The Boulevard Project

[Houston19514]

If I read the pdf right, it's suggesting that bus operations will be in general traffic (not in its own lane) along the stretch on 610???  Where traffic is the worst?  

 

Seems like they are setting this thing up to fail, no wonder why it's so cheap. 

 

See page 8: 

TxDOT and Uptown are in the early development stages of an elevated dedicated bus or HOV facility in the median of IH 610 from the Northwest Transit

Center to Post Oak Boulevard (Figure A-4). The elevated dedicated bus or HOV facility would replace the majority of the mixed traffic bus operation north of the Project (the Connection to METRO’s Northwest Transit Center) as shown in Figure A-1 with a grade separated, dedicated transit facility.

 

Also, TxDOT announced just last week that they will be providing  $25 million to build a dedicated bus lane along Loop 610, ensuring the second piece of a planned bus rapid transit corridor in the Uptown area.

[TowerSpotter]

3 possible locations

http://www.chron.com/neighborhood/bellaire/news/article/Uptown-gives-Bellaire-time-on-transit-center-idea-5654682.php

[SkylineView]

Thanks for linking TowerSpotter.

[Slick Vik]

This is truly bizarre and jihad against rail

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/author/dug-begley/

[IronTiger]

It's not a "jihad against rail", Uptown Management District doesn't like the idea of widening the road at all (which, let's face it, this has caused a lot of traffic problems in Uptown for years with this mindset), TxDOT wants to build the bus lanes but along 610 but isn't committing to the corridor to be used for rail (or at least that's how I understand it--why it's TxDOT building and not, say, HCTRA, is a mystery to me), and a TxDOT official is suggesting that since METRO, TxDOT, and Uptown can't work out an agreement, they'll pull the funding.

 

Part of the problem is that actually making the lanes viable for rail use would make the project even more expensive even if they were retrofitted for later use--remember that METRO decided to donate a substantial amount of money to over-engineer the HOT lanes on Interstate 10 so that they could, in theory, be used for rail down the line, except that in that case, that corridor was not guaranteed to them nor was it approved by voters. And the I-10 fiasco was all METRO's doing...no one at HCTRA or TxDOT strong-armed them into that.

[Slick Vik]

No. This is about the elevated portion between post oak and northwest transit center. It's basic extortion. TXDOT is saying they won't give money unless there's a guarantee of no rail ever. That is overreaching and unnecessary.

[Sparrow]

"We don't want our involvement in this project to be clouded by rail versus bus".......therefore I will make you declare that this will not someday, somehow be changed from one mode of transit to another....

 

I don't get it Mr. Moseley. Does METRO need to pinky swear that they won't make them into bike lanes one day as well? How about a blood oath that the lanes won't be fashioned as pedestrian sidewalks if the whole transit thing doesn't work out?

 

 

[Howard Huge]

Editor, can we get a "Slick Vik vs IronTiger" sub-forum, please. Jesus

[Slick Vik]

Editor, can we get a "Slick Vik vs IronTiger" sub-forum, please. Jesus

Note who responds to who first

[IronTiger]

No. This is about the elevated portion between post oak and northwest transit center. It's basic extortion. TXDOT is saying they won't give money unless there's a guarantee of no rail ever. That is overreaching and unnecessary.

 

Yes, but you didn't read my post. My post stated that to make the elevated lanes compatible for rail, they would have to spend more money to "over-engineer" for rail. That's the same principle of why METRO gave extra money during the Interstate 10 widening to give the HOT lanes "strength" to handle rail, so to speak. Only here, of course, rail was actually voted on and approved for this corridor.

[IronTiger]

Note who responds to who first

 

I like to reply to posts, and I had just seen the Swamplot link for that, and knowing Slick's propensity for misinformation/alarmist posts, wanted to explain what's going on as I best understood it. If that somehow constitutes trolling, then I don't know what doesn't.

[BigFootsSocks]

Nah it's always you two bitching at each other but I don't think anyones complaining 

[mfastx]

Politics as usual.  

 

Anti-rail people have powerful friends. 

[IronTiger]

Politics as usual.  

 

Anti-rail people have powerful friends. 

 

A better question is, why is TxDOT involved at all? Like I said, even I'm a bit perplexed why they're even offering to build bus lanes (that only METRO uses) at all.

[mfastx]

A better question is, why is TxDOT involved at all? Like I said, even I'm a bit perplexed why they're even offering to build bus lanes (that only METRO uses) at all.

 

I feel like this is more of a question of what is local vs. what is regional.  TxDOT is clearly a state transportation agency that should cover ALL modes, not just rubber-tired infrastructure.  

 

But should they be doing local feeder roads?  Or the 610 loop which is purely local infrastructure?  It's an interesting debate for sure. 

[mollusk]

A better question is, why is TxDOT involved at all? Like I said, even I'm a bit perplexed why they're even offering to build bus lanes (that only METRO uses) at all.

 

610 is an interstate and therefore under TxDOT's jurisdiction.

[Slick Vik]

Yes, but you didn't read my post. My post stated that to make the elevated lanes compatible for rail, they would have to spend more money to "over-engineer" for rail. That's the same principle of why METRO gave extra money during the Interstate 10 widening to give the HOT lanes "strength" to handle rail, so to speak. Only here, of course, rail was actually voted on and approved for this corridor.

How much more would it cost? Would that not fit in the $25 million? As some engineers on haif posted in the previous thread the additional modifications are minor so this is quite petulant on the part of TXDOT.

[IronTiger]

I feel like this is more of a question of what is local vs. what is regional. TxDOT is clearly a state transportation agency that should cover ALL modes, not just rubber-tired infrastructure.

But should they be doing local feeder roads? Or the 610 loop which is purely local infrastructure? It's an interesting debate for sure.

I think it's worth a debate. After all, some of the ROW cleared for the 610/290 interchange was for a potential HSR to go through, so you could make the argument that it's not local but rail friendly. On the other hand, spurs like 527 really only serve local traffic, so why does TxDOT maintain it?

[BigFootsSocks]

Ok now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing to get on each other's nerves as that's a question that has absolutely nothing to do with this pointless thread.

[Slick Vik]

I think it's worth a debate. After all, some of the ROW cleared for the 610/290 interchange was for a potential HSR to go through, so you could make the argument that it's not local but rail friendly. On the other hand, spurs like 527 really only serve local traffic, so why does TxDOT maintain it?

Lol give me a break. You can't be rail friendly if you're against it in some capacity

[IronTiger]

Ok now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing to get on each other's nerves as that's a question that has absolutely nothing to do with this pointless thread.

 

I think you're right, this will go nowhere, especially extremist arguments as Slick's reply shows. With a mindset like that, it's easy to see why there's gridlock in the Uptown debate to begin with.

 

And I feel like a fool again for walking into a thread that was never meant for debate to begin with and only bitching about anyone remotely against rail.

[BigFootsSocks]

Taking the slightly high road, I like it. Now kiss and make up you two

[Slick Vik]

I think you're right, this will go nowhere, especially extremist arguments as Slick's reply shows. With a mindset like that, it's easy to see why there's gridlock in the Uptown debate to begin with.

And I feel like a fool again for walking into a thread that was never meant for debate to begin with and only bitching about anyone remotely against rail.

It's not extremist it's extremist to make an option that destroys any opportunity regardless of how minor to make some minor accomodations for rail one day in the future if the demand exists at that time instead of a total reconstruction

[citykid09]

I am all for rail. Against BRT in the Uptown area and I would NOT like to see rail along Post Oak either unless it was more like a street car. What I would like to see is a Subway line from Uptown to Downtown that way no one can say anything about how they don't want it going down a certain street or in their neighborhood. It may cost more but look at all of the benefits a subway would bring over a light rial line.

 

No interaction between rail with cars or pedestrians which means no car/train wrecks no stopping of traffic and no humans getting hit by trains.

Everyone will have to pay and there will be no confusion on if your pass is still good or not.

People will be protected from the heat, rain, etc within the subway stations.

 

Edited September 21, 2014 by citykid09

[Spacecityroller]

I am all for rail. Against BRT in the Uptown area and I would NOT like to see rail along Post Oak either unless it was more like a street car. What I would like to see is a Subway line from Uptown to Downtown that way no one can say anything about how they don't want it going down a certain street or in their neighborhood. It may cost more but look at all of the benefits a subway would bring over a light rial line.

 

No interaction between rail with cars or pedestrians which means no car/train wrecks no stopping of traffic and no humans getting hit by trains.

Everyone will have to pay and there will be no confusion on if your pass is still good or not.

People will be protected from the heat, rain, etc within the subway stations.

 

I agree, if richmond and uptown never get built then go full bore a subway from like Voss & Westheimer to DT with stops at chimneyrock, galleria, weslayan. Then curves NE with a stop at Shepard and Grey, then w dallas & waugh and then allen pkwy and montrose then memorial and houston finally in DT at Capital & Main. 9 miles about

 

 http://lightrailnow.wordpress.com/2014/02/13/new-subway-metro-systems-cost-nearly-9-times-as-much-as-light-rail/

I would guess 450mil/mile so 4.05 billion. Slightly lower construction cost in Hou.

 

Edited September 21, 2014 by Spacecityroller

[citykid09]

I agree, if richmond and uptown never get built then go full bore a subway from like Voss & Westheimer to DT with stops at chimneyrock, galleria, weslayan. Then curves NE with a stop at Shepard and Grey, then w dallas & waugh and then allen pkwy and montrose then memorial and houston finally in DT at Capital & Main. 9 miles about

 

 http://lightrailnow.wordpress.com/2014/02/13/new-subway-metro-systems-cost-nearly-9-times-as-much-as-light-rail/

I would guess 450mil/mile so 4.05 billion. Slightly lower construction cost in Hou.

 

 

Tell me why Houston's light rail cost more per mile than any other cities?

 

 

And tell me how Helsinki Metro was able to build this rail line below for less than Houston was able to build a cheap a** (actually expensive) street car/light rail? Looking at the cart above Houston got robbed. Those cities have much nicer light rail lines for much cheaper.

 

[mollusk]

In order to do any meaningful analysis of why City A cost $X, City B cost $2X, and City C cost $0.5X, we first need to make sure that each analysis includes the same line items.  I have to wonder if Houston's costs include the overruns, waste, and stuff just poured down the drain from the Wilson era - let's not forget that the only thing he managed to actually do was to become the Press's 2010 Turkey of the Year.  ("How does one become a Turkey of the Year? One way is to run a massive transit agency so badly that it becomes the subject of gubernatorial-race political ads airing in Austin, El Paso, and Lubbock.")

[DNAguy]

Looks like the project is a-go. Here's the irony.... by Culberson making sure there is no rail on Post Oak, it essentially let METRO avoid guaranteeing that they won't put rail on Post Oak and let the project proceed.

 

I wonder If his constituents will enjoy a bus more than rail..... Hmmmm.

 

So I think METRO has it's playbook now. Call Culberson's / Afton's bluff. Don't want rail? build a dedicated bus lane and see how much ppl like it. Expose them for what they are: classist obstructionists who just want to stop public transportation. Of course, leave the ability to upgrade to rail when he leaves office or when the Afton Oaks folks get religion.

 

 

http://www.click2houston.com/news/new-bus-lanes-to-be-created-in-galleria-area/30977864

 

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Bogged-down-Uptown-bus-plan-proceeding-6046845.php

 

 

After some uncertainty, fears about rail development in Uptown appear less likely to delay a planned express bus project along Post Oak.

Metropolitan Transit Authority's board meets Thursday morning, and is scheduled to discuss progress on the Uptown plan. The addition to their regularly scheduled meeting comes after a letter last week from Texas Transportation Commissioner Jeff Moseley.

The letter lays out a path for officials to settle their differences and keep the $192.5 million project on track.Letter lays out path

Uptown Management District, Metro and the Texas Department of Transportation are all involved in the plan to add center lanes solely for buses to Post Oak, then use dedicated lanes along Loop 610.

The express buses would connect a future Bellaire Transit Center with the Northwest Transit Center near Interstate 10 and Loop 610, stopping at dedicated platforms along Post Oak.

"If this is successful, and I believe this will be successful, it is going to change things and things people think about transit," said Metro board chairman Gilbert Garcia.

Change also played a role in some of the squabbles. Though supportive of an express bus project, state transportation officials last year stressed they didn't want to wade into the debate regarding light rail along Post Oak. Approving $25 million for the elevated lanes along Loop 610, Moseley stressed this was a bus project.

To ensure that, state transportation officials asked Metro to verify in writing that the project was not a precursor to rail.

Metro worried that a stronger promise would put them in conflict with the voter-approved 2003 referendum, in which Metro laid out plans for light rail on Post Oak. Transit officials ultimately acquiesced to the letter, but also sought via Harris County Attorney Vince Ryan an attorney general's opinion verifying they were not violating the referendum by signing the TxDOT agreement.

Kerfuffle pointless

The pending legal opinion delayed state transportation officials making their final approval of the money. In October, Moseley indicated if the matter was settled he wanted the money moved elsewhere, before state officials agreed to give Metro until February.

In the interim, the entire kerfuffle became pointless. Last month, federal lawmakers passed the fiscal 2015 spending plan, including language inserted by Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, that forbids any federal money from going to rail projects along Post Oak north of Richmond, and Richmond west of Shepherd.

"I am keeping my word to my constituents on these two streets who overwhelmingly oppose light rail on Richmond and Post Oak," Culberson said.

The same language was in the previous federal spending bill, enacted Jan. 17, 2014.

In a Jan. 22 letter, Moseley told Garcia that the federal prohibition satisfies TxDOT's concerns.

Without the TxDOT contribution, the elevated lanes along Loop 610 are unlikely, or delayed. Regardless of that, however, Uptown is moving forward with the project, management district officials said.

On Wednesday, Houston City Council members approved the fiscal 2015 budget for Uptown's redevelopment authority. Uptown's oversight is a combination of city approvals for public works funding and projects, and its own board of directors for the management district and tax increment reinvestment zone.

"Democracy sometimes is a slower process than we would like, but we feel things are moving forward," said Uptown president John Breeding.

 

[Luminare]

Yeah I thought it was a stroke of brilliance. I think BRT has always been thought of as a trojan horse for rail in these corridors.

[IronTiger]

I thought BRT was the plan already.