Jump to content

Houston's Own Grand Central Station-Downtown Transit Hub


DJ V Lawrence

Recommended Posts

Though comparisons to other cities, especially Dallas, often frustrates some of us, I ask you to consider Dallas Union Station. It's right near Reunion Tower (the Big Ball in the skyline). Has the features the new station would have: links to light rail, commuter rail, Amtrak, and bus lines. The point made earlier regarding the proposed Hardy Yards is good. Hopefully these two projects work synergize each others development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 255
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Maybe they'll build an UNDERGROUND parking garage! :P

YEAH...and connected to downtown by lots and lots of TUNNELS and automated MEGA SKY WALKS! Maybe they could build it to look like a WAL-MART too!

(Sorry..couldn't resist! ) :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YEAH...and connected to downtown by lots and lots of TUNNELS and automated MEGA SKY WALKS! Maybe they could build it to look like a WAL-MART too!

(Sorry..couldn't resist! ) :D

Honestly we need a airport downtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing that this seems to be missing is it being a major teminus itself. It is just a place to transfer from one transport mode to another. Not like Grand Central where it is an actual destination. Maybe if it was closer to downtown or any of the major business centers around town... but north of 10?

I lived in NYC for a short time, but I don't ever remeber GCS being a destination unto itself. It's primary purpose is to be a major transportation hub.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I lived in NYC for a short time, but I don't ever remeber GCS being a destination unto itself. It's primary purpose is to be a major transportation hub.

I think the point really was that the area/neighborhood is a destination, not the building itself. Many people can get off the trains in GCS and walk to their ultimate destination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point really was that the area/neighborhood is a destination, not the building itself. Many people can get off the trains in GCS and walk to their ultimate destination.

thank ya

dont get me wrong, I'm down with this. I just see a big difference in use and therefore a weak comparison. I doubt I would try walking to the Spaghetti Warehouse from there, mush less to any of downtown's commercial towers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point really was that the area/neighborhood is a destination, not the building itself. Many people can get off the trains in GCS and walk to their ultimate destination.

Sure you can, if your destination is the UN or the Public Library. Anything else is going to be a pretty good hike. While a walk from the proposed Intermodal to Spaghetti Warehouse is a healthy .6 miles, so is Bryant Park from Grand Central. Times Square? Twice that. Want to see the site of the World Trade Center? Bring a lunch. It is over 5 miles away, akin to walking to The Medical Center.

There is this common myth that everything is a pleasant 2 block walk from everything else. In reality, it is 13.4 miles long and 1 to 2.3 miles wide. The reason it seems so accessible is its fortuitous shape (long and skinny), and it's well developed transit system, which had a 100 year head start on ours.

Any misguided belief that Grand Central is anywhere close to New York's Downtown is to completely ignore the realities of NYC. The proposed Intermodal is virtually IN Downtown Houston compared to Grand Central's location in Manhattan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure you can, if your destination is the UN or the Public Library. Anything else is going to be a pretty good hike. While a walk from the proposed Intermodal to Spaghetti Warehouse is a healthy .6 miles, so is Bryant Park from Grand Central. Times Square? Twice that. Want to see the site of the World Trade Center? Bring a lunch. It is over 5 miles away, akin to walking to The Medical Center.

There is this common myth that everything is a pleasant 2 block walk from everything else. In reality, it is 13.4 miles long and 1 to 2.3 miles wide. The reason it seems so accessible is its fortuitous shape (long and skinny), and it's well developed transit system, which had a 100 year head start on ours.

Any misguided belief that Grand Central is anywhere close to New York's Downtown is to completely ignore the realities of NYC. The proposed Intermodal is virtually IN Downtown Houston compared to Grand Central's location in Manhattan.

Don't be ridiculous. I (and I am sure others) are quite aware of the size of Manhattan Island. And any misguided belief that the only "destination" on Manhattan is in downtown or any misguided belief that there are no workplaces, offices, retail stores, residences, restaurants etc, etc, etc. within easy walking distance of GCS is also to completely ignore the realities of NYC. (and, trust me, there is a good deal more within a short walk from GCS than just the UN and the Public Library.) If there are almost no destinations in the GCS neighborhood, I wonder what all of those people rushing in and out of the building were doing every time I've been there. Are they just actors hired to make it look busy?

In short, no one even hinted that they believed that ALL of NYC or even all of Manhattan was a "pleasant 2 block walk from" GCS. This is quite contrary to the proposed Intermodal station in Houston, where almost NOTHING wold be a pleasant 2 block walk, and almost every arriving passenger would have to switch to another mode of transportation (other than walking). I think it's probably the best we can hope for, I totally support it, and hopefully, the area around it can grow into a good mixed-use area, so that there can be some pedestrian traffic coming and going from the facility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, as I mentioned in another thread, Grand Central Station is not in Downtown New York either.

Not entirely accurate. Grand Central is in the heart of Midtown Manhattan, which is more New York City's "Downtown" than Downtown is...if that makes sense. All around are Met Life, Chrysler, UN, etc. Don't let the nomenclature fool you. The proposal for Houston is more akin to locating the station in Queens. Nobody walks from Queens to Manhattan...just like nobody will walk from this station to Downtown Houston.

I also would like to "boo" this "Houston version of the NY landmark" comparison. Ours will be nothing like that, so the poor Chronicle writer should be ashamed. This is sorta like how that crappy homeless park was going to be "Houston's version of Central Park." I wonder if these Chronicle idiots have ever even been to New York...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The proposal for Houston is more akin to locating the station in Queens.

If you are comparing Buffalo Bayou to the East River, perhaps it could be Queens. :P

New York comparisons are silly anyway. The only way to put this building in Downtown would be to tunnel numerous tracks to it, which is impractical and very expensive. Besides, a transfer is not a deal killer. The Main Street line runs every 6 minutes.

And yes, calling this Houston's answer to GCT invites derision and disappointment. It could hardly compare, though if designed well, it could do us proud. The Chronicle should move on to more realistic comparisons. There is only one New York City. No American city comes close. But, that doesn't mean there are no other great cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yes, calling this Houston's answer to GCT invites derision and disappointment. It could hardly compare, though if designed well, it could do us proud. The Chronicle should move on to more realistic comparisons. There is only one New York City. No American city comes close. But, that doesn't mean there are no other great cities.

truer words have never been said...............well, concerning the comparison of a transportation crossroads in houston. we are not, can not be a chicago, nyc, etc. we are not geographically challenged, we are not limited by some of the things that larger cities are limited by. ergo..............we can be inventive, unique, artistic and genius. let's be daring enough to be houston, and make it something that works for us with a little style and a lot of bravado. the unique genius of our town is understatement.........a subtle, gentle beauty that is functional, profitable and human in scale. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am in total agreement with the comments regarding comparing this to Grand Central Station. Once again the Chronicle does a disservice to the city of Houston. The frequent silly comarisons such as this and the lame comarison of the new park to Cenral Park just seem juvenile and insecure. Sometimes I think the best thing that could happen for the future of Houston is to replace the entire staff at the Chronicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*reads article*

YAY! A 150 million dollar station, surrounded by 20 acres of park and ride lots!

:yawn:

Hardly. This project will not be surrounded by 20 acres of park and ride lots. Do the math. The land is valuable and will be developed (see below). METRO is committed to transit-oriented development, and Cypress (a real estate investment and development company that has done some high-profile projects around the country) made a huge purchase of the Hardy Yards site next door... also to be developed. There is a lot of investment going on in this area... and parking lots are not part of the plan.

If one does a little research into METRO over the past two years or so, some big changes have taken place. Light-rail has finally started... and ridership has already surpassed projections. The leadership of METRO is now made up of people from the real estate community - and the last time I checked they were initiating two transit-oriented developments. The TOD at the Texas Medical Center - with office, retail, hotel, and condo space all included in the mix - will cost over $200 million and will be built atop the Galen St. station. You guys want dense, pedestrian oriented development?? - here you go. Another retail (w/ a possible multifamily component) development is being constructed at a Park & Ride facility off of 290. More light rail, commuter rail, and bus rapid transit are all being incorporated into METRO's expansion projects - to be completed by 2012. A central intermodal facility is exactly what we need in Houston... and I'm extremely excited about this project.

And btw, the site makes total sense. It is very close to existing rail lines, Interstate 10, Interstate 45, and Highway 59 (its intermodal - so it includes rubber wheeled vehicles, also). Light rail is being expanded straight into this site. This area was incorporated into the Main Street Corridor Plan of a few years ago, as well as the 2025 Plan for the CBD by Central Houston, Inc. (that was released last year). I think we'll be pleasantly surprised if we revisit this topic in five or six years as to how much this area... and downtown and the city as a whole... will benefit from projects like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(Warning: this comment contains wishful thinking of a graphic nature)

I think this central station will be cool, but I have another suggestion; put a smaller version downtown along with it for local buses. Location: The Shops in Houston.

http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...?showtopic=4802

Some of us have discussed that not many people go there regularly. They're already renovating and putting mad money into The Shops now. Has lots of retail there that could benefit from mass crowds passing by. And it's in close proximity to Toyota Center, George R. Brown, Hilton Americas, Minute Maid Park, and the new Downtown Park. Think the Pavillions will be located near there as well. It could help that whole part of downtown become more pedestrian friendly. :P

Simply have all buses headed downtown drop everyone off at the Downtown station (The Shops), and have double Decker buses or something different transport people throughout downtown from that station. And have buses (and the light rail on Main) take people directly to the Grand Station at N.Main and 1-10 if needbe B)

(end wishful thinking here)

I wonder why Metro would feel the need to have a Grand Station in a location that doesn't have any true landmarks around it. Something tells me they will be looking for land soon. Probably Downtown or Midtown, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but Metro built their stupid $300 million useless train because they couldn't convince enough people to get on a safer, cheaper, more efficient bus. Now, they think they're going to get people to get on two or maybe three busses/trains/"rubber-wheeled vehicles"/Mega walks?

This has to be the most head-in-ass organization of all time. Just take a look at their HQ Downtown. It's built right on the rail line -- touted as the future of their operation -- and what do they do? They totally ignore the stop! Instead, all the accomodations are for busses. The DTC stop on the rail line dumps you off in the middle of a deserted area of town, out in the elements, on the back lot of the Metro HQ. If you want to transfer to a bus, you have to walk across traffic in the heat and/or rain...and go a block, to boot!

I think they're right. This is the future of Metro.

Between Metro and the Chron, there is always a bit of competition at to which end of Downtown will produce the louder sucking sound of imbeciles trying to push forward stupid agendas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The DTC stop on the rail line dumps you off in the middle of a deserted area of town, out in the elements, on the back lot of the Metro HQ. If you want to transfer to a bus, you have to walk across traffic in the heat and/or rain...and go a block, to boot!

:blink:

Am I missing something here? You're complaining because a person must walk 100 feet from the Southbound station to get to the Transit Center? Or is it because they must walk 400 feet from the Northbound station?

The Main Street line cannot have 2 stations in the same block due to space constraints. The only way to have the bus and rail on the same block would be to go underground. Because of the Pierce Elevated, the stop could not be placed further south. Mass transit riders understand the concept of walking one block to a transfer. Houstonians understand the concept of heat and rain...and Houston mass transit riders prepare accordingly.

I certainly understand your point if you are saying that because YOU would have to walk a block (and only if you transfer from the northbound train) YOU would not make the transfer, and therefore not take the train, but to suggest that no one else will walk 400 feet is a bit much.

METRO is not perfect by any stretch. They deserve criticism for some things, one being their foot dragging on placing bikeracks on all busses, which was part of the bond referendum. But, let's keep the criticism reasonable. Placing their admin building on a less expensive block saves taxpayer money. Placing an intermodal station at the confluence of Amtrak and light rail lines is also efficient. To blame them for not wasting money, and incurring more anti-Metro wrath is a bit much. There are compromises to be made with regard to money and "perfect world" issues. I believe the compromises are necessary, and for the most part, livable.

Mass transit is designed to get the maximum number of people CLOSE to their destination. It cannot and will not transport them to their front door. Some think the trade off of convenience of a car for the savings of money is worth it. Some do not. It is not for everyone. But, 40,000 people per day think the train is worth it. So do 275,000 others on the entire system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:blink:

Am I missing something here? You're complaining because a person must walk 100 feet from the Southbound station to get to the Transit Center? Or is it because they must walk 400 feet from the Northbound station?

The Main Street line cannot have 2 stations in the same block due to space constraints. The only way to have the bus and rail on the same block would be to go underground. Because of the Pierce Elevated, the stop could not be placed further south. Mass transit riders understand the concept of walking one block to a transfer. Houstonians understand the concept of heat and rain...and Houston mass transit riders prepare accordingly.

I certainly understand your point if you are saying that because YOU would have to walk a block (and only if you transfer from the northbound train) YOU would not make the transfer, and therefore not take the train, but to suggest that no one else will walk 400 feet is a bit much.

METRO is not perfect by any stretch. They deserve criticism for some things, one being their foot dragging on placing bikeracks on all busses, which was part of the bond referendum. But, let's keep the criticism reasonable. Placing their admin building on a less expensive block saves taxpayer money. Placing an intermodal station at the confluence of Amtrak and light rail lines is also efficient. To blame them for not wasting money, and incurring more anti-Metro wrath is a bit much. There are compromises to be made with regard to money and "perfect world" issues. I believe the compromises are necessary, and for the most part, livable.

Mass transit is designed to get the maximum number of people CLOSE to their destination. It cannot and will not transport them to their front door. Some think the trade off of convenience of a car for the savings of money is worth it. Some do not. It is not for everyone. But, 40,000 people per day think the train is worth it. So do 275,000 others on the entire system.

It's not necessarily the walk that's the problem, it's the connection. There's no easy way to connect from train to bus at the DTC and the two are in the same block. Had Metro reoriented the bus barn side of the building to run alongside Main, they could have covered both the train and bus platforms to make "Houston's version of Grand Central Station". Instead, the train drops passengers off in the middle of the street on the opposite sied of the building from the bus platforms.

Your mentioning that the train cannot stop in both directions due to "space constraints" is an apologist's way of defending a design that is inherently flawed by saying there's nothing Metro can do about it. Bolderdash. Metro fast tracked this silly train against the will of Houstonians and have saddled us with a a system that cannot serve the commuting needs of the city due to "space constraints," costs of expansion and the need for multiple, incompatible modes.

Classic bureaucratic screw job, all for the sake of being a "world class city" in the eyes of a handful of rednecks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Metro fast tracked this silly train against the will of Houstonians and have saddled us with a a system that cannot serve the commuting needs of the city due to "space constraints," costs of expansion and the need for multiple, incompatible modes.

Your opinion.

Mine is that they did the best they could in the face of rail and mass transit opposition from Westside taxpayers and politicians...and it works pretty decently.

I find the "handful of rednecks" to be the opposition wanting more and bigger freeways upon which they can drive pickups and SUVs, one to a vehicle, not those of us trying to piecemeal together a transit system in the Oil Capitol of the World.

That makes two opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not necessarily the walk that's the problem, it's the connection. There's no easy way to connect from train to bus at the DTC and the two are in the same block. Had Metro reoriented the bus barn side of the building to run alongside Main, they could have covered both the train and bus platforms to make "Houston's version of Grand Central Station". Instead, the train drops passengers off in the middle of the street on the opposite sied of the building from the bus platforms.

Oh please! It is not that serious. I use that transit center all the time to get to and from U of H and walkng half a block to a bus is not that big of a deal. I wouldn't even cry bad planing on their part. I agree with RedScare, this is not something to complain about with Metro. You have to walk when you get to the TMC Transit Center. Still not that big of a deal. Or you can take even the longer route and go through the skywalk. The design for these transit centers could have been a lot worse and to me, a person that uses it frequently, they are very convenient.

And I think calling a train line useless that at one time got 10,000 less passengers a day than Dallas' whole LRT system is a stretch. This still may be true unless DART's LRT got higher ridership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not necessarily the walk that's the problem, it's the connection. There's no easy way to connect from train to bus at the DTC and the two are in the same block. Had Metro reoriented the bus barn side of the building to run alongside Main, they could have covered both the train and bus platforms to make "Houston's version of Grand Central Station". Instead, the train drops passengers off in the middle of the street on the opposite sied of the building from the bus platforms.

Your mentioning that the train cannot stop in both directions due to "space constraints" is an apologist's way of defending a design that is inherently flawed by saying there's nothing Metro can do about it. Bullshit. Metro fast tracked this silly train against the will of Houstonians and have saddled us with a a system that cannot serve the commuting needs of the city due to "space constraints," costs of expansion and the need for multiple, incompatible modes.

Classic bureaucratic screw job, all for the sake of being a "world class city" in the eyes of a handful of rednecks.

The walk nor the connection don't seem to bother anyone but you.

If they had used your idea to put the DTTC on the other side of the building to make a "Grand Central", where would you put the 3-5 converging rail lines plus Amtrack plus buses [Greyhound; Rio Grande Express] plus plus Park and Ride?

If you had some proposals that didn't involve shooting down posters with scatological insults, I'm sure they would be welcomed.

:closedeyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but Metro built their stupid $300 million useless train because they couldn't convince enough people to get on a safer, cheaper, more efficient bus.

It cost less than $300 million.

And yes, people would rather ride on a train than a bus. Isn't the point of public transportation to provide a service that people will actually use?

Metro fast tracked this silly train against the will of Houstonians

Would those be the same Houstonians who voted for the train? :wacko:

Fortunately not all Houstonians' opinions are shaped by listening to AM talk radio. And is it just me, or is there something positively Freudian about this hatred of trains among certain sectors? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The walk nor the connection don't seem to bother anyone but you.

If they had used your idea to put the DTTC on the other side of the building to make a "Grand Central", where would you put the 3-5 converging rail lines plus Amtrack plus buses [Greyhound; Rio Grande Express] plus plus Park and Ride?

If you had some proposals that didn't involve shooting down posters with scatological insults, I'm sure they would be welcomed.

:closedeyes:

Okay, so how does this system become a commuter solution?

As it stands, it's a trolley -- a people mover that merely replaced the busses that were more effective on this route. But, because the trains cannot be any longer than they are now, it can never be a commuter line. No, for that you have to incorporate a heavy rail and now a BRT and make connections. Okay -- but Metro seems hell bent on making connections as inconvenient as possible -- either by dumping people in the middle of a street or now in a "Grand Central" station that is neither, because it will be across the bayou from where anyone wants to go.

The current light rail is not a mass transit solution. It is a trolley -- an amusement park ride that is slow and unnecessarily limited. We'd be much better off with the money we spent on this train being used to develop a system with a viable long-range plan behind it. That starts and ends with a train that does not travel at grade and can move along at more than 15 miles per hour. As it stands, we're out of money and we still don't have a system that adequately serves the city. Plus, we keep building more and more freeways and tollways.

Now, I've always enjoyed your comments here and have found you to be one of the most interesting posters here, but really couldn't care less whether you "welcome" my proposals or not. You may choose to read and respond, or not. I also realize that dogboy is baiting me, which I find fun, as it stimulates this conversation.

Fortunately not all Houstonians' opinions are shaped by listening to AM talk radio. And is it just me, or is there something positively Freudian about this hatred of trains among certain sectors? :rolleyes:

Bolderdash. I do not ever listen to AM radio. Especially now that MLB is carried on XM.

Would those be the same Houstonians who voted for the train? :wacko:

BTW - I voted FOR the train as it was presented to me. I am in favor of a viable mass transit solution. The plans I saw were visionary with a real aim at getting a system that served rapid transit needs, not just PR and trolley goals.

Anyone who's ever been on a really good system -- even a really good light rail system -- would laugh at our stupid train.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


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


×
×
  • Create New...