Houston's Own Grand Central Station-Downtown Transit Hub

[gto250us]

I think the idea is to make Amtrak "relevent [sic] to Houston." The fact that "current survice [sic] is a joke" is probably due to the fact that there is no station like the one being planned.

Not to torpedo you, but I think sometimes people get too carried away with complaining on this site and miss looking at the big picture.

OK, my spelling sucks.

The poor Amtrak service in Houston has nothing to do with the quality of the station. Amtrak service outside of the NE is always poor and I don't ever see that changing. I again ask you, what percentage of Houston has actually used Amtrak during the past year? I bet more folks rode horses and wagons into downtown than those who rode Amtrak. By that measure we should design hitching posts into the new station.

[Transit Nut]

I apologize in advance for the length of this post, but there are a few things which should be addressed.

The Overuse of the Term "Grand Central" and its Connotation

First, the whole "Grand Central" thing. If you read the Chronicle article http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headli...ro/3599661.html carefully, the person who was quoted as saying "Grand Central" was board member Gerald Smith. If you read his bio http://www.ridemetro.org/about/smithbio.asp, he had significant ties to New York, so perhaps this is what he visualized when he said "Grand Central." He could have just as easily used "Union Station" or "Penn Station," names of large stations in cities like Washington, DC, Newark, Toronto, or LA. It may be misleading that the Chronicle used the term a number of times, including in the title of the article. Houston's Intermodal Center may never be as grand or famous as the ones in NYC, but as long as it's better than the one in Dallas (that one needs some renovation), I'm sure it will be nice and functional. By the way, many people call it incorrectly as "Grand Central Station" instead its real name, "Grand Central Terminal" http://www.grandcentralterminal.com.

Location of the Intermodal Facility

Second, some people seem to have an issue with the Intermodal Center's location of N. Main/Hardy vs. Post Office. Based on the documents at http://www.houstonintermodal.org, the leaders looked at a number of zones around Houston for a Intermodal Center. In August 2005, they determined that somewhere in North Downtown would be best. This zone included the Hardy Yards, Post Office, and the site of the METRO bus facility. Apparently between then and now, they decided that the N. Main/Hardy area was best.

Diversity of Types of Users

I think the thinking of a number of supporters of the Post Office site is the walking distance to existing offices in downtown. However, it does not take into consideration the people using the Intermodal Center but are not M-F, 8-5 downtown commuters. Remember, this is only one part of the large METRO Solutions plan. There are already connections to the Med Center, Hermann Park, and Reliant, and there will eventually be connections to both airports, the Galleria, UH, etc. Not everyone who will use the Intermodal will be weekday commuters. Some types of people who may eventually use it:

1. Downtown weekday commuters
   
2. Med Center employees and patients
   
3. Sports fans going to MMP, Toyota, and Reliant on evenings and weekends
   
4. Visitors from south of the border going to special soccer/futbol events
   
5. Families going to the museums
   
6. Out of state students going home for the holidays
   
7. Convention attendees
   

Almost all of these people will have to make some sort of transfer to get to their final destination. Just because the facility is within walking distance of hundreds of offices doesn't mean it's in a good location.

Platform Width

Yes, people could walk a reasonable distance from the Post Office location to the UH-D station, but you also have to remember that the UH-D station was never meant to handle thousands of people. It is built on the historic Main St. bridge next to the historic UH Main building. The platform, which serves both directions, is only 10 feet wide because of the width of the bridge. This is the same width as other platforms that only serve one direction (Bell, McGowen, etc.). Other stations that have one platform to serve both directions (TMC TC, Reliant Park, etc.) are about 16-25 feet wide. If thousands of people on all these modes of transportation are going to pass through the Intermodal, there will have to be a light rail platform that can accommodate them all. When the existing light rail is extended to the N. Main/Hardy Intermodal location, they will be able to design the appropriate facilities.

UH-Downtown Expansion

If you look in another topic in this category, UH-D will be buliding a new College of Business building north of I-10, where one of their parking lots was. This is a huge, beneficial development that will connect the traditional northern edge of downtown with the other side of the freeway. With the new UH-D building, Hardy development, and the Intermodal Center, this will be a very nice place.

Amtrak, Planning, and the Unexpected

Yes, Amtrak service today is bad. However, when you plan for something that will open 5-6 years from now and last much longer, you can't always use what exists today as your guide. For example, METRORail construction began 6-7 years ago, around 2000. If you go back 6-7 more years to 1993-94, there wasn't even a plan for light rail. The Houston Pavilions will be open around Oct 2007, less than 2 years away. If we go back 2 years to 2004, I don't think anyone would have seen that a House of Blues would be coming to Houston. Same thing with the Astros; who would have thought in 2003 that Clemens and Pettitte would be playing in Houston and going to the World Serires in 2005?

The point is, there are some things you can plan for, like LRT and BRT on the North, Southeast, Harrisburg, etc. corridors by 2012. Other things just happen out of the blue. Just because Amtrak has been bad doesn't mean that when the Intermodal opens in 2012 (6 years from now) things will still be the same. Hey, it may be replaced by something better. However, any Intermodal facility should have facilities for intercity rail, whatever and whenever that may be.

Finally, remember the Intermodal Facility is not just a METRO thing. Other groups, like the City of Houston, the Downtown District, and Midtown are also part of it too.

[VicMan]

HISD should be added to that list. HISD should use the facility to help transport students who attend non-home schools across the city.

[2112]

No, but a bit of an unfortunate choice of initials, eh?

an unfortunate choice of genitals?

sorry, my terret's was kicking in.

[bkjones98]

Anyone know of any news on this project?

[editor]

Also, editor? I thought profanity was censored out?

Not very well. I put in three or four words to filter. I should add more.

[Ethanra]

IF Houston does build a central station, what about a high speed train from IAH to it. People will be able to head straight DT then use the rail to get to almost every impt. buisness area in the city, even more areas after the university line is built. I used the Hardy Toll Road the first time in years to head home from the Woodlands and pictured a non-stop train from the airport to DT running along the existing lines. Any thoughts?

[editor]

IF Houston does build a central station, what about a high speed train from IAH to it. People will be able to head straight DT then use the rail to get to almost every impt. buisness area in the city, even more areas after the university line is built. I used the Hardy Toll Road the first time in years to head home from the Woodlands and pictured a non-stop train from the airport to DT running along the existing lines. Any thoughts?

High speed? How about ANY speed? Houston would get a lot more visitors if they knew they wouldn't have to rent a car. I take a lot of two- and three-day trips to cities around the world. The cities where I don't have to rent a car are the ones most often visited. The other ones get my business only if I must.

[JGraspo]

Anyone else see this in the paper, about the Intermodal

As a transit hub, he said, the terminal would become the new north end of the Red Line, whose tracks would rise about 30 feet onto the plaza.

To continue north, riders would descend to street level and transfer to the planned North Line, whose buses on guideways would leave the terminal on its west side and curve north to North Main.

If ridership grows enough to justify converting the North Line to light rail, its tracks would enter the terminal complex directly on North Main and connect to the Red Line, Gast said.

Metro's planned East End and Southeast guided rapid transit lines, which would also be converted to light rail as ridership increased, would enter the terminal complex from the east.

Eventual commuter rail lines from U.S. 290 and the Katy Freeway would enter from the west. Union Pacific would also continue to operate freight tracks there.

For buses, Gast said, there would be four bays initially and room for another 10.

Sounds like the planning is coming along fine

[mls1202]

Pictures! Somebody post pictures! "A 400-foot-wide circular plaza, tentatively designated "the Great Space," where transit riders would disembark into a setting with greenery, an open-air market and other amenities."

However, this is somewhat diminshed by the 2000 car sea of concrete.

[RedScare]

Ask and you shall receive.

http://metrosolutions.org/go/site/1068/

Click on the link right under "Hot off the Press", and you will get a PowerPoint presentation of the Intermodal.

EDIT: Sorry, that is an overview of everything. Try this one.

http://metrosolutions.org/go/doc/1068/119976/

[Montrose1100]

I don't think some forumers should flip out over the name reference to Grand Central Terminal/Station. And I can understand how common use of the name would lead one to believe it's actual name is "Grand Central Station". I mean, people have refered to it as Grand Central Station since it was built... It's not like the internet has made people say it one way or another, you know? Wasn't it rebuilt so many times with differnt names? Or Rennovated with different names? It's the same as how people refer to the Williams Tower as the Transco Tower, and such.

Anywho, I'm glad Metro seems to be finally thinking for the future ... well maybe just for today and perhaps yesterday. Better late then never?

[mainvoice]

Yeah I would like to see how far this goes.

Do we really need something like this?

It would be cool just to have it, but do we really need this.

I don't see too many people wanting this. The money could probably be spent on other things for Metro

like speeding up the progress of rail.

I'm waiting for more details before I give it a or a

right now I'm at

i agree with you, it would be nice if they hung the light rail from a cable above ground and finished connecting the rest of the city to downtown. i believe that a group that submitted a proposal for the downtown light rail, but was not awarded it had an above ground cable system concept that was used in China and I believe it only took one year to complete a large project over there. Having the light rail completed will help offset the parking fees downtown and will bring a lot of good circulation to the city.

[Guest Plastic]

We've been talking about a Grand Central type transit center Downtown. The big issues are ,should we put it in exactly the center and is there room.

Well first I say we put it next to a place were there's lots of shops, eateries,and restrooms. This is more for the passengers so the can grab a bite to eat, relieve themselves, or go to an ATM while they wait for their bus/train. There's a few places like that Downtown.....The Park,Allen Center,Bayou Placemand The Pavillions.

While not built The Pavillions is an excellent place.Not only will it be a good transit spot but a station would be a good way to let riders access it. Food,restrooms,shops,ATMs only thing missing is space. This is where Plastic comes up with a concept. Since the only space is in the street I prorpose the world's 1st elevated transit center. Since that part of Main is closed off it would stretch over main for 3 blocks. The light rail would run under it. This would leave space at ground level for buses accept in intersections. The whole with of the steet elevated would be for buses. It could even go over cross streets also. The actuual station ould stretch from the 2 Mainstreet Square stations. Then there would be a set of ramps on each end for buses to get up and down. SO the entire lieghthe would be 5 blocks above and on Main. All riders would have to so is walk right over to The Pavillions.

The future trains would would go above ground or bellow.

[GhostDog]

i'd say somewhere about halfway between the ballparks and the museum district...

might have to buy some parking garages out but???

[nmainguy]

Plastic my friend,

How do you propose to get heavy commuter rail to the Pavilions? I think the decision has been made to put it in Hardy Yards [there's a Grand Central thread somewhere].

It's a fine idea if only it had been implemented about 30 years ago. But that would have meant forward thinking which Houston has never been for.

[Guest Plastic]

Who said it had to be heavy commuter rail. Can't light rail run out to Sugarland? And we'll get it to The Pavillions by elevating it. RUn it above the sidewalks.

[nmainguy]

Who said it had to be heavy commuter rail. Can't light rail run out to Sugarland?

Not at high speeds. You need heavy rail that can travel at high speeds with few stops. But I like your concept-just ain't going to happen...

[editor]

Not at high speeds. You need heavy rail that can travel at high speeds with few stops. But I like your concept-just ain't going to happen...

I don't think it's really out of the question.

I hate to bring up Chicago, but it's the transit system I'm most familiar with.

The Purple/Yellow Line travels all the way out to Skokie, Illinois. 14 miles as the crow flies, and much farther (17-20 miles) as the train travels. Sugar Land is about the same distance from downtown Houston.

[GhostDog]

i thought there's a proposed commuter rail to richmond which really would be heavy right?

i'd really eventually like to see heavy commuter lines from the woodlands in, humble on in, galveston in and richmond in...

maybe baytown later or freeport...

of course i'd rather not have heavy rail at all- i'd rather have the city rebuild itself from the inside out...there's so much wasted land inside 610...

[Guest Plastic]

Along RIchmond would be light rail like on Main. COmmuter rail is liek the name suggests,for commuters. People who commute long distances from the suburbs. Places like Sugarland,Katy,and The Woodlands would have commuter rail.

[nmainguy]

i thought there's a proposed commuter rail to richmond which really would be heavy right?

i'd really eventually like to see heavy commuter lines from the woodlands in, humble on in, galveston in and richmond in...

Here's a map of proposed routes:

http://metrosolutions.org/posted/1068/METR...2006.123039.pdf

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

I think the idea of commuter rail should be on forever hold until the LRT lines the people voted for inside the city of Houston are up and running. People dont move to suburbs in order to commute on trains. Trains would be a nice addition to suburban life, but it is not and should not be a priority!!!!!

[Guest Plastic]

I think the idea of commuter rail should be on forever hold until the LRT lines the people voted for inside the city of Houston are up and running. People dont move to suburbs in order to commute on trains. Trains would be a nice addition to suburban life, but it is not and should not be a priority!!!!!

Bukkcone, we need to get work going on the suburban lines as soon as possible. Yes Commuter Rail is priority. Can you imagine like without Park&Rides.

[ssullivan]

Actually commuter rail is not required for high-speed, limited-stop travel. Metro's LRVs have a top operating speed comparable to most commuter rail systems.

The main advantage of a true commuter rail system is that it can operate at much greater capacity more economically than most light rail. Most commuter rail systems are more like traditional passenger trains, with a locomotive pulling a train set of high-capacity passenger cars. Many commuter systems also use double-decker cars to increase capacity without increasing train length.

[Guest Plastic]

YOu can add any number of cars to light rail can't you?

[musicman]

I think the idea of commuter rail should be on forever hold until the LRT lines the people voted for inside the city of Houston are up and running. People dont move to suburbs in order to commute on trains. Trains would be a nice addition to suburban life, but it is not and should not be a priority!!!!!

Remember that the tracks are already there and it would only be a matter of coordinating with the track owners and obtaining the proper locomotives and passenger cars.

ssullivan has been right on.

[MexAmerican_Moose]

damn....looks like i will either have to still use my car to get to school or move inside the loop in the near future.....the North Shore area is not even in Metro's plans for mass transit

[ssullivan]

YOu can add any number of cars to light rail can't you?

Theoretically yes. But because each LRV is a complete, self-propelled vehicle, with operator cabs, they are pretty expensive. Most commuter rail coaches have no motors to propel the car, or operator cabs, because they require a locomotive to pull them. So they can be less expensive to procure and maintain over time.

And in Houston, with the current MetroRail line, train length is limited to two cars because of the block lengths downtown. Anything longer would start blocking intersections when the train stops, and would require that some cars be letting passengers off in the middle of the street, not at a boarding platform, when the train makes a station stop.

The worst potential problem I see with the commuter line out South Main to Fort Bend County is what's going to happen at Fannin South, where many maps show the line terminating. The current MetroRail line is already getting very crowded during rush hour, and that's without commuter trains dumping several hundred people at the line's southern terminus several times an hour. Metro can make all Red Line trains two cars, and possibly consider reducing headways between trains (I think the current line was engineered for a maximum frequency of every three minutes) but that's about it. I really hope Metro is looking at a long-range plan that would somehow have the Fort Bend commuter line stop at Fannin South, but then continue on to the inter-modal transit center just north of downtown. Of course that's another big potential choke-point, but at least there the passengers going to downtown destinations would have a very short ride, and would not have to be packed in with all the Medical Center passengers like they would if everyone got off the commuter line at Fannin South.

[RedScare]

The worst potential problem I see with the commuter line out South Main to Fort Bend County is what's going to happen at Fannin South, where many maps show the line terminating. The current MetroRail line is already getting very crowded during rush hour, and that's without commuter trains dumping several hundred people at the line's southern terminus several times an hour. Metro can make all Red Line trains two cars, and possibly consider reducing headways between trains (I think the current line was engineered for a maximum frequency of every three minutes) but that's about it.

That would be a very nice problem to have. At 3 minute headways and 400 capacity per vehicle, the RedLine could move 8,000 commuters per hour....in each direction. That would be the capacity of the Katy Freeway (at 2000 vehicles per lane per hour, considered "full"). It is unlikely that the Fort Bend line would reach that level of usage.