Draft agreement leaves rail out of I-10 plans

[musicman]

The Metropolitan Transit Authority's longstanding desire to someday squeeze a rail line onto the widened Katy Freeway may not be realized as soon as agency officials had hoped.

A new draft agreement among Metro, Harris County and the Texas Department of Transportation for operation of the freeway's future toll lanes does not mention rail, an absence that has Metro officials concerned.

The question is, where could Metro put its rails once the toll lanes are in place? There is no room in the freeway's current design without removing some traffic lanes, TxDOT spokeswoman Janelle Gbur and Metro board chairman David Wolff agreed.

Running rail down the middle of the freeway would displace two or more of the four toll lanes, which are to replace Metro's current High Occupancy Vehicle lanes and serve the same role for transit and carpools while generating revenue from other vehicles.

Nonetheless, Metro vice president Bryan Pennington told the agency board Friday it was "very realistic" to believe Metro could be operating rail in the Katy Freeway corridor within five to seven years.

"I think that's optimistic," Wolff said afterward. "It's intriguing because the demand is there in the I-10 corridor for rail

[Trae]

Five to seven years? Where are they going to put it? Too bad they couldn't squeeze in commuter rail on the old rail lines. Not sure if there was enough room, but have three lane feeder in each direction, four lane freeway, and a one lane (each way) HOV lane. After that, commuter rail on the side. Doubt it would fit, but an idea I just thought up. Too bad it won't happen.

[TheNiche]

Wilson reminded the board that Metro has paid TxDOT $10 million to beef up the freeway's overpasses to carry the weight of trains, and called that a "down payment" on the plan.

This is the kind of **** that pisses me off. It is one thing for METRO to make poor decisions where major transit investments are concerned...it is a whole other thing to pay $10 million dollars of public funds for improvements and fail to simultaneously enter into a contractual agreement with the owner of the ROW to assure that the investment can be utilized at METRO's discretion, subject to reasonable limitations.

[sttombiz]

I will probably kill myself if there is not a rail on the i-10 corridor. I mean 20 min to go from wilcrest to gessner on a Tuesday at 9:50 am is ridiculous. There wasnt even a wreck for hecks sake! it is only going to get worse even with the expansion! well at least tx dot is making money. isnt that what counts?

[musicman]

I will probably kill myself if there is not a rail on the i-10 corridor. I mean 20 min to go from wilcrest to gessner on a Tuesday at 9:50 am is ridiculous. There wasnt even a wreck for hecks sake! it is only going to get worse even with the expansion! well at least tx dot is making money. isnt that what counts?

it will get better by sheer capacity increase.

[westguy]

Does the Katy Tollway have two EZ Tag lanes next to the HOV3 lane? I assume that's the case since it otherwise wouldn't make sense to increase the number of lanes up to the toll plaza because the road is EZ Tag only. Therefore the Katy Tollway uses enough space for 9-10 lanes. They could easily give up two EZ Tag lanes and the Lexus crowd should still be able to have a road to themselves without having to drive behind Metro buses.

[Trae]

They really could have. Four lanes of traffic each way, then an HOV lane. Commuter could have fit down the middle. There was actually a group that wanted this, but they also wanted the freeway depresses below grade (which would have been a bit too much).

[musicman]

the lane configuration is found here.

[citykid09]

Read the comments, people are mad! People on chron.com actual agree with me! I need to sign up so I can reply and invite them all to this site.

merc2 wrote:

sam_j, what do you mean "no one rides the rail now"? Every time I have ridden it it has been quite full, and it's just a dopey little train with a limited market. If anything, it dramatizes that rail would be tremendously successful since even it does very well

6/30/2007 1:01:24 PM

AstrosFan77007 wrote:

When Bob Lanier was running for Mayor the first time, Kathy wanted rail, Bob said, "We are a large urban area, and rail will not work".

He went to excplain we need to triple the buses, double, the park and ride system.

I agree. People in our city will not ride trains.

6/30/2007 1:11:33 PM

YourConscience wrote:

.... highway planners .... IDIOTS, one and all .... I won't be around to see it, but what happens in 10 to 20 years when the new Katy Frwy is out of date and too congested to drive, .... where are the planners going to expand to, pave the area with solid concrete from 290 to 59 ..... makes ya want to slap the crap out of them all.....

6/30/2007 2:09:01 PM

drb757 wrote:

If everyone worked downtown like they do up in yankee land trains would be nice but people work all over the place here and for the same company which might have several different locations. Get over it. there will never be a heavy rail system here because there is no money in it for the crooked politicians and their buddies.

6/30/2007 2:26:45 PM

silvertungdevil wrote:

Wow, who here can actually believe this is happening right in front of our very eyes. Why people cannot have enough FORESIGHT to see this through is beyond anything i've ever seen my entire lifetime here in Houston. Hold your hand up if you would like to see one day where you drive to a station, get on a train and either go to Sugarland, Woodlands, Katy, Galveston, Downtown, Pasadena, Galleria, Airports,(to be able to park at Hobby and train up to IAH wouldn't that be nice)290 @ BW8 area, Conroe or Galena Park. Like previous poster said "I WILL NEVER TAKE A BUS" but I damn sure would take a tram. So remeber when your at that touch screen in November, assuming you vote, know where your local pocket pincher stands on light rail and environment and vote

6/30/2007 2:39:50 PM

DonDick wrote:

A few ground rules:

Commuter rail is nice. But trains that run on standard gauge tracks are different animals than light rail trains. Mixing the 2 systems would be a maintenance and logistics nightmare.

Elevated trains are nice. A poster I saw a few years back read "Take the El--Avoid Surface Congestion". The poster was 97 years old at the time.

Train tracks gotta go somewhere. I was surprised when they built Mayor Brown's Choo Choo to Nowhere at grade level. It's hi-voltage electric in a very wet city, and sure enuf, we've had problems with electrolysis and controls shorting out. Then at the medical center I noticed those 2nd story walkways connecting buildings on either side of Fannin you'd have to tear out and move to the 3rd floor at enormous expense. The tracks along the Katy would have required commuter trains or laying down an all new narrow gauge rail. I've been caught in the traffic jams that occur between Old Katy and the I-10 access road and what the occasional freight train would do especially when it hits a car. A train every 10 minutes is just that many more accidents and traffic jams.

Before you get on a train you gotta get to it. In Manhattan with 1000 people an acre, you can walk. And in bad weather you can dress warm. In Houston you gotta drive, and park somewhere close, and half are gonna have to walk across the freeway. And in bad weather we gotta get naked.

Cut-and-fill expressways are cheaper. You get the fill for the overpasses from the next underpass. Fill can be dumped anywhere, but you gotta get it from somewhere. But with its limited line-of sight, the original cut-and-fill 59 from downtown was rated at 55 MPH due to federal guidelines. It took an act of congress to change the signs. And a few years later we tore it down and depressed it all the way and it works pretty well. Elevated would have been better but all those sensitive souls in the Museum district and Montrose went down and swooned on the steps of city hall. So they made it a retention pond instead.

For sure any fix is going to cost a bunch of money. A gas tax? People are going bananas over prices now, and Texas is about as cheap as it gets. In Iran they're burning down gas stations cause they gotta pay 20 cents a gallon. Tollroads? A recent proposal to reduce the congestion to an acceptable level by raising the toll created such an uproar the changed their mends the next day. A convenience that didn't exist a couple years ago is now seen as our birthright.

Our short amd medium-term goals will be met by the work being done on I-10. 59 now flows pretty darn well. Past West Belt it used to be a mess--I drove it every day. Other day I drove at 5:15 from West Belt to where the construction necks down to 2 lanes, maybe 5 miles, took me 5 minutes. Coming back from Grand Parkway, where the construction is up to 3 lanes min, took me 11 minutes. It doesn't make sense that on the main southern highway from Florida To California, Houston shold be the longest part of the trip.

6/30/2007 3:07:34 PM

TXcreolelady wrote:

Houston traffic is HORRIBLE. There should be light rail coming in to downtown in the mornings and going back out to the suburbs in the evenings. I live in Spring and work on the Southwest side of town. It is my dream that one day I could catch the train into downtown and then catch another that will take me to the SW, where I could then take a bus to get to work.

Why won't Houston ever have mass transportation that will serve and convenience everyone. This is an oil and gas city. We won't ever get the kind of mass transportation that this city needs because the profits won't be what they are now if we go that route.

6/30/2007 3:19:24 PM

Gnrdude wrote:

Typical Metro TX-DOT BS

6/30/2007 4:30:44 PM

User Image

garduno01 wrote:

Unbelievable, that's for sure. TXDOt has it all screwed up and I think there is a broad consensus that we want and need rail. Rail will decrease the amount of accidents and deaths on the freeways and roads, lessen the demand for gasoline and oil, provide cleaner air that will FINALLY possibly solve our ozone problems, and many more reasons. Point blank, we need rail! I am going to write to TXdot, METRO, and H-GAC voicing my opinion and I urge others to do the same.

6/30/2007 5:12:56 PM

User Image

DonDick wrote:

It is my dream that one day I could catch the train out near Sharpstown and go to my clinic on Yoakum or my favorite pub off of Kirby. In my dreams.

6/30/2007 5:28:07 PM

TXcreolelady wrote:

I agree Dondick. Only in our dreams.

6/30/2007 5:32:05 PM

Binh wrote:

Why is it that some voices in Houston keep chanting things like "people hate trains" or "no one will ride it"? I can't think of anything farther from the truth when it comes to commuting to work.

We heard the same "anti-rail" mantra here in the Dallas area during 1990's and I actually fell for it at the time. However, I began commuting by rail when service was established between Fort Worth and Dallas and have continued to do so for over 6 years and have watched the number of passengers almost quadruple. Today I cannot imagine going back to driving to/from work again.

I think the primary fear of highway and oil lobbyists is that once rail service is established people will not only use it, but begin asking for more.

6/30/2007 5:51:23 PM

Axel wrote:

Metro does not need anymore rail, they should consider a monorail system throughout Hoston.

6/30/2007 7:22:00 PM

Harold81 wrote:

A couple of points:

*Many Houstonians want some sort of elevated system, which would probably work best for the city, however the fiscally conservative attitude that permeates this city and it's residents will not allow it. However they will allow $500 million in bonuses to contractors to finish freeway expansion quickly.

*Is it a coincidence that a rail component was left out of the Katy Freeway cooridor? What freeway is the Energy Belt located? Can you imagine all of those oil executives looking out of the windows of their offices in the buildings along the Katy freeway and cursing an electric train carrying thousands of people per day, cutting into their profits? They, nor Republican John Culberson who more than likely the oil executives vote for, would want that.

*Removing the rail tracks that were along the Katy freeway in the late 90's was not a coincidence.

*Houstonians are getting what they deserve for allowing themselves to be fooled into believing Houston could not benefit from rail for so long.

*With all of the great things about Houston, Houstonians must wake up to how backward the city can be, and rail is just one more glaring example of that. The things that are great about the city are great, but that does not mean the city has arrived.

6/30/2007 10:50:01 PM

rlleon42 wrote:

METRO: hmmmm Lets only allow 2 lanes on the Westpark Tollway, because we have future plans to build rail. When, 2050??? Metro needs to get its head out of its ass and start planning for the future today, not tomorrow.

Edited July 1, 2007 by citykid09

[Trae]

____ing Bob Lanier .

[VicMan]

We need to make it clear to the people along the I-10 corridor that a bullet sight is on their houses - as in someday (Maybe 10 or 20 years from now) someone's houses will be destroyed to make a rail corridor - Hey, METRO already paid TXDOt $10 million.

Edited July 1, 2007 by VicMan

[editor]

We need to make it clear to the people along the I-10 corridor that a bullet sight is on their houses - as in someday (Maybe 10 or 20 years from now) someone's houses will be destroyed to make a rail corridor - Hey, METRO already paid TXDOt $10 million.

And even if a rail corridor isn't built, a freeway expansion will, which will mean plowing down even more of their homes.

[musicman]

I will probably kill myself if there is not a rail on the i-10 corridor. I mean 20 min to go from wilcrest to gessner on a Tuesday at 9:50 am is ridiculous. There wasnt even a wreck for hecks sake! it is only going to get worse even with the expansion! well at least tx dot is making money. isnt that what counts?

With an HOV/park and ride already parallel, travel times by rail would be way slower.

Edited July 2, 2007 by musicman

[TheNiche]

With an HOV/park and ride already parallel, travel times by rail would be way slower.

This is true, and with congestion pricing in the managed lanes, building out the hard infrastructure required for rail will mean that P&R service enjoys the ultimate advantage. The caveat of course is that congestion pricing must be well-managed to prevent a repeat of the Westpark fiasco.

[Trae]

With an HOV/park and ride already parallel, travel times by rail would be way slower.

How so? Those HOV lanes back up at times.

[musicman]

How so? Those HOV lanes back up at times.

it's all about speed. the park and ride provides a direct service to downtown for those who use it. the commuter rail cant achieve the top speed of the buses plus it doesn't provide direct service. patrons would have to switch to another form of transportation to get to their ultimate destination.

[Trae]

No they wouldn't. If it went down the middle of the freeway, it would take them all the way in. The commuter rail isn't all about time either. It saves money (don't have to use gas money).

[VicMan]

No they wouldn't. If it went down the middle of the freeway, it would take them all the way in. The commuter rail isn't all about time either. It saves money (don't have to use gas money).

The important part about determining the commute of a commuter rail customer is the location of automobile parking. A Park and Ride could be established closer to residences of commuters than commuter rail parking.

[musicman]

No they wouldn't. If it went down the middle of the freeway, it would take them all the way in. The commuter rail isn't all about time either. It saves money (don't have to use gas money).

so commuters aren't concerned with travel times?

where are the commuter tracks in downtown proper trae?

Edited July 2, 2007 by musicman

[TheNiche]

How so? Those HOV lanes back up at times.

With two lanes in each direction, emergency lanes or other space for broken down vehicles to pull off onto, an EZ Tag-based system, and congestion pricing, the managed lanes will only back up under pretty extraordinary circumstances.

And since P&R busses are flexible in the sense that they can get commuters not just from point to point, but exit along the freeway and then drive a circuituitous route through a fairly spread out employment center, like the Energy Corridor, Westchase, the Galleria area, or other areas, without making their passengers transfer modes. Likewise, when there is new construction, they can adapt their routes without almost any infrastructure investment. It really is a superior service at lower cost.

Edited July 2, 2007 by TheNiche

[Parrothead]

With two lanes in each direction, emergency lanes or other space for broken down vehicles to pull off onto, an EZ Tag-based system, and congestion pricing, the managed lanes will only back up under pretty extraordinary circumstances.

And since P&R busses are flexible in the sense that they can get commuters not just from point to point, but exit along the freeway and then drive a circuituitous route through a fairly spread out employment center, like the Energy Corridor, Westchase, the Galleria area, or other areas, without making their passengers transfer modes. Likewise, when there is new construction, they can adapt their routes without almost any infrastructure investment. It really is a superior service at lower cost.

That may be so, but with Metro already trying to cut P&R routes out to force users to go downtown and take rail--it wouldn't be quite so superior. It's already happened at the Kuykendahl P&R, and ALMOST happened at the Addicks P&R, had riders not practically stormed the METRO hearing on it--thanks to some clever word-of-mouth P.R. from the Med Center folks.

Notice the new, big Cypress P&R doesn't have a direct route to the Med Center? That's no coincidence. Considering the TMC is the largest employer in this city, you'd think there would be a bit more help on the commuter end of things.

[TheNiche]

That may be so, but with Metro already trying to cut P&R routes out to force users to go downtown and take rail--it wouldn't be quite so superior. It's already happened at the Kuykendahl P&R, and ALMOST happened at the Addicks P&R, had riders not practically stormed the METRO hearing on it--thanks to some clever word-of-mouth P.R. from the Med Center folks.

Notice the new, big Cypress P&R doesn't have a direct route to the Med Center? That's no coincidence. Considering the TMC is the largest employer in this city, you'd think there would be a bit more help on the commuter end of things.

You bring up a good point, and one that stirred a memory. Several years ago, I was having a discussion with a METRO VP and he more or less made the argument that METRO can and is presently attempting to facilitate employment growth within the central city to the exclusion of the suburbs by providing disproportionate and in many cases exclusive service to the Central Business District. It blew me away that they were willfully neglecting transit to many employment centers throughout the region, but based on what's on the ground, he clearly was being honest.

[musicman]

That may be so, but with Metro already trying to cut P&R routes out to force users to go downtown and take rail--it wouldn't be quite so superior. It's already happened at the Kuykendahl P&R, and ALMOST happened at the Addicks P&R, had riders not practically stormed the METRO hearing on it--thanks to some clever word-of-mouth P.R. from the Med Center folks.

Notice the new, big Cypress P&R doesn't have a direct route to the Med Center? That's no coincidence. Considering the TMC is the largest employer in this city, you'd think there would be a bit more help on the commuter end of things.

METRO touted how they were going open up/expand more park and rides if the big election was successful and now this tactic. Parrothead, I'd suggest you shoot a letter to the councilmembers. Several do forward them to the METRO board for a response.

Edited July 2, 2007 by musicman

[Transit Nut]

There is no P&R bus to the Medical Center because there is little demand for it right now. According to the TMC Master Plan, the majority of employees live in the southwest (like Missouri City) and south (Pearland), not up along 290. There are buses from Westwood and Missouri City which serve the TMC. They were also trying to start P&R service from Pearland, but apparently the parties involved have had trouble agreeing to the details.

There were also plans to start P&R service from Katy Mills Mall this year, but they may have had trouble coordinating with the mall or something. According to the METRO Solutions Spring Update, there's supposed to also be a new P&R in Clear Lake by 2012, and another 3 P&Rs by 2025.

In many ways, commuter bus service on a free flow HOV lane is just as good or better than commuter rail. While METRO probably wants to make sure the option of commuter rail isn't precluded, the existing service works quite well.

[westguy]

it's all about speed. the park and ride provides a direct service to downtown for those who use it. the commuter rail cant achieve the top speed of the buses plus it doesn't provide direct service. patrons would have to switch to another form of transportation to get to their ultimate destination.

Commuter rail can be just as fast as buses, and transfers are already inevitable with the bus system. I think the confusion surrounding bus schedules deters most people from riding them.

The Cypress Park & Ride is only temporary, in a lot leased from HP, so it needs to make transfers at the Northwest transit center. They may have finished the permanent one by now. I'm not sure because Metro hasn't released the new schedule. This is the only one I could find, which is a bit dated. But I believe it still applies.

Also, I was mixing up the Northwest Transit Center with the Northwest Park & Ride. NTC is right at the end of 290. I doubt service from a Park & Ride lot would ever go further than that.

Edited July 2, 2007 by westguy

[wakester]

That may be so, but with Metro already trying to cut P&R routes out to force users to go downtown and take rail--it wouldn't be quite so superior. It's already happened at the Kuykendahl P&R, and ALMOST happened at the Addicks P&R, had riders not practically stormed the METRO hearing on it--thanks to some clever word-of-mouth P.R. from the Med Center folks.

Notice the new, big Cypress P&R doesn't have a direct route to the Med Center? That's no coincidence. Considering the TMC is the largest employer in this city, you'd think there would be a bit more help on the commuter end of things.

None of the P&R on the Northwest (Cypress, 1960, West Little York, and Pinemont) have direct service to TMC. Since they all have to go through the NWTC, you have to transfer to the 298 coming from I-10.

[Trae]

so commuters aren't concerned with travel times?

where are the commuter tracks in downtown proper trae?

Good lord, that's not what I am saying. Travel times are a factor, but not the only factor. Some people like to save money as well.

[musicman]

Good lord, that's not what I am saying. Travel times are a factor, but not the only factor. Some people like to save money as well.

the biggest factor is travel time. if it saves them time, they'll do it. money can be a factor as we all saw on the westpark tollway

Commuter rail can be just as fast as buses....

i agree that it can be however in an urban setting, it isn't likely.

[Trae]

The Westpark Tollway is faster than I-10, which is why it is heavily used.

[TheNiche]

Commuter rail can be just as fast as buses, and transfers are already inevitable with the bus system.

"Just as fast" does not warrant an enormous expenditure of resources on new infrastructure. Rubber tires are less expensive, run on existing road surfaces, and allow for other vehicles to use the guideway when the space is not occupied by the transit vehicle. And with commuter rail, transfers are all but absolutely certain. With busses, there's much more flexibility, and while transfers will never go away for many if not most people, quite a few commuters can enjoy curbside service to within a few blocks of their final destination.