Not A good sign for Commuter Rail

[wakester]

Saw this article on the chron.com : Chron article

Looks like UP does not want to play along with Metro on the Commuter rail plans because the high fuel cost causing a boom in the rail business. Even on 290 they only want to allow it up to 610 (Northwest mall). I ride the 217 bus from Cypress and 90% of the people are going downtown so if it does not go downtown then it will not have the ridership.

[Guest danax]

It might end up being a blessing in disquise. Routing commuters from NW Mall down the Uptown Line to the University Line, then up the Red Line would be a bit discouraging. A Washington line would be a nice, albeit expensive, solution.

[musicman]

A Union Pacific Railroad official says the Metropolitan Transit Authority's plans to run commuter trains between the suburbs and a large intermodal terminal planned for the Near Northside probably won't work.

"We feel it is not feasible to operate commuter rail at this location," Joe Adams told the regional Transportation Policy Council last week. "We have made this clear in discussions with Metro."

Adams, who represents UP board chairman Jim Young in the Houston area, spoke after Metro executive vice president John Sedlak had completed a presentation about the project, which also would receive light-rail trains and buses.

The planned terminal, at an estimated cost of $270 million, according to Metro spokeswoman Sandra Salazar, would be on North Main near the former Hardy rail yards on a site that includes land Metro is negotiating to buy from UP.

Adams said the location is at the intersection of two major east-west lines that run from New Orleans to Los Angeles and a north-south line that carries traffic from the chemical area of Houston to Brownsville and up to the North.

Sedlak told the council that Metro's commuter rail plans are being studied for feasibility, and until the results are in, he said, "We'll have to agree to disagree."

Boom times

Metro officials declined to speak on the subject, citing ongoing negotiations, but UP's Adams said there are obstacles.

East-west tracks, which pass through the proposed terminal site between Burnett and Naylor, and the north-south tracks, which run east of the site on Hardy and Elysian, each carry 25-30 trains a day, Adams said.

There also are a number of industries and warehouses in the vicinity and its approaches, he said.

UP spokesman Joe Arbona said higher fuel prices and congested roads have brought a boom to the freight rail industry, so the railroad may need unused space on its current right of way for future track.

Adams said UP has no problem with Metro running light rail on Main at the terminal, and said at least one proposed commuter route may be doable.

IMO it sounds like METRO never even spoke with union paciific when developing their plans. For union pacific to own the land metro needs and UP says it is heavily used isn't a good thing

Edited May 9, 2007 by musicman

[CDeb]

OY vey!

[ricco67]

While I'm hoping that commuter rail does come to Houston, I find it that it's going to be rather difficult considering how busy the rails are here. Few people realize how heavy the traffic is and how how much a small dent in a schedule will affect lines and schedules outside of the city.

It makes sense that the rail boom is occurring because of the Fuel price increase, but it is surprising that it's only now that they (UP and other lines) are considering increasing the capacity capability in some stretches. With the Rail traffic currently under siege by some residents moving into the older areas, it makes me wonder how this will impact the rail lines and the local economy.

[musicman]

It makes sense that the rail boom is occurring because of the Fuel price increase, but it is surprising that it's only now that they (UP and other lines) are considering increasing the capacity capability in some stretches. With the Rail traffic currently under siege by some residents moving into the older areas, it makes me wonder how this will impact the rail lines and the local economy.

it is my understanding that they don't get federal subsidies for tracks/route expansion. they are doing well to maintain the current system with private funds. expansion is only considered if routes are too congested and our current fuel supply situation is aiding in the congestion.

[wakester]

It might end up being a blessing in disguise. Routing commuters from NW Mall down the Uptown Line to the University Line, then up the Red Line would be a bit discouraging. A Washington line would be a nice, albeit expensive, solution.

That idea by the UP guy of getting people to take the Uptown line, University Line, and Red line would be a joke. I think even if they had a Washington line that people still would not use it from Cypress. They would just go back to using the Park n Ride from 1960 (214) and the commuter train would be empty. I think even if the Commuter train went all the way to the Main terminal and they had to take to Red line and walk 3 blocks to where the current bus drops them off, you would see a lot of people go back to the 214 bus. You get pretty spoiled when you can have a one seat ride and no transfers.

[TheNiche]

That idea by the UP guy of getting people to take the Uptown line, University Line, and Red line would be a joke. I think even if they had a Washington line that people still would not use it from Cypress. They would just go back to using the Park n Ride from 1960 (214) and the commuter train would be empty. I think even if the Commuter train went all the way to the Main terminal and they had to take to Red line and walk 3 blocks to where the current bus drops them off, you would see a lot of people go back to the 214 bus. You get pretty spoiled when you can have a one seat ride and no transfers.

I would concur, except that I would suspect that they'd eliminate the 214 because it provides a duplicate service.

[RedScare]

All the UP spokesman is really saying is that UP may not be cooperative as far as using its right of way. That would leave METRO to find a different way of routing the commuter rail. It is not surprising at all that UP is reluctant to release spare capacity at a time of rising rail usage. It WOULD be surprising if there is only one solution to the problem.

As danax said, if commuter rail can only go as far as the Northwest TC, it may spur development of the Washington line into downtown.

[citykid09]

It's always something to hold Houston back from getting rail or anything exciting. I do think that someday Houston will get commuter and more light rail, but I will probably be an old man by then.

[ricco67]

It's a safe assumption that we will ALL be old men by the time that rail would get done.

In this case, UP has a proper excuse, unless METRO can come up with a way to build track that it can share with UP instead of the other way around.

While I suspect that it WOULD be possible to do build a track that would parallel UP, it would have to cross the UP line at one point and that could be a point of contention when it comes to right of way to avoid a collision. One possible resolution would build a tunnel up to downtown, but since it would cross a couple of bayous, it wouldn't be feasible during a high flooding event.

It's going to take a considerable amount of resourcefulness and ingenuity to be able to accomplish quite a feat.

I would love to be the fly on THAT wall if someone brings this up at a meeting.

[Guest Plastic]

Well they are going to build the 290 HOTlanes along Hempstead highway. There are tracks on the side. There's hardly room for the track, how are they going to squeeze in a HOTway and commuter rail line?

[jt16]

UP is not a good corporate citizen in my opinion. They still own a ROW for a short abandoned section of track near Memorial Heights. The Neighborhood Association has tried for years to buy this from UP for greenspace, but they refuse to let go of it. It's a tiny tract of land not connected to any other part of UP's system. I tried to contact UP locally, but got no response.

[musicman]

UP is not a good corporate citizen in my opinion. They still own a ROW for a short abandoned section of track near Memorial Heights.

is it maintained by them?

Edited May 10, 2007 by musicman

[jt16]

They took out the railroad ties a few years ago. They do still maintain the ROW. It's the small piece of property behind Walgreens on Washington.

[musicman]

They took out the railroad ties a few years ago. They do still maintain the ROW. It's the small piece of property behind Walgreens on Washington.

if it is maintained then i'd call them good corporate citizen. because someone doesn't sell you their property doesn't mean they aren't a good corporate citizen.

[The Voice of University Oaks]

Notice that the most important quote in this article comes at the very end:

However, Adams said an engineering solution may be possible. "If you have a very significant amount of money to devote, you can probably solve any problem," he said.

In other words, if commuter rail is going to operate on UP rights-of-way, a very significant amount of work (such as double- and triple-tracking, adding new grade separations, installing new signal systems, etc.) is going to need to be done so that UP's freight operations (which, after all, is what they are in business for) do not get impeded.

Joe Adams is not saying anything today that he hasn't already said at previous meetings regarding commuter rail, whether they be with METRO or other agencies. He said these same things at every meeting of H-GAC's Fort Bend County commuter rail feasibility study a few years ago. The reality of the situation is that UP's local track network, in its existing state, simply cannot support commuter rail. It's going to take a lot of negotiating, a lot of upgrading and a lot of money to make it happen.

What we're seeing here might be a bit of public theater between METRO and Union Pacific which is intended to show the TPC that, if they indeed think commuter rail is a viable option for Houston, they need to pony up the money for it.

UPDATE: see Christof's latest blog entry for further insight on what's going on here.

Edited May 11, 2007 by The Voice of University Oaks

[jt16]

if it is maintained then i'd call them good corporate citizen. because someone doesn't sell you their property doesn't mean they aren't a good corporate citizen.

I guess we just have different opinions on what makes a good corporate citizen. Simply doing the minimum to meet certain regulations doesn't make you a good corporate citizen in my opinion. The good corporate citizens go out of their way to make the neighborhoods that their customers and employees live in a much more desirable place.

[TheNiche]

The good corporate citizens go out of their way to make the neighborhoods that their customers and employees live in a much more desirable place.

The Memorial Heights Neighborhood Association is neither a customer or employee/contractor to Union Pacific. I suspect that very few if any of their constituents are customers or employees/contractors to UP, either.

[wakester]

Well they are going to build the 290 HOTlanes along Hempstead highway. There are tracks on the side. There's hardly room for the track, how are they going to squeeze in a HOTway and commuter rail line?

TxDOT has set a side 50 feet of right a way along the Hempstead Tollway for rail

[musicman]

The good corporate citizens go out of their way to make the neighborhoods that their customers and employees live in a much more desirable place.

do you work for UP?

name any other companies that make your neighborhood a "much more desirable place"?

Edited May 12, 2007 by musicman

[H-Town Man]

jt16 isn't saying anything unusual about corporate citizenship. If UP owns a chunk of land in a spot where they will never use it again, they should sell it. Probably the only reason they don't is bureaucratic laziness.

[musicman]

jt16 isn't saying anything unusual about corporate citizenship. If UP owns a chunk of land in a spot where they will never use it again, they should sell it. Probably the only reason they don't is bureaucratic laziness.

jt's comment seems selfish. if UP was doing something specifically bad towards jt, then i can see how UP would be a bad corporate citizen but in this instance if they are maintaining their property, i have to give UP some credit.

[musicman]

Commuter rail in Fort Bend stuck at the station

STAFFORD, Texas -- For some, the thought of mass-transit rail service is bad news. But for thousands in Fort Bend County, commuter rail cannot pull into the station fast enough.

The mayor of Stafford complains that Metro is overlooking Fort Bend County and is not working fast enough to bring commuter rail to the county. He thinks he knows why.

[editor]

And while there appears to be room to run a parallel line along the same route, Union Pacific holds the right of way and may be holding onto it for expansion of its freight rail service.

This is probably the heart of the matter. I don't think UP is unwilling to have commuter trains on its tracks, it already runs hundreds, if not thousands, of commuter trains daily on its freight tracks in other parts of the country. I think UP just has other plans.

The track right-of-way is worth a lot of money. And what's located underneath is worth even more, especially in Texas.

Someone in the oil industry should correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the railroads own the mineral rights to what's under their tracks and have in the past made a metric buttload of money extracting it.

[TexasVines]

yes the vast majority of the time the railroads own the mineral rights.....this is being exploited in Fort Worth in the Barrett Shale to allow drilling and the railroads make money

just because the railroad would allow additional track does not mean they would have to give up any mineral rights.....just like people buy or lease property all the time without the mineral rights

as for the unused section of ROW near the neighborhood.....would you say anyone else was a bad corporate citizen if they did not sell an unused parking lot for a park because you and your neighbors thought it would be nice for a park.....probably not

and there is a very good chance even if the railroad did want to sell it that it would never go to your neighborhood because in most cases the entity that sold the ROW has the first chance to repurchase it or reclaim it.....so if UP tried to sell it you have no idea who might have first rights to the claim....surely not your neighborhood

[editor]

Are we talking "sell" here? Why would Metro have to buy UP lines? Why not just lease time on them?

[musicman]

Are we talking "sell" here? Why would Metro have to buy UP lines? Why not just lease time on them?

according to the stafford mayor, METRO isn't even talking to UP which concurs with statements from UP. you can't make a deal if you aren't in discussions.