prepared by Christof Spieler, cspieler@ctchouston.org, February 14, 2006. Last updated March 13, 2006.
What is the Universities Line?
The Universities Line is a proposed East-West light rail line that would extend from the Post Oak area through Greenway Plaza, Neartown, Midtown, and the Third Ward to the University of Houston. It is part of the METRO Solutions plan for expanding transit in the Houston region.
Were will the line be located?
METRO is currently studying alignment options and has not reached a decision yet. The west end of the line will be just outside the 610 loop at South Rice, near the Galleria. The east end will be at the University of Houston. The line will cross the Main Street light rail line at Wheeler. East of Main Street, alignments along Elgin, Alabama, and Wheeler are bering considered. West of Main, the options are Richmond or Westpark/59.
METRO's website includes maps showing the potential alignments: east of Main (pdf) and west of Main.
When will decisions be made? When will construction start?
METRO intends to choose an alignment by the end of 2006, following a technical study and community input. Design and engineering would continue for another 2 years; construction would start in late 2008 and the line would be completed in 2012. See METRO's website for a more detailed schedule and an outline of the process (pdf file).
Will I have a chance to have public input?
Yes. METRO will meet with community groups and business groups and hold open meetings. There will also be formal public hearings to conclude each phase of the process. METRO also has a form on their website for comments or questions.
What destinations would the Universities Line serve?
The Universities line is intended to serve two major employment centers -- Greenway Plaza and the University of Houston / Texas Southern University. It will also serve the Post Oak area, either directly or through a transfer. The line is also intended to serve the University of St. Thomas, the Menil Collection, retail and restaurant areas, and residential neighborhoods including Neartown and the Third Ward.
The Universities line will also be part of a larger transit system. It will connect to three other light rail or bus rapid transit lines -- the Uptown/West Loop line, the existing Main Street Line, and the Southeast Line. These lines will link the Universities Line to Downtown, the Texas Medical Center, the Museum District, Reliant Park, commuter bus and rail services in most of Houston's freeway corridors, and neighborhoods including the East Side, Southeast Houston, and the Near North Side. All of these line are scheduled to be open when the Universities line starts operating in 2012. By 2025, METRO plans to extend these lines to add service to other areas including Greenspoint, the Heights, Gulfgate, and both airports.
For more information on the overall system, see the CTC fact sheet.
Why is light rail any better than the buses that run on Richmond now?
Light rail offers faster, more reliable, and more convenient service than buses. Buses get stuck in traffic jams along with cars; light rail has its own lanes. Buses wait as boarding passengers fumble for change; light rail stations have ticket machines so passengers pay before boarding. Buses wait at red lights; light rail gets signal priority. All this adds up to a considerable reduction in travel times. Light rail service would also be more frequent than the current bus service, with trains every 6-12 minutes. Light rail is more comfortable than local bus, with a smoother ride and nicer stops, and it's much easier to use for the elderly, the handicapped, parents with strollers, and bike riders because there is no step from the platform to the train.
It is possible to eliminate some of these issues by investing money to improve bus service. But to use bus technology to solve the biggest problem with local bus service - the slow speed and unpredictable travel times -- requires the implementation of full BRT with reserved lanes, which is every bit as disruptive as light rail and almost as expensive. High quality transit isn't cheap.
Local buses are an important for those who rely on public transit. But light rail is a much more convenient and comfortable service that also appeals to those who have the choice of driving.
Shouldn't we be building light rail to the suburbs and to the airports instead?
Many other light rail systems, like the Plano line in Dallas, were built to bring suburban commuters into the city. Houston has already built an extensive HOV lane and park-and-ride network (map) to meet that need, and these buses are carrying 40,000 trips a day. METRO plans to further expand this network and add more service.
It only makes sense to build rail to the suburbs if it would attract significantly more ridership than the buses; since light rail service would be no faster, no more frequent, and no more convenient that's unlikely.
But, away from the Main Street line, there is no existing high-quality transit service serving the business centers, institutions, and neighborhoods inside the Loop. This is the need METRO is trying to fill with the Universities line.
METRO's 2025 plan includes light rail service to both airports. But airports do not generate nearly as many riders as business centers or universities. Light rail to Hobby or IAH would be more costly than the Universities line while serving attracting less ridership.
Didn't the 2003 METRO Solutions referendum specifiy that this line would be on Westpark?
METRO was calling what is now the Universities line the Westpark line. But there was no statement that the Westpark line would be on Westpark for its entire length, just that it would run between Wheeler Station (which is on Wheeler, the continuation of Richmond) and the Hillcroft Transit Center (which is on Westpark). METRO also made clear that studies would need to be conducted to determine exact alignments. No study had been conducted on the Westpark line before the vote. That study will begin now, and it will determine which of multiple possible alignments in the Westpark corridor will be chosen; Richmond is one of those alignments. METRO cannot get federal funding unless it shows it has evaluated all the alternatives. In any case, Westpark ends at Kirby, so between there and Main Street the tracks cannot follow Westpark.
It's important to note that no other form of transportation project requires voter approval. Toll roads, freeways, and street widenings proceed with no election and oftenh with only minimal public input.
Many other cities have light rail running on abandoned railroad tracks or in the center of freeways. Why not here?
Houston does not have many abandoned railroad lines. There is one, however, along Westpark, and METRO owns much of it already. An existing right-of-way like this is usually the least expensive place to put a light rail line, and it does not displace traffic lanes. Westpark is an option which METRO will be considering.
However, the Universities line is intended to serve business centers, institutions, and neighborhoods. To do this, light rail has to go to where the office buildings, universities, museums, restaurants, apartments, and houses are, and the stations have to be in pedestrian-friendly locations. Sometimes, an existing right of way is in the right place. Often, it is not. Westpark, for example, is across the freeway from Greenway Plaza; Richmond is right in the center of that office complex.
Why not run elevated or in subway?
Light rail is capable of running either elevated or in a subway. Some sections of grade-separated line, or short overpasses over busy streets, may be appropriate on the Universities line. But elevated track brings problems as well; some object to elevated tracks on aesthetic grounds, and the support columns themselves -- which may be 6 feet wide -- still take up space. An elevated station is big: 3 stories tall, 50 feet wide, 200 feet long, with deep support beams and multiple escalators, stairs, and elevators. That's a big structure to put in the middle of a neighborhood.
It's also important to note that grade separation is expensive Ð elevated structures are a least twice as much per mile to build as tracks in the street, and tunnels cost at least 4 times as much. Since cost-effectiveness standards are a big part of getting federal funding, making a line more expensive without increasing ridership correspondingly can mean no federal funds, and without that money METRO can't afford to build much rail.
Alternate technologies don't solve the problem. While supporters of monorail and mini-metro claim otherwise, nobody has managed to build elevated transit of any sort for less than elevated light rail. An unlike light rail, which can combine elevated sections where required with less expensive ground level segments elsewhere, a monorail ine has to be elevated along its entire length.
Grade-separated transit systems are a useful technology. In dense urban settings, on very busy lines, or on long routes where high speeds are critical, there may be no other choice. For the Universities line, the options should be considered. But considerable segments of ground level rail will likely be part of the solution for aesthetic and cost reasons.
What will rail do to businesses?
Business owners have good reasons to fear the effects of rail construction. But rail can also bring customers. On Main Street -- as in other light rail systems across the country -- people use light rail to go out to eat and to shop. Across the country, there are many examples of retail and dining areas that have thrived because rail has enabled people to get there easily.
But the construction that precedes the opening of a rail line can keep customers away. This was a major problem Downtown, where many area streets were under construction at the same time as the rail line. But transit agencies and business groups can take measures to minimize the impact. Construction can be done in short segments or overnight to shorten the time streets are torn up. Agencies can use signage, coupon flyers, and shuttle buses to attract customers during construction. It might even be reasonable to give business loans or grants to keep them in business if patronage drops during construction.
Is light rail safe?
The Main Street line has become infamous for car-train accidents. But it's important to keep that in perspective. There were 50 accidents on the Main Sreet line in 2005; Houston had 13,000 freeway accidents in the same time (and that doesn't include crashes on city streets). There has been one fatality on the Main Street line in 2 years; the Houston area averages a traffic fatality daily. Most of the Main Street accidents have been no more than fender-benders; has they occurred on a freeway they never would have made the news. In fact, there were more accidents a year on Main Street before rail was built than there have been since.
Safety improvements on the Main Street line after it opened cut the accident rate. Other design measures -- for example, left turn lanes with left turn signals -- on future lines could cut the rate further.
For pedestrians, light rail trains -- which do not sverve out of their lanes, do not accelerate abruptly, and do not run lights -- are much safer than cars.
What about the street trees and esplanades?
Where a street is wide enough, street trees and light rail go together well. Main Street now has more trees than it did before rail was built, and in New Orleans streetcars ran beneath a canopy of live oaks. On narrower streets, choices have to be made between preserving green space, preserving traffic lanes, and avoiding the need to buy additional property. Regardless of which option is chosen, the technology exists to move fully grown trees and replant them. Green space can also be combined with the tracks themselves; in New Orleans, the Canal Street streetcar, opened in 2004, has grass growing between the rails.
On Main Street, we have only one traffic lane each way with no left turns. Will that happen elsewhere?
Main Street was a special case: major parallel streets exist a block or two away on either side, and left turns had been illegal for years. Travis, Milam, Fannin, and San Jacinto had more than enough capacity to carry the traffic that was carried on Main, so community groups were able to convince METRO to keep only one lane of traffic in each direction. This allowed wider sidewalks, landscaping, and more trees. Main is now more attractive and more friendly to pedestrians than it was before, and the parallel streets remain uncongested. The same solution does not apply to other corridors. In San Jose, for example, light rail runs in a major arterial, and the design preserved two traffic lanes in each direction in addition to left turn lanes with left turn signals at intersections. METRO and community groups would have to work together to find the right solution for Richmond, but it is unlikely to be the same as Main Street. As part of the federal study process, METRO is required to look at the impact of rail on traffic.
What about noise?
Light rail trains are quiet, making less noise than a bus or car traffic. Main Street line trains do sound horns at intersections, but those horns are not much louder than car horns (and much more pleasant). As part of the federal study process, METRO is required to look at noise and vibration issues.
Won't rail bring crime?
Frankly, transit crime is more of a scare tactic than a reality. Crime does occur in stations and on trains. But thanks to transit police patrols and surveillance cameras, transit facilities tend to be safer than the surrounding neighborhoods. And cities with light rail have not seen crime moving from high-crime neighborhoods to low-crime neighborhoods. Criminals, after all, can drive.
What about flooding?
Light rail does not inherently increase or decrease flooding on the streets it runs on. Streets are designed with a crown in the center to drain water to the gutters, so light rail tracks are generally in the highest part of the street. That's no different than the street would be without tracks. However, in conjunction with rail construction, it is possible to upgrade storm sewers to actually reduce flooding. Street flooding -- that is, several inches of water standing in the center of the street -- can definitely shut down a street-level light rail system. However, even in rainy Houston, that's an infrequent occurance, and when the trains aren't moving nothing else is either. Elevated rail wouldn't be shut down by flooding, but that's of little use to riders if they cross the water to reach stations. As part of the federal study process, METRO is required to look at flooding issues.
What will rail do to property values?
Generally, studies indicate a slight rise in residential property values and a sometimes significant rise in commercial property values around stations. There may be exceptions, of course, in particular residential properties that are directly adjacent to unsightly structures like park-and-ride lots and overpasses.
How much will the Universities line cost to build?
The Main Street light rail line cost about $50 million a mile, including tracks, strete rebuilding, stations, and trains. The entire length of the Universities line is less than 9 miles, so it would probably cost $400-$500 million. METRO will consider costs in its study. The $1 billion number sometimes mentioned by rail opponents appears to be fictional.
Where will the money come from?
The federal government, through the Federal Transit Authority's New Starts program, is expected to pay half of the cost. The rest will be funded by METRO through its existing sales tax revenue. No tax increase is involved.
Doesn't light rail lose money?
All transit systems in the United States require public subsidy to cover their operating costs. Most cities operating light rail find that their cost per passenger mile is lower than for their bus system. Transit is not unique in requiring public subsidy; roads and highways are subsidized through property taxes and gas taxes.