Slick Vik Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 There are many ways to connect a light rail line to the airport. You could have a central station with any of the following options: a shuttle bus connecting terminals to the rail station (Boston, LA are cities that I know have this), you could construct a people mover (my vote would be for us to somehow extend the underground people mover to the rail station since it is already outside of the sterile zone, the underground people mover would most likely have to be reconstructed as well), or you could have elevated walkways from the station to the terminals. A more expensive and probably not viable option would be to construct a station at each of the terminals, but you'd have to reconfigure the terminals and it would cost a lot. The original 2003 referendum had light rail going to IAH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimenez Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 http://m.flickr.com/lightbox?id=9684097316Test drive near Fulton 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 The original 2003 referendum had light rail going to IAH.Only in a long term unfunded future master plan sort of way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triton Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 New elevators finished 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citykid09 Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 Nice! I wuld have never guessed this was in Houston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Houston's North Rail Line will open for service on Dec. 21, 2013, according to Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County officials addressing a luncheon held by the Greater Houston Partnership Tuesday, Oct. 22. The $756 million, 5.3-mile light rail transit extension will link MetroRail's University of Houston Downtown Station, one current LRT terminus, with Northline Commons via Main Street and Fulton Street, and is the first addition to Houston's initial 7.5-mile, LRT segment, which opened in January 2004. MetroRail officials earlier this year targeted an opening date for the line prior to Christmas. Two other LRT routes, the East Line and Southeast Line, currently are scheduled to begin operations next year. http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/passenger/light-rail/houston-north-rail-line-to-open-dec-21.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 (edited) ^ Great news! Glad to see you noticed that, similar to the cities you routinely tout as models, Houston is expanding its rail too. ;-) Edited October 24, 2013 by Houston19514 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aarosurf Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Only $27,000 per foot to construct. Hopefully it spurs a lot of development east of I-45. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HtownWxBoy Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Great news ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Good to hear. This line will serve houston well for many, many years. Great addition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 ^ Great news! Glad to see you noticed that, similar to the cities you routinely tout as models, Houston is expanding its rail too. ;-) It's admirable that Houston's new lines are going into low income areas. Many times such projects go into flashy areas for developers to jump on, which is good, but doesn't help the people that need this kind of infrastructure the most. I think part of this is that these neighborhoods aren't morons like Afton Oaks that protest against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesL Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Only $27,000 per foot to construct. Hopefully it spurs a lot of development east of I-45. Keep in mind that includes new underground utilities, streets, sidewalks, and traffic signals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Keep in mind that includes new underground utilities, streets, sidewalks, and traffic signals.The idea that a street has to be rebuilt by the rail authority is ridiculous. And adds a lot to the cost unnecessarily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 The idea that a street has to be rebuilt by the rail authority is ridiculous. And adds a lot to the cost unnecessarily.So, if they tear up your yard to repair a sewer line (taking out a tree or two?), you should shoulder the cost of fixing the damage done? You sure you want to go with that, or do you want to rethink that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 So, if they tear up your yard to repair a sewer line (taking out a tree or two?), you should shoulder the cost of fixing the damage done? You sure you want to go with that, or do you want to rethink that?The reason these rules were put in place initially were to put houston electric's streetcar out of business. And it worked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 The reason these rules were put in place initially were to put houston electric's streetcar out of business. And it worked.I'm going to guess that this has much more to do with standard project management methodology. You generally want to have one group that's responsible for the success of the full project. If you make one group responsible for the rail and another responsible for the street work, you're raising your risk and the difficulty of coordination. Both teams have timelines and deliverables that need to be coordinated. Sorry that doesn't sound as sexy as a massive conspiracy to undermine rail. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 I like light rail, too, as others on this board do too, but remember, it's like person A saying "I don't like Republicans" and person B saying "Every Republican in the neighborhood needs to be rounded up and shot". Same idea, but it's what separates citizens from criminal lunatics. And Slick, you never answered my question... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 (edited) I'm going to guess that this has much more to do with standard project management methodology. You generally want to have one group that's responsible for the success of the full project. If you make one group responsible for the rail and another responsible for the street work, you're raising your risk and the difficulty of coordination. Both teams have timelines and deliverables that need to be coordinated. Sorry that doesn't sound as sexy as a massive conspiracy to undermine rail.No. I suggest you read houston electric by Steve baron to read about the history. Edited October 28, 2013 by Slick Vik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 The idea that a street has to be rebuilt by the rail authority is ridiculous. And adds a lot to the cost unnecessarily. So, you advocate building rail without moving the utilities, repairing the sidewalks rail construction destroys, etc? That makes sense, let's just leave the utilities under the rail, so when repair is needed, the rail line gets torn up. Actually, that's a great idea, lets tear out the rail and improve mobility back to where it was before these stupid projects started destroying the ability of people to move around the city (it is a giant pain to get past the rail on North Main/Fulton if you are headed East or West). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 (edited) So, you advocate building rail without moving the utilities, repairing the sidewalks rail construction destroys, etc? That makes sense, let's just leave the utilities under the rail, so when repair is needed, the rail line gets torn up. Actually, that's a great idea, lets tear out the rail and improve mobility back to where it was before these stupid projects started destroying the ability of people to move around the city (it is a giant pain to get past the rail on North Main/Fulton if you are headed East or West).That's not what I said. I said Metro shouldn't be financially responsible for rebuilding a street or sidewalks for that matter.Also riding a train will be much smoother than a bus for people in the north line area. Edited October 28, 2013 by Slick Vik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolBuddy06 Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Back on topic, I'm excited about this extension and the development that I hope comes with it. And personally, it gives my brother-in-law more flexibility in picking his classes at HCC without me having to drive him around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylejack Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 That's not what I said. I said Metro shouldn't be financially responsible for rebuilding a street or sidewalks for that matter.Also riding a train will be much smoother than a bus for people in the north line area. They're only responsible for building the streets they themselves took apart. If I damage my neighbor's sidewalk then I owe him to fix it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 It would be better if it were elevated the entire length, and if the downtown segments were underground. Still support and thankful for what we have though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
august948 Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 It's admirable that Houston's new lines are going into low income areas. Many times such projects go into flashy areas for developers to jump on, which is good, but doesn't help the people that need this kind of infrastructure the most. I think part of this is that these neighborhoods aren't morons like Afton Oaks that protest against it. Was that altruism on METRO's part of just because it's cheaper and gets less flack from the neighborhoood (plus being good for the developers who can get adjoining land cheaper)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bachanon Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 It's admirable that Houston's new lines are going into low income areas. Many times such projects go into flashy areas for developers to jump on, which is good, but doesn't help the people that need this kind of infrastructure the most. I think part of this is that these neighborhoods aren't morons like Afton Oaks that protest against it. Was that altruism on METRO's part of just because it's cheaper and gets less flack from the neighborhoood (plus being good for the developers who can get adjoining land cheaper)? Government funding has strings attached. I think one was regarding existing utilized bus routes. It would stand to reason the low income areas nearest downtown, users of mass transit, would fit the bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slick Vik Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Was that altruism on METRO's part of just because it's cheaper and gets less flack from the neighborhoood (plus being good for the developers who can get adjoining land cheaper)?A smart neighborhood which realizes the value of being close to a rail line unlike afton oaks who fought tooth and nail to avoid it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Government funding has strings attached. I think one was regarding existing utilized bus routes. It would stand to reason the low income areas nearest downtown, users of mass transit, would fit the bill. It's going to be really interesting to see what the impact on bus service is going to be. Is this designed to augment existing bus routes or is it designed to replace them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) It's going to be really interesting to see what the impact on bus service is going to be. Is this designed to augment existing bus routes or is it designed to replace them? Never mind. Answered my own question. The number 15 bus route will be discontinued because it duplicates the route of the North line. The current average workday ridership of the number 15 route is 2,281 and it saw a 10.3% increase in ridership over the last 12 months. I would argue that any consideration of ridership numbers for the North line should consider that amount as a shift in existing transit ridership rather than an increase. The projected ridership at opening is 17,400 average weekday boardings which would be a net increase of approx. 15,000. Interested to see the actual numbers. http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/TX_Houston_North_Corridor_LRT_complete_profile.pdf Edited October 29, 2013 by livincinco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
august948 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Never mind. Answered my own question. The number 15 bus route will be discontinued because it duplicates the route of the North line. The current average workday ridership of the number 15 route is 2,281 and it saw a 10.3% increase in ridership over the last 12 months. I would argue that any consideration of ridership numbers for the North line should consider that amount as a shift in existing transit ridership rather than an increase. The projected ridership at opening is 17,400 average weekday boardings which would be a net increase of approx. 15,000. Interested to see the actual numbers. http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/TX_Houston_North_Corridor_LRT_complete_profile.pdf I'm curious how they came to an average of 17,400 weekday bordings when the current bus route has 2,281. Does that represent changed bus routes to force riders onto the rail line? Is some of it people already on the existing line, just continuing on to destinations on the new segment? Or did they pull it out of their posterior? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I'm curious how they came to an average of 17,400 weekday bordings when the current bus route has 2,281. Does that represent changed bus routes to force riders onto the rail line? Is some of it people already on the existing line, just continuing on to destinations on the new segment? Or did they pull it out of their posterior? Don't know what kind of science went into those numbers. It'll be fun to watch the actual numbers when they come in though and see what the impact is on impacted bus lines. (Yes, I realize that qualifies me as a nerd to say that). 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.