Jump to content

Culberson And METRO Reach Compromise


Slick Vik

Recommended Posts

It is amazing that Metro now cannot even build rail on Post Oak Blvd. unless it is approved in a new referendum. The 2003 referendum explicitly authorized rail on Post Oak Blvd.

It seems like a blatant waste of money to demand yet another vote on this. Watch, he'll stall it for another ten years and then say "Well we need to have a vote on this!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 207
  • Created
  • Last Reply

because there are corridors in this city moving over 10 times that number of people..? in any event, like i said 2 posts above yours, i no longer have an "issue" with the line, now that the trains will apparently bring people directly up the Red line. i just figure there are many other corridors that would be more justifiable for the "highest priority rail line".

 

Lets remember that its only highest priority to Culberson and not Metro or the city. There is no way that Culberson can force Metro to doing what he wants. He isn't in the branch that executes the law. Even in the branch that he does serve there is no way you could get away with legal language that would specifically bind an entire city organization as big as Metro focus all energy on one priority.

 

This would be like.....say I have an MEP (Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing) Consultant firm working on a project. My plumber might say that his top priority is a particular pipe that conflicts with maybe some element of the architecture design. Get this though. That pipe is one pipe in one instance in a building that is enormous! As an Architect though I would respect his work and say yes it is a top priority....it isn't a top priority to the whole project! I can't stop the entire project and put all my concerns behind one consultants pipe issue which could be solved along side or further down the line when I reach that part of the building.

 

Culberson, however powerful and charitable he thinks he is, does not have the authority or power nor federal funding to mandate that they make 90A a top priority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is a light rail commuter train going to go up the Red line to wheeler station? It will have to stop at all the stations in the Med center, because there's no express rail or passing switches for most of the track. Which means that it'll be similar to the north line extension - some trains during peak hours will turn around at Fannin south, while others go all the way to sugarland/Missouri city. I'm intrigued by the Idea though of what they are wanting to make.

Are there any designs or maps or anything of this?

Wheeler is probably the worst station on the original line. My friend got held up at knifepoint there. That being said if the university line eventually goes there and the 90a commuter line goes there, there will be more eyes at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets remember that its only highest priority to Culberson and not Metro or the city. There is no way that Culberson can force Metro to doing what he wants. He isn't in the branch that executes the law. Even in the branch that he does serve there is no way you could get away with legal language that would specifically bind an entire city organization as big as Metro focus all energy on one priority.

 

But it is Metro's and the Gulf Coast Rail District's and HGAC's highest priority for commuter rail

(or certainly in the top 3 for all of those agencies and it's the only commuter rail on Metro's "current projects" list and was the only commuter rail proposed to be built by Metro as part of the 2003 Metro referendum)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, the Ft Bend Parkway is used by more than 20,000 cars per day.  In any event, I'm not sure what your issue with that is.  20,000 cars per day does not strike me as an inconsequential number and the  bond ratings agencies seem okay with it.

I actually like the Ft. Bend Parkway. It fits in perfectly to Houston's hub-and-spoke highway system..... Ft. Bend answers the big gap to the area between 59, 90, and 288.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

interesting article from 2007:

 

http://www.chron.com/opinion/editorials/article/Obstruction-Rail-opponents-legal-tactics-show-1818512.php

 

Most notably:

The request raises a familiar issue often cited by rail opponents. In a 2003 referendum, Houston voters narrowly approved a plan authorizing Metro to expand the rail system with seven additional lines, including a route, labeled Westpark, running from Wheeler Station at Main to the Hillcroft Transit Center. Opponents of rail anywhere on Richmond argue that any route except one along Westpark requires fresh approval from the voters.

Metro officials correctly contend the names of the proposed routes were general and open to change. They point to additional wording on the ballot, repeated three times: "Final scope, length of rail segments or lines or other details, together with implementation schedule, will be based upon demand and completion of the project development process, including community input."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually like the Ft. Bend Parkway. It fits in perfectly to Houston's hub-and-spoke highway system..... Ft. Bend answers the big gap to the area between 59, 90, and 288.

for the record, i like Ft Bend Parkway too. mainly for those reasons you listed.. i guess i just assumed a "top priority rail line" would correlate with the areas with the most highway traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it is Metro's and the Gulf Coast Rail District's and HGAC's highest priority for commuter rail

(or certainly in the top 3 for all of those agencies and it's the only commuter rail on Metro's "current projects" list and was the only commuter rail proposed to be built by Metro as part of the 2003 Metro referendum)

when did METRO acquire the Westpark ROW? its interesting that they wouldn't have that on the 2003 referendum as well, given the ease of making that empty ROW into rail, and exploding population to the west.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when did METRO acquire the Westpark ROW? its interesting that they wouldn't have that on the 2003 referendum as well, given the ease of making that empty ROW into rail, and exploding population to the west.

Back in 2001 iirc, HCTRA gave them the other half of the wide ROW, enough for rail

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for the record, i like Ft Bend Parkway too. mainly for those reasons you listed.. i guess i just assumed a "top priority rail line" would correlate with the areas with the most highway traffic.

 

Well, Ii think it's a combination of being feasible and serving areas with the most highway traffic. 

 

But in any event, the southwest corridor it is proposed to serve is certainly one of the areas with the very most highway traffic.  Southwest Freeway (approx. 318,000+ per day) Westpark Tollway (100,000+ per day), Fort Bend Parkway (20,000+ per day)...  I'm not sure which other corridor you think has more highway traffic.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i guess thats where we aren't seeing eye to eye..

idon't consider i69 to really be in this corridor, and i sure as heck don't consider Westpark Tollroad to be a part of this corridor. this rail line will stop over 3.5 miles short of i69, and Westpark.. that corridor is over 7 miles up the Beltway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i guess thats where we aren't seeing eye to eye..

idon't consider i69 to really be in this corridor, and i sure as heck don't consider Westpark Tollroad to be a part of this corridor. this rail line will stop over 3.5 miles short of i69, and Westpark.. that corridor is over 7 miles up the Beltway.

 

Take a look at the Gulf Coast Rail District's information regarding the proposed US90A Commuter Rail project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

OK, so I'm on board with a US90A commuter rail, partially because it connects with the light rail and it's not feasible for a "light rail commuter rail" set-up (Westpark OTOH...). However, after looking at that link, unless they want to build a new track under the Bellfort/Almeda stack, is it really a good idea to overshoot the Red Line terminus, stop, reverse to go on the track going north/south, then cross back over the existing freight line, then do all of that in reverse on the way back? I don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original referendum included a line from Wheeler Station (at Richmond/Wheeler and Main St) to the Hillcroft Transit center.  The corridor was called "Westpark"  but it was always fairly clear that the inner portion of this line would be on Richmond.

 

At some point the Inner Katy line (Downtown, Washington Ave, Heights, to the Northwest Transit Center) which was also part of the planned Phase II to be implemented by 2012 was moved back out of the plan and "Westpark" was made into the "University Line" and also continued east on Wheeler to UH/TSU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The University Line should absolutely be the top priority, it has far more ridership potential and would be much more cost effective on an operational basis than the 90A line.  

 

I really hope they can find a way to build it still.  I am in favor of the 90A line but it shouldn't even be close to priority with the University Line IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like a blatant waste of money to demand yet another vote on this. Watch, he'll stall it for another ten years and then say "Well we need to have a vote on this!"

 

I think his next tactic will be to interpret the wording of the agreement to mean that Metro has to spend all the money needed to get the 90A commuter rail line up and running before he will let them build the University Line.

 

The best thing working in Metro's favor long term is the 4,000+ high end apartments under construction in the Montrose/Midtown/Museum District area, and the overall densification of the inner loop. The reason Houston has suburban congressmen who can override city interests (something unimaginable in cities like Chicago) is that the city is so decentralized. Put some weight in the center (especially wealthy people who make demands) and that starts changing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The best thing working in Metro's favor long term is the 4,000+ high end apartments under construction in the Montrose/Midtown/Museum District area..."

 

Why would the mass of middle- to lower-class voters in Houston have any interest in building rail lines to serve the rich? I don't know too many people who can afford to live in all those high-end units being built. The poorer you are, the farther out you have to look for affordable housing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in 2001 iirc, HCTRA gave them the other half of the wide ROW, enough for rail

 

Thats backwards Metro bought the row and then sold the portion used for the toll road later. In 2014 they sold even more of the row to the FB toll road authority.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Westpark-expansion-to-proceed-with-Metro-land-sale-5281369.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats backwards Metro bought the row and then sold the portion used for the toll road later. In 2014 they sold even more of the row to the FB toll road authority.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Westpark-expansion-to-proceed-with-Metro-land-sale-5281369.php

 

From the article:

"Part of the agreement is that Metro can negotiate to buy some of the property back if it decides to build a rail line in the future. The toll road would not consume the entire width, leaving room for rail."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The best thing working in Metro's favor long term is the 4,000+ high end apartments under construction in the Montrose/Midtown/Museum District area..."

Why would the mass of middle- to lower-class voters in Houston have any interest in building rail lines to serve the rich? I don't know too many people who can afford to live in all those high-end units being built. The poorer you are, the farther out you have to look for affordable housing.

That's a strange interpretation of what I said. The wealthy have political power. Why do you think Afton Oaks single-handedly caused Metro to change its route for this line?

Middle-to-lower class voters already support rail in Houston; they were the main source of votes in the last referendum. They will support this line too because it connects major job centers where they work and destinations (the Galleria) where they play (yes middle class people do like the Galleria).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After all, there is no actual binding contract - nothing to stop the veteran lawmaker from returning to his self-appointed role as a one-man veto on Metro and nothing to stop the next mayor from setting a new agenda for the mass transit agency. Rather, the agreement provides little more than written evidence of Culberson and Metro making a promise to play nice, and we all know that politicians handle promises with the delicacy of a bull in a china shop. The only thing guaranteed is a shower of press releases to reward an elected official for doing something that should have been part of his regular job in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats backwards Metro bought the row and then sold the portion used for the toll road later. In 2014 they sold even more of the row to the FB toll road authority.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Westpark-expansion-to-proceed-with-Metro-land-sale-5281369.php

I did know that, but was writing from my phone in the parking lot after work and didn't have time to elaborate: as I understood it, METRO bought the line in 2001 then sold the "top half" to HCTRA for the tollroad. There's even a leftover rail bridge that wasn't demolished so that a light rail or commuter rail could be built. 

 

METRO bought the line pretty much out to Eagle Lake, and I always wondered why they couldn't save at least one part of it (to Wallis) and rent that out as a junker/relief route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After all, there is no actual binding contract - nothing to stop the veteran lawmaker from returning to his self-appointed role as a one-man veto on Metro and nothing to stop the next mayor from setting a new agenda for the mass transit agency. Rather, the agreement provides little more than written evidence of Culberson and Metro making a promise to play nice, and we all know that politicians handle promises with the delicacy of a bull in a china shop. The only thing guaranteed is a shower of press releases to reward an elected official for doing something that should have been part of his regular job in the first place.

 

It's a signed agreement. It's a contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a signed agreement. It's a contract.

 

Yeah it would be one thing if it was just some statement or he said it in some interview, but its now an official signed agreement by both parties involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the day before METRO, when it was called Rapid Transit, the West Alabama bus route followed West Alabama only as far out as Sheperd. The route then dropped down to Richmond Ave and followed that street all the way out just past Windsor Plaza.

So for those that are sticklers about the name, just remember that there has been a mass transit line on Richmond for decades, even if it wasn't called "The Richmond Line".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I'm going to reiterate my own personal rant from a long time ago :-)   It has to do with a puzzlement about the invisible paradise that some Afton Oaks folks have tried to preserve.  

 

Richmond through that area is a bumpy 6-lane thoroughfare with a lot of traffic, cars, buses, trucks.  

 

I would think that repaving the street, landscaping it, and having a nice little electric choo-choo train down the middle would be nicer than how it is now, especially if it reduced the number of buses.  plus, one's property value might go up if potential buyers recognized the convenience of just hopping on the train to go to a restaurant or whatever.  

 

I guess I'm just an evil liberal, or something :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I'm going to reiterate my own personal rant from a long time ago :-)   It has to do with a puzzlement about the invisible paradise that some Afton Oaks folks have tried to preserve.  

 

Richmond through that area is a bumpy 6-lane thoroughfare with a lot of traffic, cars, buses, trucks.  

 

I would think that repaving the street, landscaping it, and having a nice little electric choo-choo train down the middle would be nicer than how it is now, especially if it reduced the number of buses.  plus, one's property value might go up if potential buyers recognized the convenience of just hopping on the train to go to a restaurant or whatever.  

 

I guess I'm just an evil liberal, or something :-)

 

Your right, but the issue is the rail line that crosses Richmond right there. It would require a grade separation for the light rail, either a bridge or an underpass. I think they could make a bridge look nice.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...