Metro Changes Rail Plan

[tomv]

Here's my suggested route for the new light rail line connecting the Galleria and UH: Start at Westheimer and Post Oak, run it under the 610 service roads along with 4 lanes of Westheimer through traffic, down Westheimer to Weslayan with stops at Mid Lane, Highland Village and Weslayan. Lots of retail and multifamily in through there, and you avoid having to take the line down Richmond through Afton Oaks which that neighborhood is fiercely opposed to. Then south on Weslayan to Richmond, with a stop at that corner. Then down Richmond all the way to Main with stops at Greenway Plaza, Kirby, Shepherd, Montrose and Main. East of Main down Wheeler with stops at Almeda and Dowling, then down Wheeler and/or Blodgett with final stops at TSU and UH. Once that line is operational, it will be a real possibility I think for someone to live, work, visit, or go to school here and not need a car.

[RedScare]

Tom:

METRO President Frank Wilson asked me to personally thank you for laying out the Galleria line. METRO has now saved so much money on design fees that they have enough left over to put light rail in Eastside.

jk. Actually, that route is not so bad. It's a direct shot to all the employment centers, and hits the heart of the Galleria (one of Houston's top destinations), as opposed to skirting nearby, requiring a transfer.

Eventually, it may continue west on Westheimer, hitting all of the apartment complexes on or near that route.

[The Voice of University Oaks]

Westheimer - Weslayan - Richmond, in all honesty, would not be a bad alignment. I doubt METRO (and its consultant for the Westpark AA, DMJM+Harris) has seriously considered it, though.

More likely, you'll see it head west down Richmond from Main Street with stops at Montrose (or just west of Montrose to better serve UST and the Menil Complex), maybe Shepherd/Greenbriar, Kirby (to satisfy the Upper Kirby District folks) and Edloe. At Timmons, it would veer southward, bridge over 59, and then turn back westward in the Westpark right-of-way that METRO already owns (the Enterprise car rental on the south side of 59 will likely have to be removed, but hopefully the Whataburger will remain). It would stay elevated across the UP tracks, then settle into the right-of-way and continue to South Rice. I really wish it would go out a bit further, to Hillcroft (as was proposed in the original plan) or even Gessner or Westchase, but it doesn't look like that's on the table at this time.

East of Main Street, the alignment is a bit more tricky. Wheeler is the obvious choice, but the administration at TSU reportedly does not want a train running through the middle of their campus (which a Wheeler alignment would require). Residents along Cleburne and Blodgett don't want it, either. That leaves Alabama, which has sufficient right-of-way and cuts through heavily transit-dependent portions of Third Ward but which doesn't serve TSU as well (TSU students would need to walk through Cuney Homes to get to class). Also, there's the issue of how to get the train off of Wheeler and onto Alabama in Midtown, and then what to do when Alabama ends at Scott Street. Do you end the tracks there and force UH students to walk across the Robertson Stadium parking lot to get to class? Do you go south down Scott and then east on Wheeler to Calhoun? Do you cut through the Robertson Stadium parking lot, cross Cullen, and end the tracks in front of Agnes Arnold Hall on the UH campus?

All sorts of fun decisions METRO and their consultants get to make in the coming years...

[Original Timmy Chan's]

All sorts of fun decisions METRO and their consultants get to make in the coming years...

And of course, no matter what decision they make, it will be the wrong decision to at least half the community.

Those are some interesting alignment problems at TSU and UH.

To serve UH students, you really need a station on Cullen Blvd, which will require an alignment down either Holman or Wheeler...or take Alabama and snake around the Robertson Stadium parking lot, which isn't a good idea with all the drunks tailgating in the parking lot before football games (hey, I'm looking out for myself!)

Of course, the Alabama alignment doesn't help TSU, since TSU is several blocks off of Alabama. Then again, maybe the Alabama alignment helps my long-time dream of turning Cuney Homes into TSU and UH student housing.

The Blodgett alignment would hit the south end of TSU, but it wouldn't line up with the UH boundaries. The rail would have to turn north up Scott Street and then turn east down Wheeler to Cullen.

The best alignment would seem to be right down Wheeler, since it would hit both the heart of TSU and the south boundary of UH. However, with the safety record of the existing rail line, I can understand TSU's aversion to putting tracks right through the middle of campus, with thousands of students walking back and forth across the tracks all day long.

I think Alabama would be a good location for the rail east of Main, since it's more of a developed major thoroughfare than Wheeler. How about an Alabama alignment through 3rd Ward, shifting over to Cleburne for a few blocks by TSU, and then back to Alabama in front of Yates.

Who do I send my invoice to? I'm billing my time at cost plus materials...

[The Voice of University Oaks]

And of course, no matter what decision they make, it will be the wrong decision to at least half the community. 

Those are some interesting alignment problems at TSU and UH. 

To serve UH students, you really need a station on Cullen Blvd, which will require an alignment down either Holman or Wheeler...or take Alabama and snake around the Robertson Stadium parking lot, which isn't a good idea with all the drunks tailgating in the parking lot before football games (hey, I'm looking out for myself!)

Tell me about it! That's where my group has their tailgates, too...

I think Alabama would be a good location for the rail east of Main, since it's more of a developed major thoroughfare than Wheeler.  How about an Alabama alignment through 3rd Ward, shifting over to Cleburne for a few blocks by TSU, and then back to Alabama in front of Yates.

Or, alternatively, it could head down Alabama, then turn south at Ennis, then east at Cleburne, have a station along Cleburne with TSU one side and Cuney Homes on the other, then continue on to Tierwester, turn southward, turn back to the east at Wheeler, have a station at Scott, then continue eastward along Wheeler and end at University Oaks ( ) in front of Moody Towers.

By discussing these alternatives, we're saving METRO millions in preliminary engineering costs!

[Original Timmy Chan's]

Tell me about it! That's where my group has their tailgates, too...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

]

I actually tailgate over in "Chug-a-Lug Park" at Elgin and Cullen, but by the time I walk over to Robertson Stadium parking lot, I have problems seeing clearly...

By discussing these alternatives, we're saving METRO millions in preliminary engineering costs!

Only if METRO employees are wasting as much time reading this forum as we spend typing on it.

Good idea about the Tierwester route, by the way. I don't think the folks on Wheeler between Tierwester and Scott will be enthralled about the idea, but maybe over time that can become a sort of commercial strip through there between TSU and UH.

I think a huge positive from the light rail around UH and TSU is that some portion of Houston will finally see the 3rd Ward for themselves and realize it's not the ugly crime-ridden ghetto that it has a reputation for. Sure, there are some trashy parts, and some areas that I won't go to at night, but I think by and large its reputation is undeserved.

And of course UH's reputation gets trashed along with the 3rd Ward...despite the fact that some of the wealthiest people in Houston live as close to campus as the public housing in the 3rd Ward. Just a little burr in my saddle...

[Astro]

Here's my suggested route for the new light rail line connecting the Galleria and UH: Start at Westheimer and Post Oak, run it under the 610 service roads along with 4 lanes of Westheimer through traffic, down Westheimer to Weslayan with stops at Mid Lane, Highland Village and Weslayan. Lots of retail and multifamily in through there, and you avoid having to take the line down Richmond through Afton Oaks which that neighborhood is fiercely opposed to.  Then south on Weslayan to Richmond, with a stop at that corner.  Then down Richmond all the way to Main with stops at Greenway Plaza, Kirby, Shepherd, Montrose and Main.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is my favored route as well. I would much prefer to see the rail line running all the way down Westheimer eventually to Westchase and beyond, rather than Westpark. Westheimer is a much more densely developed corridor. If that street didn't get so narrow once it got inside the loop and there was more room for it I would like to see it go all the way to Elgin. But since Richmond is wider I guess that would be the best possible corridor although it will be sad to remove the tree-lined median in the Montrose area. So I think the rail line should cut south around Weslayan or Timmons. Hopefully there's enough ROW through Greenway Plaza that those trees in the Richmond median can be preserved.

[nmainguy]

Here's my suggested route for the new light rail line connecting the Galleria and UH: Start at Westheimer and Post Oak, run it under the 610 service roads along with 4 lanes of Westheimer through traffic, down Westheimer to Weslayan with stops at Mid Lane, Highland Village and Weslayan. Lots of retail and multifamily in through there, and you avoid having to take the line down Richmond through Afton Oaks which that neighborhood is fiercely opposed to.  Then south on Weslayan to Richmond, with a stop at that corner.  Then down Richmond all the way to Main with stops at Greenway Plaza, Kirby, Shepherd, Montrose and Main. East of Main down Wheeler with stops at Almeda and  Dowling, then down Wheeler and/or Blodgett with final stops at TSU and UH.    Once that line is operational, it will be a real possibility I think for someone to live, work, visit, or go to school here and not need a car.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Apparently this "tomv" person is a trouble maker and a rabble rouser! Can you believe his logic??? Connect population/employment/retail and blow off the Afton Oaks SUVer's? My god! Has the world gone MAD??????? (of course, great idea, tomv...all my sarcasim aside)

[RedScare]

blogHouston favors a route similar to this as well. If so many of us agree that this is a good allignment, it is a sure bet that it will not happen.

[HeightsGuy]

Now that this topic has been resurrected, I have a pertinant question to all those who are hopping mad over this.........

What exactly did you vote for in 2003?

If memory serves, I remember the gist of the whole referendum was whether to continue adding rail, I don't remember seeing detailed plans or routes. Am I wrong in this statement?

You know, I consider myself a liberal, and I have rants against Delay a mile long, including rail. I think the things he did years ago have set the whole timetable back a decade or more. That said, his constituants told him they wanted this, and whether he personally wants it or not, he has jumped on board and is trying to do something about it. I'll give him credit for that. Also, between you and me, it's a lot better to have Delay backing rail (even with his own ideas and changes) than having Delay continue to fight against it.

[ssullivan]

HeightsGuy,

The Metro Solutions initiative on the 2003 ballot did include a list of the rail corridors in its language. DeLay and Culberson made sure of this. However, the vote was an all-or-nothing one; there was one election for the whole plan, not separate elections for each line. So those who argue that the new plan is not what was voted on do have a point, to an extent, although I personally disagree with them. The same corridors are still included in the revised plan, with additions. The main difference is that some corridors won't have light rail transit from the start, but instead will have BRT with the plan to upgrade to light rail in the future.

Anyway, the more I consider the revised plan, the more I like it. Sure, I'd love to have rail on all those routes from day one, but if we can't get that, then I'd rather have this than nothing at all.

[RedScare]

This link contains the ballot language that the voters voted on.

http://localvoter.com/issue-metro-ballot.asp

Note that the language includes the term "light rail" and "Metro's rail system". I hate to lawyer this, but it does not promise "rail service", as it does promise "bus service" expansion. In other words, whether Metro intended it or not, the referendum did not approve trains running on the track, only the track itself. I believe it was intentional, but not for the reasons you think. If ridership did not justify the trains, Metro did not have to waste money putting them there. Is it sneaky? Yes. But, this was a politically inspired vote. The lines were laid out to maximize yes votes. Metro needed an escape clause for financial reasons.

The new plan does indeed fulfill Metro's promise to lay track. It merely delays the day that trains run down the track. I don't even agree that Metro violated the intent of the referendum. The bond money may still be spent on the referendum lines. The new money that DeLay and Culberson get approved can go toward the expanded lines.

[kjb434]

good analysis Redscare.

As much as people despise Delay and Culberson (i don't), they do have to admit they came through with this plan. Securing this money was a big feet and will be great for the city.

[Ethanra]

So what is the next step of this stage of rail? When do they break ground? What is a time table? Thankyou

[kjb434]

Plans are being drawn up right now. I think late 2006 and in 2007 some construction will be going on.

Much of the alignment analysis has been done on the lines especiall the north line and the one a going to UofH. The section of the UofH line from the current Red line to Uptown will be one that needs some confirmation.

[Kirzania]

Plans are being drawn up right now.  I think late 2006 and in 2007 some construction will be going on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know you said they'd been doing studies north of UofH, but do you/anyone know if they're starting there first or doing the Galleria area first? (As per the expansion maps they have posted in Reliant.)

Wikipedia seems to have some "future" info: "Alternatives Analysis and Draft Environmental Impact Analysis studies are currently underway on four extensions, but only one extension

[kjb434]

Well the Galleria area and the UofH line is the same line.

[Kirzania]

Well the Galleria area and the UofH line is the same line.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

:sigh: Sorry, was having issues finding that map again. I couldn't remember where exactly the rail's track went.

[kjb434]

neither can METRO. The process they are defining is the final alignment. As soon as that is determined, the plans will move forward. Don't forget, they have to go through some more public meetings also. Especially before construction starts.

[YakuzaIce]

:sigh: Sorry, was having issues finding that map again. I couldn't remember where exactly the rail's track went.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well here is a newer slightly less confusing map

PDF http://www.ridemetro.org/latest/releases/2bExpansionPlan.pdf

I know I saw one in picture form from the chron, but I can't seem to find it.

[RedScare]

This was in the This Week section of the Chronicle.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/t...03/news/3273376

I agree that East End should be well served in the plan, especially along Harrisburg. However, I wish Gilbert Moreno would tone down the "they owe the people in this area a refund" rhetoric.

The Lockwood connector looks useful as well.

[kjb434]

Yeah,

he's always playing the victim.

[Houston19514]

This was in the This Week section of the Chronicle.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/t...03/news/3273376

I agree that East End should be well served in the plan, especially along Harrisburg.

[MidtownCoog]

Did Gilbert take over for Johnny Matta?

[713 To 214]

This was in the This Week section of the Chronicle.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/t...03/news/3273376

I agree that East End should be well served in the plan, especially along Harrisburg.  However, I wish Gilbert Moreno would tone down the "they owe the people in this area a refund" rhetoric.

The Lockwood connector looks useful as well.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why?

[danes75]

Who says Delay is backing rail? My father used to be a Senator in Oklahoma and this all sounds very familiar.

IN HOUSTON

Delay: "Rail is a bad idea."

Public: "Hey, but we want it, and we elected you, so you get it for us."

Delay: "Oh... alright. I'm at your service."

IN WASHINGTON

FTA: "Mr. Delay, these numbers don't seem to be adding up. Can you help us understand them?"

Delay: "Um, well, if they don't they don't. Sorry to have wasted your time. Have a great afternoon."

IN HOUSTON

Delay: "Awe, shucks. Look, the FTA won't approve your request. I was in your corner and did what I could but its those evil, gay lovin', America hatin' Democrats. They killed this."

Delay: "Well, since it looks like rail is out, here's a bus and a track in the road. See? Mass Transit."

[The Voice of University Oaks]

Somebody inform Gilbert Moreno that he already has a "Lockwood Connector:" it's called the 42 Holman!

Seriously, though, I can't really argue with him when he says that the University Line (or whatever METRO is calling it this week) could do a better job of connecting to the East End. The City of Houston's Major Throughfare Plan calls for punching Wheeler underneath the BSNF tracks and across to Wayside, so why not use the opportunity to extend both road and rail across? The train could then go on to Gulfgate. That's not going to happen, of course, because there's no budget for it, but it makes sense in the long term.

I don't really see a Lockwood Connector running from Harrisburg to Elgin happening, either, for two reasons. First, the Lockwood/Egin underpass at Spur 5 and I-45 is notorious for flooding problems, even in moderate rains. Either a lot of money will have to be spent on improved drainage (pumps, detention ponds, etc.) or service interruptions will be commonplace. Second, I just can't see the University Line running along Elgin. I know the Third Ward rail task force has suggested that it go down Elgin instead of Alabama or Wheeler, but once METRO's consultants run the ridership models for an Elgin alignment, that option will probably get eliminated. Elgin is not an established transit corridor (how many bus routes currently travel down Elgin east of Dowling? If you said "zero," you're correct!), it doesn't serve the UH campus all that well (nothing but parking lots on the north side of campus) and doesn't serve TSU at all.

I think Moreno will have better luck pushing the Signature Express Line from Magnolia TC to Gulfgate. If it goes down Garland, it will follow the route of the proposed Harrisburg extension anyway. Might as well start adding better service to build up ridership now.

[CDeb]

One last thing does taking 7000 cars of the rode clear up trafic in Houston?  Is their a study or fact about this.

OK, so I'm a little late jumping into this, but I just wanted to caution about underestimating the impact of 7,000 less commuters on freeway operations.

Let's say those 7,000 commuters are spread out over three hours (that's probably being generous). That's 2,300 vehicles per hour less on the road. On a four-lane freeway, that's 583 less VPH per lane. On a five-lane freeway that's 467 vph per lane.

Heck, let's say that's 7,000 trips, not commuters. The numbers are still 292 vph per lane and 233 vph per lane.

Either way, even 233 fewer vph per lane is a huge improvement from a traffic flow standpoint. If the freeway is at capacity (but still in stable flow), that can mean a 15 mph increase in travel speeds. If the freeway flow is unstable (i.e. "stop and go"). It can mean going from a parking lot to flowing at a respectable 45-50 mph.

BTW, are people really upset with changes in the plan, or do they just dislike METRO due to past issues? Because it seems to me that the only difference in this new plan is the material of which the tires are made. This can't really be what they're upset over, can it?

[texasboy]

A Houston forumer at SSP posted some renderings of the bus rapid transit vehicles.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread...451#post1617451

[kjb434]

yeah,

Not much different at all.