Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So if they were to eventually convert this to LRT, how would the interaction with the existing green and purple line termini work? Even though it's somewhat disruptive and definitely more expensive, the simpler solution would have been to simply extend those lines west along Washington or even do the same thing and run them down I-10 to Northwest TC but as LRT. I understand how the inner Katy line would interact with green and purple as BRT (they simply share downtown stations and let people transfer as needed) but can't conceptualize how that would look as future LRT.
I don't exactly love this project btw - as usual it's far from the best project it could be - but something is necessary to connect the two disconnected sections of the system.
There would be no reason to shut down the entire line for months just to convert it to LRT, there isn’t a big enough difference between the two transit types.
So if they were to eventually convert this to LRT, how would the interaction with the existing green and purple line termini work? Even though it's somewhat disruptive and definitely more expensive, the simpler solution would have been to simply extend those lines west along Washington or even do the same thing and run them down I-10 to Northwest TC but as LRT. I understand how the inner Katy line would interact with green and purple as BRT (they simply share downtown stations and let people transfer as needed) but can't conceptualize how that would look as future LRT.
I don't exactly love this project btw - as usual it's far from the best project it could be - but something is necessary to connect the two disconnected sections of the system.
To your first paragraph, I don't think that would major problem. The current map is shown how it would currently work as a BRT + LRT system. Were the line to be switched to LRT, they would just merge routes and maybe take a station away if needed while merging the connection. The new Inner Katy terminus to the east would share that of the green or purple line while the new western terminus of the green or purple line would be that of the Uptown line.
I whole heartedly agree with your second paragraph btw. Could be better, but I can't complain with:
1. Connecting the Silver Line with the LRT System. Something that was long missing.
2. Being fully elevated including the stations (meaning no interaction with intersections whatsoever even with crossroads). The Northern portion of the Silver line also has its dedicated overpass, meaning this system will be entirely grade separated and elevated from the point of exiting downtown to the point of entering Uptown. This also I can't complain about.
There would be no reason to shut down the entire line for months just to convert it to LRT, there isn’t a big enough difference between the two transit types.
It wouldn't have to be shut down. They'd just shut down sections and share lanes for a that portion. Same as they do in any other rail upgrade/maintenance project. Systems in general are designed with that in mind.
Btw I'm not arguing it will happen or that its likely to happen, I'm just arguing that its entirely possible to keep the route going. If they go that route or not is up to METRO.
While the basic transfer point is salient, I don't know that your mode switch point is relevant - the only difference here is the tires on the transit vehicle, basically. Everything else is practically equivalent - stations, even floor boarding, multiple door boarding, frequency, etc.
Its a mental thing. Easier psychologically to transfer train to train.
Actually the vast vast majority of LRT in Houston is deployed exactly as enhanced streetcar.
Just out of curiosity, have you been to other light rail systems around the country? I ask this because the other light rail systems in the nation are usually even more street car-y than Houston (i.e. Denver). Even Calgary's system was more street car.
Dallas light rail outside of their downtown is one of the least street car ish light rail systems I have seen in USA with Los Angeles being one of the few places to top it. If the D2 subway plan goes through, this might even elevate Dallas ahead of Los Angele's (light rail portion only, not their heavy rail portions). DART is in no way shape or form a traditional Metro system or anything remotely close, but the portions outside of downtown get as close in USA as possible.
Ofcourse, outside of USA, this is a different story. London's Docklands Light Rail is basically a metro system.
To be clear, yes I have been and rode on all of the systems I described.
Obviously we aren't going to agree on the metro budgeting and how they should plan their next routes, so no point on continuing that conversation, but I was curious about this.
Just out of curiosity, have you been to other light rail systems around the country? I ask this because the other light rail systems in the nation are usually even more street car-y than Houston (i.e. Denver). Even Calgary's system was more street car.
Dallas light rail outside of their downtown is one of the least street car ish light rail systems I have seen in USA with Los Angeles being one of the few places to top it. If the D2 subway plan goes through, this might even elevate Dallas ahead of Los Angele's (light rail portion only, not their heavy rail portions). DART is in no way shape or form a traditional Metro system or anything remotely close, but the portions outside of downtown get as close in USA as possible.
Ofcourse, outside of USA, this is a different story. London's Docklands Light Rail is basically a metro system.
To be clear, yes I have been and rode on all of the systems I described.
Obviously we aren't going to agree on the metro budgeting and how they should plan their next routes, so no point on continuing that conversation, but I was curious about this.
Calling Houston's system an enhanced streetcar used to be a common criticism back in the day when it first opened, but you're right that many streetcar systems in the US are like Houston's, especially closer in to the core. It's only once the lines get away from the core do most other light rail systems start to resemble heavy rail lines. SF, Portland, San Diego, Toronto, Phoenix, Twin Cities, etc., and several other light rail systems are built similar to Houston's near the core.
Calling Houston's system an enhanced streetcar used to be a common criticism back in the day when it first opened, but you're right that many streetcar systems in the US are like Houston's, especially closer in to the core. It's only once the lines get away from the core do most other light rail systems start to resemble heavy rail lines. SF, Portland, San Diego, Toronto, Phoenix, Twin Cities, etc., and several other light rail systems are built similar to Houston's near the core.
And there's fundamental reasons for this which imo are obvious and no need to dive into them. But this Inner Katy route being fully elevated . This is why I think that the argument of "if it is operated as a street car anyway than what's the point" argument is invalid. If you take a look at the history of many of the most successful transit lines, things didn't happen out of no where overnight. It was a process that began with low ridership and expansion and integration changed things over time. Even Houston's red line is better today than it was when it began particularly with portions where traffic has closed.
That's also why I take an "at least its progress" perspective on the Inner Katy route. While there is no reason to believe that METRO will electrify the line (which is entirely possible even without stopping service) given METRO's stalling history, without progress, even that opportunity won't exist.
Even those portions of the Denver and Phoenix line that are how you describe are few and far in between.
Actually the vast vast majority of LRT in Houston is deployed exactly as enhanced streetcar. Are you suggesting a Red Line extension to IAH would be built completely differently? I find that very difficult to believe. The other issue is what portion of folks going to and from IAH would have Downtown as their starting or ending point? While these days (especially compared to the 1990s) there is a significant concentration of hotels in Downtown, still only a small portion of travelers have Downtown as their O/D. And the travelers going to/from TMC and Uptown (probably the two other biggest concentrations of hotels) would have to add another 20-35 minutes to their trip. And of course very very few local residents would find it useful.
So, my position on the airport extensions is that they should ONLY be undertaken if the areas between the existing service termini and the airport essentially justify extensions on their own.
I also don't think mere elevation of a BRT busway instantly leaps into "must then do it as LRT" territory. As I've said, the service quality is essentially the same. You only should do LRT if you're really sure volumes are going to justify it, now or in the near future. That's why LRT Main Street has made more sense (even deployed as enhanced streetcar), because BRT vehicles would have a difficult time handling the volumes present on that section of the Red Line. But the Green, Purple, and Red Line extensions should have been done as BRT.
If the elevated BRT gets really high volumes, then look at conversion, as you've noted.
Here's the article about the conversion in Boston that has gotten me concerned:
The MBTA is converting from fixed wire to lithium buses in Cambridge, MA. These are the same types of buses that METRO wants to use on the Galleria BRT route and require charging at high-voltage plugs (huge downtime to detour to the plug). It's green-chic today to embrace lithium, despite the environmental water degradation in desert areas (mostly in the Global South).
Regarding the IAH connection, there is already existing rail along the Hardy Toll Road and the airport connector corridor could have been used to connect to the terminals with a station near the hotel.
Just out of curiosity, have you been to other light rail systems around the country? I ask this because the other light rail systems in the nation are usually even more street car-y than Houston (i.e. Denver). Even Calgary's system was more street car.
Dallas light rail outside of their downtown is one of the least street car ish light rail systems I have seen in USA with Los Angeles being one of the few places to top it. If the D2 subway plan goes through, this might even elevate Dallas ahead of Los Angele's (light rail portion only, not their heavy rail portions). DART is in no way shape or form a traditional Metro system or anything remotely close, but the portions outside of downtown get as close in USA as possible.
Ofcourse, outside of USA, this is a different story. London's Docklands Light Rail is basically a metro system.
To be clear, yes I have been and rode on all of the systems I described.
Obviously we aren't going to agree on the metro budgeting and how they should plan their next routes, so no point on continuing that conversation, but I was curious about this.
I have studied (due to research for my job) but not ridden many of those systems. Denver is actually only enhanced streetcar in the immediate downtown area, otherwise it has its own alignment, though I think it has mostly at-grade street crossings.
I don't know about the ones in the NE. Calgary's looked similar to Denver's, only streetcar in the downtown area. Seattle's is definitely not streetcar outside of downtown, and I think it may actually be in a tunnel for part of downtown.
Portland's is sort of streetcar-ish except in really outlying portions. It's also famous for underperforming relative to the amount of investment.
Sacramento's is only streetcar in downtown and immediately adjacent neighborhoods. I think that's true of much of the Twin Cities' system as well, though the newer line to St. Paul may be mostly streetcar.
To be clear, one reason many of these lines have more non-streetcar portions is that they chose to follow old railroad alignments, which may or may not be in the best locations to really serve neighborhoods, so it's a tradeoff.
I've only ridden the subway in Los Angeles, but their LRT strikes me as more the ideal setup if you're insisting on LRT, because it mostly eschews streetcar but still has convenient stops for many neighborhoods. This is a negative for the Inner Katy corridor, whether LRT or BRT, because its alignment makes stops inconvenient for most neighborhoods by being adjacent to the freeway and having barriers nearby like the UP tracks / street overpasses and the bayou. A stop at Heights / Yale would have been ideal - easy to get to from adjacent residential and mixed-use areas.
On a side note, you can also grade separate streetcars / trams - see Toronto and SF.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
