Texas Transit Association

The passeger rail plan offered up by County Judge Bob Eckels ten days before Houston’s light rail referendum is outlined here, along with video.

Article I:
Eckels touts alternate commuter rail plan
Says system faster, cheaper than Metro’s
By LUCAS WALL
Oct. 28, 2003 Houston Chronicle

Harris County can build a commuter rail system faster and cheaper than Metro’s light rail plan, Judge Robert Eckels said Monday, releasing a draft of a study for the U.S. 290 and Texas 249 corridors.

Eckels and numerous other Republican leaders are urging voters to reject next week’s Metropolitan Transit Authority $7.5 billion expansion plan. It calls for building $5.8 billion of rail during the next 22 years: 65 miles of light rail as well as an eight-mile commuter line to Missouri City. Metro has no rail proposed to Hempstead or Tomball by 2025.

“There is a lot of potential for commuter rail in this community,” Eckels said at a news conference at Houston TranStar. “We believe it’s a viable alternative to light rail.”

Commissioner Steve Radack, who initiated the commuter rail review, is also against Metro’s plan. But he questioned the release of the study before its completion.

“Waiting until something is done accurately is very prudent,” said Radack, whose precinct includes most of the U.S. 290 corridor. “I’m optimistic. I think it has a tremendous amount of potential. But the study isn’t complete yet, and I’m not one of those people who likes to deal with fantasy or dreams.”

Radack said it’s unwise to present an unfinished study as an alternative to Metro’s transit-expansion referendum, which includes new bus routes, HOV lanes and local roadwork.

Commuter rail utilizes heavy trains, such as those run by Amtrak, and runs at high speeds on freight railroads with an exclusive right of way. Light rail utilizes smaller trains and runs at slower speeds, often on tracks embedded in the street.

The final commuter rail report, which Commissioners Court requested July 29, is due at the court’s next meeting Nov. 4 — the same day voters decide Metro’s transit-expansion plan.

Eckels said he expects the court will authorize a more detailed study looking at other potential commuter rail corridors and moving ahead with plans on who would pay for and operate the first two proposed lines.

“There are 165 miles or more of commuter line candidates in Harris County,” Eckels said while standing behind a model of an East Coast commuter train. One coach was modified with a sticker reading, “Harris County Express.”

A countywide commuter rail network at $5 million per mile could cost less than $1 billion, Eckels said, far cheaper than the $80-million-per-mile light rail system Metro proposes. (Metro’s cost-per-mile figure has been adjusted upward for inflation; the Main Street line under construction costs $43 million per mile).

Metro supporters, however, questioned Eckels’ numbers and dismissed the notion that commuter rail alone is a solution to the region’s traffic problems. They point out a more detailed study of a commuter train to Fort Bend County puts the cost at $14 million to $19 million per mile.

Paul Mabry, spokesman for Citizens for Public Transportation, called Eckels’ pre-election maneuver “an 11th-hour Hail Mary.” CPT is the political action committee campaigning for passage of the “Metro Solutions” plan.

“We want a complete system that does something about the traffic mess we’re into,” Mabry said. “You start by addressing where the traffic is the greatest: down in the urban area. It is not up in Prairie View.”

Metro officials, while supporting the commuter rail concept, pointed out some flaws in the county’s study, including basing construction costs on having only three stations per line, each with 150 parking spaces.

John Sedlak, a Metro vice president, said the transit authority’s Park & Ride lots along U.S. 290 accommodate about 5,000 commuter-bus riders daily. Sedlak noted the county study lacks ridership and fare revenue forecasts.

“We would certainly see commuter rail as being complementary to the Metro Solutions plan but not as an alternative to it,” Sedlak said. “The light rail is very specifically addressing the needs in congested corridors where there are high densities of transit ridership.”

Eckels has urged voters to turn down Metro Solutions and let the county come back next year with a better rail proposal. He said commuter rail could be operating by 2006, much more quickly than Metro’s light rail expansion, the first piece of which wouldn’t start running until 2008.

Most important, Eckels said, is that the larger trains are a better solution to traffic woes.

“Commuter rail is safer and faster, typically, than light rail because it runs in the existing rail corridors separated from traffic so you’re not mixing with the cars on the road,” Eckels said. “It runs where congestion is worse and can provide alternates for relief on congested freeways.”

Article II:
New rail plan offers options to METRO’s light rail proposal

The new proposal for commuter rail would use existing rail lines.
By Mark Garay
ABC13 Eyewitness News
(10/27/03 - HOUSTON) — Harris County has its own idea on how to relieve traffic. County Judge Robert Eckels released a preliminary study that claims to have a mobility solution for a lot less money in a lot less time.

View thge video ABC13 “report”:http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/news/102703_local_railplan.html#.

RelatedLink 50 most recent local headlines

Everyone wants better mobility. Houston says light rail must be a part of the solution. Harris County says that may be true, but not yet.

Judge Eckels stated, “I personally believe we should vote the METRO plan down.”

Strong words from Judge Eckels. Monday he came out with a study that endorses larger commuter rail over an expanded form of light rail.

“When you run some of these METRO rails in the streets as they propose, you’re gonna make traffic worse, particularly as you head into the Greenway Plaza and the Galleria areas,” said Eckels.

Eckels says commuter rail lines are already in place, used by freight trains. He says they operate separate from streets. And he says commuter rail would be cheaper, and quicker to get online.

The county plan includes lines along Highway 290 and State Highway 249. At about 40 miles each, total capital costs would barely skim $200 million, far less than METRO’s light rail plan.

Eckels said, “METRO should have waited until that was complete so that we could look at all these together.”

“This study was done in the last 60 days. Are we supposed to be clairvoyant and anticipate the next study, and then wait until that study is done?” asked Paul Maybry of Citizens for Public Transportation.

Light rail supporters are suspect of the numbers, and the timing.

“I think it’s pretty obvious that this is only coming forward in 10 days before an election to create confusion in the minds of the voters,” Maybry told Eyewitness News.

For his part, Eckels agrees light rail could be a part of the county’s plan, and endorses transfer stations like the one downtown to tie the two together. He says the idea has a proven track record in New York, Washington DC, Florida and California.

“It is, we believe, a viable alternative to light rail, and in fact is commonly used throughout the nation,” said Eckels.

Maybry responded, “Because every city he mentioned that has commuter rail, also has light rail.”

Eckels admits no specific funding source has yet been found, and he says the county will need a partnership to make it work. Next step — the county will authorize more money for more specific studies.