METRORail Uptown Line

[roadrunner]

We'll see what TxDot says about ripping up a newly constructed 610.

Well this probably wouldn't break ground for another 2-3 years, so I think TxDot wouldn't be too concerned.

[desirous]

What about expanding the ROW along Post Oak? It's mostly parking lots and lawns.

[Trae]

that is irrelevant to both what the Analysis in question called for and what is still the current plan.

How? TxDot could protest/deny it, and METRO wouldn't be able to break up 610. That one of the reasons why I thought METRO was going to tunnel all the way until just before I-10. I read it wrong.

By the way, METRO will tunnel again to go under 610 and come up at Post Oak?

Edited August 8, 2008 by Trae

[wakester]

In one of those Metro live chat sessions I ask the person who is planning the lines about the Uptown line and if it would go down the middle of 610 until Memorial. He said they were talking with TxDOT and that it was their preferred option. Ofcourse the problem with that stretch Post Oak Blvd to Memorial is that they can not take an inch of Memorial park which is on both sides of 610 at one point.

[Highway6]

How?

What i answered - Metro's Current Uptown plan/the preferred option - result of alternative analysis report

Why i answered - because you were dead wrong in your answer for the above.

What i wasn't answering - what might happen to current plan

It's irrelevant because you're essentially saying.. "but i should be right" ..instead of just admitting you were wrong, you're going off on tangents.

Your strait down Post Oak plan might be exactly what we end up with.... who cares.... that doesn't change the current plan nor does it make your previously wrong answer any less wrong.

Edited August 8, 2008 by Highway6

[Trae]

What i answered - Metro's Current Uptown plan/the preferred option - result of alternative analysis report

Why i answered - because you were dead wrong in your answer for the above.

What i wasn't answering - what might happen to current plan

It's irrelevant because you're essentially saying.. "but i should be right" ..instead of just admitting you were wrong, you're going off on tangents.

Your strait down Post Oak plan might be exactly what we end up with.... who cares.... that doesn't change the current plan nor does it make your previously wrong answer any less wrong.

WTF? No I wasn't. I was honestly just saying "we'll see what TxDot says". I wasn't trying to prove that I was right. I know I was wrong because I even said I must have read the analysis thing wrong. Besides, I wasn't talking about it tunneling under Post Oak. I knew that was out of the question. I was talking about under 610 and come up just before I-10. You told me that METRO decided on the other plan. Big ____ing deal.

Good grief all mighty one.

Edited August 9, 2008 by Trae

[totheskies]

Just so we're crystal clear, I submitted an email to Metro about the Uptown line. Here's the question and response...

I've been hearing a few rumours concerning the possibility of parts of the Uptown line being Subway. Is this something that METRO is seriously considering??

I know it's very expensive, but given the traffic within the Galleria is the most congested in the city, it seems to make a lot of sense.

Especially in regard to the intersection of Westheimer and 610, an at-grade line is just going to be sub-standard, and Houstonians deserve better than that. Building above or below grade would be the safest and most efficient option for the Galleria. Anyway, I'd love to get some feedback straight from the source, so that we can at least correct or validate the rumours.

From : Donna Lane

Date : 08/11/08 11:28

No part of the Uptown rail line is being designed to be underground. As you mentioned, it is very expensive and is not within the METRO budget to do so.

Thank you for your interest.

Sincerely,

Donna Lane

So if you ever want subway in Houston, you better get out your checkbooks.

Edited August 11, 2008 by totheskies

[Trae]

But no one was talking about the entire Uptown Line being underground.

[713 To 214]

There will be No Subway AT ALL. There will be no portion of this line below-grade. It's simple. Let it go.

[totheskies]

But no one was talking about the entire Uptown Line being underground.

Yes, but as it says, they're planning for all of it to be at-grade. So we don't have to worry about something that won't happen

.... totheskies starts singing along with Erykah Badu "I guess I'll see ya next lifetime..."

Edited August 11, 2008 by totheskies

[Trae]

There will be No Subway AT ALL. There will be no portion of this line below-grade. It's simple. Let it go.

So WTF was up with that approved alternative analysis?

totheskies, what's the email address?

Edited August 11, 2008 by Trae

[713 To 214]

^ Send an email to METRO with your questions. Obviously, HAIF is not the best source for this type of info. It's simple. Send an email.

[totheskies]

So WTF was up with that approved alternative analysis?

totheskies, what's the email address?

There's good news to be had with this though...

It's not that METRO doesn't want Subway... it's just too expensive at this point. But once we have a rail system in place, it can become feasible down the road. Just imagine if the Uptown line shows ridership that's even close to the Red Line (considering that it hits Memorial Park, the Galleria, and BLVD Place, I'd be willing to bet it may even exceed the Red Line ridership). By 2030, Houston will be talking about Subway to replace several of these lines. But for step one in 2012, it AIN'T a-gonna happen.

I just used the email function from the MetroSolutions website...

http://metrosolutions.org/go/inquiry/1068/

They were reasonably fast with their response. I think everyone on HAIF should start inundating them with feedback, so we can make our voices heard!!

[JJxvi]

If you look at the 610 overpass over Post Oak, it has been built with a huge area of empty space north of Post Oak. In other words, the bridge span not only goes over post oak and both u-turn lanes, but there is also maybe 75 to 100 yards of span over empty space north of the South-to-North U-turn lane. There is now a wall enclosing it so that its not as obvious as it was when they were building it. Not sure if it was designed with this purpose in mind, but I remember thinking the design was odd while they were building it. (I drive under every day).

Edited August 11, 2008 by JJxvi

[Highway6]

From the last "Chat with Metro" session a few weeks ago.

Q: Will the Uptown Line run in the middle of 610? This is from Memorial to Post Oak Blvd.

(12:52:21 PM) Bryan Pennington:

A: We are working closely with TxDot to resolve this issue. From my perspective, the middle of 610 would be the optimum solution, but we need to see how the discussions with TxDot pan out.

So their plan still calls for what the alternative analysis called for, track running in the middle of 610 and this is what they are working towards. And if this does go through then at either end, to get to/from the middle of the freeway, it has to go over or under.

So yes, while the Metro Rep said no part will be underground, that is only referring to full-blown subgrade. This wouldn't include a tunneling portal to transition from Post Oak to the middle of 610 if that is what they choose to do. That would be no more "underground" than any other underpass.

They intend to go elevated at the North point where the track transitions from PostOak/feeder to the middle of 610 in the vicinity of Woodway. Though I've seen in several place the term "portal" used for the southern transition point and like JJxvi said, there is a lot of room at the Post Oak overpass... it would seem like a better idea to bridge over here as well. Middle 610 to middle Post Oak elevated would mean the rail and feeder and Post oak traffic would never intersect.

Im guessing its much cheaper to go the 'under' route. I also wonder since elevated strutures take up so much distance, if having one here would interfere with their desired station location at Uptown Park ( if they still plan on one here ).

Edited August 12, 2008 by Highway6

[RedScare]

There's good news to be had with this though...

It's not that METRO doesn't want Subway... it's just too expensive at this point. But once we have a rail system in place, it can become feasible down the road. Just imagine if the Uptown line shows ridership that's even close to the Red Line (considering that it hits Memorial Park, the Galleria, and BLVD Place, I'd be willing to bet it may even exceed the Red Line ridership). By 2030, Houston will be talking about Subway to replace several of these lines. But for step one in 2012, it AIN'T a-gonna happen.

I just used the email function from the MetroSolutions website...

http://metrosolutions.org/go/inquiry/1068/

They were reasonably fast with their response. I think everyone on HAIF should start inundating them with feedback, so we can make our voices heard!!

I cannot think of a logical reason why this would happen. Ridership would have to be far in excess of the current Red Line totals to justify moving the line underground. Even if that were the case, a more reasonable, efficient and cheaper solution would be to add additional lines elsewhere designed to relieve the load on the Uptown line. Given that Uptown is not constrained by 250 foot blocks, the simplest solution would be to run double trainsets, or longer ones.

[TheNiche]

There's good news to be had with this though...

It's not that METRO doesn't want Subway... it's just too expensive at this point. But once we have a rail system in place, it can become feasible down the road. Just imagine if the Uptown line shows ridership that's even close to the Red Line (considering that it hits Memorial Park, the Galleria, and BLVD Place, I'd be willing to bet it may even exceed the Red Line ridership). By 2030, Houston will be talking about Subway to replace several of these lines. But for step one in 2012, it AIN'T a-gonna happen.

Washington D.C. had used mostly subways, and with higher ridership than anywhere but New York City...up until recently. Now they're copying the Houston model of light rail as they expand because it isn't as expensive.

I think that it can be done in Houston if the dollar becomes stong again and if we allow more immigration. But the costs have to come down.

I cannot think of a logical reason why this would happen.

Opportunity cost of land.

[RedScare]

Opportunity cost of land.

That was figured into my response. I don't see Uptown land prices and density rising in 20 years to the point that it would justify ripping out a perfectly good rail line to go underground. It could, but I'm betting against it. Even the current wave of construction leaves plenty of room, and adding additional lines would still be a more cost effective solution. An east-west line, for instance, would take 60% or more of the Uptown line's ridership.

[TheNiche]

That was figured into my response. I don't see Uptown land prices and density rising in 20 years to the point that it would justify ripping out a perfectly good rail line to go underground. It could, but I'm betting against it. Even the current wave of construction leaves plenty of room, and adding additional lines would still be a more cost effective solution. An east-west line, for instance, would take 60% or more of the Uptown line's ridership.

Land in the middle of POB is much more valuable than land adjacent to POB.

Think about opportunity cost in the form of traffic congestion. Think about all the trips that are delayed or that never happen. Remove the congestion, and more people can travel and more easily. That has value that far exceeds the out-of-pocket costs; it saves the time of our most valuable Houstonians.

The theoretical value of POB right of way can be determined by implementing congestion pricing as a toll road. In order to keep traffic flowing, a much higher price must be charged, but many fewer vehicles can use or cross it. Then think about it with congestion pricing but with grade-seperated light rail (whether above or below, that doesn't matter)--even though the price would be considerably lower, so many more people could use it that revenue would increase, and in a dramatic way. The discounted present value of the difference between toll revenues in those two scenarios is the extra amount that we'd be willing to pay to grade-seperate light rail from POB--that is the land value.

[totheskies]

I cannot think of a logical reason why this would happen. Ridership would have to be far in excess of the current Red Line totals to justify moving the line underground. Even if that were the case, a more reasonable, efficient and cheaper solution would be to add additional lines elsewhere designed to relieve the load on the Uptown line. Given that Uptown is not constrained by 250 foot blocks, the simplest solution would be to run double trainsets, or longer ones.

I'm not in the business of predicting the future, but it's definitely a possibility. We all know that Houston is currently a sprawl mecca... but we also know that the inner core of the city (Galleria area perhaps even moreso) has grown alot since 2000. If we keep or quicken that pace between now and 2020, Houston is looking at possibly 1 million people living inside the loop. That number of people is going to cause traffic nightmares. Throw in at-grade trams to compete with that traffic, and something's going to have to give. Again, we never know, but if those conditions come to fruition, Houston will be a ripe candidate for a Subway system.

Also keep in mind... DARTRail has only existed eight years longer than the Red Line, and they are aggressively considering the addition of more Subway. Dallas' inner core is more sparsely populated than Houston's.

[ricco67]

I'm not in the business of predicting the future, but it's definitely a possibility. We all know that Houston is currently a sprawl mecca... but we also know that the inner core of the city (Galleria area perhaps even moreso) has grown alot since 2000. If we keep or quicken that pace between now and 2020, Houston is looking at possibly 1 million people living inside the loop. That number of people is going to cause traffic nightmares. Throw in at-grade trams to compete with that traffic, and something's going to have to give. Again, we never know, but if those conditions come to fruition, Houston will be a ripe candidate for a Subway system.

Also keep in mind... DARTRail has only existed eight years longer than the Red Line, and they are aggressively considering the addition of more Subway. Dallas' inner core is more sparsely populated than Houston's.

I've always thought that, as the density increases, that the Richmond and U-Lines would eventually be converted to Subways.

The Redline has proven that we will use it, we just don't have a "track record" for people in government to justify the costs the construction of a subway line. Once the ridership numbers, Population density/population, and surface traffic increases; I'm sure that it will be favorable for construction of one. Thing is, I wouldn't hold my breath because I know it won't be in MY lifetime.

[Trae]

How old are you Ricco? 70?

[ricco67]

How old are you Ricco? 70?

Gee...why do we even bother with profiles?

I figure it might take 10-15 years for the density to take place, but FOREVER for things to get moving for funds to be approved, designs made,debates held, funding approved.....and then there is the tunneling.

Nope.I doubt if I'll live to see it.

[Mister X]

As long as we are all fantasizing about subways. I say the first real subway line should be built under Westheimer /Elgin. Just look at all the retail and residential complexes that would be connected and that people could get to without a car: Galleria, High Street, River Oaks District, Highland Village, West Ave, Montrose area, and The Mix complex. All these places (and more) are on or will be on Westheimer/Elgin.

In fact, I think a subway should go under Westheimer all the way out to Beltway 8 to the west. Think about all the people who already live within walking distance to Westhimer right now that wouldn't have to get in there cars to get to all those cool places I listed.

Since at grade rail has already been ruled out of the question for Westheimer, what could possibly ever work better and be more convenient than connecting all these places with underground transportation.

Edited August 13, 2008 by Mister X

[TheNiche]

Gee...why do we even bother with profiles?

I figure it might take 10-15 years for the density to take place, but FOREVER for things to get moving for funds to be approved, designs made,debates held, funding approved.....and then there is the tunneling.

Nope.I doubt if I'll live to see it.

Funding is a stumbling block, not only because the FTA's budget is forever-uncertain, but because such a disproportionate outlay of funds for a project that only serves inner-city areas would really piss off the vast number of people in northwest Harris County that pay taxes to METRO. You'd either be looking at some kind of a transit authority jurisdictional secession movement within the State legislature or METRO would have to simultaneously undertake a major project (not just commuter rail) in northwest Harris County to get thier constituents on board.

And since funding for METRO is constrained by the cap on sales taxes, they'd probably have to lobby for alternative forms of taxation in the legislature, one way or the other.

[RedScare]

I'm not in the business of predicting the future, but it's definitely a possibility. We all know that Houston is currently a sprawl mecca... but we also know that the inner core of the city (Galleria area perhaps even moreso) has grown alot since 2000. If we keep or quicken that pace between now and 2020, Houston is looking at possibly 1 million people living inside the loop. That number of people is going to cause traffic nightmares. Throw in at-grade trams to compete with that traffic, and something's going to have to give. Again, we never know, but if those conditions come to fruition, Houston will be a ripe candidate for a Subway system.

Also keep in mind... DARTRail has only existed eight years longer than the Red Line, and they are aggressively considering the addition of more Subway. Dallas' inner core is more sparsely populated than Houston's.

Well, I am not paid paid for predictions either, but I can safely say that there is no possibility whatsoever for a subway replacing the uptown line by 2020. For one, the current inner loop population is about 500,000. It would be a virtual impossibility for it to reach 1 million in population in 12 years. If it did, METRO would not be wasting its money on rebuilding rail lines that it just completed 7 years earlier. They would be working on the Inner Katy line, possibly an east-west Westheimer line...anything but a redo of the uptown line. Secondly, it takes years to design, fund and build a subway, even if they decided to do so. METRO would need to virtually begin working on a replacement subway the day they opened the uptown line in order to complete it by 2020. Thirdly, none of the studies conducted on this corridor even remotely support the ideas or scenarios you are throwing around here regarding uptown line ridership. I have not seen any ridership projections that even reach HALF of the Red Line totals. It will take a lot longer than 7 years to grow ridership to levels that require a redo.

If a Galleria subway is a cool fantasy for you, that's fine. To even remotely suggest that it might happen, especially before the first line is even built, is complete fantasy. METRO does not design these things for 5-10 years out. They design them to be there for decades. Whatever one may think of their design process, they most assuredly will not be returning to redesign it at triple the cost 7 years later.

[roadrunner]

As long as we are all fantasizing about subways. I say the first real subway line should be built under Westhimer /Elgin. Just look at all the retail and residential complexes that would be connected and that people could get to without a car: Galleria, High Street, River Oaks District, Highland Village, West Ave, Montrose area, and The Mix complex. All these places (and more) are on or will be on Westhimer/Elgin.

In fact, I think a subway should go under Westhiemer all the way out to Beltway 8 to the west. Think about all the people who already live within walking distance to Westhimer right now that wouldn't have to get in there cars to get to all those cool places I listed.

Since at grade rail has already been ruled out of the question for Westhimer, what could possibly ever work better and be more convenient than connecting all these places with underground transportation.

This is the only subway line I see actually having a chance of being built in our lifetimes. I think in 20 years this area could potentially support a north and south subway in the inner west loop.

[madmann101]

I think they should really elevate the lines or atleast build a monorail. I know it's cheaper than subway but more expensive than building on the surface. It's pointless to build this thing and later have to come back and tear it up for subway. How about we just wait 20 years to build any type of public transit, that's how long we'll probably have to wait anyway.

[Trae]

RedScare, I think METRO is underestimating their new line ridership numbers (just like they did with the Red Line). I think the University Line, and possible Uptown Line will have about the same amount of riders as the Red Line.

[TheNiche]

RedScare, I think METRO is underestimating their new line ridership numbers (just like they did with the Red Line). I think the University Line, and possible Uptown Line will have about the same amount of riders as the Red Line.

I'd agree, and would point that if METRO routes most of its inbound bus traffic from the greater southwest side towards the Hillcroft Transit Center, that's really all it should take. I'd speculate that the Hillcroft TC becomes a stopping point for P&R busses, too.

But ridership isn't what grade-seperations are all about. Grade-seperations benefit the people that aren't using transit. They're about mitigating externalities.

Edited August 14, 2008 by TheNiche