METRO thinking of buying the MKT land inside 610

[kf5nd]

The City was going to turn the abandoned MKT railroad right of way into a bike & hike trail. Now we hear on page B7 of today's Chronicle that METRO wants it for the 290 train:

Aug. 22, 2007, 9:47PM
Metro may buy former rail bed
By RAD SALLEE
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle

The Metropolitan Transit Authority board today will consider the purchase of a former rail bed between downtown and the 610 North Loop, as well as sites for new Park & Ride lots in Katy and Pearland.

Metro plans a commuter rail line from near U.S. 290 and Hempstead Highway to a future terminal for trains and buses north of downtown, although an exact route has not been announced.

Metro spokeswoman Raequel Roberts refused Wednesday to discuss the transit agency's interest in the property or provide a map of it before today's meeting, set for 1 p.m. at 1900 Main.

The 6.6-mile former Missouri Kansas Texas Railroad right of way no longer has tracks on it and is owned by the Texas Department of Transportation.

Union Pacific Railroad officials have said a UP right of way between those same locations has too much freight traffic to be shared with Metro for transit.

Union Pacific spokesman Joe Arbona said Wednesday that the former MKT route runs generally north of the UP tracks.

Arbona added that he does not think commuter rail on it would interfere with UP operations.

Texas Department of Transportation spokeswoman Janelle Gbur said TxDOT has a letter of intent from the city of Houston to purchase the right of way, possibly for a hike and bike trail.

TxDOT officials were unaware of Metro's interest in it, Gbur said.

Source: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5076637.html

My question is... can't we have both? Why not have the train and bike trail, which are next to each other in the Hempstead Corridor, simply continue on in the same manner inside Loop 610 on the old MKT land?

I don't think it has to be either-or, as long as there is enough room. 14 feet is all the bike need, roughly.

[Ed Browne]

It seemed inevitable that the MKT would be recaptured as rail given the proposed location for the downtown transit center. People in the Heights will likely fight this tooth and nail, at least judging from past meetings that I've attended where this idea has come up. At the risk of making some of my friends unhappy, I think that it's a good idea.

In terms of sharing the area with bicyclists, I think it depends upon the type of transit. Will it be commuter rail or LRT? My opinion is that LRT would be significantly more bike friendly, but commuter rail might be more appropriate for US290. In either case, there should be a barrier between the bike lanes and the rail lines. It could double as a noise barrier for the affected neighborhoods.

[christof]

More on my blog, Intermodality

[Bob]

When I got to the METRO board meeting this afternoon and thanked Rad Sallee for the heads-up in his article this morning, he alerted me that METRO had withdrawn this agenda item (since this morning).

I went ahead and addressed the Eureka-MKT corridor in my public comments anyway. I said essentially this:

It is reasonable for METRO to buy this valuable corridor land to preserve it for future use.

However, there are several transit and transportation options on the table, including a hike-and-bike trail, street cars, light rail, or commuter rail. Each of these opportunities has different benefits and will affect the adjacent neighborhoods differently.

And the neighborhoods matter: the Eureka-MKT corridor runs through the heart of Cottage Grove, Timbergrove Manor, Heights, and First Ward. These neighbors care about what happens to the MKT and deserve to be involved in its planning.

CTC is committed to the simple idea that this project and others are better when neighborhoods are directly involved early in transportation planning.

We fully expect that any decision to buy this land will not short circuit or bypass a full and public planning process for the Eureka-MKT corridor.

After the meeting, when Rad asked why the item was pulled, David Wolff said "it was premature to put it on the agenda" but confirmed that METRO is interested in buying the right of way. When Rad asked him whether there's room for a bike trail, Wolff said he thought "most of the ROW is 100' except for a few narrow points" and "you can do a lot of things with 100 feet of right of way".

It turns out that the right of way is ample west of Yale, but is really narrow in some spots east of Yale, especially in First Ward. As any planning goes forward, it will be incumbent on METRO and the City to work closely with these neighbors to address their concerns and balance the interests.

[Howard Bingham]

The City was going to turn the abandoned MKT railroad right of way into a bike & hike trail. Now we hear on page B7 of today's Chronicle that METRO wants it for the 290 train...

My question is... can't we have both? Why not have the train and bike trail, which are next to each other in the Hempstead Corridor, simply continue on in the same manner inside Loop 610 on the old MKT land?

I don't think it has to be either-or, as long as there is enough room. 14 feet is all the bike need, roughly.

In many other areas of the US, there are a number of locations that support both light-rail or commuter rail within the same row, separation being not more than a 5 foot high fence for safety to isolate pedestrian & bike traffic from that of rail.

The 100 ft. width that exists over most of the area (With exception of several locations near the CBD) easily would support both applications.

IIRC: There is a narrow parallel street in much of the area close to the CBD, perhaps someone could update existing maps with some detail to identify areas which are not wide enough to support both rail & hike/bike applications.

Perhaps it would be best if the Metro bod would work closer to those at city hall & the county commissioners on planning (This is how the MKT row west of Loop 610 got removed from any rail application.). Commuter Rail west of Loop 610 could have been built at a fraction of what the 22 wide lanes of concrete & would have been more environmental friendly..

Howard Bingham

[JimMackey]

The MKT ROW and other potential transit corridors in the area were studied by the city just 3-4 years ago. There is good info and maps in the study.

http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/plann ... /home.html

Also, the MKT ROW from east of Houston Ave, under I10/I45 and under Hogan sits deep within the White Oak Bayou floodplain/floodway. The remains of the old MKT trestle under Hogan has been repeatedly battered by floodwaters.

Why not do a subway from the NW Transit Ctr in to downtown?

Jim Mackey

[Howard Bingham]

The MKT ROW and other potential transit corridors in the area were studied by the city just 3-4 years ago. There is good info and maps in the study.

http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/plann ... /home.html

Also, the MKT ROW from east of Houston Ave, under I10/I45 and under Hogan sits deep within the White Oak Bayou floodplain/floodway. The remains of the old MKT trestle under Hogan has been repeatedly battered by floodwaters.

Why not do a subway from the NW Transit Ctr in to downtown?

Jim Mackey

--
Simple, both White Oak & Buffalo Bayous would flood any tunnels..

Were you here when Tropical Storm Allison flooded the downtown tunnel system & essentially put the eastern 2/3 rds of Houston under water for close to a week, with many buildings requiring years to dry out & repaired.? Parking garages in the civic center were also submerged.

IIRC, Metro has studied the former MKT route many years ago, but do not recall how far back.. At one time there was consideration to run commuter rail in the long dismantled MKT row that we can thank former Houston Mayor Bob Lanier for essentially giving away the row to TxDOT for freeway expansion (Before the current widening fiasco was begun.).

Maybe others have hard dates..

Howard Bingham