Some one

Yeah, can we work on recalling this guy? It's one thing to halt projects before they break ground but to actively halt projects in the work and undo finished projects is another. It seems like he's hellbent on sending Houston back to the 20th century.

44 minutes ago, Justin Welling said:

We'll see. There are new bus stop signs showing up on the northern side of downtown on Travis St where the stops were previously removed when the red paint was first rolled out. Part of the project was to remove bus stops where right turns are. 

That is concerning and I don't understand why they would do that.

More hysterics

There are no actual plans to remove the bus lanes, at least not anytime soon.

How soon can we vote to recall someone? Seriously though, I hope he never lives Houston Ave. down.

ETA: Also, I wonder what his thoughts are on removing the Pierce Elevated since he seems to be so concerned about firefighters and police officers getting to Houston Ave. from 45 North. 🤔

4 hours ago, goofy said:

Has our smart boy mayor addressed this again? 

He's too busy giving speeches about how much he cares about "public safety." 🙄

In my ideal world, I'd convert Westheimer into a multimodal corridor west of 610. Take the outer two lanes and convert them to bus and bike lanes. East of 610 would be a little more challenging but this is under the assumption that the Westheimer road diet already happened. Then I'd have an elevated rail running on Westheimer between West Oak and 610. Then it transitions to a subway east of 610, with two branches: One to downtown following the 82 and one to UH/Eastwood Transit Center following Elgin/Lockwood (interlining with the University BRT). I'd maybe even extend it south from West Oak and have it connect to the (hypothetical) Westpark Commuter Rail, running from Fulshear to Uptown TC, at Mission Bend P&R.

It's fun to play make-believe sometimes. 😁

2 hours ago, editor said:

Here's my delusional optimism: A rail line from Bush airport to downtown to Hobby airport to the Port of Galveston.

Each year, hundreds of thousands of people spend millions of dollars on charter bus rides from Houston's airports to the cruise port.  Or, in my case, $130 each way in a Lyft.  

The fact that the cruise lines have had to bend over backwards to set up these bus services shows there is a demand, and then the locals can also benefit from the new routes.

Or a rail line down Hardy that connects to the IAH BRT near Greenspoint and a rail line from Burnett TC down Highway 3 to Galveston, with the Purple/Green Line being extended from Hobby Airport (Future terminus) to SH 3 via Airport/College in South Houston (or even beyond that to Pasadena/La Porte).

Adding onto your delusional optimism.

1 hour ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Westheimer being TXDoT controlled ROW should not eliminate the possibility of rail or other high-capacity transit in the corridor, and I doubt there is any "prohibition" that needs to be amended.  TXDoT also controls the freeway ROWs and Metro has worked with them and is working with them to build HOV lanes and BRT structures.

I think it's less that TXDOT isn't open to the idea of rail/high-capacity transit on Westheimer, and more so that they're not open to any transit that reduces the amount of lanes on Westheimer.

2 hours ago, steve1363 said:

There was a segment on channel 13 yesterday.   Knapp Chevrolet was very much against the changes, as was the church, and the nearby fire station.   Both were interviewed.

As far as 11th street, let's not paint the opposition as being "against non-car related infrastructure."  That is a flat out lie and an attempt to create an "us vs. them" hostile environment which I notice a lot on this site.  In fact, many in the neighborhood suggested 14th street would have been a much better option for the bike lanes.

Great, so let's keep the bike lanes on 11th St AND add bike lanes to 14th. 😁

From what I remember, METRO considered extending the green/purple line down Washington to Heights/Yale but axed it cause it was too late in the planning process. It's a shame too, cause it could've spurred more development for Washington and served as a feeder for the planned Inner Katy BRT. I would love to have a subway run down Westheimer but that's never gonna happen. :(

Here's to hoping we see rail west of I-45 someday, even if it's to the Courthouse.

19 hours ago, Triton said:

Wow I had to do a double take. This looks super similar to our N Main area.

Funnily enough, there are also plans to cap 45 under N Main too. I think once it's done, it's gonna look similar to this.

What a backward decision and statement. "We want to improve safety on this street so we're going to remove everything that made the street safer for pedestrians and bicyclists and return it back to its hostile stroad environment. Dw, we'll study how to make it safer for pedestrians......not." I hope this doesn't set a precedent for projects like this.

I thought below-grade freeways were supposed to function as flood basins though. 🤔

22 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:

It's a ridiculous waste of money. These guys don't know of anything else but moving cars. And they also started laying this project out KNOWING Metro was building their new BRT line and had conflicting plans. Why is it so hard for this agency to use those same monies and help create a commuter rail plan for the area? 

Unfortunately, TxDOT is legally required to spend 97% of its funding on road projects. Maybe we would've seen commuter rail or (better) intercity rail if that wasn't the case, but for now, TxDOT's gonna TxDOT.

6 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

They are not sinking 45 and 59 “so they can serve as a floodplain “.  The below-grade segments will be drained with pumping systems.  The section of I-10 being raised runs next to and over a bayou , so sinking it would not be feasible.

I see. Still, I don't think this project is necessary.

Yeah, I'm looking forward to the cap parks being built and implemented. I think they should also look into capping 59 between Elgin and McGowen and  I-10/(and future I-45) between McKnee and the rail line, but I'll take what we can get. 

Also, might be an unpopular opinion, but am I the only one who doesn't see the point of the I-10 express lane continuing past downtown, especially when all of the other HOV/express lanes end downtown? I feel like they'd have less ROW to take if they had I-45 run where the express lanes should be, and just have the I-10 express lanes intertwine with 45's express lanes.

I don't get it. So they want to elevate I-10 to get it out of the floodplain.... but they also want to sink 45 and 59 below ground so they can function as a floodplain? How inconsistent.

33 minutes ago, BEES?! said:

Where are you reading about these studies? That's really interesting to hear about a University BRT expansion, but it makes sense, since the current plan is to go all the way to Westchase.

Trying to ascertain things from Ft Bend Transit is tough, because their online presence isn't very good. They (Ft Bend) have talked about a P&R in Cinco Ranch area on Westpark/1093, though, but that was a couple of years ago.

From the GCRD Website.

https://www.gcrd.net/post/westpark-corridor-map

Quote

GCRD’s study would provide an extension to METRO’s in-process analysis for a BRT transportation spine from northeast Houston through the University area of the University of Houston and Texas Southern University, and the Rice University Ion complex (where it crossed the Main Street Red Line light rail system), through the Uptown District to the west side of Houston where it would end at Wilcrest. GCRD would examine the continuation of the BRT into Fort Bend County to at least Fulshear.

https://www.gcrd.net/post/us-90a-alternatives-analysis

Quote

In the spring of 2021, the GCRD approached H-GAC about conducting a study to assess the technological and economic feasibility of establishing and operating efficient transit service along this corridor. With the assumption that commuter rail is not a viable technology option for this corridor, and with the understanding that recent legislation allows GCRD to consider technologies other than commuter rail, this study seeks to explore a basic commuter system using modal options including light rail transit and bus rapid transit that could have dramatic benefits to mobility within the region.

 

 

 

The goal of this study is to generate feasible and reasonable transit alternative(s) for this corridor that the GCRD can advance into more detailed study and analysis, with an eye towards implementation.

The 290 and Galveston corridors are still being studied as well, although not as much as the other two.

So I've been looking into this and apparently, the US 90A and Westpark corridors' studies are ongoing. Granted, the plan isn't necessarily for commuter rail anymore, as they're exploring alternative options such as light rail or BRT, and it's not even a guarantee that this will advance past the studies. But it's interesting to see how they'll move forward with it.

ETA: The Westpark corridor is likely to become an extension of the future University BRT into Fulshear. If this does go through then the Big BRT is about to get even bigger

9 hours ago, kennyc05 said:

I wish the plans were rail instead of BRT to IAH.

Me too, but an express BRT to IAH would be a lot faster than a potential Red Line extension. I just hate how its schedule is pretty much dependent on the I-45 expansion project (and we all know how that's going). 

3 hours ago, mattyt36 said:

Yet they literally follow major freeway corridors, therefore providing the literal "choice" that transit promoters say people supposedly want and will supposedly use in large numbers if given to them.  "If only people had a choice . . . ", right?  (Incidentally, yet another persistent example of transit promoters saying even when transit is built that it doesn't work because it just wasn't done perfectly, which as far as I can tell basically translates into, "If money were no object and you didn't have to worry about any political considerations, everything would be perfect!"  This way of thinking would definitely give me a migraine--not sure how it doesn't give others the same.)

 

  I never said they should follow major freeway corridors. I actually think its foolish to put rail where the freeway is, especially since a lot of them have stations that are difficult to get to. I'd rather they put them where the people are. That's why the Houston METRO, despite being slow, has about as riders than the DART rail in Dallas. Because Metro was more focused on building rail where the people were (between districts and neighborhoods) rather than where the ROW was.

3 hours ago, mattyt36 said:

Well the referendum had a dollar amount associated with it, right?  Are you suggesting METRO should have risked going back to the voters?  (That assumes they even had the bonding capacity to begin with--did you consider that?)

Examples?

I never suggested that. I understand the constraints METRO has. The plan we have now is still much better than having no transit plan. I just wish they were a little clearer about the BRT not being convertible.

The light rail in DFW fails because DART was more focused on building them in old ROW rather than where the people were. It's the very same reason why the Houston metrorail, despite not covering as many areas as DART does, has almost as much riders as DART does.

What's even more annoying is the fact that the Silver Line, which was supposed to be light rail, was later changed to BRT due to cost. And this was before the Metronext plan was approved. So Metro is really inconsistent with these things. Not to mention that a common complaint about the transit plan was that there was not enough rail, especially on the west side. 

I thought they were planning on tearing down half of it and turning the other half into the skypark. 

So they don't wanna, oh I don't know, maybe take a lane or two and convert them into bus lanes? I mean the road is wide enough anyways.

On 1/16/2023 at 7:03 PM, MaxConcrete said:

The Honolulu rail project is one of the biggest fiascos in public transit in the United States. It's a cautionary story for any city looking to build trains.

As mentioned previously, it is massively over budget and extremely late. According to an online report, "Operational readiness is slated for March of 2031."

https://www.khon2.com/local-news/hart-honolulu-rail-route-to-civic-center-costs-9-9b/

The most recent info I can find is that 19 miles will cost $10 billion, or $526 million per mile. This is more than double the original budget. Finishing the last mile (apparently currently unfunded) is another $1.3 billion.

https://www.hawaiibusiness.com/hart-history-hawaii-rail-project-when-finished-budget/

Honolulu is not a subway, it is mostly on elevated track. The cost of Austin's planned system was recently raised from $5.8 billion to $10.3 billion, with the tunnel section now projected to cost $978 million per mile.

Of course, public transit ridership collapsed due to Covid, and nationally is still down around 33% compared to pre-Covid levels.

Bottom line: rail transit is obscenely expensive and has low ridership. It's much wiser to build resources that are much less expensive and can be used by multiple modes, including buses, carpools and SOVs. That means managed lanes, as TxDOT is trying to build on the North Freeway.

 

Isn't the I-45 rebuild projected to be $10 billion? I hardly see that as wiser and "less expensive" than building rail transit.