METRORail University Line

[Slick Vik]

I'm sure that HCC has some basic US government classes to help you to understand how the different levels of government work. Might be helpful.

I know very well how the government works. Sneaking in lines in legislation at the 11th hour is immoral.

[kylejack]

The rest of the city voted for the line to go through their neighborhoods. What should the elected officials of the city at large do?

 

No, they voted voted for this. Not to go through any particular neighborhoods like Afton Oaks.

 

 

Westpark

Approximately 6.6 miles westward from the Wheeler Station on Phase I METRORail to the Hillcroft Transit Center,

serving Greenway Plaza, West University, Bellairé, and the Uptown/Galleria area. This segment of line will have

approximately 4 stations.

Note: Final scope, length of rail segments or lines and other details...will be based upon demand and completion of the

project development process, including community input.

Edited February 24, 2014 by kylejack

[IronTiger]

Approximately 6.6 miles westward from the Wheeler Station on Phase I METRORail to the Hillcroft Transit Center,

serving Greenway Plaza, West University, Bellairé, and the Uptown/Galleria area. This segment of line will have

approximately 4 stations.

Why does "Bellaire" have an accent mark? Have I been pronouncing it wrong this whole time (I thought it was pronounced same way as "Fresh Prince of XXXXXX"), or did someone just screw up in editing?

[kylejack]

Why does "Bellaire" have an accent mark? Have I been pronouncing it wrong this whole time (I thought it was pronounced same way as "Fresh Prince of XXXXXX"), or did someone just screw up in editing?

 

I dunno, ask Upper Kirby District http://www.upperkirbydistrict.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=115

[cloud713]

Why doesn't METRO split up the University Line into segments? Instead of trying to get the whole thing built at one time, build the eastern section from Eastwood TC to the Menil Station. This seems to be the uncontroversial segment. Then hopefully by the time it gets built, they should have the western segment routing all sorted. Building the eastern segment first works best anyways since it ties into the existing system.

I have wondered this too.. I believe they would have to resubmit the plan though for federal funding if they split it in half, but it would still probably get the eastern half built before they resolve the Culberson issue/build the western half.. Plus like you said, the eastern half is where all the current rail segments and universities are. I'd run it all the way west to the shepherd station though.. Might as well build it out as much as possible, unless you think they'd have to turn the rail across 59 before a shepherd stop to avoid culbersons district.

[nativehoustonion]

That is so old it has no merit.  Richmond has potholes, flooding so we should just let it sit there.  More voters in Ted Poe's district for  rail then against.  They can build rail to  Shepard then have a tollway right through Culberson's district. LOL!     

[cloud713]

I dunno, ask Upper Kirby District http://www.upperkirbydistrict.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=115

There are a few typos in that report so I assume the Bellaire accent is wrong too.. And go figure that was written by an Afton Oaks resident... Heh. I guess I wouldn't mind a 4 stop Westpark only route.. It would be quite a bit quicker getting from uptown to the main st line, but it would miss a few destinations like the menil and st Thomas..

[JJxvi]

Westpark dead ends into River Oaks Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge/Ram/whatever at Kirby. It does not exist east of Kirby, it does not exist at Shepherd/Greenbriar, presumably the voters did not vote to build a line that has it eastern terminus at Westpark and Kirby.

Edited February 24, 2014 by JJxvi

[cloud713]

There is still the "Westpark" ROW that extends along the power lines east up to Montrose.. But between Montrose and 527/Wheeler station it gets tricky...

[Slick Vik]

I have wondered this too.. I believe they would have to resubmit the plan though for federal funding if they split it in half, but it would still probably get the eastern half built before they resolve the Culberson issue/build the western half.. Plus like you said, the eastern half is where all the current rail segments and universities are. I'd run it all the way west to the shepherd station though.. Might as well build it out as much as possible, unless you think they'd have to turn the rail across 59 before a shepherd stop to avoid culbersons district.

 

I don't think they would get federal funding for that. The feds have cities with well thought out plans that want money, they don't have time for a city bickering within itself. They give money to plans they see fit.

[jt16]

I don't think they would get federal funding for that. The feds have cities with well thought out plans that want money, they don't have time for a city bickering within itself. They give money to plans they see fit.

You don't believe that do you? Federal transportation dollars are notorious for massive waste. You get dollars as long as your project fits some silly burocratic formula.

[Slick Vik]

You don't believe that do you? Federal transportation dollars are notorious for massive waste. You get dollars as long as your project fits some silly burocratic formula.

When cities are infighting the FTA will skip over them, and threaten future funds as well, this just happened in Cincinnati.

[kylejack]

You don't believe that do you? Federal transportation dollars are notorious for massive waste. You get dollars as long as your project fits some silly burocratic formula.

 

They require a well thought out plan, and compliance with various requirements, such as buying American. The feds suspended money from METRO when it was found that they were buying Spanish rail cars. It was later re-issued after they corrected this foolish mistake.

[Slick Vik]

They require a well thought out plan, and compliance with various requirements, such as buying American. The feds suspended money from METRO when it was found that they were buying Spanish rail cars. It was later re-issued after they corrected this foolish mistake.

They are still buying Spanish rail cars in a roundabout way. The buy American clause is dumb.

[kylejack]

Yes it is, but gotta play by the rules, and METRO blew millions on this folly.

[Slick Vik]

Yes it is, but gotta play by the rules, and METRO blew millions on this folly.

And time

[IronTiger]

There's a lot of talk about the University Line and how it's being blocked by Culberson and all that. But it got me thinking about it, and let's face it, even with avoiding Afton Oaks and taking the more sane route, the University Line is pretty flawed in many aspects.

Richmond Avenue is still a major thoroughfare, but east of Afton Oaks, it's only so wide. The medians are large enough to fit a rail line, and in the end, at least up to the Cummins stop, you'll have a wheezy line that screws up traffic patterns, blocks roads, and stops at not only at the 5 stops within three miles but also at stoplights. Some of them may be combined and timed properly with the stops, but it will be slow. Once it crosses 59, it could finally speed up and reach Hillcroft and beyond.

Thing is, despite what Culberson did and the complaints of Afton Oaks, anyone talking about a "world class transit system" shouldn't be talking about street running light rail that extends outside the CBD in the same thought.

I think that if the light rail was sunken below street level, it would also solve the street running issue: but are subways even workable given the topography of Houston? Is there any other real option, or are we stuck with what we've got?

Edited March 15, 2014 by IronTiger

[cloud713]

subway would be amazing (hopefully in the next 50 years), but i would prefer it go under Westheimer, not Richmond. 

a 4 stop line (seems like i heard that was a consideration once) running from Wheeler Station, across 59 into the Westpark/METRO/powerline ROW would be ideal for speed, but it wouldnt be able to serve nearly as much as a Richmond line. there could still be a stop for Wheeler, Edloe (Greenway/UK), Post Oak, and then Hillcroft TC, but with less traffic to deal with compared to down the middle of Richmond. maybe they could even submerge the tracks under the few crossroads there are along that route (or at least a couple of the more busy ones, and have a submerged station at Edloe with a tunnel under 59 over to the Greenway tunnel system).

[IronTiger]

A true "burrowing" subway I don't think would work, a cut-and-cover would probably be the preferred option. To be honest, I went to Dallas this week--just got back today, and while I'm not going to complain about Houston's being not as extensive, the routes that they do have seem well done and have a reasonable amount of people during the weekday (non-peak hours). Not having street running, and even having an area where the light rail ran in a tunnel (still with a wire above, not third rail) would do a world of difference, but I just can't see where you CAN do that in Houston besides abandoned ROWs, which there aren't a lot of.

[cloud713]

Exactly.. Which is why I say just put the whole University Line down the westpark ROW to Wheeler (though it will unfortunately miss st Thomas, the Menil, ect). As for cut and cover, I agree. So when the roads are being rebuilt is a perfect time to run a line under them. I think post oak, Westheimer, the current LRT lines through the downtown and TMC portions, and maybe even part of Kirby could use cut and cover subways next time they are repaired.

The DART line under cityplace is neat huh? I envision something line that for the Greenway stop connecting into it's tunnel network.

[IronTiger]

In my modified plan, the block between Richmond, Portsmouth, Cummins, and Timmons would be demolished for the light rail to swing right and down. Cummins then would be closed south of Richmond (but it's not like it's creating two segments of roads) with only the southern part open to get into that strip center (the old northbound would be turned into a driveway). What ROW of Cummins isn't used for the light rail would be used as a pedestrian mall. After the Cummins stop, it crosses over Norfolk (Norfolk gets gates!) and over 59, demolishing part of the strip center, crossing Westpark at grade, over Westlayan at grade, over the railroad on a bridge, and then you know the rest (mostly).

Meanwhile, Richmond is completely rebuilt on the surface, benefitting the buses greatly (as well as cars)

[Elseed]

Na...No subway...either at street level or an elevated line....but at the end of the day if we can just have an awesome bus system I'm happy with that...seeing how we're probably not gonna get another line til 3015

[IronTiger]

Would it even be possible that since they seem to run it in a narrow ROW anyway west of 610, would it work to run it in the right of way just south of 610 where power lines currently go? It would be a few blocks away from the proposed stations along Richmond, but it might even go faster than the old one, and cheaper to build.

[cloud713]

Would it even be possible that since they seem to run it in a narrow ROW anyway west of 610, would it work to run it in the right of way just south of 610 where power lines currently go? It would be a few blocks away from the proposed stations along Richmond, but it might even go faster than the old one, and cheaper to build.

did you mean south of 610 or south of 59? i assume you meant south of 59. in which case, i believe METRO owns the other half of the Westpark ROW all the way up until Montrose. i dont see why they couldnt fit tracks under the power lines/ROW that continues past Montrose, almost all the way across from Wheeler Station. but i suppose i would like to see a Menil/St Thomas stop on Richmond before it jumps over to the Westpark ROW, so maybe that power line stretch east of Montrose doesnt matter. just run it down the planned/original University Line route from the east all the way up to Yoakum BLVD, so it still somewhat serves the Menil and St Thomas.. and then turn south, down the wide median on Yoakum, and build a new matching bridge across 59 for the train to jump over to the METRO/Westpark/power line ROW.

[nativehoustonion]

Great idea but far too late.  When we voted for METRO SOLUTIONS it did not include subway.  So, if we change it, METRO will have to do a new study which takes years.  We also have to vote for it.  They already have the light rail study we just needs the funding.  Something must be done on Richmond Ave. it is falling apart. I cannot understand TXDOT builds a $2 billion freeway (KATY) which there was no vote and is already congested.  I never go out there and we cannot build the major link in the city core.  I think you are wrong about the stops.  My car was in the shop off Westheimer and Taft.  They had buses running 5 minutes apart and I hoped on one and was took in 5 minutes for $1.00.  Now I don't mind taking the bus to Wheeler Station to connect to the rail and go Downtown.      

[IronTiger]

I think that the University Line as it is planned now is slow, ruins a road, and has way too many stops. If it's "already voted for" and with the delays, it needs to be scrapped entirely and replaced with a modified plan.

[cloud713]

I think that the University Line as it is planned now is slow, ruins a road, and has way too many stops. If it's "already voted for" and with the delays, it needs to be scrapped entirely and replaced with a modified plan.

Agreed.. That's why I suggested jumping it over on Yoakum across 59. I don't think they'd be able to cross at Montrose, which is where METROs Westpark ROW starts, so Yoakum would be the best alternative to cross over into the ROW while maintaining the most amount of track along Westpark for higher speeds and a cheaper build.

[RocketSci]

How about maintaining the same route but go below grade at Montrose, Shepherd, and Kirby, similar to the Holcomb/Fannin intersection. Not a true subway, but would reduce traffic impacts and increase speed by bypassing these intersections. Any re routing along the Westpark power line easement east of Kirby would require removal of many dozens of homes and businesses, essentially destroying all of Vassar Street, Autrey, Chelsea.

Edited March 16, 2014 by RocketSci

[IronTiger]

How about maintaining the same route but go below grade at Montrose, Shepherd, and Kirby, similar to the Holcomb/Fannin intersection. Not a true subway, but would reduce traffic impacts and increase speed by bypassing these intersections. Any re routing along the Westpark power line easement east of Kirby would require removal of many dozens of homes and businesses, essentially destroying all of Vassar Street, Autrey, Chelsea.

It should be noted that Holcombe and Fannin's bypass was built back in the 1960s and was only retrofitted for Metro's use. A similar attempt today would require lots of demolition, which at that rate they should just give up and tear out the southern (or northern, depending on who complains the loudest) for a parallel METRORail track.

[Slick Vik]

The reason it goes down Richmond until 610 (before the reroute at greenway) is that that route would get more ridership then putting it on westpark. Also the street that would be for cars would be rebuilt as well. If you didn't want to take Richmond take Alabama or westheimer it's not THAT big of an inconvenience.