JClark54

The U.S. DOT announced today it has awarded $36 million to the CoH to cover a portion of this project: https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/2023-06/FY22-RCE-Selections_PDFa.pdf

METRO claims TxDOT's I-10 revamp will increase its BRT project costs: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/i-10-txdot-metro-bus-transit-18112410.php To make room for TxDOT's managed leans, Metro will swing its BRT busway across the freeway closer to the Loop 610 interchange than initially planned, complicating both the design and the cost of land, Reddy said. That includes some right of way along the freeway on the border of Memorial Park. The extra cost, which would jump the total price to around $600 million, could be filled by additional regional transportation funding, Metro CEO Tom Lambert said, doled out by the Houston-Galveston Area Council. “We’re going to take a look at options for grant funding,” Lambert said, adding that federal officials have committed new funding to transit projects in coming years.

Thanks for the insight. The official address for the 501c3 is 3405 Navigation, which is the Dua Textiles building rather than the UP-owned property. I had assumed that was a temporary location until work could start on the UP-owned land, but maybe not if they pointed you east.

The railroad track removal is interesting. This area has been believed to the Texas Railroad Heritage Museum's location since the steam locomotive formerly at Minute Maid as well as many passenger cars ended up on the sidings between Cubework and Dua Textiles. Jim Crane donated the engine car to a 501c3 designated with running the museum. The nonprofit has posted on social the museum would be housed on UP-owned property and that it had financial support from UP and the National Railroad Historical Society. https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?ref=watch_permalink&v=487217195620408

Thanks, what I assumed. Would be an amazing addition to the area. Near the proposed Ennis METRORail stop and would go a long way to connecting the Columbia Tap with the Harrisburg Trail, if plans to extend the Harrisburg Trail ever take off.

Anyone know what "future Delano bridge crossing" references?

New chain-link fencing has been setup and it looks like wood framing has been put in place for a driveway pour.

This location might interest Trees For Houston, if there's funding, volunteers, and support from the stakeholder: https://www.treesforhouston.org Much of its recent work is at schools, but occasionally it does trail or park spaces.

I'm not opposed to your suggestion, but the highway purists on this board may differ. The Palestine derailment has garnered attention from local and federal legislators. As a result, legislators on both sides of the aisle have begun scrutinizing precision scheduled railroading's growing impact on communities large and small. Many bills have been filed that would give regulators more means to inhibit what many analysts and leaked internal company memos claim are dangerous train-building practices. The so-called bipartisan railway safety act of 2023, as an example, includes language empowering the FRA administrator to set train length caps locally based on the factors prevalent to that area. By the railroads' own admission, they have not invested in Houston rail infrastructure in any meaningful way to support their new model, and they really don't intend to without regulatory requirement. Passage of the above bill or any of the similarly styled ones theoretically would provide reprieve to the communities bearing the brunt of so-called super train parking. Trains must fit in yards or sidings. So either they return to pre-PSR lengths or railroads expand their infrastructure to support the longer, heavier trains they've been building in recent years. Both would likely result in less street blockage, bettering quality of life for residents and Amtrak, or another passenger rail authority, alike.

If there's a groundswell of resident support for acquiring private property to expand rail infrastructure, I imagine it easily could be accomplished. Freight rail reps say their analysis found zero political backing for eminent domain in this climate, or they would have already expanded the lines. It appears to be the age-old adage that many elected officials view land acquisition for highways as a public benefit, whereas they seem to view land acquisition for rail as the opposite. The Texas AG has filed suit, claiming the Texas Central passenger railway isn't a true railroad and thus shouldn't have eminent domain authority.

Yes, I am the person who wrote the METRORail track and Galveston sub are the same gauge width, so light rail can most certainly run on the Galveston sub. I don't even need to look as far as Utah for an example of passenger rail service operating on a freight railroad line: Amtrak's Sunset Limited route on the Terminal line in Houston. I'm not a passenger rail opponent. Actually quite the opposite. I just understand there are many more issues than fitment keeping a third-party operator from successfully utilizing the Galveston sub for passenger rail service to Galveston. A regional mobility entity like METRO or Texas Central can't tell UP what to do, and without change at the Congressional level, the FRA can't force them to cooperate. -UP owns the Galveston sub. It would have to grant trackage rights, an outcome I seriously question in this climate. It's currently engaged in a years-long lawsuit with Amtrak over this very issue. UP point blank writes to regulators it wants Amtrak, a current trackage rights holder, and freight operators like Canadian Pacific that don't currently have trackage rights now but stand to gain it through a merger with an operator that does off its right of way. -The line drops to one track in various sections, so trains frequently stop for hours until the one with right of way clears the area. Sometimes, blockages are also caused by trains being longer than yard sidings can support, thus they stick out onto the main line. Amtrak argues in the Terminal line lawsuit (see posts above) that these two commonalities cause trains to arrive late with regularity. Would a passenger still buy a ticket if there's a lateness chance of, say, 90 minutes (splitting the difference of Amtrak's lateness states in the UP suit) between Houston and Galveston? There's a thread in this forum where someone wrote that the arrival times of Amtrak trains to New Orleans (Terminal line) made them second guess that mode of transportation. UP and BNSF have said in meetings with communities impacted by their new operating model the only way to improve fluidity -- making prolonged blockages on streets a thing of the past -- is expanding the current infrastructure to better support the longer trains they have every intention to continue building. CP-KCS plans to break the record for longest train length in the Houston complex, as an example. It wants to exceed 12,000 feet in length. This means expanding yards and adding tracks to existing lines, something they say is impossible on the Galveston sub and many other lines in Houston. The current political climate doesn't look kindly upon land acquisition. They also claim some of the industrial properties needed to be acquired to add tracks are worth quite a lot of $$$.

Disregard the comments above. just got a message answering my question.

Thanks for the information. Yes, I saw that map during my research. It's what led to confusion about the Jensen route based on the following graf: "After opposition to the project built in the community, many also questioned Metro’s decision to run the line along Lockwood at all." Some in the piece want it off Lockwood entirely. I heard that repeated many times in the public hearing posted online, too, and on Nextdoor. But the Jensen route in the map above shows a jag to Lockwood through Eastwood at Polk.

I'm trying to understand the Jensen route but can't find datails in the project documents or public hearings that METRO posted online. Only cursory remarks that it was studied but scored lower than Lockwood. Would the route use St Emmanuel?

It was a joke. There are three within two blocks of this address, and one of them is across the street.

If there's one thing the east end lacks, it's a warehouse-turned-gym.

Per METRO's web site, it appears the METRORail runs on a standard gauge railway. That's the same gauge, or width, as the UP line running along Highway 3. It's possible light rail carriages are smaller, but I can't imagine by too much as railcar construction in the USA is standardized to ensure system fluidity -- minus the handful of narrow gauge railways used for tourism purposes. I agree there are stretches of that line with two tracks and possibly ample space for a third line or sidings. People with more knowledge about railroad construction than me say there are other stretches where adjacent infrastructure proximity is so tight the line drops to a single track, and land acquisition would be required for expansion. If our state leaders' approach to the Texas Central high-speed railway is any indication, I presume they won't support land acquisition for passenger rail anytime soon.

It appears to be single track for a good stretch of the route, including over the intercostal waterway.

In public hearings about trains parking on streets, UP brass claimed adding capacity to that line would've already happened were it feasible. The ROW narrows in stretches where not-UP-owned buildings or roadways are close. The line drops from two tracks to one as a result, forcing trains to wait until passing ones clear the area before merging. Land acquisition is possible, but it's not on the table at this time, they said.

Eh, I posted your comment in totality. Full respect to your views. I don't have to answer in the way you see fit. Do you want to talk about the merits of the project of whether I posted in accordance with your standards? We're wasting one another's time.

For clarity, it was you who asked for the information to be posted here you would later deem "illogically located." I tried avoid what would ultimately occur from your request by noting at first post that it was a separate project also covered on this forum. I take no issue if the content is moved, as I voluntarily provided the link to the core thread. But the person claiming it's not suitable here is the one who drove it's placement.

METRO posted a project video yesterday:

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/lifestyle/home-design/article/eldorado-third-ward-reopening-17863351.php

The Houston complex is the most congested in the country, which would make passenger rail timetables challenging without further investment. UP and Amtrak are in a years-long dispute over the Sunset Limited route, as an example. Amtrak claims UP's new operational model of running longer trains without upgrading infrastructure to support them has resulted in blockages that hinder on-time performance. "Many of the delays incurred by the Sunset are attributable to UP corporate decisions, operational practices, or failures that result in systemic violations of Amtrak preference rights and cause substandard customer on-time performance. Among those are that UP regularly runs freight trains longer than sidings along its route; when UP dispatches freight trains that do not fit into sidings, the Sunset Limited trains must follow that non-fitter, which can result in hours of passenger delay. I imagine the passenger rail route for the western suburbs would utilize the terminal line through the inner loop, which is the same as Amtrak. Per evidence presented in Amtrak's suit, delays have resulted in some passengers arriving more 181 minutes late.

The existing thread can be found here: