

And honestly, I've been spending a lot of time in Atlanta and Dallas recently, and their systems would blow away our 20 mph train system that interacts with cars. I would rather keep formulating new ideas to improve the transportation system for the city that would be sustainable for the long term rather than put in what may just be a "nice to have" system that does nothing different than our regular city buses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...