METRO Solutions Inner City Corridor Construction

[Trae]

How can you transfer north to the Uptown Line if you are on the University Line? There is no stop close to where the Uptown Line goes north down Post Oak. If Uptown is BRT, will buses drive along the tracks with a "Uptown" symbol on them, then head north at the split?

Anyone going to answer my question?

[musicman]

Anyone going to answer my question?

demanding trae!

last i had heard was metro was still trying to determine how to tie the uptown route to the westpark one. westpark will be done first.

[Highway6]

Anyone going to answer my question?

All BRT will have tracks in place according to Metro. The only difference between the BRT and LRT lines will be the actual vehicles to transport the people. There will be tracks in place and covered until ridership merits purchasing trains for that particular line.

We don't know yet how Metro intends to handle the connection of the University and Uptown line. We should find out when they release the LPA hopefully in September.

The hope would be a 3 way switch there so that Uni line trains can run north on Post Oak.

One option would be to have every other Univ. Line train converge into the uptown line instead of continuing on westpark.

Another option would be some sort of spur so that every Uni line train goes from Westpark to Post Oak up to some specfied station that serves both the galeria and connection to the Uptown Line before going south and the continuing west on westpark

Basically Post Oak between Richmond and Westpark is one big fuzzy.. we don't know.

But.. since Metro has stated a desire to have tracks on every BRT anyways.. there are options as to if this stretch will be part of the Uni line, the Uptown Line, or both.

[ricco67]

I'm struggling to remember the post oak/Richmond intersection on how it looks like and I believe they can get rather creative when it comes to handling that particular section of roadway. If I remember correctly, there is quite a bit of room for them to have 4 tracks there or possibly even have a cross platform layout there.

I'm more nervous about the UT line than anything else. This will be a considerable challenge for a layout and logistics of construction. I'd love to be the fly on the wall during THAT planning meeting.

sue me, i'm boring!

[musicman]

I'm struggling to remember the post oak/Richmond intersection on how it looks like and I believe they can get rather creative when it comes to handling that particular section of roadway. If I remember correctly, there is quite a bit of room for them to have 4 tracks there or possibly even have a cross platform layout there.

Out there it will be on westpark, not richmond.

[ricco67]

So? I stand by my statement. Regardless of whether it's on Richmond/post oak or Westpark/610, it should be fascinating to see what happens.

[musicman]

So? I stand by my statement. Regardless of whether it's on Richmond/post oak or Westpark/610, it should be fascinating to see what happens.

there was a little more to your statement than "it should be fascinating to see what happens".

[ricco67]

there was a little more to your statement than "it should be fascinating to see what happens".

That's true, but everything there is something I stand by. Whether or not it's built where I suggested it might be built on. There's plenty of room for quite a few scenarios.

[musicman]

That's true, but everything there is something I stand by. Whether or not it's built where I suggested it might be built on. There's plenty of room for quite a few scenarios.

I agree there is plenty of room for quite a few scenarios but one of them isn't on Richmond/post oak at least according to METRO.

[Trae]

demanding trae!

last i had heard was metro was still trying to determine how to tie the uptown route to the westpark one. westpark will be done first.

Anyway, how hard could it be? METRO could pretend that the Uptown Line would be part of the University Line. Then have it split off like two, normal separate lines would. Every other train (well in this case, every bus) will have an "Uptown" sign on it (in the front) so people will know where it is going to go. The trains will have Hillcroft on them instead. It would be easier if both were LRT, but oh well.

[Highway6]

Anyway, how hard could it be? METRO could pretend that the Uptown Line would be part of the University Line. Then have it split off like two, normal separate lines would. Every other train (well in this case, every bus) will have an "Uptown" sign on it (in the front) so people will know where it is going to go. The trains will have Hillcroft on them instead. It would be easier if both were LRT, but oh well.

Did ya even bother reading my response to you....

[Trae]

Now I did. I saw musicman's first.

[musicman]

Anyway, how hard could it be? METRO could pretend that the Uptown Line would be part of the University Line. Then have it split off like two, normal separate lines would. Every other train (well in this case, every bus) will have an "Uptown" sign on it (in the front) so people will know where it is going to go. The trains will have Hillcroft on them instead. It would be easier if both were LRT, but oh well.

the university line will be LRT while, most likely the uptown line won't be. so the splitting off scenario might not be feasible initially.

[Highway6]

the university line will be LRT while, most likely the uptown line won't be. so the splitting off scenario might not be feasible initially.

but the tracks will be down in the ground.. so why not ?

LRT vs BRT really shouldnt matter that much when discussing future lines and routes if Metro sticks with their plan to put track down in the ground on all lines from the get-go.

EDIT ::

I stand corrected.

rereading the FAQs on MEtro's site.. it's not a given tracks will go down from the get-go on every line. I had understood wrong. They are using different terminology for different lines.. BRT and BRT convertible... Some lines specifically say. tracks will be down and covered.. others dont.

Regardless.. The connection we are talking about is vital to the entire system.. and it's quite possible to have track down on part of the BRT routes.

They aren't going to design a poopy connection just because the terms BRT isnt compatible with LRT... God, least i hope not. ...A specific stretch of the system can be designed to be compatible with both.

[Jax]

Do you think there's a chance that they might change their minds and make the uptown line LRT due to this issue? It might not matter so much on the other lines, but it seems like connecting downtown to the Galleria directly would be a big deal.

[musicman]

but the tracks will be down in the ground.. so why not ?

LRT vs BRT really shouldnt matter that much when discussing future lines and routes if Metro sticks with their plan to put track down in the ground on all lines from the get-go.

it is more than just putting down tracks. they also have to install power lines, acquire vehicle, etc. i have to assume they are doing things in phases so that massive amounts of money don't have to be spent in a relatively short timeframe.

[Highway6]

it is more than just putting down tracks. they also have to install power lines, acquire vehicle, etc. i have to assume they are doing things in phases so that massive amounts of money don't have to be spent in a relatively short timeframe.

University vs Uptown.. basically these are just terms to differentiate bid packages and how to divy up paying for parts of one system. Right ?

After this connection is designed.. wouldnt it be adventageous for Metro to include this connection in the universities package since it is 50% federally funded as opposed to the uptown line which is 100% locally funded.

Who's to say the scope of the universities line cant include this connection and some spur with tracks and power and everything needed to run rail north on post oak up to a certain point, if design of this system dictates the connection of these two lines not be specifically where westpark meets postoak ( if it extended ). And by connection, I dont mean physical location of the switches... but the point where they decide to put the southernmost station of the uptown line.

[musicman]

University vs Uptown.. basically these are just terms to differentiate bid packages and how to divy up paying for parts of one system. Right ?

After this connection is designed.. wouldnt it be adventageous for Metro to include this connection in the universities package since it is 50% federally funded as opposed to the uptown line which is 100% locally funded.

Who's to say the scope of the universities line cant include this connection and some spur with tracks and power and everything needed to run rail north on post oak up to a certain point, if design of this system dictates the connection of these two lines not be specifically where westpark meets postoak ( if it extended ). And by connection, I dont mean physical location of the switches... but the point where they decide to put the southernmost station on the uptown line.

i just reread my last post...sorry for the bad grammar/spelling/etc when you start talking monies, funding, etc....that is beyond my scope of knowledge to be honest. there are definitely different bid packages for various segments. i don't know if the univ line is 50% funded and whether the uptown line is 100% locally funded. it was my understanding that METRO doesn't want to do any of the lines unless they get some type of funding. it was also my understanding that the BRT was suggested in order to obtain funding. they felt ridership numbers for LRT on some segments would be too low to obtain funding so they went the BRT route which would have a better chance of obtaining funding.

[Jax]

Ridership shouldn't be an issue with the Uptown line, should it?

[musicman]

Ridership shouldn't be an issue with the Uptown line, should it?

IMO i would say there are no guarantees. unlike the red line which has park and ride service going to it and serves some major employment centers/attractions without having to switch routes, the uptown line will be more isolated with respect to p&r (less riders available) and the employment center is less dense which will most likely result in less riders available.

it is hard to predict to be honest.

[Trae]

But many will transfer to the Uptown Line from the Red or Univ. Line to go to the Galleria area. Also, many northwest commuters who work in the Galleria will use it (it will have a stop at the NW Transit Center). The commuter line will have a stop there as well.

[musicman]

But many will transfer to the Uptown Line from the Red or Univ. Line to go to the Galleria area. Also, many northwest commuters who work in the Galleria will use it (it will have a stop at the NW Transit Center). The commuter line will have a stop there as well.

I think my definition of many is different than yours. those transfers from the red line to the uptown line will be interesting to say the least

[TheNiche]

i just reread my last post...sorry for the bad grammar/spelling/etc when you start talking monies, funding, etc....that is beyond my scope of knowledge to be honest. there are definitely different bid packages for various segments. i don't know if the univ line is 50% funded and whether the uptown line is 100% locally funded. it was my understanding that METRO doesn't want to do any of the lines unless they get some type of funding. it was also my understanding that the BRT was suggested in order to obtain funding. they felt ridership numbers for LRT on some segments would be too low to obtain funding so they went the BRT route which would have a better chance of obtaining funding.

My sense of the funding issue is that many high-ridership bus routes throughout the dense and poor areas of southwest Houston will be rerouted to put more people on the University Line, which at that point becomes a shoe-in for federal funding. Many of these people aren't commuters headed for office employment centers or upscale retail in Uptown and many will transfer to other parts of the system or back to busses to get to their final destination, but as long as a warm body passed through the system, the feds don't care as to why.

The Uptown route has three problems: 1) it serves areas with more affluent ridership, and the more wealthy people are the more they tend to drive, 2) it isn't as well tied in to the bus network, so it doesn't lend itself to ridership manipulation, and 3) as many cities are competing for limited federal funds, METRO has to keep costs per rider down to ensure a reasonable chance at getting funding.

[ricco67]

the UT line (I wonder how many aggies are cringing at that? ) is going to be interesting overall. But construction aside, I think it will receive a good sized ridership from the people living in the area as well as the hotels (there are approximately 17-20 from 610/post oak to Richmond/610) to make the ridership seem to be a bit higher. Not to mention the people that STAY downtown hotels taking the line to the galleria (believe it or not, quite a few of the "tourists" would save money and take the train than a taxi, if they don't rent a car), not to mention the density of the office and actual living areas are going to increase significantly over the next few years.

So anything is possible.

[TheNiche]

the UT line (I wonder how many aggies are cringing at that? ) is going to be interesting overall. But construction aside, I think it will receive a good sized ridership from the people living in the area as well as the hotels (there are approximately 17-20 from 610/post oak to Richmond/610) to make the ridership seem to be a bit higher. Not to mention the people that STAY downtown hotels taking the line to the galleria (believe it or not, quite a few of the "tourists" would save money and take the train than a taxi, if they don't rent a car), not to mention the density of the office and actual living areas are going to increase significantly over the next few years.

So anything is possible.

Nothing adds to LRT ridership like poor people adapting to new bus routes. ...except possibly for offsite parking with replacable shuttle service.

Also, see point #3.

[ricco67]

But you also miss the point that quite a few people at the various hotels DON'T rent a car. With that and the people that would gladly park their cars at the P&R to avoid the traffic (if the stop is near where they work). Plus there are a number of people to go TO the galleria for work from the inner loop. The ridership numbers are (theoretically) there, it's a matter of putting the rubber to the road, or steel to the rail, or whatever.

[TheNiche]

But you also miss the point that quite a few people at the various hotels DON'T rent a car. With that and the people that would gladly park their cars at the P&R to avoid the traffic (if the stop is near where they work). Plus there are a number of people to go TO the galleria for work from the inner loop. The ridership numbers are (theoretically) there, it's a matter of putting the rubber to the road, or steel to the rail, or whatever.

No, I got it perfectly. You miss mine. It is not that "quite a few" doesn't exist. It is that "quite a few" isn't enough.

[ricco67]

Well, I wish I can give you hard numbers for "quite a few", maybe I should have used, "Significant" portion, perhaps? out of about 18 hotels (I seriously doubt people from the Omni or hotel Derek would walk over to the station. the locations of the stations would be critical to take advantage of the various hotels and residences along the area.

Or do you need me to point that out to you as well? I can give you a listing if you wish.

[TheNiche]

Well, I wish I can give you hard numbers for "quite a few", maybe I should have used, "Significant" portion, perhaps? out of about 18 hotels (I seriously doubt people from the Omni or hotel Derek would walk over to the station. the locations of the stations would be critical to take advantage of the various hotels and residences along the area.

Or do you need me to point that out to you as well? I can give you a listing if you wish.

I'm not arguing that "quite a few", "significant", or a combination of the two would be incorrect. ...I probably could if I were so inclined, but I really don't have the energy to undertake that one.

All I'm saying is that "quite a few" or "significant" isn't enough.

[Jax]

What a pointless argument. "Quite a few isn't enough". Well it depends on how many quite a few is!

Rather than saying there will be quite a few riders I guess I will have to say that I think that "quite a few riders" is "enough". I agree with Rico on this one.

Most tourists/visitors don't like renting cars. I could definitely see a lot of people using the metro to go uptown and shop or to go downtown from the uptown hotels. Even rich people like to take public transportations when it's convenient (that is the key). At least the ones I know in Atlanta and DC and New York and Toronto and Montreal do. A wealthy person wouldn't walk miles to take the metro (not even in New York), but if it's close and easy, of course they will.