White Announces Way Cleared For Fed Transit $

GovernorAggie · June 15, 2005

I'm a MetroRail supporter and I am happy with this plan. I don't think it has been downgraded at all--I just think that it has been staggered to increase its chances of getting all of the possible federal match.

I think they made deals with DeLay and Culberson as more good will olive branches. I remember the sentiment here that DeLay and Culberson's pledges to help Houston get $ for transit was basically to not stand in the way. Now they're at least actively going after funds. Baby steps folks. Dallasites seem so "wise" for clamoring and gaining more rail but they also had to start with something too. After the second line was built, they look to be going all-out now. The same thing will happen here.

I think that METRO could even take an incremental approach to the BRT-LRT conversions. Remember that the rails will be in place. The most significant costs will be in constructing on starting power lines for the trains. Also remember that METRO has plans to buy more new trains for the Main Street line, so they will have several more to use in order to start up other lines. Lastly, maybe they could look at buying LRVs that don't need the overhead power supplies and that could get the conversion to rail underway faster.

ricco67 · June 15, 2005

I agree, GA;

The fact that there will be rails in the ground doesn't seem to be reaching out. but from the bit of information that I DID hear from the news services (KHOU and KTRK are the ones I heard from) is the fact that this plan will allow them to convert more quickly by not including the costs of the trains themselves (which can be pricey as we all know).

My only real beef with the plan is the fact that is the route to/from the galleria area. I kinda' wished they would have gone through Memorial park, that would have allowed an express route to NW TC and down to the gallera and out to westpark from there.

Ricco

ssullivan · June 15, 2005

Lastly, maybe they could look at buying LRVs that don't need the overhead power supplies and that could get the conversion to rail underway faster.

I don't think such a thing exists. I've never seen light rail that didn't use overhead power. About the only other option would be a system that uses a third rail electric pickup, but that won't work with an at-grade system. And this type of power supply is usually only used with rapid transit (heavy) rail and commuter rail systems.

tomv · June 15, 2005

I guess this ends the debate for now on whether the downtown connector/ east-west line should be below grade, at grade, or elevated. It looks like there's not going to be a downtown connector! That's too bad, because it would have connected the convention center and the theatre district with the Main Street line.

GovernorAggie · June 15, 2005

I don't think such a thing exists. I've never seen light rail that didn't use overhead power. About the only other option would be a system that uses a third rail electric pickup, but that won't work with an at-grade system. And this type of power supply is usually only used with rapid transit (heavy) rail and commuter rail systems.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I remember hearing about some diesel-electric hybrid type trains that didn't have to use overhead power (I remember b/c I personally think all those overhead wires look pretty trashy and I was glad to see that alternative). I'll have to find it to make sure I wasn't dreaming.

EDIT: Here's a paragraph from Wikipedia:

"Light rail systems are almost universally operated by electricity delivered through overhead lines, although several systems are powered through different means, such as the JFK Airtrain, which uses a standard third rail for its electrical power, and trams in Bordeaux which use a special third-rail configuration in which the rail is only powered while a tram is on top of it (making it safe to install third rails even on city streets). A few unusual systems such as the River LINE in New Jersey and the O-Train in Ottawa even use diesel-powered trains, though this is sometimes intended as an interim measure until the funds to install electric power become available."

Here's a link to Bombadier's Talent model, which is in use in Ottawa:

http://www.bombardier.com/index.jsp?id=1_0...1/1_1_3_2_2.jsp

Here's info on Bordeaux, France's third-rail at-grade operation from LRTA:

The result is APS, or ground-level current collection (Alimentation par Sol). The third rail, in the middle of the tracks, serves as the power supply. This rail consists of a succession of 8-m long powered sections, interspersed by 3-m neutral sections. The tram as it rolls by activates the powered section underneath, by touching it with a "frotteur"(skate). Each time no more than two -- separated

ssullivan · June 15, 2005

Interesting, had no idea that such a third-rail system existed. Thanks for posting that!

As for the diesel hybrids, I would hate to see us go that route. That does nothing to help our air pollution issues, and is not much quieter than a regular bus running down the street. Electric drive systems also have a history of lasting much longer than diesel engines, often doubling the useful life of the vehicle.

GovernorAggie · June 15, 2005

No prob!

I hope to find some info on the costs of this at-grade third rail vs. overhead wire power. If the costs are about tthe same, then I hope that Houston goes ahead and lays a third rail with the others, which would only leave a need to connect them to a power source.

Then again, I don't know if the FTA has approved at-grade third rail power sources.

GovernorAggie · June 15, 2005

There looks to be an actual plan on when it would be right to switch from rubber tires to rail:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/page1/3226040

And proof that money is actually speaking up for more rail in Houston:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/m...politan/3226054

I especially like the last sentence of the article, referring to university students:

"Those are the riders of tomorrow, and they are wanting transit"

MontroseNeighborhoodCafe · June 15, 2005

June 15, 2005, 12:17AM

Switch to rail on some new routes could take a decade

Metro chief says ridership increase needed to convert buses to trains

By RAD SALLEE

MontroseNeighborhoodCafe · June 15, 2005

UNPRECEDENTED FEDERAL FUNDING SOUGHT FOR HOUSTON AREA TO IMPROVE MOBILITY; METRO PLAN POISED TO DELIVER

June 13, 2005

METRO announced today that it can now deliver more rapid transit throughout the Houston area

Ethanra · June 15, 2005

What is the next step for the city? I mean what needs to be done for the construction of this to begin? When? I like this phase I plan a lot better then the old one. It sounds like the current leaders are taking thier time to make sure things are done correctly and put in the most efficient areas. I can think of other cities that rushed with mass transit and have horrible ridership numbers and thier completed projects lose tens of millions of dollars a year but still like to brag about thier system. Its about time mass transit is on the way to a city this size in area and pop. but I am glad our current leaders are taking that extra time and research to do it right.

N Judah · June 15, 2005

With this plan, I think that development will happen along the BRT lines at the same intensity as if they were already LRT lines. Laying down the tracks and the stations shows the route commitment that developers want to see but at a cheaper price for Metro.

Once the lines get built up it will be easy for Metro to justify conversion to LRT, as there will already be existing ridership/development in and around the stations. So I think that makes it a lot easier for them politically.

ssullivan · June 15, 2005

The map on the Metro website (MontroseNeighborhoodCafe linked to it in his/her post above) is quite good at laying out everything covered in this plan, along with projected completion dates. A couple of items on the map that stood out to me are the 2009 completion date for the intermodal facility, as well as a signature express bus line from the Southeast Transit Center to the TMC Transit Center. This is an important corridor and parties in that area have been lobbying Metro for a light rail link here. I'm glad to see it being included, because it will greatly improve access to the Medical Center for many southeast residents. There are some local bus routes that currently make this link, but this will provide a much faster way of getting there.

kjb434 · June 15, 2005

With so much good news, I'm ready for things to start moving.

Luckily existing planning has been completed on some lines that the engineering could commence soon.

happytown · June 15, 2005

Hizzy,
I'm just relaying the what Mike Strech (head of HCTRA) has told me and what was the concept presented before for US 290. The HOV lanes will be removed from US 290 ass soon as a Toll Road is completed. The park-n-ride concepts will still be employed, but on the Tollway. This will leave US290 free for TxDOT to rebuild as they wish without having the HOV lane in the way. It will also have TxDOT in the position of not needing to buy any new right-of-way.
Hey, those BRT pics look good.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

happytown · June 15, 2005

I am very excited about the UH to Galleria light rail. This is an excellent complement to the downtown to Reliant rail line. Especially The TSU campus should really benefit from this. I know the academic standards are not as high there as some would like, but I think Houstonians should treat it as a real urban asset. The campus is undergoing some very nice architectural and landscaping improvements, and is a natural center to the third ward. I also think this line will have a positive effect on Midtown.

713 To 214 · June 15, 2005

but I am glad our current leaders are taking that extra time and research to do it right.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What special pieces of information do you have in your posession that lead you to that conclusion?

If anything, they (current leaders) are being forced into a position by Culbersome and Delay that takes other rail options off the table that actually might be better for Houston in the long run!

June 15, 2005

What special pieces of information do you have in your posession that lead you to that conclusion?
If anything, they (current leaders) are being forced into a position by Culbersome and Delay that takes other rail options off the table that actually might be better for Houston in the long run!
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We are getting a pretty awesome east-west rail line, which will tie UH Central, TSU, Greenway Plaza, lower montrose, and Uptown, including a Park and Ride and Transit Center. This is a great rail line for visitors, who can now add all the great venues on the red line, to all the great venues on this new West-East line. I am overjoyed just with this alon. And, we are getting potentially a fantastic new multi-modal station tying Amtrac, the Red Line, commuter rail, Greyhound, and countless other long-hual bus lines. We are getting Rapid Bus Transit lines...with RAIL allready in place to convert to LRV when the time is right. Lets remember that the alternative is to do nothing because the Feds wont help us. So I dont really see a big problem in the grand scope of things.

skwatra · June 15, 2005

i agree the uh-galleria line will be great in the future, but how bad will construction be now? i understand we have to go through this phase to get what we want in the end, but i just wanted opinions for my particular situation. i was thinking about moving to midtown at the end of this year, i go to UH part time and work in clear lake, but hate living in the suburbs other than the lack of commute/traffic.

it seems like between 59 and LRT construction, that area could get pretty messy. by the time they're done, i'll have graduated...

if i stick myself near 45, i should be okay right? only problems would be getting to rice and the galleria area?

hate to burst the bubble on a fairly positive thread, IMO this plan looks good, and i'm happy to see the addition of commuter lines. if there was one now to galveston i would use it several times a week at non-peak hours. i think the future of our transit system is headed in the right direction.

VelvetJ · June 15, 2005

Lets remember that the alternative is to do nothing because the Feds wont help us. So I dont really see a big problem in the grand scope of things.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And there lies your problem, which is the point I think 713 to 214 was trying to make. "The alternative is to do nothing". The issue is, we all know the TRUE reason that is even a alternative at all. It is because of Delay and Culberson, and not so much the Feds.

I am glad Houston is at least doing something, however IMO, 713 to 214 is exactly right. There were other factors at work here. I'm sure it was a situation of Delay and Culberson basically saying, "do as we say, or we will make sure Houston doesn't get ANYTHING from the Feds".

*side note*- Once again, I know it's been discussed before, but what was the reason Delay gave for supporting federal money to go to rail in Dallas but authored legislation to block it in Houston? Again, in his eyes, why was rail such a great idea for Dallas and not Houston?

RedScare · June 15, 2005

US 59 is scheduled for completion in July 2006. I see no way for the UH-Galleria line to start before then, but even if it did, they could schedule around the 59 construction. The UH-midtown section and the Galleria to Kirby section would have little, if any effect on 59 detours.

As to your graduating before it is finished....well, there's always grad school!

skwatra · June 15, 2005

that's good to hear, last i saw 59 was to be completed by Dec 06.

and i'm already in grad school

RedScare · June 15, 2005

The reason most people don't get into politics is that they don't understand, or more importantly, don't wish to engage in, the art of compromise.

Tom Delay is arguably the most powerful man in the House. John Culberson runs transportation. If you don't please these two, purse strings can be tightened considerably, as we have seen.

It is an immense credit to Bill White's ability to forge compromise, as well as Culberson and DeLay's constituents, that compromise brought us more federal money quicker.

There may be some parts of the plan that don't please some. The use of BRT with rail infrastructure gets us more route miles more quickly, which shows movement and will create excitement to finish it and add to it, which is the ultimate goal.

My problem with the original plan was that without showing suburban voters something for their effort, future bond referendums would be hard to come by. This new plan shows those voters some rail now.

Love them or hate them (and I am not a fan whatsoever), Federal dollars go through these two. That they finally did something for Houston should be applauded, not derided.

kjb434 · June 15, 2005

good point RedScare.

people need to understand that the suburban folks don't see any benefit to LRT unless they can use it. The commuter rail commitments show that METRO will reach out to them earlier.

Also, once commuter rail is setup, these people will need transportation once they reach the I-610 loop. LRT, BRT, and existin buses will compliment this.

The Great Hizzy! · June 15, 2005

I stand by my point that it is always best to show ridership efficiencies with regard to transit projects before you go asking FTA for future monies. Delay is irrelevant when it comes to FTA approving $$$ to agencies after the fact. FTA looks at a subpar system (like MDTA back in the 80s) and their tight with the money. You either have to have a higher per dollar match or come up with the numbers to justify your request. It's systemic and, although not ironclad yea or nay, a pretty good indicator of your prospects for receiving *limited* federal funds versus other agencies.

The last thing Houston needs is a, for example, a north line extension to Northline Mall that has pretty weak ridership. This, again, happened in Miami and with Jax's people mover and those two agencies have caught hell trying to secure new funding for desired expansions. FTA can be a beast about this.

So at the very least, funding for the decidated guideways to be built with adaptable rail infrastructure gives Houston the advantage of already having part of the corridors built but not having the potential embarrassment of running a rail line that might flop. Instead, if it flops, you can blame the buses instead.

That said, the Harrisburg and SE corridors are likely to be successes from a ridership standpoint, and the idea to committ to a ready-to-go rail line from UH to Uptown was a sound decision as well because, although the line probably won't generate a per day ridership figure as high as the current line, it's overall daily ridership will be high enough and the per mile boardings good enough to make this line a relative success when compared to other LRT lines in other cities, be they Denver, Phoenix (who, don't forget, is getting their first line soon), Charlotte or Portland.

That said, keep on your public officials and make sure that they aren't asleep at the wheel and that they follow through on their committment to see the entirety of the rail expansion project through, including those lines that have justifiable ridership in switching from BRT to LRT. Bill White seems cool but he and David Wulfe may not be around when it's actually time to make the decision to switch.

June 15, 2005

The reason most people don't get into politics is that they don't understand, or more importantly, don't wish to engage in, the art of compromise.
Tom Delay is arguably the most powerful man in the House.

dp2 · June 15, 2005

All in all, this is a very positive step in the right direction, much applause for Mayor White and the new head of Metro. And one point to note, no matter how it appears, the east-west downtown LRT line is only delayed, not dead. The existing north-south line won't be able to handle all the potential dowtown ridership once system build out is reached (in say 30 years), nor would just adding an outside trolley loop. It is an LRT line, not heavy transit, and thus capacity-wise isn't comparable to The El or subways. But it can handle it in the short-term (10-20 years.) This plan is about adjusting the timelines to funding realities, while giving the outer areas (and all their taxpayers who also fund Metro) an affordable portion of rail transit, too. Good to see cost effective commuter rail added to the equation where appropriate. One thing this plan does is give hope to far more taxpayers that their area will also see improved transit before the post-2025 timeframe given in the previous plan. Equity is a 2-way street.

Only 1 major point of criticism, the intermodal transit center. While conceptually it might make some sense, as planned it will be a huge Achille's Heel if implemented, the kind of mistake that will be case studied in planning textbooks for the next 100 years. Too much hubbing in the wrong location creating an ever increasing choke point. As a stopgap facility for the commuter rail portion it is fine, but how incredibly foolish, short-sighted, and beholden to special interests it would be to use it as a permanent hub for the commuter rail system (which will eventually reach a dozen or more lines) instead of a site actually downtown(and within walking distances of work for many) on the existing rail line. Other cities such as Seattle are trying (very expensive and thus long-term) to extend their commuter rail from the existing edge terminals to a station(s) actually in downtown (something Philly did 20 years ago), and Boston, San Francisco, LA, and other cities have for years complained about their main commuter rail stations not being more centrally located. Same for Madrid, Paris, London. Why not learn from them?

Metro has substantially improved its system design, but needs to continue to refine.

bruce_oneal · June 15, 2005

i agree the uh-galleria line will be great in the future, but how bad will construction be now? i understand we have to go through this phase to get what we want in the end, but i just wanted opinions for my particular situation. i was thinking about moving to midtown at the end of this year, i go to UH part time and work in clear lake, but hate living in the suburbs other than the lack of commute/traffic.
it seems like between 59 and LRT construction, that area could get pretty messy. by the time they're done, i'll have graduated...
if i stick myself near 45, i should be okay right? only problems would be getting to rice and the galleria area?
hate to burst the bubble on a fairly positive thread, IMO this plan looks good, and i'm happy to see the addition of commuter lines. if there was one now to galveston i would use it several times a week at non-peak hours. i think the future of our transit system is headed in the right direction.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i THOUGHT i heard something about a galveston line in the news this week? am i mistaken? i have not seen anything in print mentioning it, so i could be very wrong.

RedScare · June 15, 2005

Planning and possibly engineering for a Galveston line is included, but apparently, construction would not begin before 2012, as I read the map and articles.

White Announces Way Cleared For Fed Transit $

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Archived