METRORail University Line

[zaphod]

The disruption of a tunnel construction depends on how it's done, of course. I doubt if it would be built with an open trench construction, but would probably be built by actually tunnelling under ground, with little surface disruption.

just curious, is that even possible in houston? plus wouldn't the tunnel need to be really deep then?

[Highway6]

From your Alabama/Weslyan Station, it would be quite a hike to Highland Village. I don't buy it when some say no one would take LRT to Highland-but I do think no one would take it if the hike was that long. Second is your route misses the proposed developement at the old Ford dealership and the adjacent one at Westcreek. I still think the Richmond to Weslyan to Westheimer route is the wisest course. The crossing at the tracks adjacent to Highland could actually be a win-win solution if the LRT tracks and Westheimer were built as an underpass.

I agree.. I was settling. I'd like it to be on Westeimer also starting at Weslayn.. but just the thought of surface rail on Westeimer, between 610 and Chimney Rock... the cars aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

So how bout this... Richmond, north on Weslayn, West on Westheimer.

There you have the Highland Park Station at Drexel...

Then Westeimer and the lightrail go under the railroad tracks.. but.. here's the kicker... West of the railroad tracks, only Westheimer comes back up... the lightrail at that point becomes the subway.

Its then not at grade as it crosses 610 or as it runs along the dreaded traffic stretch mentioned above.

You can still puncture in mini boarding stations whereever... one at 610.. one at postoak, wherever.. it can also directly connect to the underground galleria parking garage.

Then we pop it back up to the middle of the Westheimer once it crosses Chimney Rock.

We are freaking geniuses in this forum... how do we let Metro know of our ideas ?

Though.. i notice on their plan... They don't show Westheimer as an option.. I wonder if they have already ruled out anything on Westheimer.

_____________________________________________________

One thing I havn't seen discussed.

How does this line terminate ?

I just reexamined Metro's plan.. they just have it fizzling out past Sage.

Also.. the Uptown line, they have coming down PostOak.

They have a Transit station, i assume where these two lines meet. Does Metro own any land in this area?

It seems, they dont plan to have lightrail eventually ride out to 8 on either Richmond or Westheimer.. then, there is actually no reason for the above proposed to pop back abaove ground.

____________________________________________________

One last issue.....

Will each line need a maintenance/storage facility at one end like at South Fannin, or will the trains be able to switch lines. Also, what was the capacity and intent of the South Fannin yard... is it meant to grow and serve the trains for all future lines ?

* EDIT*

The uptown line, i just realized, is only BRT, not lightrail.

What is everyone's thoughts on Bus Rapid Transit here?

I think, one reason lightrail, or any rail is so appealing, is its appearance of consistency and permenance.

Rail can't move. I think psychologically, that does wonders for would-be riders.

They always know exactly where the route is. It can't change on a whim everytime Metro decides to realign things. Its less or not effected at all by vehicle traffic (in the case of subway). You don't have to worry about drivers filling in and not knowing the routes and missing stops. { Back in junior high, numerous times, I found myself having to tell lost drivers where the express route from downtown up 290 was supposed to go}

BRT is glorifed bus with a supposed rightt-of-way. And it may have dedicated right-of-way, but it still runs on tires and its own power, and is not tied to the earth in any sort of permanent way. I think one reason Transit Agencies like it is because of its flexibility. But I think that flexibility, or lack thereof, is the exact reason why commuters are more comfortable with rail then they are bus.

[nmainguy]

We are freaking geniuses in this forum... how do we let Metro know of our ideas ?

Though.. i notice on their plan... They don't show Westheimer as an option.. I wonder if they have already ruled out anything on Westheimer.

Here's a short statement from METRO regarding Westheimer: http://www.ridemetro.org/News/METROConnect...43862&mid=28506

There is contact info at the bottom.

[WesternGulf]

All this is giving me a headache. I wonder if any of the stations at the ends of the University line will have a park and ride lot like the currenlt line at Fannin South. If so, where would one terminate if placing the line on Westheimer?

[CE_ugh]

Here's a short statement from METRO regarding Westheimer: http://www.ridemetro.org/News/METROConnect...43862&mid=28506

There is contact info at the bottom.

If Highland Village wants it than the Westhiemer would be a definite go.

Also, while I like Highway6's plan to go down Alabama; there are some hopping mad Afton Oaks people who may hit the ceiling if this was even hinted at.

[citykid09]

If Highland Village wants it than the Westhiemer would be a definite go.

Also, while I like Highway6's plan to go down Alabama; there are some hopping mad Afton Oaks people who may hit the ceiling if this was even hinted at.

Underground, above ground, or not on the road, is the only way I can see it going anywhere near Westhimer.

[CE_ugh]

Underground, above ground, or not on the road, is the only way I can see it going anywhere near Westhimer.

Cost is probably the main reason this alignment was dropped from consideration.

[citykid09]

Cost is probably the main reason this alignment was dropped from consideration.

Why? Other cities go all out for there rail systems, why does Houston have to be so cheap with minimum needs. I say atleast go all out on the one line that goes from downtown to uptown. This line should make people say WOW!

[tierwestah]

Pardon me while i echo THE KID for a moment : face it folks! Houston needs subway or Monorail that's it! Any train that's at grade level for the cars is just a disaster waiting to happen. If so many accidents have happened on the Main Street (which doesn't carry half the amount of traffic as Westheimer or Richmond) then you can only imagine what will happen if there's an at-grade light rail built in that area. Disaster.

Anybody who doesn't agree with me is foolish and needs to be slapped for not thinking of people's safety and faster transportation options. PERIOD. I know THE KID and SCARFACE got my back on this issue!

[nmainguy]

Pardon me while i echo THE KID for a moment : face it folks! Houston needs subway or Monorail that's it! Any train that's at grade level for the cars is just a disaster waiting to happen. If so many accidents have happened on the Main Street (which doesn't carry half the amount of traffic as Westheimer or Richmond) then you can only imagine what will happen if there's an at-grade light rail built in that area. Disaster.

Anybody who doesn't agree with me is foolish and needs to be slapped for not thinking of people's safety and faster transportation options. PERIOD. I know THE KID and SCARFACE got my back on this issue!

At the risk of being "slapped"-actually slapping me at this point in time would probably result in you having the crap beat out of you by my hulk of a partner-people need to be aware of the signage. People need to be aware of the trains..."Oh! Look! There's a big ol' train on rails imbedded in the street...but I'll go ahead and turn in front of them and they will just have to swerve out of my way".

Jesus, I am so tierd of hearing that argument re: cars running into trains.

[ssullivan]

At the risk of being "slapped"-actually slapping me at this point in time would probably result in you having the crap beat out of you by my hulk of a partner-people need to be aware of the signage. People need to be aware of the trains..."Oh! Look! There's a big ol' train on rails imbedded in the street...but I'll go ahead and turn in front of them and they will just have to swerve out of my way".

Jesus, I am so tierd of hearing that argument re: cars running into trains.

Amen to that! Not to mention that many, if not most, of the accidents were the fault of drivers running red traffic lights! You don't run the red light, you don't get hit. It's not that hard to figure out.

[CE_ugh]

Why? Other cities go all out for there rail systems, why does Houston have to be so cheap with minimum needs. I say atleast go all out on the one line that goes from downtown to uptown. This line should make people say WOW!

I completely agree. I stated earlier in the thread that under Westhiemer was the only way to go. However, if the ridership isnt there (which I believe it is) they wont get federal funding, and it wont get built. I seriously think if Highland Village and developers at the old Central Ford site could be persuaded to push for a Westhiemer alignment; then it could happen. But dont get your hopes up.

[CE_ugh]

All this is giving me a headache. I wonder if any of the stations at the ends of the University line will have a park and ride lot like the currenlt line at Fannin South. If so, where would one terminate if placing the line on Westheimer?

I dont think either end would require one. UH has about 15000 students on campus during peak times and a 30 minute hop on the train would put them at the galleria, greenway plaza, or downtown. Thats the impetus for this line

[Guest danax]

Why? Other cities go all out for there rail systems, why does Houston have to be so cheap with minimum needs. I say atleast go all out on the one line that goes from downtown to uptown. This line should make people say WOW!

I agree. It would appear that we are not going "first class" here with our urban transit system. We're getting gussied-up buses for the Uptown line running down Post Oak, one of our classiest boulevards, so coming to the conclusion that we're getting a cheapie, entry-level transit system would seem to be accurate.

Therefore, hoping that they would go all-out and get a subway dug, technical challenges aside, is pure pipedream, unfortunately.

[Highway6]

Pardon me while i echo THE KID for a moment : face it folks! Houston needs subway or Monorail that's it! Any train that's at grade level for the cars is just a disaster waiting to happen.

I think dislike of monorail is a function of the feeling of isolation.

I don't have a problem with Metrorail mainly going for at grade lightrail... I think some parts of the city... i like the idea thats its basically a streetcar, and one can enjoy seeing the city.

And i think if part of the reason for having a transit line is to spur development, density, urban feel, street life... monorail can't achieve this. Look at downtown. The tunnel system has the same effect. While downtown is somwhat getting livelier, the system of tunnels and skyways kills streetlife. I would be afraid monorail would do the same for urban growth along the rail line.

However.. i do think, Metro needs to be willing go go below grade at certain high traffic locations.. such as the Galleria.... I think Houston would best benfit with a subway/lightrail hybrid.

Even NYC's transit system.. its not all subway.. 40% is above ground.

Oh yes..

And I have contacted Metro.. asking them for more information on why Westheimer has been eliminated and about the Galleria's position on the line.

[RedScare]

The suggestion that anyone who opposes a monorail is settling for mediocrity is ridiculous. I challenge any monorail supporter to show me a monorail installation that even remotely approaches affordability. The assumption that METRO not only has unlimited resources to install fanciful transit systems, but also has unanimous support to do so is a fantasy. Not only am I not the least bit convinced that monorail is more attractive than LRT, but I know that the amount of federal funding that METRO would get for an overpriced rail system is ZERO.

Posting your dreams of a transit system if price were no object is one thing. Ignoring the realities of slim majority support for ANY rail, plus opposition by our elected "leaders", and the reduced federal funding and tighter rail requirements from the current administration, is quite another. Calling the rest of us "foolish" for dwelling in reality rather than frolicking in your fantasy is off the mark. "PERIOD".

[tierwestah]

At the risk of being "slapped"-actually slapping me at this point in time would probably result in you having the crap beat out of you by my hulk of a partner

this comment wasn't a display of your homosexuality was it? If so, Please spare me!

Amen to that! Not to mention that many, if not most, of the accidents were the fault of drivers running red traffic lights! You don't run the red light, you don't get hit. It's not that hard to figure out.

And you, i really wish there was a way to slap you through the internet by that comment. Like it or not, i don't think that we can put 100 % of the blame to the drivers. When i first drove down the Main Street line, i myself was confused at so many restrictions the train had put on Main Street that i could see how any driver or out of town visitor could easily make a mistake. But i don't care, part of it all is due to poor design and poor planning.

Who caused what accident is not really that important to me. The fact is there were accidents and one fatality. What is important to me is that a light rail or train system be designed and done right the first time around and then we won't have to go back and try to figure out what happened, correct, or either play the "blame game" by pointing the finger.

At the risk of sounding redundant, the only safe and sensible solution that i can think of for a train going out that way towards Uptown is to make sure it is not "at grade" with the cars. Either by going over or under. We build freeways here like its nothing. Why can't we build something in the air that's dedicated to a metrorail train or either clear a 2.5 mile passage underground to run a train underneath?

As MidtownCoog intelligently pointed out earlier: if we can destroy a neighborhood to build 288, why can't we sacrifice anything to build a smart rail plan the RIGHT way the first time? And to danax <slap> and Redscare <slap> Whether it be fantasy or not, i think that it is one option that might have to be considered if they're talking about expanding a line out that way. PERIOD!!!

[west20th]

this comment wasn't a display of your homosexuality was it? If so, Please spare me!

And you, i really wish there was a way to slap you through the internet by that comment. And to danax <slap> and Redscare <slap> Whether it be fantasy or not, i think that it is one option that might have to be considered if they're talking about expanding a line out that way. PERIOD!!!

Is it necessary to be so ugly and mean-spirited?

[RedScare]

The fact is there were accidents and one fatality.

We build freeways here like its nothing.

Yes, and amazingly, there has never been a SINGLE accident or fatality on any of those freeways.

[sevfiv]

i'm right there with the headache about this...

and i also think that this issue has many problems, including poor planning/design/signage, AND drivers who cannot/will not/do not read the signs that are in place (these are the same type of drivers that stop on railroad tracks in general, of course ).

also, it's obviously going to be hard to implement something that this city has avoided/shunned for so long...

[citykid09]

i'm right there with the headache about this...

and i also think that this issue has many problems, including poor planning/design/signage, AND drivers who cannot/will not/do not read the signs that are in place (these are the same drivers that stop on railroad tracks in general, of course ).

also, it's obviously going to be hard to implememnt something that this city has avoided/shunned for so long...

I think the rail line going along the road is just stupid. This stops traffic backs it up and defeats the whole purpuse of having rail. If it can't be above or below ground, atleast give the thing its own path that why it can go faster and not stop traffic.

[nmainguy]

this comment wasn't a display of your homosexuality was it? If so, Please spare me!

And you, i really wish there was a way to slap you through the internet by that comment. Like it or not, i don't think that we can put 100 % of the blame to the drivers. When i first drove down the Main Street line, i myself was confused at so many restrictions the train had put on Main Street that i could see how any driver or out of town visitor could easily make a mistake. But i don't care, part of it all is due to poor design and poor planning.

Your first comment regarding my attempt at humor...irrelevant.

As for the rest of your rant, there is blame to be assigned: Bad and careless drivers who ignore and/or refuse to obey traffic signage.

If you have trouble obeying traffic signage, perhaps you'd be happier in a small one-light town.

[tierwestah]

Yes, and amazingly, there has never been a SINGLE accident or fatality on any of those freeways.

You're misunderstanding my point- if we were to build monorail, that would involve building an above-grade bridge- simliar procedure to building an elevated freeway. this would be dedicated for the incoming and outgoing train lines exclusively.

Is it necessary to be so ugly and mean-spirited?

Read my signature- that says it all! >

Your first comment regarding my attempt at humor...irrelevant.

As for the rest of your rant, there is blame to be assigned: Bad and careless drivers who ignore and/or refuse to obey traffic signage.

If you have trouble obeying traffic signage, perhaps you'd be happier in a small one-light town.

i have no problem obeying traffic signs and rules- that's part of driving overall. But what about all those people who aren't familiar with the design of the street? People do tend to make honest and careless mistakes! Does that mean they should get clobbered by a train? I don't think so. The best way to cure this is to take preventative measures to help deter people from making these type of mistakes.

And yes, no one can change my mind on this- that part of Westheimer/Richmond near 610 is a jungle and putting any train at-grade level is just asking for trouble! Yall can say what you want about me but even a blind person could see that if you put a train in a much busier intersection than the first line (where our train has already been the butt of many jokes as the accident capital), this just spells disaster. PERIOD!!!

[sevfiv]

People do tend to make honest and careless mistakes! Does that mean they should get clobbered by a train?

not necessarily, but that's what happens when you make a left turn over railroad tracks when a train is coming...just like making a left turn from the middle lane in regular traffic...

The best way to cure this is to take preventative measures to help deter people from making these type of mistakes.

so should we install nipples on coke cans now, too?

[tierwestah]

not necessarily, but that's what happens when you make a left turn over railroad tracks when a train is coming...just like making a left turn from the middle lane in regular traffic...

so should we install nipples on coke cans now, too?

whatever!!! You can make jokes all you want but the fact remains simple- You can't apply the same scenarios when talking about a lrt train that's designed to function in regular car traffic with a railroad train. For one, railroad trains are used to transport natural resources like coal and other resources. Rapid transit and LRT trains are supposed to be designed to transport people in a faster method. Normally when railroad trains come, there's almost always a red/white stripe arm that comes down keeping people from crossing anyway. LRT doesn't always have the arm at every intersection. And also to add, LRT trains come much more frequent than railroad trains.

[RedScare]

You're misunderstanding my point-

No, you misunderstand MY point. I asked you earlier if you could point out a monorail that didn't cost a fortune, but you ignored me. I assume that is because you could not find one. So let me explain. The Main Street LRT cost about $43 million per mile to build. Costs for the U-Line is expected to be similar. Seattle voters just cancelled their monorail because it was going to cost $136 million per mile...more than triple the cost of LRT. Want more? Las Vegas just built a monorail that cost $141 million per mile.

The U-Line is 10 miles. LRT would cost about $450 million. Monorail would cost about 1.4 Billion. So, what you suggest is that because ONE drunk ran a redlight and killed himself in 2 and a half years, METRO taxpayers should pay an extra $1 Billion.

I think you know the answer to that question....not no, but HELL NO!

TheNiche had a great explanation about risks vs. costs in another thread. You should read it. In short, it says that we weigh the risks against the costs to make our decisions. 350 people die on Harris County roads every year, yet you still drive your car on these roads. One person has died in 2 1/2 years of LRT. It is not worth an extra Billion dollars to protect him from the train, especially since he would have died anyway if that had been a bus instead of a train.

I know this won't change your mind. I only tell you this so you'll understand why no one is even listening to your argument. It's too expensive.

[Highway6]

No, you misunderstand MY point. I asked you earlier if you could point out a monorail that didn't cost a fortune, but you ignored me. I assume that is because you could not find one. So let me explain. The Main Street LRT cost about $43 million per mile to build. Costs for the U-Line is expected to be similar. Seattle voters just cancelled their monorail because it was going to cost $136 million per mile...more than triple the cost of LRT. Want more? Las Vegas just built a monorail that cost $141 million per mile.

What about from a ridership perspective..

These cities that have monorail, like Vegas.. it's my understanding that ridership is way less then what we experience here... Any validity to this or is it the same levels of ridership.. but becasue the cost is so much more, its just less cost effective ?

[sevfiv]

whatever!!! You can make jokes all you want but the fact remains simple- You can't apply the same scenarios when talking about a lrt train that's designed to function in regular car traffic with a railroad train. For one, railroad trains are used to transport natural resources like coal and other resources. Rapid transit and LRT trains are supposed to be designed to transport people in a faster method. And also to add, LRT trains come much more frequent than railroad trains.

it may seem like a joke but i am dead serious.

i can apply the same "theory" that it is BAD to stop on any set of tracks or try to take the r-o-w from a train.

and for the frequency of lrt's, you'd think that would make them even MORE conspicuous, whether they are transporting people or coal.

argh

[citykid09]

No, you misunderstand MY point. I asked you earlier if you could point out a monorail that didn't cost a fortune, but you ignored me. I assume that is because you could not find one. So let me explain. The Main Street LRT cost about $43 million per mile to build. Costs for the U-Line is expected to be similar. Seattle voters just cancelled their monorail because it was going to cost $136 million per mile...more than triple the cost of LRT. Want more? Las Vegas just built a monorail that cost $141 million per mile.

The U-Line is 10 miles. LRT would cost about $450 million. Monorail would cost about 1.4 Billion. So, what you suggest is that because ONE drunk ran a redlight and killed himself in 2 and a half years, METRO taxpayers should pay an extra $1 Billion.

I think you know the answer to that question....not no, but HELL NO!

TheNiche had a great explanation about risks vs. costs in another thread. You should read it. In short, it says that we weigh the risks against the costs to make our decisions. 350 people die on Harris County roads every year, yet you still drive your car on these roads. One person has died in 2 1/2 years of LRT. It is not worth an extra Billion dollars to protect him from the train, especially since he would have died anyway if that had been a bus instead of a train.

I know this won't change your mind. I only tell you this so you'll understand why no one is even listening to your argument. It's too expensive.

So what would the cost of a part subway/ part street level system be?

[RedScare]

What about from a ridership perspective..

These cities that have monorail, like Vegas.. it's my understanding that ridership is way less then what we experience here... Any validity to this or is it the same levels of ridership.. but becasue the cost is so much more, its just less cost effective ?

That's an additional problem. My numbers are just construction costs, before a single rider steps on board. Low ridership would be a different set of numbers.

I do believe that street level transit gets the most ridership because it is the easiest to board and exit, versus going up and down stairs to get to elevated and subway stations. But, I'm leaving that out of this debate. I'm just saying the stronomical costs of monorail is why no one is installing it.