ZKB9 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 It is amazing that Metro now cannot even build rail on Post Oak Blvd. unless it is approved in a new referendum. The 2003 referendum explicitly authorized rail on Post Oak Blvd.It seems like a blatant waste of money to demand yet another vote on this. Watch, he'll stall it for another ten years and then say "Well we need to have a vote on this!" 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 because there are corridors in this city moving over 10 times that number of people..? in any event, like i said 2 posts above yours, i no longer have an "issue" with the line, now that the trains will apparently bring people directly up the Red line. i just figure there are many other corridors that would be more justifiable for the "highest priority rail line". Lets remember that its only highest priority to Culberson and not Metro or the city. There is no way that Culberson can force Metro to doing what he wants. He isn't in the branch that executes the law. Even in the branch that he does serve there is no way you could get away with legal language that would specifically bind an entire city organization as big as Metro focus all energy on one priority. This would be like.....say I have an MEP (Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing) Consultant firm working on a project. My plumber might say that his top priority is a particular pipe that conflicts with maybe some element of the architecture design. Get this though. That pipe is one pipe in one instance in a building that is enormous! As an Architect though I would respect his work and say yes it is a top priority....it isn't a top priority to the whole project! I can't stop the entire project and put all my concerns behind one consultants pipe issue which could be solved along side or further down the line when I reach that part of the building. Culberson, however powerful and charitable he thinks he is, does not have the authority or power nor federal funding to mandate that they make 90A a top priority. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 How is a light rail commuter train going to go up the Red line to wheeler station? It will have to stop at all the stations in the Med center, because there's no express rail or passing switches for most of the track. Which means that it'll be similar to the north line extension - some trains during peak hours will turn around at Fannin south, while others go all the way to sugarland/Missouri city. I'm intrigued by the Idea though of what they are wanting to make.Are there any designs or maps or anything of this?Wheeler is probably the worst station on the original line. My friend got held up at knifepoint there. That being said if the university line eventually goes there and the 90a commuter line goes there, there will be more eyes at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Lets remember that its only highest priority to Culberson and not Metro or the city. There is no way that Culberson can force Metro to doing what he wants. He isn't in the branch that executes the law. Even in the branch that he does serve there is no way you could get away with legal language that would specifically bind an entire city organization as big as Metro focus all energy on one priority. But it is Metro's and the Gulf Coast Rail District's and HGAC's highest priority for commuter rail(or certainly in the top 3 for all of those agencies and it's the only commuter rail on Metro's "current projects" list and was the only commuter rail proposed to be built by Metro as part of the 2003 Metro referendum) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triton Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 FWIW, the Ft Bend Parkway is used by more than 20,000 cars per day. In any event, I'm not sure what your issue with that is. 20,000 cars per day does not strike me as an inconsequential number and the bond ratings agencies seem okay with it.I actually like the Ft. Bend Parkway. It fits in perfectly to Houston's hub-and-spoke highway system..... Ft. Bend answers the big gap to the area between 59, 90, and 288. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 interesting article from 2007: http://www.chron.com/opinion/editorials/article/Obstruction-Rail-opponents-legal-tactics-show-1818512.php Most notably:The request raises a familiar issue often cited by rail opponents. In a 2003 referendum, Houston voters narrowly approved a plan authorizing Metro to expand the rail system with seven additional lines, including a route, labeled Westpark, running from Wheeler Station at Main to the Hillcroft Transit Center. Opponents of rail anywhere on Richmond argue that any route except one along Westpark requires fresh approval from the voters.Metro officials correctly contend the names of the proposed routes were general and open to change. They point to additional wording on the ballot, repeated three times: "Final scope, length of rail segments or lines or other details, together with implementation schedule, will be based upon demand and completion of the project development process, including community input." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cspwal Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 So the original referendum it wasn't on Richmond? Which means that the studies they did to determine the best route moved it to Richmond? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 I actually like the Ft. Bend Parkway. It fits in perfectly to Houston's hub-and-spoke highway system..... Ft. Bend answers the big gap to the area between 59, 90, and 288. for the record, i like Ft Bend Parkway too. mainly for those reasons you listed.. i guess i just assumed a "top priority rail line" would correlate with the areas with the most highway traffic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 But it is Metro's and the Gulf Coast Rail District's and HGAC's highest priority for commuter rail (or certainly in the top 3 for all of those agencies and it's the only commuter rail on Metro's "current projects" list and was the only commuter rail proposed to be built by Metro as part of the 2003 Metro referendum) when did METRO acquire the Westpark ROW? its interesting that they wouldn't have that on the 2003 referendum as well, given the ease of making that empty ROW into rail, and exploding population to the west. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 when did METRO acquire the Westpark ROW? its interesting that they wouldn't have that on the 2003 referendum as well, given the ease of making that empty ROW into rail, and exploding population to the west.Back in 2001 iirc, HCTRA gave them the other half of the wide ROW, enough for rail 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) for the record, i like Ft Bend Parkway too. mainly for those reasons you listed.. i guess i just assumed a "top priority rail line" would correlate with the areas with the most highway traffic. Well, Ii think it's a combination of being feasible and serving areas with the most highway traffic. But in any event, the southwest corridor it is proposed to serve is certainly one of the areas with the very most highway traffic. Southwest Freeway (approx. 318,000+ per day) Westpark Tollway (100,000+ per day), Fort Bend Parkway (20,000+ per day)... I'm not sure which other corridor you think has more highway traffic. Edited May 19, 2015 by Houston19514 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 i guess thats where we aren't seeing eye to eye.. idon't consider i69 to really be in this corridor, and i sure as heck don't consider Westpark Tollroad to be a part of this corridor. this rail line will stop over 3.5 miles short of i69, and Westpark.. that corridor is over 7 miles up the Beltway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cspwal Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 http://www.ridemetro.org/CurrentProjects/90A-Southwest_RailCorridor.aspx It's still listed as on hold... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) i guess thats where we aren't seeing eye to eye..idon't consider i69 to really be in this corridor, and i sure as heck don't consider Westpark Tollroad to be a part of this corridor. this rail line will stop over 3.5 miles short of i69, and Westpark.. that corridor is over 7 miles up the Beltway. Take a look at the Gulf Coast Rail District's information regarding the proposed US90A Commuter Rail project. Edited May 19, 2015 by Houston19514 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Take a look at the Gulf Coast Rail District's information regarding the proposed US90A Commuter Rail project. OK, so I'm on board with a US90A commuter rail, partially because it connects with the light rail and it's not feasible for a "light rail commuter rail" set-up (Westpark OTOH...). However, after looking at that link, unless they want to build a new track under the Bellfort/Almeda stack, is it really a good idea to overshoot the Red Line terminus, stop, reverse to go on the track going north/south, then cross back over the existing freight line, then do all of that in reverse on the way back? I don't think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJxvi Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 (edited) The original referendum included a line from Wheeler Station (at Richmond/Wheeler and Main St) to the Hillcroft Transit center. The corridor was called "Westpark" but it was always fairly clear that the inner portion of this line would be on Richmond. At some point the Inner Katy line (Downtown, Washington Ave, Heights, to the Northwest Transit Center) which was also part of the planned Phase II to be implemented by 2012 was moved back out of the plan and "Westpark" was made into the "University Line" and also continued east on Wheeler to UH/TSU Edited May 19, 2015 by JJxvi 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 The University Line should absolutely be the top priority, it has far more ridership potential and would be much more cost effective on an operational basis than the 90A line. I really hope they can find a way to build it still. I am in favor of the 90A line but it shouldn't even be close to priority with the University Line IMO. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H-Town Man Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 It seems like a blatant waste of money to demand yet another vote on this. Watch, he'll stall it for another ten years and then say "Well we need to have a vote on this!" I think his next tactic will be to interpret the wording of the agreement to mean that Metro has to spend all the money needed to get the 90A commuter rail line up and running before he will let them build the University Line. The best thing working in Metro's favor long term is the 4,000+ high end apartments under construction in the Montrose/Midtown/Museum District area, and the overall densification of the inner loop. The reason Houston has suburban congressmen who can override city interests (something unimaginable in cities like Chicago) is that the city is so decentralized. Put some weight in the center (especially wealthy people who make demands) and that starts changing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmac Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 "The best thing working in Metro's favor long term is the 4,000+ high end apartments under construction in the Montrose/Midtown/Museum District area..." Why would the mass of middle- to lower-class voters in Houston have any interest in building rail lines to serve the rich? I don't know too many people who can afford to live in all those high-end units being built. The poorer you are, the farther out you have to look for affordable housing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacecityroller Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) Back in 2001 iirc, HCTRA gave them the other half of the wide ROW, enough for rail Thats backwards Metro bought the row and then sold the portion used for the toll road later. In 2014 they sold even more of the row to the FB toll road authority.http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Westpark-expansion-to-proceed-with-Metro-land-sale-5281369.php Edited May 20, 2015 by Spacecityroller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban909 Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Thats backwards Metro bought the row and then sold the portion used for the toll road later. In 2014 they sold even more of the row to the FB toll road authority.http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Westpark-expansion-to-proceed-with-Metro-land-sale-5281369.php From the article:"Part of the agreement is that Metro can negotiate to buy some of the property back if it decides to build a rail line in the future. The toll road would not consume the entire width, leaving room for rail." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H-Town Man Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 "The best thing working in Metro's favor long term is the 4,000+ high end apartments under construction in the Montrose/Midtown/Museum District area..."Why would the mass of middle- to lower-class voters in Houston have any interest in building rail lines to serve the rich? I don't know too many people who can afford to live in all those high-end units being built. The poorer you are, the farther out you have to look for affordable housing.That's a strange interpretation of what I said. The wealthy have political power. Why do you think Afton Oaks single-handedly caused Metro to change its route for this line? Middle-to-lower class voters already support rail in Houston; they were the main source of votes in the last referendum. They will support this line too because it connects major job centers where they work and destinations (the Galleria) where they play (yes middle class people do like the Galleria). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted May 20, 2015 Author Share Posted May 20, 2015 After all, there is no actual binding contract - nothing to stop the veteran lawmaker from returning to his self-appointed role as a one-man veto on Metro and nothing to stop the next mayor from setting a new agenda for the mass transit agency. Rather, the agreement provides little more than written evidence of Culberson and Metro making a promise to play nice, and we all know that politicians handle promises with the delicacy of a bull in a china shop. The only thing guaranteed is a shower of press releases to reward an elected official for doing something that should have been part of his regular job in the first place. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Thats backwards Metro bought the row and then sold the portion used for the toll road later. In 2014 they sold even more of the row to the FB toll road authority.http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Westpark-expansion-to-proceed-with-Metro-land-sale-5281369.phpI did know that, but was writing from my phone in the parking lot after work and didn't have time to elaborate: as I understood it, METRO bought the line in 2001 then sold the "top half" to HCTRA for the tollroad. There's even a leftover rail bridge that wasn't demolished so that a light rail or commuter rail could be built. METRO bought the line pretty much out to Eagle Lake, and I always wondered why they couldn't save at least one part of it (to Wallis) and rent that out as a junker/relief route. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triton Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 After all, there is no actual binding contract - nothing to stop the veteran lawmaker from returning to his self-appointed role as a one-man veto on Metro and nothing to stop the next mayor from setting a new agenda for the mass transit agency. Rather, the agreement provides little more than written evidence of Culberson and Metro making a promise to play nice, and we all know that politicians handle promises with the delicacy of a bull in a china shop. The only thing guaranteed is a shower of press releases to reward an elected official for doing something that should have been part of his regular job in the first place. It's a signed agreement. It's a contract. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 It's a signed agreement. It's a contract. Yeah it would be one thing if it was just some statement or he said it in some interview, but its now an official signed agreement by both parties involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plumber2 Posted May 23, 2015 Share Posted May 23, 2015 Back in the day before METRO, when it was called Rapid Transit, the West Alabama bus route followed West Alabama only as far out as Sheperd. The route then dropped down to Richmond Ave and followed that street all the way out just past Windsor Plaza.So for those that are sticklers about the name, just remember that there has been a mass transit line on Richmond for decades, even if it wasn't called "The Richmond Line". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchFan Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 OK, I'm going to reiterate my own personal rant from a long time ago :-) It has to do with a puzzlement about the invisible paradise that some Afton Oaks folks have tried to preserve. Richmond through that area is a bumpy 6-lane thoroughfare with a lot of traffic, cars, buses, trucks. I would think that repaving the street, landscaping it, and having a nice little electric choo-choo train down the middle would be nicer than how it is now, especially if it reduced the number of buses. plus, one's property value might go up if potential buyers recognized the convenience of just hopping on the train to go to a restaurant or whatever. I guess I'm just an evil liberal, or something :-) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacecityroller Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 OK, I'm going to reiterate my own personal rant from a long time ago :-) It has to do with a puzzlement about the invisible paradise that some Afton Oaks folks have tried to preserve. Richmond through that area is a bumpy 6-lane thoroughfare with a lot of traffic, cars, buses, trucks. I would think that repaving the street, landscaping it, and having a nice little electric choo-choo train down the middle would be nicer than how it is now, especially if it reduced the number of buses. plus, one's property value might go up if potential buyers recognized the convenience of just hopping on the train to go to a restaurant or whatever. I guess I'm just an evil liberal, or something :-) Your right, but the issue is the rail line that crosses Richmond right there. It would require a grade separation for the light rail, either a bridge or an underpass. I think they could make a bridge look nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 The residents would love an underpass, and it's not like there's any former Hazmat-level factory seeping contaminants into the ground near it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.