Why Is Metro Not Building The Light Rail On the Freeways?

A regional commuter rail study unveiled today recommends starting with a "baseline" system of five lines, but none providing direct service to Sugar Land, The Woodlands, Kingwood or Bush and Hobby airports.

Alan Clark, who heads transportation planning for the Houston-Galveston Area Council where the plan was presented, said conflict with heavy freight rail operations would prevent commuter rail to those destinations in the near future.

The five recommended lines are:

• U.S. 290, with a passenger terminal and maintenance facility near Metro's Northwest Transit Center. This would connect to Metro's planned Uptown light rail line.

• Texas 3 to Galveston

• Texas 249 to Tomball with "back door" service to The Woodlands

• Texas 35 to Pearland

• Almeda Road, later turning west and providing an indirect route to Fort Bend Co

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5829400.html

 

this should make TJ and big_texxx happy

 

would be extremely costly

 

Well, Houston is going to practically double in population in the next 15 years or so, so we're gonna have to build SOMETHING. I can't think of any long-term solutions that aren't insanely costly, whether we're going with the tried-and-true "more freeways forever" plan or the "eliminate all cars" plan. Obviously, we're going to end up with something in between, likely a network of light rail, commuter rail, and bus & park and ride routes. Speaking as a guy with no car, I'll take any and all of it, and right away, please.

 

Light rail cracks me up.

 

Good question. Basically, the lines such as the 290 one I highlighted above are planned to use existing railroad tracks, not build new tracks. So they'd be sharing the tracks with freight rail with the commuter trains getting priority during rush hours and such. The tracks to IAH, the Woodlands, etc., apparently have too much frieght train traffic currently to try to shoehorn some people trains in there, too. That's what I've struggled to gather, anyway, I'm no expert.

I know the Woodlands currently has a really successful park and ride program in place, not sure about Kingwood or the big airport. I'd like to see a train (or SOMETHING) running to IAH at some point myself. Hopefully someone's working on a solution.

 

I live in the Dallas area, and we've had DART Rail for a while now. And while it's usually highway adjacent, it's not physically on the highway anywhere (and, in only 2.5 more years, I'll be able to take a train to Love Field. 5.5 more years to get all the way to D/FW Airport. And that's presuming DART can find the $1 billion or so it seems to have misplaced).

A comprehensive traffic mitigation plan would include both HOV lanes and light rail (taking away the HOV lanes would likely add more traffic to the other lanes than the rail cars would take away).

 

You must be completely unaware of the rabid anti-Metro activists in Houston. They will do everything possible to scuttle anything Metro tries to do in the way of rail. If Metro had it's way, the city would be much further along.

 

forget light rails, bring on TUBES.

 

I'm fine with the current rail plan. We need a well-developed rail network inside the city itself before building commuter rail, because commuter rail is pointless if people can't get to other destinations after arriving downtown.

 

Do you remember how much trouble there was with Metro building on Main St. through downtown? Now just imagine them trying to build on 290, 59, 45 etc...at some point you would pretty much have to shut down the entire freeway.

While it is a good idea, it would be EXTREMELY costly and difficult. And like A_3P0 posted, there is aleady much debate with the past/current plans.

And while I'm too lazy to do the research, are there any cities in America that have lightrails on their freeways?

 

Because building a slow streetcar that conflicts with street traffic and existing utilities was/is such a dumbass idea.

Build it with prefabricated sections, above the existing streets and utilities and you put it up like tinkertoys wherever you want to go. And you'd never have a train/car accident or pedestrians walking in to it.

 

Sometimes the EL in Chicago runs down the middle of the highway.

 

*Sigh* "Let me put my gloves on, and my scrubs on"

Get the Inner City Light Rail up and running. Then, build commuter rail to the suburbs (like what is already planned). You need the core infrastructure before the suburban commuters come in on rail.

For those that say it is just a trolley, there are plenty of other light rail systems that run in city streets, and are successful. For example: San Francisco (Muni), Portland, Boston (Green Line), Baltimore, and others.

If only Bob Lanier had not denied the light rail plan twenty years ago... Better late than never.

 

By the way, here is a comment I wrote in the Chron article (I'm the second half of course):

This is one of the funniest posts I have read in a while. Seriously, rail along the Beltway? Where the hell are you going to put it?

If you just put time and searched a bit, you would know that METRO has plans for light rail to Hobby. The Southeast Line will continue south to Hobby.

For Galveston, you should know by now that METRO plans a commuter rail line down that way already.

The Southwest Commuter Rail Line is already planned from METRO, too. Will start in Missouri City (if Sugar Land pays METRO and becomes a member city, maybe it will go there), and it will end at the South Fannin Station on the Red Line.

45 from Webster to the Woodlands? Yeah, you try that. 45 North isn't getting rail anytime soon (commute rail at least). Light rail will run parallel to 45 along city streets, and terminate at IAH (you should see the maps).

59 North isn't getting rail anytime soon either. Ridership and such does not support it.

288 should get rail. But TxDot wants a tollway down the middle (similar to I-10). Very shortsighted (just like the Katy Tollway). It is painful to see that thing under construction, when the Katy Corridor Coalition, along with METRO, planned four mainlanes each way, HOV each way, and a commuter rail line down the middle.

Loop 610? You serious?! The only part of 610 that will get rail is the West Loop. It will go along Post Oak, then swoop into a subway just after San Felipe, and come up in the Post Oak median near I-10. METRO has released these plans months ago.

I explained I-10 West. I-10 East isn't getting rail anytime soon. Not much ridership out that way. Most people there work at the refineries on that side of town, so rail wouldn't do them much.

METRO already plans to use the 50 foot right-of-way that they still own along the Westpark Tollway, and build a commuter rail line.

Some of you all need to educate yourselves on METRO's plans. Some hilarious comments in this article.

 

**** you anti dallas people. i hate to admit it as much as you do, but the HOV and dart are far superior to metro. perhaps it's because metro services a larger area than dart, but the HOV issue isn't even close.

i'll agree with the other sentiments. i love the idea of light rail to the burbs, but the inner city needs to be built up first.




and hilltopper, you don't own a car?

 

Not.

The HOV system in Dallas isn't anywhere close to the HOV system in Houston. Not even. It's not even a comparison really.

Now, DART rail is better than METRORail (for now), but Houston's rail on just 7.5 miles carries 45,000 passengers daily. DART, on 45-miles, carries 61,000.

Also, light rail should not go out to the burbs. That is commuter rail. Light rail should only be built for the Inner City, and help those you used the commuter rail to get into town move around.

But overall, more people use METRO than DART + The T in Fort Worth.