METRORail University Line

[samagon]

"Ok, looks like there was no real response to my question, so I'll have to assume that this is all just a bunch of worrying followed by a heap of Sim City-style fantasizing"

"Sure, nothing has changed except that the route now leaves Richmond at Timmons and crosses over 59 to Westpark, thereby appeasing the vast majority of the Afton Oaksers"

the Univ Line route crosses 59 at Cummins, not Timmons.

that choice of crossing has resulted in significant engineering issues re returning the train to grade in the allotted space, traffic management at the Weslayan, Westpark, 59 service road clusterf**k, concerns over the siting of the Weslayan station, and in environmental issues from the orientation of the LRT as it heads south elevated over Westpark.

in that 1 1/2 block spot alone there is organized opposition to the present design from Centerpoint, owner of the ROW on both sides of the METRO ROW on Westpark, and from the Sunset Terrace/Montclair neighborhood (approx 400 homes), the College Court neighborhood (500+ homes), and the West U "chimney." ~1000 homes filled with upper middle class voters.

but you could be right about it being solely a financial issue.

I tend to agree that it is mostly political that the University line isn't going in, I really hope they don't get it pushed through on some miracle, not because I'm vindictive, but because I want the population to grow in this city, the population in their area will grow as well as the areas that have and are getting light rail, and as traffic snarls become more and more as population grows, they will look to the other areas and wish they had what the areas with better than bus mass transit have.

maybe that is vindictive.

[SkylineView]

Thanks to all for the commentary. I had completely forgotten that the proposed UL jumped 59 (my bad). For the record, I like the proposal to build something down Westheimer, but realize that since bus service is already passable and it's not going to happen.

At some point over the past few months there was an article noting that METRO wanted to 're-envision light rail in Houston' (or something to that effect). While I'm not a fan of sim-city pipe-dreams, I do believe this city could do a damn sight better than the north line (don't even get me started on the airport connection thing... who on earth will sit on that train for an hour to crawl out there?). Maybe we can use some of the $8B in new-found state revenue to jump-start a few proposals.

[RedScare]

Maybe we can use some of the $8B in new-found state revenue to jump-start a few proposals.

Heh heh. I don't think you quite realize the level of hatred expressed in Austin toward Houston. They look for ways to screw Houston. The next time Rick Perry brings up secession, Houston should agree...but only if we then get to secede from Texas.

[infinite_jim]

The only hope for this line is near term Fed. $$$. This could happen though if a stimulus is passed that creates the infrastructure bank, but is not likely given the current political "Gerry-zoo."

As it is now, I'm personally glad that the light rail system has been bifurcated between the affluent and non-affluent residential parts of town. I think in a few years folks will be amazed/mad at the ridership numbers in the sense that expansion of the system will become an inevitable fact. It will be interesting to see how the housing supply reacts to the increased demand in the rail corridors.

Also consider that everyday that goes by is another day that a Culbertson voter dies off and another voter for light rail comes of age. By the time the UL is politically ready it will probably just go straight down Richmond to save money and time. By then traffic will be horrendous and the train will be seen as too little, too late. I'll never forget a rail meeting at Rice back in 2006 where many students came to protest his opposition to the line. There were a couple of women there who had gone bankrupt paying medical bills and Culbertson ignored their pleas for some kind of help and used his typical backhanded dribble about supposed "free markets" to simply change the topic off of light rail. In retrospect, I feel kind of ashamed to have been there because of the rail line as the very real threat of inflating health care costs sat before me in the frame of an bankrupted cancer-survivor.

Edited January 16, 2013 by infinite_jim

[urban909]

By the time the UL is politically ready it will probably just go straight down Richmond to save money and time. By then traffic will be horrendous and the train will be seen as too little, too late.

I believe that traffice+increase in inner-core living, etc will have eventually force rethinking of mobility (ie. not just car). This might offer a good opportunity for a reset. I voted for the refrerendum a decade ago and I am hoping that this delay, in the long term, will allow the creation of a better, all inclusive and streamlined system.

[IHB2]

I believe that traffice+increase in inner-core living, etc will have eventually force rethinking of mobility (ie. not just car). This might offer a good opportunity for a reset. I voted for the refrerendum a decade ago and I am hoping that this delay, in the long term, will allow the creation of a better, all inclusive and streamlined system.

here are 2 things about inner loop neighborhoods west of Montrose that affect support/opposition for the proposed Univ Line route, and probably any other route in the same general area - 1) there really is no significant traffic congestion on the surface streets in the CBD-Uptown-TMC triangle that add any sense of urgency to LRT - in fact the idea of removing car lanes has had exactly the opposite effect, and 2) all arguments about increased housing prices and supply b/c of proximity to the amenity that is clean, quiet LRT get no traction with property owners who would rather not be near the LRT than realize another $40 or 50K on their $500K-$multi-million homes.

for most of the property owners in these neighborhoods where there is organized and widespread opposition, the LRT is merely another choice among a smorgasbord of amenites, and the cost/benefit of this particular one fails whatever metric these upper middle class and rich folks use.

it's unlikely that 10 years from now the property owners in these high-end neighborhoods will have significantly different NIMBY opinions about mass/public transit even though the populations will have at least partially turned over. just like it's unlikely any majority of Southampton residents would ever welcome the Ashby project no matter how far in the future you go.

[scarface]

They should keep the University Line down Richmond, then jump the 59 as planned, then subway the line under WestPark. Since Westpark is the least congested between Westheimer and Westpark, this would be perfect. They basically did the same when they trenched the WestPark tollway over there just east of 59 and westpark Drive. They can subway under Westpark

If they delay this line, they should not make the same at-grade system they did with the Red Line. Just think, if there were so many accidents in the beginning in the area off Main, think about what will happen if we put a line in an area with 10X the amount of traffic. Let's learn from the past!

\

[IHB2]

They should keep the University Line down Richmond, then jump the 59 as planned, then subway the line under WestPark. Since Westpark is the least congested between Westheimer and Westpark, this would be perfect. They basically did the same when they trenched the WestPark tollway over there just east of 59 and westpark Drive. They can subway under Westpark

If they delay this line, they should not make the same at-grade system they did with the Red Line. Just think, if there were so many accidents in the beginning in the area off Main, think about what will happen if we put a line in an area with 10X the amount of traffic. Let's learn from the past!

I think there is no avoiding the engineering issues with trying to go under Westpark in the allotted space b/c the LRT track has to be XX feet high above 59 and the 59 service road. If you aren't familiar with the area, all that's left before Westpark is a strip center lot. You are talking about taking the rail line down from at least the Edloe bridge height to underground in 100-200 feet and still make some kind of sharp turn and ...then what? Come up in time to go over the new bridge that will have to be built over the UPRR? LRT also has limits on the % grades it will safely operate on, and that plan would require a pretty steep grade.

Like the idea that the line should just stay elevated over 59 Westpark and the UPRR, your idea will also require the one thing that we know is definitely off the table at METRO - extra $$$ for any build except at grade.

[SkylineView]

Re: IBH2's most recent post.

1) I agree the surface street congestion today is not horrific (especially compared to other top-100 cities worldwide), but I believe we will quickly run into serious mobility issues as the inner loop / Uptown area continues to add tens-of-thousands of apartments. I know it's silly... I just wish we were proactive, and not so damn reactive.

2) I think the entire argument about using light rail to boost housing prices is a laugh. Light rail should be used to connect dense population centers, both residential and commercial. Single family homes (even townhomes) shouldn't be the focus. If the city would present and fund a long term (lets go 25 years) plan for light rail, developers, landowners, homeowners, business owners etc... would all benefit as the area densified and property prices increased in advance of light rail construction. This would also add further fuel to the 'we need to build it' fire.

Come to think of it, maybe I'm way off base on this. How far in advance were the north & east side lines put down on paper? I haven't lived in Houston long enough to know the full back story. Was there substantial development in advance of the current construction?

[Houston19514]

Re: IBH2's most recent post.

1) I agree the surface street congestion today is not horrific (especially compared to other top-100 cities worldwide), but I believe we will quickly run into serious mobility issues as the inner loop / Uptown area continues to add tens-of-thousands of apartments. I know it's silly... I just wish we were proactive, and not so damn reactive.

2) I think the entire argument about using light rail to boost housing prices is a laugh. Light rail should be used to connect dense population centers, both residential and commercial. Single family homes (even townhomes) shouldn't be the focus. If the city would present and fund a long term (lets go 25 years) plan for light rail, developers, landowners, homeowners, business owners etc... would all benefit as the area densified and property prices increased in advance of light rail construction. This would also add further fuel to the 'we need to build it' fire.

Come to think of it, maybe I'm way off base on this. How far in advance were the north & east side lines put down on paper? I haven't lived in Houston long enough to know the full back story. Was there substantial development in advance of the current construction?

Developers will rarely build in advance of planned infrastructure. They dont trust the government to follow through.

[IHB2]

Developers will rarely build in advance of planned infrastructure. They dont trust the government to follow through.

But in this car-centric urban area it costs only pennies (relatively speaking) for a govt to plop down a 4 lane road and some bare bones sewerage connectors out on the Katy Prairie or in Brazoria County, then turn it all over to a MUD for the details, compared to laying high $$$ rail in the inner city.

Inside the loop has its own development logic, and my guess is that transit will always have to follow the development. I didn't think that previously, but a decade of LRT down Main + the crash of the Solutions program seem to indicate that's the way it's going to be.

[SkylineView]

Does anyone know anything about the consultants they hired to re-imagine the Metro?

http://www.houstontomorrow.org/livability/story/metro-selects-team-for-system-re-imagining-project/

[mfastx]

Wouldn't it be great if they came up with a new rail plan with some grade seperation...

Not getting my hopes up though.

[IHB2]

Does anyone know anything about the consultants they hired to re-imagine the Metro?

http://www.houstonto...gining-project/

from the article:

"The project is led by Metro board member Christof Spieler. According to Spieler, plans are to truly wipe the slate clean for this process to imagine how best to connect the people of the Houston region"

"At the special board meeting, Chairman Gilbert Garcia said “This whole effort is going to be expensive and [take] time and effort; it’s got to move the needle. This can’t just be to increase ridership by 5%. It’s got to move the needle, and that’s what I impressed on all the participants.“

All I know is that METRO has been a tax collecting behemoth since 1979, and the notion that after all those decades and all those $Billions the agency needs to start over from square one is outrageous. That the agency needs to let a contract to spend more tax $$$ on expensive consultants b/c apparently the current METRO staff can't imagine its way out of the current operating scheme is an admission of what METRO's harshest critics have been saying for years.

Edited January 20, 2013 by IHB2

[mfastx]

from the article:

"The project is led by Metro board member Christof Spieler. According to Spieler, plans are to truly wipe the slate clean for this process to imagine how best to connect the people of the Houston region"

All I know is that METRO has been a tax collecting behemoth since 1979, and the notion that the agency needs to start over from square one is outrageous. That the agency needs to let a contract to spend more tax $$$ on consultants b/c apparently the current METRO staff can't imagine its way out of the current operating scheme is an admission of what METRO's harshest critics have been saying for years.

That's debatable. METRO collects far less tax money than other major transit agencies.

[Slick Vik]

Hopefully they do a total metro system and forget about light rail altogether

[RedScare]

I suggested something along the lines of looking at new ways to accomplish the connection between Downtown and the Galleria two pages ago, and some people went ape over it. Now, METRO says they will look at the entire system. Hmm, I'm looking rather prescient right now, if I do say so myself.

[scarface]

Hopefully they do a total metro system and forget about light rail altogether

What do you mean by that?

I don't like the sound of this idea already.

[Slick Vik]

What do you mean by that?

I don't like the sound of this idea already.

Subway, or elevated rail, or any rail that has its on right of way and can proceed at fast speeds. It's the fastest method of public transit, and more comfortable than god awful buses. Light rail is okay for congested areas but over a vast swath of land not the best.

[IHB2]

That's debatable. METRO collects far less tax money than other major transit agencies.

your statement has absolutely no relationship to my assertion that METRO has collected and spent billions of tax dollars since 1979 to develop the public transit system in its service area, and now just 10 years after the so-called "Solutions" referendum feels the need to completely re-imagine the entire system.

it is unassailable fact that METRO has collected billions over that time. here's METRO's projection 1988-2014 on sales tax alone:

http://www.ridemetro.org/AboutUs/Referendum/PDFs/Cindy-Burt-GMP-Presentation-080312.pdf

[IHB2]

I suggested something along the lines of looking at new ways to accomplish the connection between Downtown and the Galleria two pages ago, and some people went ape over it. Now, METRO says they will look at the entire system. Hmm, I'm looking rather prescient right now, if I do say so myself.

And I'm guessing that some of the same people who went so vehemently ape when you were simply being your prescient self will now line up in complete admiration for the Spieler-led re-imagining. See it's different when the idea comes down from Olympus rather than up from the commoners.

If only Disney hadn't trademarked "Imagineers" METRO could have used it, and Walt's got a mighty fine elevated monorail too darn it.

[RedScare]

And I'm guessing that some of the same people who went so vehemently ape when you were simply being your prescient self will now line up in complete admiration for the Spieler-led re-imagining. See it's different when the idea comes down from Olympus rather than up from the commoners.

If only Disney hadn't trademarked "Imagineers" METRO could have used it, and Walt's got a mighty fine elevated monorail too darn it.

Let's be honest. Those people who trashed my suggestion don't set the bar very high. Many of them actually praise DART rail. Not for its 1,000 ppm ridership, or where the routes go, mind you, but simply for total track mileage. Given that you and I must live here and pay for METRO, I have to admit being encouraged that Christof Speiler is heading up the "re-imagining" of METRO. They may actually get something right this time.

[IHB2]

Let's be honest. Those people who trashed my suggestion don't set the bar very high. Many of them actually praise DART rail. Not for its 1,000 ppm ridership, or where the routes go, mind you, but simply for total track mileage. Given that you and I must live here and pay for METRO, I have to admit being encouraged that Christof Speiler is heading up the "re-imagining" of METRO. They may actually get something right this time.

Yep, Christof is way more level-headed than the folks who were certain his appointment to the METRO Board would bring the transit equivalent of the Rapture. And he certainly understands the politics of public transit better than he did before his appointment.

That said, any re-imagining of the total system that includes retrofitting Houston surface streets with even 1 more foot of at-grade, fixed-guideway transportation than is already funded and building/built will be consultant money down the drain.

[RedScare]

I wouldn't necessarily agree with you on that. I'll just leave it at that.

[mfastx]

your statement has absolutely no relationship to my assertion that METRO has collected and spent billions of tax dollars since 1979 to develop the public transit system in its service area, and now just 10 years after the so-called "Solutions" referendum feels the need to completely re-imagine the entire system.

it is unassailable fact that METRO has collected billions over that time. here's METRO's projection 1988-2014 on sales tax alone:

http://www.ridemetro...tion-080312.pdf

I just don't get the point of you pointing that out though. What you say in this post is no different than any other major transit agency for any large city.

METRO has had to re-imagine a lot of times, they've had multiple plans in the past, but due to political and voter opposition, they've had to make changes. I really don't see this as a big deal. Clearly, the current proposition faces large political opposition.

[IHB2]

I just don't get the point of you pointing that out though. What you say in this post is no different than any other major transit agency for any large city.

METRO has had to re-imagine a lot of times, they've had multiple plans in the past, but due to political and voter opposition, they've had to make changes. I really don't see this as a big deal. Clearly, the current proposition faces large political opposition.

you don't see it as a big deal that METRO's Solutions, which presumably got that name b/c it purported to be all about comprehensive solutions to Houston's projected growth and mass transit needs, turned out to be utterly unworkable within a decade of its adoption regardless of how many $$$s METRO poured into it?

do you pay taxes in the METRO service area?

[mfastx]

you don't see it as a big deal that METRO's Solutions, which presumably got that name b/c it purported to be all about comprehensive solutions to Houston's projected growth and mass transit needs, turned out to be utterly unworkable within a decade of its adoption regardless of how many $$$s METRO poured into it?

do you pay taxes in the METRO service area?

I have paid taxes in the METRO service area.

Metro solutions was a great plan, but it's not feasable today due to much lower than projected tax revenue, the recession, and unforeseeen political opposition. My guess is that the re-imagining project isn't going to be a completely different approach, I think it will be mostly the same concepts and routes of the solutions plan, just a different way of going about achieving it. Makes sense considering many of METRO's top executives are different than 10 years ago.

EDIT: I'm very surprised at how unhappy you are with this news. I would have thought that you'd be cautiously optiomistic, considering how much you loath the University Line in it's current form.

Edited January 22, 2013 by mfastx

[IHB2]

I loathe METRO the agency, as it has operated and continues to operate - the Univ Line is just an example of the agency's incompetence. For decades, the agency has squandered hundreds of millions of dollars on unworkable transit plans, and along the way has actually reversed the efficiency of the service to the very people most in need of tax-subsidized public transportation - at least the "new" Metro Board acknowledges that the bus sytem was degraded to better serve the LRT lines.

Park & Ride, HOV lanes are great, but a drop in the bucket compared to what an efficient transit agency could have accomplished for this region.

[KinkaidAlum]

It's kind of hard to accomplish great things when you are constantly under attack.

What if METRO hadn't been losing a quarter of its funding over all these years?

What if Lanier had not gone against the will of the voters and used rail money to expand park and rides and concrete pours to appease his wealthy builder/developer/engineering buddies?

What if federal matching funds hadn't been denied to the region?

METRO is a mess, but this shouldn't come as a surprise. It's hard to be anything but when its been surrounded by Lanier, Culberson, DeLay, and (insert the name of any of the long line of idiotic Harris County Commissioners here).

Edited January 22, 2013 by KinkaidAlum

[infinite_jim]

I loathe METRO the agency, as it has operated and continues to operate - the Univ Line is just an example of the agency's incompetence. For decades, the agency has squandered hundreds of millions of dollars on unworkable transit plans, and along the way has actually reversed the efficiency of the service to the very people most in need of tax-subsidized public transportation - at least the "new" Metro Board acknowledges that the bus sytem was degraded to better serve the LRT lines.

Park & Ride, HOV lanes are great, but a drop in the bucket compared to what an efficient transit agency could have accomplished for this region.

The park and ride and HOV lanes have had the largest legacy costs for the agency and the least amount ridership w/r/t those costs. More people ride the singular rail than the whole P&R system everyday. So it's ok to spend money on people who have it already but it's waste of money to spend it on folks w/o the means to buy a $11k automobile?

edit: http://www.ridemetro...Report_FY12.pdf

Edited January 22, 2013 by infinite_jim