METRORail Uptown Line

[AtticaFlinch]

Simply put, the Galleria needs more thru streets. Regardless of how the rail is designed, more streets are needed to absorb all that traffic. Even if the rail is built above grade and Westheimer is built below grade, while it may solve the problem of increased congestion due to rail, it doesn't solve the already extant traffic problems. From Sage to 610 and Richmond to San Felipe, the city needs to exercise eminent domain, destroy the crap out of some parking lots and put in a tenable street grid. The Galleria's streets were designed to handle suburban traffic flow, but the area's grown to be the city's second largest business district since then.

[citykid09]

Simply put, the Galleria needs more thru streets. Regardless of how the rail is designed, more streets are needed to absorb all that traffic. Even if the rail is built above grade and Westheimer is built below grade, while it may solve the problem of increased congestion due to rail, it doesn't solve the already extant traffic problems. From Sage to 610 and Richmond to San Felipe, the city needs to exercise eminent domain, destroy the crap out of some parking lots and put in a tenable street grid. The Galleria's streets were designed to handle suburban traffic flow, but the area's grown to be the city's second largest business district since then.

I agree!

[ricco67]

I came across an article in the River Oaks examiner (Link) that mentions how Metro is looking to get more ROW on Post Oak. The way they're making it sound (to me) is they're grabbing HUGE swaths of land, when I looked at the PDF provided, it seems like they're only going to grab land about 8 feet or so into various properties, which I expected.

Not saying that the article is incorrect, but it's interesting on how they mention the square footage, instead of just the rough dimensions.

The way I read the article, it seems like the author WANTED to give a negative slant against the Rail, particularly because it takes up a piece of the "Water Wall".

[jfre81]

How close to the actual Waterwall will it get?

I'm also wondering if it'll be 2015 before we see this too, or later. Really it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to complete and operate it before the University Line is done.

[ricco67]

How close to the actual Waterwall will it get?

I'm also wondering if it'll be 2015 before we see this too, or later. Really it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to complete and operate it before the University Line is done.

Well, the PDF link that I put up there shows how much land and where they plan on purchasing the land, but I think they are just in the ROW acquisition stage and wouldn't doubt if the uptown line be going online at about the same time U-line is done.

[ricco67]

According to a KTRK Blurb on the line:

Galleria business owners are starting to get cold feet about the future line.

Many complain that it will bring heavy congestion and some business are already thinking about shutting down the doors and moving elsewhere.

The argument that Metro states that it will bring shoppers to the galleria, many business owners stated that "If people can't afford to drive their cars to this area, then they can't ultimately can not afford to buying products at many of these stores."

I think there is some disinformation is going on from somewhere, the business owners claim that METRO will be starting construction there at the end of this year, but there is nothing Metro can do until the U-line is well underway.

[kylejack]

The argument that Metro states that it will bring shoppers to the galleria, many business owners stated that "If people can't afford to drive their cars to this area, then they can't ultimately can not afford to buying products at many of these stores."

What business owners said that??

Anyway, looks like Metro is under fire for destroying some documents: http://www.khou.com/news/investigative/11-News-Investigation-Metro-Destroyed-Documents-Possibly-Connected-to-Spending-85252502.html

Edited February 25, 2010 by kylejack

[ricco67]

What business owners said that??

The news reporter wasn't being specific as to who said it. Apparently they (shop owners) held a meeting sometime today about the matter.

I think it's a crock, they used the same basic arguments when 610 was slated to go under construction and it was delayed several years because of their BS.

[citykid09]

The argument that Metro states that it will bring shoppers to the galleria, many business owners stated that "If people can't afford to drive their cars to this area, then they can't ultimately can not afford to buying products at many of these stores."

That sounds snobbish. I do think that the way that they have planned the Uptown line doesn't really fit in with the theme of the area. If not a subway, they should at least entrench it like DART did with Mockingbird Station. Elevating it might look tacky for that area, but then again you never know. I just think more effort (money) should be put into the Uptown line since it is Houston's "glitzy" area. Maybe they designers should go to LA and take a look at the line they just opened for some inspiration.

I do agree though that if the Uptown line is designed anything like the Red Line (as the renderings show), I don't see many of the usual Galleria area shoppers riding it. Do you really think shoppers are going to wait at a rail stop with their expensive items all hot and sweating? NO! But if the stations were covered with air-conditioning nicely lit and safe, I'm sure many more people will ride it.

[kylejack]

Put more money into rich areas because they're rich?

[citykid09]

Put more money into rich areas because they're rich?

No, I did say that, but the Galleria area is Houston's shining star. Why not complement that with a design that fits that area. But Houston doesn't work that way. Houston doesn't build for aesthetics Houston builds for efficiency only.

[kylejack]

Waiting a max of 6 minutes is not a problem, regardless of heat.

Assuming frequency will be the same, that is.

[AtticaFlinch]

No, I did say that, but the Galleria area is Houston's shining star. Why not complement that with a design that fits that area. But Houston doesn't work that way. Houston doesn't build for aesthetics Houston builds for efficiency only.

Pretty gross and utilitarian, I agree.

So yeah, you have some weird assumptions about what Houston does and doesn't do and the reasons for it as viewed through your particular aesthetic goggles. Also, I have a bit of a problem (call me a populist) with your assumption that we should tailor that train only to people who shop at the Galleria. People are employed at those many shops, not to mention the area is the city's second largest business district housing tons of office space. Do you think all those people are merely concerned with a handful of shoppers sweating with their shopping bags for six minutes?

[C2H]

citykid is right though, there are a few select areas where Houston builds for aesthetics. The Galleria is one, but downtown, the city's main centerpiece could do a better job.

[LegacyTree]

Aesthetics = Gold-digger Turf

[AtticaFlinch]

citykid is right though, there are a few select areas where Houston builds for aesthetics. The Galleria is one, but downtown, the city's main centerpiece could do a better job.

Like spending a billion dollars on a park? Or digging up traffic lanes to plant trees? What exactly do you people want the city to do, throw glitter around everywhere? Damn the costs and idea of functionality, let's throw all caution to the wind and build the world's biggest skyscraper built to resemble the International Space Station! (Or whatever else.)

Geezus. If that's what you want, then get it done, man. Buy a plot of land Downtown, hire architects to design the building, get the proper permits and then build it. But, if you don't have the sack to venture into that realm of capitalism, then don't be upset if other people don't either.

[N Judah]

No, I did say that, but the Galleria area is Houston's shining star. Why not complement that with a design that fits that area. But Houston doesn't work that way. Houston doesn't build for aesthetics Houston builds for efficiency only.

Agreed...I think Houston's at the point on the curve where even minimal effort can have a hugely positive effect. Maybe get the TIRZ to chip in? You'd think they'd be on board with that, even moreso now that there's a vague threat out there of businesses saying they'll leave.

[JamesL]

The Uptown District is paying for aesthetic upgrades to the station and guideway. I've heard the track will be embedded in grass like Barcelona's tram. http://tinypic.com/dhaiyv.jpg

[KinkaidAlum]

No, I did say that, but the Galleria area is Houston's shining star. Why not complement that with a design that fits that area. But Houston doesn't work that way. Houston doesn't build for aesthetics Houston builds for efficiency only.

Redonkulous. The Galleria is a MALL. Surrounded by strip malls full of generic stuff you can find anywhere in the country. It isn't even close to being Houston's shining star!

[crunchtastic]

Maybe he has a point about 'shining stars' and design, etc. The galleria area is by design a temple to conspicuous consumption, so why not dress the trains themselves? The uptown line cars could all have various paint jobs, a Pucci print, a Hermes, etc. Times is tough; I bet Gucci would be willing to make a deal for the constant free advertising in exchange for some logo treatment on a train car. The stations could look like those big LV train cases. ....effectively taking the "Houston doesn't care how it looks" refrain and the money/brand/image worship and all it corollaries (more supertall shiny buildings!!!) to its logical conclusion.

Somehow, I doubt this is what citykid had in mind, tho. And since Dubai probably already has an entire mall shaped like a Prada shoe, eh, forget it. We'd be behind the curve. Again. Sigh.

[kylejack]

If Galleria wants to crust their train stops in gold, they can spend out of their TIRZ, its not Metro's problem.

[samagon]

I think they should at least bedazle the trains and stations.

It is pretty short sighted of those business owners to assume that people wouldn't want to ride a train to their shopping locations, rather than drive a car. I hate going to that area because traffic sucks, I may not save time by riding a train down there, but I would save gas and heartache. Ultimately, I'd probably go there more often, and while I wouldn't go on a crazy shopping spree, I never really do anyway.

I guess I'm not who they are thinking about, or care about.

[ricco67]

KTRK managed to put up a link on the story.

[shasta]

citykid is right though, there are a few select areas where Houston builds for aesthetics. The Galleria is one, but downtown, the city's main centerpiece could do a better job.

Are you serious?

You think that Uptown and the Galleria area is aesthetically pleasing.

I'd take downtown with Discovery Green, it's historic buildings, sports and theater districts and walkable streets over a big clumpy mall with a mini freeway called Westheimer and unbearable traffic any day of the week.

[C2H]

Like spending a billion dollars on a park? Or digging up traffic lanes to plant trees? What exactly do you people want the city to do, throw glitter around everywhere? Damn the costs and idea of functionality, let's throw all caution to the wind and build the world's biggest skyscraper built to resemble the International Space Station! (Or whatever

else.)

Geezus. If that's what you want, then get it done, man. Buy a plot of land Downtown, hire architects to design the building, get the proper permits and then build it. But, if you don't have the sack to venture into that realm of capitalism, then don't be upset if other people don't either.

all i'm saying is in comparison to many other cities, houston struggles on the looks department. Not saying that Houston doesn't have beautiful areas, it just seems that there's too many areas around Houston that look like they've been left to rot. Some of those areas are close to downtown and that is completely unacceptable. People think Houston is ugly but i think Houston is both: beautiful and ugly. We should admit that the city could step up in plenty of areas. I think that would be a first major step in improvement.

Edited February 26, 2010 by C2H

[kylejack]

all i'm saying is in comparison to many other cities, houston struggles on the looks department. Not saying that Houston doesn't have beautiful areas, it just seems that there's too many areas around Houston that look like they've been left to rot. Some of those areas are close to downtown and that is completely unacceptable. People think Houston is ugly but i think Houston is both: beautiful and ugly. We should admit that the city could step up in plenty of areas. I think that would be a first major step in improvement.

Except that you're not endorsing beautification of areas close to downtown, such as East End or Midtown, you and CityKid are talking about prioritizing beautification of a place that's outside the Loop.

Edited February 26, 2010 by kylejack

[AtticaFlinch]

all i'm saying is in comparison to many other cities, houston struggles on the looks department.

Which cities? And don't give me a city with a mountain backdrop or one on a breathtaking body of water. Give me something comparable to Houston's topography, like Orlando or Jackson, Mississippi. Which of these cities are more pleasing to the eye and why? Again, don't mention mountains or oceans in your explanation. There's nothing a developer or city planner can do about Houston's geography.

[Highway6]

Are you serious?

You think that Uptown and the Galleria area is aesthetically pleasing.

I'd take downtown with Discovery Green, it's historic buildings, sports and theater districts and walkable streets over a big clumpy mall with a mini freeway called Westheimer and unbearable traffic any day of the week.

Yes I do.

Westheimer, between Sage and Post Oak, and Post Oak between Westheimer and the Waterwall are actually aesthetically pleasing with their Oak trees, flower beds, and chrome. Historic buildings are not the only means to measuring an area's beauty. Westheimer and Post Oak, while not pedestrian friendly, are pedestrian usable.. They attract quite the volume of pedestrians for being outside the loop, esp building up to Christmas.

I also think Post oak between Westheimer and Sanfelipe has it's appeal with the cluster of tall buildings on either end.

The TIRZ has obviously done a lot to beautify this area and I think they have been successful. As for the rail stations. I agree that Metro shouldnt have to do more to spruce them up, but I also think it won't matter.. the TIRZ will still give us upgraded Uptown line.. whether its the grass-track idea or better stations.

I actually thing the normal stations are aesthetically pleasing enough for the uptown line, except that they wouldnt match the area's chrome. I do like the grass-track idea though.

Except that you're not endorsing beautification of areas close to downtown, such as East End or Midtown, you and CityKid are talking about prioritizing beautification of a place that's outside the Loop.

It's a block outside the Loop. You speak of the Loop as a magical line. It's the 2nd largest biggest business district in the city.. No, It's not the City's shining star but It is important. Also, it may not be the most walkable area in the city, but as the city's biggest shopping district, I don't see why it shouldnt strive to become the most walkable district. It is worth beautification just as much as Inner Loop locations such as downtown or TMC.

I'm not saying this is Metro's responsibility... It's not. I just think the "nothing of worth outside the magic line" mentality is silly.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Highway6

[kylejack]

It's a block outside the Loop. You speak of the Loop as a magical line. It's the 2nd largest biggest business district in the city.. No, It's not the City's shining star but It is important. Also, it may not be the most walkable area in the city, but as the city's biggest shopping district, I don't see why it shouldnt strive to become the most walkable district. It is worth beautification just as much as Inner Loop locations such as downtown or TMC.

I'm not saying this is Metro's responsibility... It's not. I just think the "nothing of worth outside the magic line" mentality is silly.

Uh, he was complaining that the areas closest to downtown weren't beautified. And then therefore endorsing beautifying Uptown. That is the hypocrisy I was addressing. It doesn't matter if its 1 block outside or 3 blocks inside, the point is that an area near the loop is farther out than areas he appears not to care about.

[T 2 THA C]

I think both DT n UT have come along way since 2000 and the new rail lines should only add to make both more ped friendly