METRO Next - 2040 Vision

[102IAHexpress]

1 hour ago, wilcal said:

 

Do they still have to pay to ride? No trying to ask a leading question, just honestly don't know if they have a special deal worked out. 

 

 

When my wife worked at Methodist she had access to a special Q Card called the TMC Q Card. Valid only at a few of the TMC area stations. It was essentially a very reduced fare to use within the TMC. Which makes sense, why pay full fare for essentially a shuttle ride to the parking lot. However, I'm not sure if it still exists?

 

https://www.ridemetro.org/Pages/RailFareFacts.aspx

 

 

[Houston19514]

3 hours ago, wilcal said:

 

Do they still have to pay to ride? No trying to ask a leading question, just honestly don't know if they have a special deal worked out. 

 

Also, Smith Lands is only 13.4% if you count those passengers both ways. It's a lot, but not insane.

 

People who park at Smith Lands (and pay to do so) receive a Q Card that is good for rides within the TMC area, between Smith Lands, TMC Transit Center, Dryden and Memorial Hermann/Houston Zoo stations.

 

If you count the passengers at Smith Lands both ways, you would also have to double the total count, so Smith Lands still only  constitutes less than 7% of the Red Line's passengers (hardly the nefarious inflation of passenger projections 102IAHexpress imagines).

Edited April 30, 2019 by Houston19514

[H-Town Man]

On ‎4‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 5:51 PM, august948 said:

 

It's more of a rhetorical question.  I'm already certain that some are in favor of highway expansion (myself included) and some are not. 

 

Here's the problem.  Only a fraction of the entire metro area lives inside the loop.  Last I checked it was around 600,000.  It may be more now, but the point is that it's only a fraction of the total.  If you are serious about moving the transport network forward, you have to address the needs of the vast majority of people who live outside this core area.  Expecting everyone to move inside the loop, or even inside the beltway is unrealistic.  From my perspective, and from that of many others as well, moving people in and out of the city efficiently is far more important than whatever is done in the core.  If you could magically eliminate the morning and evening rush hours, Monday through Friday, getting around Houston would be a (relative) breeze.  Since we don't have magic at our disposal, that need must be addressed.

 

On ‎4‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 9:25 AM, august948 said:

 

For a medium sized city, Innerloopville we'll call it, there's already got a pretty good public transport system and the 2040 proposals intend to make that even better.  Those of us outside the loop will be paying a lot for that privilege.  You're welcome.

 

As for mid-afternoon congestion, I'd guess some of that is related to folks coming in from rural wastelands outside the perimeter.  You can either batten down the hatches and make it increasingly difficult to go in and out of the city or find some way to smooth that transit.  I vote for the latter, but that requires a real expansion of the metro service area and inclusion of outlying communities in the process (and funding). 

 

On ‎4‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 9:54 AM, august948 said:

 

A very good point.  If we're going to tackle this problem effectively we've got to deal with the last mile problem for someone who lives off the Grand Parkway.

 

The people who live inside the Loop must deal with living next to and paying for a freeway system they largely don't need. They have to put up with the smog, noise, and unsightliness of giant rivers of concrete that exist so that some jerk can live all the way out in Tomball or the Woodlands and still commute to his job downtown. They pay a lot in terms of quality of life for the suburbanites' privilege of living out on the windswept prairie or the fragrant pine woods and still doing business in the inner-loopers' backyard. You're welcome.

 

The notion of there being a "last mile" problem for people who live off the Grand Parkway is especially rich - these are people who have chosen to remove themselves as far from the city as they can, to essentially turn their back and their tax dollars on the "riff-raff," sending only their flood runoff as a contribution to the community, and they want mass transit brought to their doorstep? If I decide to move 30 miles outside of a city, do I get to demand that the city send its buses to pick me up in the morning? 

[102IAHexpress]

56 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Smith Lands still only  constitutes less than 7% of the Red Line's passengers (hardly the nefarious inflation of passenger projections 102IAHexpress imagines).

 

Nice try, but per Metro's statistics, only one station in Metro's entire light rail network accounts for more than 7% of total ridership for weekday boarding's. So, I'm not sure why you are fixated on that 7% number? The more honest representation is that Smith Lands and Fannin South are usually in the top four of most boarded stations in the entire network. Again, so we are all clear, they are essentially spill over parking lots for the TMC. Remove those parking lots, and the Red Line does not look so "successful" anymore. 

 

station	total	%
Dryden / TMC	4,831	8.25%
Memorial Hermann Hospital / Houston Zoo	3,908	6.67%
Fannin South	3,534	6.03%
Smith Lands	3,369	5.75%
TMC Transit Center	3,276	5.59%
Downtown Transit Center	3,235	5.52%
Northline Transit Center / HCC	3,058	5.22%
Wheeler Transit Center	2,954	5.04%
Main Street Square	2,918	4.98%
Preston	2,673	4.56%
Central Station Main	2,453	4.19%
Ensemble / HCC	2,158	3.68%
Museum District	1,331	2.27%
McGowen	1,271	2.17%
Fulton / North Central	1,131	1.93%
Central Station	1,031	1.76%
Central Station	987	1.69%
Bell	973	1.66%
Stadium Park / Astrodome	958	1.64%
UH-Downtown	906	1.55%
Magnolia Park Transit Center	869	1.48%
TSU / UH Athletics District	855	1.46%
Burnett Transit Center / Casa De Amigos	806	1.38%
Cavalcade	792	1.35%
Palm Center Transit Center	745	1.27%
Theater District	699	1.19%
UH South / University Oaks	678	1.16%
Quitman / Near Northside	625	1.07%
Moody Park	542	0.93%
Elgin / Third Ward	453	0.77%
Hermann Park / Rice U	449	0.77%
Lockwood / Eastwood	416	0.71%
Theater District	407	0.69%
Coffee Plant / Second Ward	398	0.68%
Altic / Howard Hughes	386	0.66%
EaDo / Stadium	381	0.65%
EaDo / Stadium	352	0.60%
MacGregor Park / Martin Luther King, Jr.	346	0.59%
Cesar Chavez / 67th Street	291	0.50%
Melbourne / North Lindale	280	0.48%
Convention District	243	0.41%
Convention District	222	0.38%
Lindale Park	199	0.34%
Leeland / Third Ward	179	0.31%

[Houston19514]

10 minutes ago, 102IAHexpress said:

 

Nice try, but per Metro's statistics, only one station in Metro's entire light rail network accounts for more than 7% of total ridership for weekday boarding's. So, I'm not sure why you are fixated on that 7% number? The more honest representation is that Smith Lands and Fannin South are usually in the top four of most boarded stations in the entire network. Again, so we are all clear, they are essentially spill over parking lots for the TMC. Remove those parking lots, and the Red Line does not look so "successful" anymore. 

 

station	total	%
Dryden / TMC	4,831	8.25%
Memorial Hermann Hospital / Houston Zoo	3,908	6.67%
Fannin South	3,534	6.03%
Smith Lands	3,369	5.75%
TMC Transit Center	3,276	5.59%
Downtown Transit Center	3,235	5.52%
Northline Transit Center / HCC	3,058	5.22%
Wheeler Transit Center	2,954	5.04%
Main Street Square	2,918	4.98%
Preston	2,673	4.56%
Central Station Main	2,453	4.19%
Ensemble / HCC	2,158	3.68%
Museum District	1,331	2.27%
McGowen	1,271	2.17%
Fulton / North Central	1,131	1.93%
Central Station	1,031	1.76%
Central Station	987	1.69%
Bell	973	1.66%
Stadium Park / Astrodome	958	1.64%
UH-Downtown	906	1.55%
Magnolia Park Transit Center	869	1.48%
TSU / UH Athletics District	855	1.46%
Burnett Transit Center / Casa De Amigos	806	1.38%
Cavalcade	792	1.35%
Palm Center Transit Center	745	1.27%
Theater District	699	1.19%
UH South / University Oaks	678	1.16%
Quitman / Near Northside	625	1.07%
Moody Park	542	0.93%
Elgin / Third Ward	453	0.77%
Hermann Park / Rice U	449	0.77%
Lockwood / Eastwood	416	0.71%
Theater District	407	0.69%
Coffee Plant / Second Ward	398	0.68%
Altic / Howard Hughes	386	0.66%
EaDo / Stadium	381	0.65%
EaDo / Stadium	352	0.60%
MacGregor Park / Martin Luther King, Jr.	346	0.59%
Cesar Chavez / 67th Street	291	0.50%
Melbourne / North Lindale	280	0.48%
Convention District	243	0.41%
Convention District	222	0.38%
Lindale Park	199	0.34%
Leeland / Third Ward	179	0.31%

 

Nothing about that makes the Red Line any less successful.  One of the things successful transit systems do is provide alternative modes of transportation for workers and visitors to reach increasingly dense and congested areas.

[iah77]

That would never happen. You all realize TMC is an actual entity/protected trademark and that its largest source of revenue is parking fees lol?

[102IAHexpress]

25 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Nothing about that makes the Red Line any less successful.  One of the things successful transit systems do is provide alternative modes of transportation for workers and visitors to reach increasingly dense and congested areas.

 

Great! Lets build a parking garage at every light rail station! That will prove how successful light rail is in Houston. 

[Houston19514]

9 minutes ago, 102IAHexpress said:

 

Great! Lets build a parking garage at every light rail station! That will prove how successful light rail is in Houston. 

 

Productive contributions, as usual.

[cspwal]

59 minutes ago, 102IAHexpress said:

 

Great! Lets build a parking garage at every light rail station! That will prove how successful light rail is in Houston. 

At the current park and ride lots, I would prefer garages - more cars = more transit users, there could be GFR (lol), and they might be able to integrate in as better transit centers

 

Right now, I think the only park and ride garage Metro runs is the new one at 99 and 10 in Katy

[august948]

4 hours ago, H-Town Man said:

 

 

 

The people who live inside the Loop must deal with living next to and paying for a freeway system they largely don't need. They have to put up with the smog, noise, and unsightliness of giant rivers of concrete that exist so that some jerk can live all the way out in Tomball or the Woodlands and still commute to his job downtown. They pay a lot in terms of quality of life for the suburbanites' privilege of living out on the windswept prairie or the fragrant pine woods and still doing business in the inner-loopers' backyard. You're welcome.

 

The notion of there being a "last mile" problem for people who live off the Grand Parkway is especially rich - these are people who have chosen to remove themselves as far from the city as they can, to essentially turn their back and their tax dollars on the "riff-raff," sending only their flood runoff as a contribution to the community, and they want mass transit brought to their doorstep? If I decide to move 30 miles outside of a city, do I get to demand that the city send its buses to pick me up in the morning? 

 

And the alternative is...to let the freeways degrade, or better yet rip them up so the population either has to move away from the Houston metro area or all move inside the loop?  In the first case the city decays from lack of economic activity in the second case cost of living goes through the roof.  All of that is purely hypothetical, of course, because highway building is largely under the control of txdot and various regional toll authorties.  So, if you don't proactively address transit for the denizens of the hinterlands you'll just end up with more traffic on on more of those giant rivers of concrete that take up perhaps .00001% of the land in the city.

 

Or we could just move the business centers out of the city (a la Exxon) if we're determined to make it difficult to live and work in the city.  I'm sure that will help densify the core.

[ADCS]

3 hours ago, august948 said:

 

And the alternative is...to let the freeways degrade, or better yet rip them up so the population either has to move away from the Houston metro area or all move inside the loop?  In the first case the city decays from lack of economic activity in the second case cost of living goes through the roof.  All of that is purely hypothetical, of course, because highway building is largely under the control of txdot and various regional toll authorties.  So, if you don't proactively address transit for the denizens of the hinterlands you'll just end up with more traffic on on more of those giant rivers of concrete that take up perhaps .00001% of the land in the city.

 

Or we could just move the business centers out of the city (a la Exxon) if we're determined to make it difficult to live and work in the city.  I'm sure that will help densify the core.

 

Maintain existing facilities after the 45 rebuild, but don't prioritize further expansion. Redirect resources toward comprehensive public transit whose primary purpose isn't just welfare for the poor. I don't see companies moving away from NYC and SF because of the difficulties commuting from Dutchess County or Vallejo

[Triton]

6 hours ago, cspwal said:

At the current park and ride lots, I would prefer garages - more cars = more transit users, there could be GFR (lol), and they might be able to integrate in as better transit centers

 

Right now, I think the only park and ride garage Metro runs is the new one at 99 and 10 in Katy

 

Completely agree. This is going to be a sprawling city, and I think we need to acknowledge that reality. I really like the Washington DC transit model. They have this large parking garage structure in their suburban station in Vienna and the transit actually runs in the center of the freeway. I liked parking my rental there and just taking the mass transit into the city so I didn't have to deal with traffic. Based on the amount of people parking there, I think it's safe to say this is also lowering the congestion that would have been there on the highways too.

 

 

(parking garage on left side)

 

[BeerNut]

8 hours ago, cspwal said:

At the current park and ride lots, I would prefer garages - more cars = more transit users, there could be GFR (lol), and they might be able to integrate in as better transit centers

 

Right now, I think the only park and ride garage Metro runs is the new one at 99 and 10 in Katy

might as well add residential too

[august948]

7 hours ago, ADCS said:

 

Maintain existing facilities after the 45 rebuild, but don't prioritize further expansion. Redirect resources toward comprehensive public transit whose primary purpose isn't just welfare for the poor. I don't see companies moving away from NYC and SF because of the difficulties commuting from Dutchess County or Vallejo

 

Companies have been moving away.  It may not be directly because of the commute, but indirectly NYC and SF have made the cost of living higher by land use regulations.  That has driven some business outward, either to more suburban or exurban locations or away entirely.  Part of that is natural, the city core will always be more expensive and those two cities in particular have some geographic constraints.  But part of that is a long series of governmental decisions that have pushed the costs even higher than they would naturally be.  We don't have to go that route.

 

My point here is that if we don't get on a real, useful, regional transit system, we will get bigger freeways by default.  A big part of that is getting the surrounding communities (I'd favor doing it by county rather than by city) to buy into this and come on board with financing.

[102IAHexpress]

We have garages

14 hours ago, cspwal said:

Right now, I think the only park and ride garage Metro runs is the new one at 99 and 10 in Katy

 

There's one out in Cypress. Actually I think Cypress was the first park and ride to have a garage. There's retail near by too.

 

I could see light rail garages being successful near the hobby airport station. Like a cheaper long term parking option, plus it takes you to the terminal. But the regular light rail stations having garages would be an admission that the light rail needs a lot of help and massaging in order for their to be ridership growth. 

[cspwal]

I don't think the light rail needs that much help with ridership numbers - even the people that ride it from Fannin South or Smithlands to TMC are still reducing congestion on 288 and inside the Medical center, because if they weren't on the train they'd either be on a bus (wouldn't have as many people per square foot) or in their car (even worse for congestion).  I would like to know the percentage of the daily ridership that is just the TMC transit cards, but anecdotally, the train is pretty full in downtown at rush hour, so it's not all TMC traffic to those to parking lots

[H-Town Man]

On 4/30/2019 at 7:19 PM, august948 said:

 

And the alternative is...to let the freeways degrade, or better yet rip them up so the population either has to move away from the Houston metro area or all move inside the loop?  In the first case the city decays from lack of economic activity in the second case cost of living goes through the roof.  All of that is purely hypothetical, of course, because highway building is largely under the control of txdot and various regional toll authorties.  So, if you don't proactively address transit for the denizens of the hinterlands you'll just end up with more traffic on on more of those giant rivers of concrete that take up perhaps .00001% of the land in the city.

 

Or we could just move the business centers out of the city (a la Exxon) if we're determined to make it difficult to live and work in the city.  I'm sure that will help densify the core.

 

No, maintain the freeways. They're a necessary evil. But also build forms of transit that enable more people to live inside the loop, so that we can grow as a city without that growth meaning more of the city gets paved over for people commuting 30 miles.

 

.00001% of the land, don't make me laugh. Everything within a mile of a freeway is stigmatized to some degree. If I10 and the North Loop weren't there, the Heights would feel much different, etc.

Edited May 2, 2019 by H-Town Man

[august948]

32 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

 

No, maintain the freeways. They're a necessary evil. But also build forms of transit that enable more people to live inside the loop, so that we can grow as a city without that growth meaning more of the city gets paved over for people commuting 30 miles.

 

.00001% of the land, don't make me laugh. Everything within a mile of a freeway is stigmatized to some degree. If I10 and the North Loop weren't there, the Heights would feel much different, etc.

 

I have to assume your vision here is most single family homes being replaced by mid or high rise residential inside the loop.  Fair enough.  Looking at a current service map, most major roads have transit service of some sort.  The ones that don't are perhaps more industrial areas where there's a lower density of residents.  The nice thing about bus service is that all you need are the buses and some signage and you've got a bus line.  Easy to do.  What other forms of transit are we talking about here?  Do we need light rail on every major road?  BRT on every major road?  Bus service on minor residential streets?  I'm not sure what more would be needed to support greater density inside the loop.  And, as I noted, as things develop it's easy to add bus routes to support new high-rises.

 

I don't think transit, or lack thereof, is a major factor holding back the building of residential buildings inside the loop.  Those seem to be going up right and left anyway, even outside the loop (and outside the beltway at least in Westchase and the Energy Corridor).  There's the economics of it (do I spend $300,000 to get a 4 bedroom condo or do I spend $300,000 to get a 4000sqft house on a big lot with good (or at least new) schools.  Believe it or not there are a lot of people that will go for option 2.  The loop has plenty of transit options.  We need to figure out how to get people in and out of the city.  To the degree we can do that, we will alleviate congestion inside the city.

[H-Town Man]

1 hour ago, august948 said:

 

I have to assume your vision here is most single family homes being replaced by mid or high rise residential inside the loop.  Fair enough.  Looking at a current service map, most major roads have transit service of some sort.  The ones that don't are perhaps more industrial areas where there's a lower density of residents.  The nice thing about bus service is that all you need are the buses and some signage and you've got a bus line.  Easy to do.  What other forms of transit are we talking about here?  Do we need light rail on every major road?  BRT on every major road?  Bus service on minor residential streets?  I'm not sure what more would be needed to support greater density inside the loop.  And, as I noted, as things develop it's easy to add bus routes to support new high-rises.

 

I don't think transit, or lack thereof, is a major factor holding back the building of residential buildings inside the loop.  Those seem to be going up right and left anyway, even outside the loop (and outside the beltway at least in Westchase and the Energy Corridor).  There's the economics of it (do I spend $300,000 to get a 4 bedroom condo or do I spend $300,000 to get a 4000sqft house on a big lot with good (or at least new) schools.  Believe it or not there are a lot of people that will go for option 2.  The loop has plenty of transit options.  We need to figure out how to get people in and out of the city.  To the degree we can do that, we will alleviate congestion inside the city.

 

If the fact that there's apartments going up right and left proves that transit is fine inside the loop, then I guess the fact that plenty of subdivisions are being built proves that people are getting in and out of the city just fine. If it's enough to have some form of transit (even if just buses) on most major roads inside the loop, then it's enough to have some form of roads going to and from the outskirts, and they don't need to be that fast or nice.

 

Do we need light rail on every major road? No, just connect the major job centers and a few spokes.

[cspwal]

Bus service on all major roads improves connectivity (you can get from point A to point B ) - but even dialing the bus frequency all the way up, local busses are always going to be the same speed as taking surface streets places.  One thing that would be needed to support density inside the loop is limited and express service - you don't need to make 0 stops between downtown and the galleria, but make it 4.  Buses can do that, as can light rail.

Another thing needed is dedicated ROW so that the transit can be reliable and less affected by traffic.  Again, buses or trains can be used

The big difference between a train and a bus is a train can hold more people - 241 per car on light rail as opposed to 84 maximum on a bendy bus.  My hope is that the Uptown BRT will be so successful that there's a big expansion of BRT lines throughout the city, with them being upgraded to light rail as they approach maximum capacity.

[BeerNut]

5 hours ago, cspwal said:

Bus service on all major roads improves connectivity (you can get from point A to point B ) - but even dialing the bus frequency all the way up, local busses are always going to be the same speed as taking surface streets places.  One thing that would be needed to support density inside the loop is limited and express service - you don't need to make 0 stops between downtown and the galleria, but make it 4.  Buses can do that, as can light rail.

 

Has Metro mentioned an express bus?  This would definitely be of interest to me to go to Galleria from Downtown or Wheeler station.

[cspwal]

Here's the METRONext plan as currently formulated

All the grey lines are going to be "express" buses that will offer two way service all week.  Additionally, there's some mention somewhere of "Westheimer signature bus" that would be a limited bus between Downtown, Midtown, Greenway, and Uptown

 

Trying to find the current plan, I stumbled across this

http://www.metronext.org/pdfs/METRONext_PI Phase 2_April_2019_FINAL.pdf

 

Looking at the numbers they came up with, the least expensive option per new rider is the green and purple line extension to telephone road, and then running down to Hobby.  It would result in a 38 min ride to the aiport from downtown (on the Green line), ~8,100 new riders at a cost of $1.06 billion, or $131 million per new rider.

 

The most expensive per new rider is a BRT to Hobby from downtown - it would cost $1.6 billion, but only get 6,0000 new riders.  Upshot is a 29 minute ride to the airport, with only 2 stops

https://imgur.com/e8ljaQK

 

I posted all the alternatives here https://imgur.com/a/XjCObXX 

Here is the comparisons

Option	Travel time Downtown to Hobby (min)	Daily ridership (model)	Daily ridership (model) + airport users	Capital cost	Cost per new rider
Green & Purple line extend; combine, continue to Hobby	38	6,600	8,100	$1,060,000,000	$130,864
Green line extension	40	4,600	6,100	$900,000,000	$147,541
BRT Extension from Green line and Purple lines	51	4,500	5,400	$903,000,000	$167,222
Purple line extension	48	2,800	4,300	$881,000,000	$204,884
Both extensions	40	7,200	8,700	$1,800,000,000	$206,897
BRT from Downtown to Hobby	29	5,100	6,000	$1,600,000,000	$266,667

[wilcal]

Interesting that they are including the two-way HOV cost on I-45 in the BRT from Downtown to Hobby in the capital costs, I'm guessing.

 

I think the clear winner is running a combined green/purple to Hobby. 38 minutes from Hobby to GRB is great. 

 

Also interesting: that they think that 1,500 airport users will use an LRT extension. 

[Texasota]

I mean, I absolutely would. If anything that number seems low.

[Houston19514]

2 hours ago, cspwal said:

Here's the METRONext plan as currently formulated

 

 

Your map appears to show light rail to Bush Airport. That is not back on the table, is it?

[august948]

8 hours ago, cspwal said:

Bus service on all major roads improves connectivity (you can get from point A to point B ) - but even dialing the bus frequency all the way up, local busses are always going to be the same speed as taking surface streets places.  One thing that would be needed to support density inside the loop is limited and express service - you don't need to make 0 stops between downtown and the galleria, but make it 4.  Buses can do that, as can light rail.

Another thing needed is dedicated ROW so that the transit can be reliable and less affected by traffic.  Again, buses or trains can be used

The big difference between a train and a bus is a train can hold more people - 241 per car on light rail as opposed to 84 maximum on a bendy bus.  My hope is that the Uptown BRT will be so successful that there's a big expansion of BRT lines throughout the city, with them being upgraded to light rail as they approach maximum capacity.

 

Agree on the dedicated ROW.  I've long thought that all the highways around town should be configured like the Katy fwy in that you have two-way dedicated HOV/HOT lanes down the middle.  Having that set up in such a way that you can use HOV all the way, traversing multiple freeways, without having to drop back to the mainlanes would allow us to use P&R type service between major destinations all day, in both directions.  Then from stations along the HOV/freeways you could have connectivity to buses, lrt, and brt to bridge the final mile.  By using P&R buses combined with a thorough HOV network you can easily extend transit reach out into the exurbs.

[102IAHexpress]

8 hours ago, cspwal said:

 

 

Trying to find the current plan, I stumbled across this

http://www.metronext.org/pdfs/METRONext_PI Phase 2_April_2019_FINAL.pdf

 

 

 

Interesting "ideas" they put together. We will have to see what actually becomes a formal proposal, and what the board decides.

 

The most interesting thing I saw was the picture of a commuter bus with bicycle access. You learn something new everyday. Two decades of riding Metro buses, and I didn't know that the tall commuter buses had a bicycle rack in the luggage compartment in the belly of the bus. 

[mollusk]

13 minutes ago, 102IAHexpress said:

The most interesting thing I saw was the picture of a commuter bus with bicycle access. You learn something new everyday. Two decades of riding Metro buses, and I didn't know that the tall commuter buses had a bicycle rack in the luggage compartment in the belly of the bus. 

 

uh... they've been there pretty much all along.  I have a friend who does a reverse commute and uses his bicycle for the last several miles.  He's been stashing it down below the whole time.  

[Houston19514]

20 minutes ago, 102IAHexpress said:

The most interesting thing I saw was the picture of a commuter bus with bicycle access. You learn something new everyday. Two decades of riding Metro buses, and I didn't know that the tall commuter buses had a bicycle rack in the luggage compartment in the belly of the bus. 

 

Least surprising statement I've seen all day.

[wilcal]

17 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Your map appears to show light rail to Bush Airport. That is not back on the table, is it?

 

It's BRT. Zero plans for LRT.

 

11 hours ago, mollusk said:

 

uh... they've been there pretty much all along.  I have a friend who does a reverse commute and uses his bicycle for the last several miles.  He's been stashing it down below the whole time.  

 

Yeah, and it's not the greatest setup. I do it for fun occasionally for my commute from Montrose to Humble and you just have to throw it under there. Would be nice if there was a pull out drawer kind of system. 

[102IAHexpress]

53 minutes ago, wilcal said:

Yeah, and it's not the greatest setup. I do it for fun occasionally for my commute from Montrose to Humble and you just have to throw it under there. Would be nice if there was a pull out drawer kind of system. 

 

Is it like the short low level buses where you can just place your bike on the rack, without the driver getting out? Or does the driver have to get out to open the door/belly? 

 

If the driver doesn't need to get out, then why not just use more of these tall buses for an express bus to hobby? Eliminate the expense of light rail. Just, throw your luggage down below, then when it's time for your stop, get out, open the belly and go on your way. 

[wilcal]

16 minutes ago, 102IAHexpress said:

 

Is it like the short low level buses where you can just place your bike on the rack, without the driver getting out? Or does the driver have to get out to open the door/belly? 

 

If the driver doesn't need to get out, then why not just use more of these tall buses for an express bus to hobby? Eliminate the expense of light rail. Just, throw your luggage down below, then when it's time for your stop, get out, open the belly and go on your way. 

 

It's a Park and Ride bus, so it's the larger coach style ones. Just like the ones that are on the 102 occasionally, so people do put luggage/other stuff underneath. 

 

The driver does not assist, you just raise the handle and it swings open. 

[102IAHexpress]

1 hour ago, wilcal said:

 

It's a Park and Ride bus, so it's the larger coach style ones. Just like the ones that are on the 102 occasionally, so people do put luggage/other stuff underneath. 

 

 

Gotcha. So it's -not- like the one in the picture? That's what I've never seen before. Bike storage that pulls out, like a drawer. I always understood it to be a big storage bin, that could hold anything that would fit. I've just never seen one that is designed for bike to be stored like a drawer. 

[wilcal]

7 minutes ago, 102IAHexpress said:

 

Gotcha. So it's -not- like the one in the picture? That's what I've never seen before. Bike storage that pulls out, like a drawer. I always understood it to be a big storage bin, that could hold anything that would fit. I've just never seen one that is designed for bike to be stored like a drawer. 

 

I don't see a pic that you are referencing.

 

There's no bin on the Metro ones. 

 

This is basically an identical setup: 

 

The passenger uses the handle and it's just an open area that you slide your bike in. There is a designated bike storage cubicle with a sticker on it usually. 

[102IAHexpress]

3 minutes ago, wilcal said:

 

I don't see a pic that you are referencing.

 

 

 

Sorry, it's on page 16 of the "board workshop" pdf that was posted a few posts up.

 

This is what is on the picture on page 16, which I have never seen before:

 

 

[wilcal]

4 hours ago, 102IAHexpress said:

 

Sorry, it's on page 16 of the "board workshop" pdf that was posted a few posts up.

 

This is what is on the picture on page 16, which I have never seen before:

 

 

 

Oh man, that would be so much better.

I first assumed something like this would be inside the  hold where the bike sticker is.

[H-Town Man]

On ‎5‎/‎2‎/‎2019 at 1:40 PM, cspwal said:

Here's the METRONext plan as currently formulated

All the grey lines are going to be "express" buses that will offer two way service all week.  Additionally, there's some mention somewhere of "Westheimer signature bus" that would be a limited bus between Downtown, Midtown, Greenway, and Uptown

 

Trying to find the current plan, I stumbled across this

http://www.metronext.org/pdfs/METRONext_PI Phase 2_April_2019_FINAL.pdf

 

Looking at the numbers they came up with, the least expensive option per new rider is the green and purple line extension to telephone road, and then running down to Hobby.  It would result in a 38 min ride to the aiport from downtown (on the Green line), ~8,100 new riders at a cost of $1.06 billion, or $131 million per new rider.

 

The most expensive per new rider is a BRT to Hobby from downtown - it would cost $1.6 billion, but only get 6,0000 new riders.  Upshot is a 29 minute ride to the airport, with only 2 stops

https://imgur.com/e8ljaQK

 

I posted all the alternatives here https://imgur.com/a/XjCObXX 

Here is the comparisons

Option	Travel time Downtown to Hobby (min)	Daily ridership (model)	Daily ridership (model) + airport users	Capital cost	Cost per new rider
Green & Purple line extend; combine, continue to Hobby	38	6,600	8,100	$1,060,000,000	$130,864
Green line extension	40	4,600	6,100	$900,000,000	$147,541
BRT Extension from Green line and Purple lines	51	4,500	5,400	$903,000,000	$167,222
Purple line extension	48	2,800	4,300	$881,000,000	$204,884
Both extensions	40	7,200	8,700	$1,800,000,000	$206,897
BRT from Downtown to Hobby	29	5,100	6,000	$1,600,000,000	$266,667

 

When did they add light rail to the Northwest Transit Center and beyond? This is exciting if true.

 

[EllenOlenska]

1 hour ago, H-Town Man said:

 

When did they add light rail to the Northwest Transit Center and beyond? This is exciting if true.

 

Is that a track on (or near) the highway and not on Washington? 

[wilcal]

1 hour ago, H-Town Man said:

 

When did they add light rail to the Northwest Transit Center and beyond? This is exciting if true.

 

 

43 minutes ago, EllenOlenska said:

Is that a track on (or near) the highway and not on Washington? 

 

That is almost assuredly a mistake on the map. That is going to be BRT. 

 

The light rail would be extended on the north side to Acres Homes stop on the highway.

 

That map also shows red line extending to meet with purple to continue on to Hobby, and that plan was scrapped as well I thought. 

[Houston19514]

Yeah.  I'm pretty sure the map posted above by cspwal is not the current plan.

 

I think the current plan can be found here (except that the Purple/Green lines to Hobby have been redesigned, as recently discussed.

[H-Town Man]

Ok. Ho hum.

 

[wilcal]

Dug Begley reporting that at the Metro Board Meeting today that the Green/Purple line would be extended west to Washington@Heights Blvd

 

 

Hell, at this point, just continue it up some combo of Shepherd/Durham into the Heights. They need to be redesigned anyway and be suject to a road diet. 

 

Edited May 23, 2019 by wilcal

[cougarpad]

1 hour ago, wilcal said:

Dug Begley reporting that at the Metro Board Meeting today that the Green/Purple line would be extended west to Washington@Heights Blvd

 

 

Hell, at this point, just continue it up some combo of Shepherd/Durham into the Heights. They need to be redesigned anyway and be suject to a road diet. 

 

This section has a high chance of getting built because it would extend upward to the highseed rail atation if it gets built.

[Texasota]

That would be absolutely fantastic. Such a logical extension of core capacity.

[Avossos]

2 hours ago, wilcal said:

Dug Begley reporting that at the Metro Board Meeting today that the Green/Purple line would be extended west to Washington@Heights Blvd

 

 

Hell, at this point, just continue it up some combo of Shepherd/Durham into the Heights. They need to be redesigned anyway and be suject to a road diet. 

 

 

46 minutes ago, Texasota said:

That would be absolutely fantastic. Such a logical extension of core capacity.

 

I am a fan of this. The courthouse may not be there for long, but the need for transportation in this area is important.

 

Why not take it down center street instead? That would keep Wash ave pretty functional while Center Street can be improved... Also not sure why it would stop at Heights... I think it should go all the way up Shepard / Durahm and to NW transit Station.... No need to keep Purple and Green together past Houston Ave...

[cougarpad]

1 hour ago, Avossos said:

 

 

I am a fan of this. The courthouse may not be there for long, but the need for transportation in this area is important.

 

Why not take it down center street instead? That would keep Wash ave pretty functional while Center Street can be improved... Also not sure why it would stop at Heights... I think it should go all the way up Shepard / Durahm and to NW transit Station.... No need to keep Purple and Green together past Houston Ave...

The regional maps of the metro plans posted up in the the thread has lightrail going all the way up to where Northwest Mall/ Highspeed Station is. I think the map recently posted is just a cut out of the line in the Heights corridor from the bigger total line.

Edited May 23, 2019 by cougarpad

[rechlin]

I agree this would be fantastic, if it goes down Center as @Avossos said, instead of Washington.  There are no good east-west alternative roads to Washington, so if the rail went down that, it would slow down traffic (bicycle, automotive, etc) way too much.  It's OK that rail went down Main because drivers and cyclists can always take roads like Travis and Fannin.  But with Washington, there is no good alternative.

 

And yes, it should ultimately go at least to Shepherd, and maybe all the way to Westcott, and then somehow eventually make it up to the Northwest Transit Center, perhaps via Old Katy Road.

[Triton]

5 hours ago, wilcal said:

Dug Begley reporting that at the Metro Board Meeting today that the Green/Purple line would be extended west to Washington@Heights Blvd

 

 

Hell, at this point, just continue it up some combo of Shepherd/Durham into the Heights. They need to be redesigned anyway and be suject to a road diet. 

 

 

Fantastic! Me and my wife were literally talking about this yesterday as we were eating on Washington at Ninja Ramen. I dare anyone to take a drive down Washington and the amount of renovations, new town homes, brand new bars, and multi-family mid rises either just finished or under construction is just staggering. The Washington corridor is on the up and we were telling each other how it would be great to have some type of transit line bring all this together. But I think they need to be wary about only have one lane going each way on Washington... some of those areas can get clogged, especially with Uber and Lyft constantly dropping people off. Too bad there's not a way to do a type of Post Oak Blvd redevelopment... I just don't think Washington Ave has the space.

[ADCS]

13 minutes ago, Triton said:

 

Fantastic! Me and my wife were literally talking about this yesterday as we were eating on Washington at Ninja Ramen. I dare anyone to take a drive down Washington and the amount of renovations, new town homes, brand new bars, and multi-family mid rises either just finished or under construction is just staggering. The Washington corridor is on the up and we were telling each other how it would be great to have some type of transit line bring all this together. But I think they need to be wary about only have one lane going each way on Washington... some of those areas can get clogged, especially with Uber and Lyft constantly dropping people off. Too bad there's not a way to do a type of Post Oak Blvd redevelopment... I just don't think Washington Ave has the space.

 

Center St is a logical relief route for Washington

[Triton]

6 minutes ago, ADCS said:

 

Center St is a logical relief route for Washington

Yea, but they'll need to redo Center St as well.