Jump to content
HAIF - Houston's original social media

Metro Rail on FM 1960


Recommended Posts

I dont think it will be such a bad idea for Houston to consider putting a Metro Rail on FM 1960. FM 1960 is a very busy road. It'll be a great success. They are already about to make the Kuyrkendahl/FM1960 intersection an underpass.

Edited by Chris
Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think it will be such a bad idea for Houston to consider putting a Metro Rail on FM 1960. FM 1960 is a very busy road. It'll be a great success. They are already about to make the Kuyrkendahl/FM1960 intersection an underpass.

Uh, no. :huh:

I don't even know where to begin...and don't think that it's necessary that I try.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think it will be such a bad idea for Houston to consider putting a Metro Rail on FM 1960. FM 1960 is a very busy road. It'll be a great success. They are already about to make the Kuyrkendahl/FM1960 intersection an underpass.

Are you dreaming of a white Christmas too?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think it will be such a bad idea for Houston to consider putting a Metro Rail on FM 1960. FM 1960 is a very busy road. It'll be a great success. They are already about to make the Kuyrkendahl/FM1960 intersection an underpass.

Where would you put it Chris ? I believe the road is at it's widest possible point now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Metorail on FM 1960? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Hell, the MetroBus route 86 runs every 40 minutes, so what makes you think an 1960 ral line will happen? Mind U, Nineteen-Sixty is a state road, so unless TxDot relinquishes control if it to Harris County, City of Houston (annex sticks) and METRO in a million years, cars dominate it for now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Metorail on FM 1960? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Hell, the MetroBus route 86 runs every 40 minutes, so what makes you think an 1960 ral line will happen? Mind U, Nineteen-Sixty is a state road, so unless TxDot relinquishes control if it to Harris County, City of Houston (annex sticks) and METRO in a million years, cars dominate it for now.

Take a drive on it, your question will be solved. I cannot speak for the east side but the west of FM 1960 is booming.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Take a drive on it, your question will be solved. I cannot speak for the east side but the west of FM 1960 is booming.

disregard the rail question for a moment and explain to me how 1960 W is booming. 290 to 249 - not booming. 249 to Veterans - not booming. Veterans to 45 - declining. 45 to Hardy - not booming. Hardy to 59 - not booming. 59 to Lake Houston... hmmm... if i were thinking any part of 1960 were booming, this would be it.

now, back to rail on FM1960 - even if metro COULD do it, what purpose would it serve? What exists on 1960 other than lots of strip centers and two malls in decline? do people need rail to travel to the grocery stores and malls up there - maybe. but that won't support rail.

if you want a rail to do anything near 1960, i'd think it would be a train along 249 to 45 and then 45 to the metro center, where you'd be able to catch other trains to other places...

but don't worry, it isn't going to happen any time soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cities often build metro lines by reclaiming old railroad lines that have fallen into disuse or limited use. And even though the old tracks are there, it still costs them umpteen millions of dollars to do it. And, if there are no old railroad tracks, it costs them bazillions of dollars per mile. When something like this happens, cities usually connect downtown with some suburban hub, for commuters primarily. And to take people downtown to sporting events, etc. For example, they've talked about running the metro along Hardy Road to Spring, out 249 to Tomball, out I-10 to Katy, etc. And it's also a big selling point that, with any metro lines they build, they connect to one another, so they have a combined effect. Granted, there's a few places of interest along 1960: the NW Medical Center, Willowbrook Mall, Chili's restaurant, etc. But nothing compared to linking downtown, the Medical Center, the Galleria, the stadiums, etc. There would just never be any voting tax base to support a project like rail on 1960, let alone numbers (# of people moved per day, etc.) to justify it. There would be so little support, that you'd almost have better luck trying to get 1960 converted into a pedestrian-only zone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, I'm sure a Light rail system would probably work that would connect stations for commuters be heading towards town, but only after an extensive network is done within the city itself.

Even then, 1960 woud have to increase substantially in population and density and/or offer stations with adequate parking to allow commuters to go there instead of EVERYONE going to the 3 or 4 stations that would be in their regional area .

Link to post
Share on other sites
disregard the rail question for a moment and explain to me how 1960 W is booming. 290 to 249 - not booming. 249 to Veterans - not booming. Veterans to 45 - declining. 45 to Hardy - not booming. Hardy to 59 - not booming. 59 to Lake Houston... hmmm... if i were thinking any part of 1960 were booming, this would be it.

now, back to rail on FM1960 - even if metro COULD do it, what purpose would it serve? What exists on 1960 other than lots of strip centers and two malls in decline? do people need rail to travel to the grocery stores and malls up there - maybe. but that won't support rail.

if you want a rail to do anything near 1960, i'd think it would be a train along 249 to 45 and then 45 to the metro center, where you'd be able to catch other trains to other places...

but don't worry, it isn't going to happen any time soon.

Absolutely hillarious :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Plastic

Yes there and Westheimer would be ideal spots for some type of streetcar or monorail. They only problem is the people out there don't want it. They almost had a cow cause Metro was putting a bus route up there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for improving transit in all areas of Houston, but if we can't even get rail really going in the city proper (i.e., Inner Loop) then it's certainly not going to be easy to accomplish in suburban areas of the metro. My proposed solution: nuke 1960 and start over. That area has really gone down hill since the last time I was out that way (1999).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hahahaha! No left turns on 1960, that'll go really well with area residents. Next up, no right turns on Steubner!

1960 is like the only main road in the area, unlike Richmond Ave., which has Westhiemer, West Alabama, Westpark and many other similar traveling roads near by.

That and the 1960 area is WAY too car-centric, super suburban with no new urbanization projects forecasted.

I say no too. <_<

Link to post
Share on other sites
Amen to that. Mass transit was good in the 19th century. Today it's good for air travel.

Do you guys travel much??? If you do I don't think you'd have such a flippant attitude about transit. Some, limited, inconvenience aside: mass transit can be an exceptionally easy way to get around a city or a country (e.g., the Deutsche Bahn ICE trains; France's TGV; pretty much any city of merit in Europe and now in Asia).

Yes, air travel is still a great way to travel far distances in relatively short time periods. However, if one lives in a city with good rail transit they just go down to the Bahnhof for instance (there's usually several in a large city) and there are numerous trains going to other cities at all times of the day and night. Ditto for inner city travel. No, it's not "door to door convenience" but it's convenient all the same. It just takes some getting used to (and it's a great way to keep the weight off and get some exercise). But the (largely American) attitude to "just stay in your car" is so untenable and myopic. (Another example of our perceived "superiority" over other countries and cultures to really be a bunch of drivel.) I'd encourage all of you to travel (internationally) if you don't already. I think that some of your attitudes toward mass transit and the positive impact it can have on a city (or a country) would definitely change for the better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that some of your attitudes toward mass transit and the positive impact it can have on a city (or a country) would definitely change for the better.

I just don't think 1960 is ready for new Urbanization. They are happy being the older version of Katy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you guys travel much??? If you do I don't think you'd have such a flippant attitude about transit. Some, limited, inconvenience aside: mass transit can be an exceptionally easy way to get around a city or a country (e.g., the Deutsche Bahn ICE trains; France's TGV; pretty much any city of merit in Europe and now in Asia).

Yes, air travel is still a great way to travel far distances in relatively short time periods. However, if one lives in a city with good rail transit they just go down to the Bahnhof for instance (there's usually several in a large city) and there are numerous trains going to other cities at all times of the day and night. Ditto for inner city travel. No, it's not "door to door convenience" but it's convenient all the same. It just takes some getting used to (and it's a great way to keep the weight off and get some exercise). But the (largely American) attitude to "just stay in your car" is so untenable and myopic. (Another example of our perceived "superiority" over other countries and cultures to really be a bunch of drivel.) I'd encourage all of you to travel (internationally) if you don't already. I think that some of your attitudes toward mass transit and the positive impact it can have on a city (or a country) would definitely change for the better.

Hillarious from start to finish :lol::lol:

I just don't think 1960 is ready for new Urbanization. They are happy being the older version of Katy.

And the laughter continues :lol::lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
People. If you are looking for door to door convenience, you are not going to find that using any type of public transport. Stay in your cars for that one.

True story: There is no such thing as door-to-door convenience in Houston. Even if we have the main Street Metrorail line, count up how many minutes it tales to walk from a LRT station across 2/3 of a massive parking lot to Reliant Stadium itself. Same thing goes for HCCS Central (cross four city streets to campus, huh??!), Fannin South (the park and ride obviously), and much of Downtown Houston (outside the immediate Main Street Corridor). Now THAT is NOT door-to-door convenience; but if you're just being too lazy to use your legs in a sprawl-influenced small piece of the city...

:rolleyes: Now Texas Medical Center has that advantage of door-to-door because its built up AGAINST Fannin Street with at least THREE LRT stations; same thing for Hermann park, and the UH Downtown. Now THAT IS door to door convenience because you can just get off METRORail, just cross the street, walk RIGHT INTO the buiding without the suburban sized Black Top to hold you back.

Edited by DaTrain
Link to post
Share on other sites
Now Texas Medical Center has that advantage of door-to-door because its built up AGAINST Fannin Street with at least THREE LRT stations; same thing for Hermann park, and the UH Downtown. Now THAT IS door to door convenience because you can just get off METRORail, just cross the street, walk RIGHT INTO the buiding without the suburban sized Black Top to hold you back.

That is assuming you work on Fannin. I was on Holcombe recently to visit a hospitalized friend and if i would have ridden the train it would have been a long walk. definitely not door to door. I will say that i did see a trolley as i was driving off. I believe it said TMC circulator so this may feed from the rail.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That is assuming you work on Fannin. I was on Holcombe recently to visit a hospitalized friend and if i would have ridden the train it would have been a long walk. definitely not door to door. I will say that i did see a trolley as i was driving off. I believe it said TMC circulator so this may feed from the rail.

you're right it does feed into the rail. I was there yesterday and the walking over to The Baylor building by the Mouse House (which is just as far as MD Anderson, where I assumed you went to), and it wasn't that bad of a walk at all. I think it just depends on what all you're willing to walk to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
you're right it does feed into the rail. I was there yesterday and the walking over to The Baylor building by the Mouse House (which is just as far as MD Anderson, where I assumed you went to), and it wasn't that bad of a walk at all. I think it just depends on what all you're willing to walk to.

I was a little rushed and drove so it was just easier to park nearby. I do bike and skate thru the med center fairly regularly. Best way to see the twin waterwalls.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

i think its a great idea...................however, certain conditions do apply...................

1. Run the 1960 line from Lake Houston all the way to 249 (Willowbrook Mall)

2. Line must be either elevated or underground and must run through IAH, which would have lines that connect to downtown.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Can somone please explain the difference between 1960 and the Richmond/Westheimer corridor from DT to the Beltway, because I really don't see it...It seems to me that any argument against rail on 1960 would apply to Richmond as well. Also, on 1960, there are still plenty of lots to build stations. I certainly don't think a Nuke is any more warranted in either location. Also, the stip mall sprawl didn't stop at 1960, 2920 is the new 1960...out west it will probably be Fry Rd.

This is not to say I think rail on 1960 is a good idea becuase I am just not sure anyone would use it or want it...but it is not so laughable that everyone should be so dismissive of the OP...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can somone please explain the difference between 1960 and the Richmond/Westheimer corridor from DT to the Beltway, because I really don't see it...It seems to me that any argument against rail on 1960 would apply to Richmond as well. Also, on 1960, there are still plenty of lots to build stations. I certainly don't think a Nuke is any more warranted in either location. Also, the stip mall sprawl didn't stop at 1960, 2920 is the new 1960...out west it will probably be Fry Rd.

This is not to say I think rail on 1960 is a good idea becuase I am just not sure anyone would use it or want it...but it is not so laughable that everyone should be so dismissive of the OP...

density potential?

Link to post
Share on other sites

seems to me that either place has the same amount of "potential"...but I think you are on to something in that everyone here is being a little harder on 1960 because it is further out, but aesthetically it is no different. But as it stands, is Richmond substantially more dense than 1960 from 45 to 249?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can somone please explain the difference between 1960 and the Richmond/Westheimer corridor from DT to the Beltway, because I really don't see it...It seems to me that any argument against rail on 1960 would apply to Richmond as well. Also, on 1960, there are still plenty of lots to build stations. I certainly don't think a Nuke is any more warranted in either location. Also, the stip mall sprawl didn't stop at 1960, 2920 is the new 1960...out west it will probably be Fry Rd.

This is not to say I think rail on 1960 is a good idea becuase I am just not sure anyone would use it or want it...but it is not so laughable that everyone should be so dismissive of the OP...

1960 has less employment along it than does Westheimer or Richmond. It lacks a Houston Galleria, it lacks all the office buildings and condos in that area, it lacks a Greenway Plaza, and it lacks an easy connection to Downtown Houston or the Texas Medical Center.

There are parts of Westheimer and Richmond that are somewhat similar to 1960 aesthetically, but those are also the parts of Westheimer or Richmond that don't do so much for ridership.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1960 has less employment along it than does Westheimer or Richmond. It lacks a Houston Galleria, it lacks all the office buildings and condos in that area, it lacks a Greenway Plaza, and it lacks an easy connection to Downtown Houston or the Texas Medical Center.

There are parts of Westheimer and Richmond that are somewhat similar to 1960 aesthetically, but those are also the parts of Westheimer or Richmond that don't do so much for ridership.

I was speaking more aesthetically but...I will give you Greenway Plaza and the Galleria, but 1960 has many low rise office complexes all along the stretch, and has the HP offices near 249. If it connected to the airport and a line to greenspoint and downtown, I don't think it would be such a stretch. Like I said, I don't think rail is a good idea, maybe if it connects to many other rail lines that need to be built first. But aesthetically, there are many other roads in Houston that are just as ugly...including Richmond and Westheimer between 610 and the Beltway. The problem with 1960 is that many people who work on it live on it as well, and a rail line does not provide enough benefit to get them out of their cars.

Do you think people will live downtown and ride the rail to Greenway Plaza? Will they live in the Ghetto apartment complexes on Richmond and do the same? Who will ride this rail?

I guess I just don't find the concept as obscenely outragious as everyone else who responded to the OP...he didn't say a timetable...

EDIT: I should disclose that I think an east west rail line should have gone through DT from the convention center (even out east to the cruise ship terminal!!!) out to the Galleria and Westchase...but I realize the engineering would be a pain on that one...

Edited by cnote
Link to post
Share on other sites
1960 has less employment along it than does Westheimer or Richmond. It lacks a Houston Galleria, it lacks all the office buildings and condos in that area, it lacks a Greenway Plaza, and it lacks an easy connection to Downtown Houston or the Texas Medical Center.

There are parts of Westheimer and Richmond that are somewhat similar to 1960 aesthetically, but those are also the parts of Westheimer or Richmond that don't do so much for ridership.

Since 1960 lacks a "Galleria" or "Greenway plaza", it does not deserve a rail line? No employment along 1960? Gee, I wonder where all those people during rush hour are going to.

Having lived in the area (fallbrook/Grant) and having to deal with all the issues that were there, I would have to disagree with you. Willowbrook mall is adjacent to a number of other shopping centers and makes traffic quite painful, and yes it can be considered a major employment center, its just not the high paying jobs you think rail should support. Now I will grant you that it is nothing compared to the Galleria, but FEW places can be LIKE the galleria, just because they aren't high end, doesn't mean that you should dismiss the numbers so readily. The traffic in the area is increasing by leaps and bounds (to the point TXDot is building an UNDERPASS at 1960 Kuykendahl) and Houston can actually be AHEAD of the traffic congestion curve.

Rail is viable in the area if it is designed properly with the proper connections, with proper stations/parking at certain stations. Will it be better if 290 had a line? yes, but I believe that it went further onto I-59, it could connect to the airport (via a shuttle) for business travelers AND employees. You can correct me if you don't think that IAH isn't a major employment center as well.

Don't let your Anti-Metro/Rail bias blind you to possibilities.

Is Metro perfect? No. Can they do a better job? Yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Since 1960 lacks a "Galleria" or "Greenway plaza", it does not deserve a rail line? No employment along 1960? Gee, I wonder where all those people during rush hour are going to.

Having lived in the area (fallbrook/Grant) and having to deal with all the issues that were there, I would have to disagree with you. Willowbrook mall is adjacent to a number of other shopping centers and makes traffic quite painful, and yes it can be considered a major employment center, its just not the high paying jobs you think rail should support. Now I will grant you that it is nothing compared to the Galleria, but FEW places can be LIKE the galleria, just because they aren't high end, doesn't mean that you should dismiss the numbers so readily. The traffic in the area is increasing by leaps and bounds (to the point TXDot is building an UNDERPASS at 1960 Kuykendahl) and Houston can actually be AHEAD of the traffic congestion curve.

Rail is viable in the area if it is designed properly with the proper connections, with proper stations/parking at certain stations. Will it be better if 290 had a line? yes, but I believe that it went further onto I-59, it could connect to the airport (via a shuttle) for business travelers AND employees. You can correct me if you don't think that IAH isn't a major employment center as well.

Don't let your Anti-Metro/Rail bias blind you to possibilities.

Is Metro perfect? No. Can they do a better job? Yes.

So what are the numbers, eh? And what number of them are within a quarter mile of FM 1960, much less the rail platforms?

No, don't even bother saying "I don't know, a whole bunch," because I've done a lot of the work for you. Behold the marvelously low employment density along 1960 as compared to the Richmond/Westheimer corridors.

Rail is not viable in the area not only because jobs are insufficiently concentrated along the route, and not only because the urban form is not greatly conducive to transit, but because linking 1960 in a way as would be necessary to generate meaningful ridership would be tremendously expensive. Even if METRO is going to waste it on poorly-implemented rail somewhere else, it would be extraordinarily easy to conceive of a better use of those funds.

And as for your accusation that I might be tooting a different horn if Willowbrook jobs paid more, that's utterly false. I'd readily advocate a properly-designed light rail route that linked Houston to Pasadena. Pasadena has employment density. Same goes for Sharpstown, Greenspoint, and IAH...but not 1960.

P.S. - I'm not anti-rail, I'm anti-stupid...which inherently encompasses the near-entirety of potential anti-METROness. Rail has its place in the world, and this isn't it.

Edited by TheNiche
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rail on Richmond is stupid (now), rail on 1960 is stupid (now)...build rail along the freeways to DT dang it!!!!! let busses connect the interior DT, Uptown, Med Center triangle. Metro has it backwards...

Link to post
Share on other sites

All that light rail on Richmond would do is link up our region's three largest job centers (working with the Main St. line), along with just about every tourist destination in Houston, and run through one of the city's densest areas. No, that doesn't make sense...

Link to post
Share on other sites
All that light rail on Richmond would do is link up our region's three largest job centers (working with the Main St. line), along with just about every tourist destination in Houston, and run through one of the city's densest areas. No, that doesn't make sense...

Not the way it is proposed. Elevate it or bury it, but get it the hell out of my way. And if that makes it too costly, then don't do it at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...