mfastx Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Am I the only one that thinks this light rail looks out of place? For some reason it just doesn't seem right. And it looks a mess with all those powerlines and cords hanging above the light rail. But what can you say? They tried? I'm sorry its just not working for me. I think a street car line would have been much better for these VERY non urban areas. The money should have been spent on a subway line from downtown to the galleria and to the big airport. Just my opinion. Please post videos of a similar light rail line that goes through areas like this in other cities I would like to see. I agree with you that I'd have rather seen the money spent on heavy rail which would have had more ridership, more impact, and more durability. However the light rail lines in Los Angeles look similar to this. But they also have heavy rail and BRT as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citykid09 Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 I agree with you that I'd have rather seen the money spent on heavy rail which would have had more ridership, more impact, and more durability. However the light rail lines in Los Angeles look similar to this. But they also have heavy rail and BRT as well. Are you sure light rail in Los Angeles is that similar to Houston's? From what I have seen, LA's light rail is set up more like a heavy rail system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Are you sure light rail in Los Angeles is that similar to Houston's? From what I have seen, LA's light rail is set up more like a heavy rail system. Parts of it are grade separated and other parts aren't. For the most part LA's rail lines are superior however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 friend of mine just told me he saw a train being towed along the east line. Just testing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intencity77 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 friend of mine just told me he saw a train being towed along the east line. Just testing?Yes, Metro sent the email out awhile back. Clearance testing will be happening for the next two weeks. Started January 25th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 friend of mine just told me he saw a train being towed along the east line.Just testing? I predict METRO opening the east end line and have it go until the station before the freight tracks and running a shuttle to Magnolia Transit Center from there until the underpass is built. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intencity77 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 I predict METRO opening the east end line and have it go until the station before the freight tracks and running a shuttle to Magnolia Transit Center from there until the underpass is built.I believe that is the plan (minus the shuttle). Someone at Metro mentioned this awhile back, but their plans are always changing, so who knows. The line will stop at the Altic Station for now. The rail yard for this line is also located before the yet to be constructed underpass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 I believe that is the plan (minus the shuttle). Someone at Metro mentioned this awhile back, but their plans are always changing, so who knows. The line will stop at the Altic Station for now. The rail yard for this line is also located before the yet to be constructed underpass. Yea I was going to say I could see the line running without the shuttle too but that really sucks because without it going to the transit center it hurts connectivity a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asubrt Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Looks like the underpass isn't happening... http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Contaminated-soil-sinks-Metro-underpass-plans-for-5219781.php?cmpid=btfpm But now, as work on the so-called Green Line nears completion, the discovery of a vast area of gasoline-polluted soil appears to have scuttled the underpass plan, reopening a wound that Metro, the city and the neighborhood thought had been healed. The city's $20 million stake in the project is in question, and transit officials are seeking community support for a plan likely to send the light rail trains over the Union Pacific tracks rather than under them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 That's disappointing. It also brings up all sorts of troubling questions about how polluted the rest of the soil in Houston is (industrial areas like the East End), which can affect garden-grown foods. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Well that's lame, but I guess I'm not shocked it's not happening after falling so far behind schedule. Gasoline soil.. Wtf? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Getting it complete is more important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 The soil was probably contaminated sometime in the past in the 1970s or 1980s where pollution ran unchecked in a great economy. Up in Detroit, the grounds of old factories have all sorts of heavy metals (mercury, lead) in them that make it impractical to redevelop. On the upshot, we have our own version of oil sands apparently (like in Alberta!) and we have the technology to extract the gasoline AND clean up the soil to boot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txn4art Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 That's disappointing. It also brings up all sorts of troubling questions about how polluted the rest of the soil in Houston is (industrial areas like the East End), which can affect garden-grown foods. It would probably be okay to plant vegetables and berry bushes in raised beds if the contamination is not in the topsoil. Fruit trees with deep roots...maybe not. The East End covers a large area and not all of it is industrial, so how likely is it that residential neighborhoods developed in the early 20th century have contaminated soil? Of course, there's the lead paint chips scraped off when houses are painted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I'm not sure I understand. Why does it matter if it's gasoline polluted soil or not? They built a tunnel under the ship channel, don't tell me that soil wasn't polluted somehow. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 That tunnel was built way before modern epa standards.then again the standards were probably different in this situation compared to a residential area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollusk Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) Residential areas are not immune to soil contamination. Gas stations can have leaky underground tanks, and old school dry cleaners can be really nasty - PERC dry cleaning fluid passes easily through concrete into the ground below, and is all sorts of hazardous. And let's not forget those old car batteries that have been just lying behind the garage... I worked on a transaction once that was nearly derailed by a stack of them. Edited February 11, 2014 by mollusk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I'm not sure I understand. Why does it matter if it's gasoline polluted soil or not? They built a tunnel under the ship channel, don't tell me that soil wasn't polluted somehow. The Washburn Tunnel was built in 1950. There was zero concern about soil contamination then. Same thing when the Baytown Tunnel was built in 1953. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 The Washburn Tunnel was built in 1950. There was zero concern about soil contamination then. Same thing when the Baytown Tunnel was built in 1953. I know, I just think it's rather silly how everyone immediately says we can't tunnel or build subways because of our water table, and we were doing it over half a century ago. There's got to be a way around this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban909 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I know, I just think it's rather silly how everyone immediately says we can't tunnel or build subways because of our water table, and we were doing it over half a century ago. There's got to be a way around this. I would imagine that it has to do more with the costs associated with cleaning up the contamination, rather than the ability to build tunnels/underpasses. Its not only having to dig up gasoline soaked soil, but disposing it according to state environmental/EPA laws. Further, that the entire area needs to be cleaned, not just the where the underpass would be built. This is probably more expensive (and possibly more damaging environmentally due to shifting pockets of gasoline/disturbed soil) than just building a bridge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
102IAHexpress Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Might be worth it for Metro to hire a geochemist to conduct a hydrocarbon fingerprinting analysis if they haven't done so already. Could be that the contamination is not that old and therefore the polluter/business might still be around and they would have to clean it up. These experts are often used in litigation cases involving soil/earth contamination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I still maintain that there is technology to not only clean but extract the contaminated soil. After all, it can't be that bad, or the entire East End would become a Superfund site, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkultra25 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I would imagine that it has to do more with the costs associated with cleaning up the contamination, rather than the ability to build tunnels/underpasses. Its not only having to dig up gasoline soaked soil, but disposing it according to state environmental/EPA laws. Further, that the entire area needs to be cleaned, not just the where the underpass would be built. This is probably more expensive (and possibly more damaging environmentally due to shifting pockets of gasoline/disturbed soil) than just building a bridge. This is essentially what the article in the Chron stated yesterday. Basically, it's similar to asbestos - as long as you leave it in place undisturbed, there's no problem, but as soon as you start to remove it or clean it up, the environmental regs that come into play mandate expensive remediation efforts. In this case, since the size of the area containing contaminated soil is significantly larger than expected, the cost to remediate has similarly increased way beyond what Metro planned for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illusionescape Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 I think to appease the East End residents & business owners, the design will be modified to only allow for the train lines to travel on the overpass. The vehicular traffic will remain at grade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted February 23, 2014 Share Posted February 23, 2014 I think to appease the East End residents & business owners, the design will be modified to only allow for the train lines to travel on the overpass. The vehicular traffic will remain at grade.Sounds like the north line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesL Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I think to appease the East End residents & business owners, the design will be modified to only allow for the train lines to travel on the overpass. The vehicular traffic will remain at grade. That's not the case. Rail and a lane of traffic over. http://ridemetro.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=5&clip_id=766&meta_id=9165 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Interesting they sold much of the westpark ROW. Presumably that could be used on other transit projects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 the Westpark corridor goes all the way out to Eagle Lake? crazy.. but what use would they have building a tollway or commuter rail out to a town of 3,000 people? i thought the Prairie Parkway would be far out.. this corridor goes over 20 miles past that. interesting METRO would give up the southern portion of the ROW to FBCTRA when it seemed like they were reserving the southern half for commuter rail (still not sure what theyre going to do with the light rail segment between 610 and Hilcroft TC.. the only option really is to use the southern ROW, which would block commuter rail from going all the way to Wheeler Station) would another agency operate commuter rail in Ft Bend county that FBCTRA could sell the southern half to? or would a commuter rail line just stop at 1464? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchFan Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) As a condition of selling the Westpark corridor to Metro, the railroad company insisted that Metro buy the entire extent of it, all the way out to Eagle Lake. Metro didn't have any plans for the way-out part, though. Edited February 27, 2014 by ArchFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoustonMidtown Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 (edited) Im not sure what this building is called -- it is where the East Side trains go for maintenance, washing, etc.... Edited March 10, 2014 by HoustonMidtown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.