Metrorail Expansion Hits Snag

[MontroseNeighborhoodCafe]

Feb. 8, 2005, 10:46PM

Metrorail expansion hits snag

Federal report leaves Houston off transit funds list, which may delay planned routes

By LUCAS WALL

Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle

Metro did not make the cut this year for a federal transportation agency's funding recommendations, putting the schedule for expansion of Houston's light rail in jeopardy.

In a report to Congress released on Tuesday, the Federal Transit Administration details rail and bus projects that it believes should get funding assistance for the fiscal year 2006. Houston MetroRail appears in a 55-page appendix listing hundreds of pending projects across the United States not ready for grants.

The "New Starts" report did not surprise Metropolitan Transit Authority officials, who said they've yet to receive a project rating from the FTA on the proposed Northline and Southeast light rail extensions. Nevertheless, they are disappointed and concerned Metro might not be able to break ground on the next rail segment in 2006 as planned.

"For people who really care about Houston and believe, as I think every intelligent person does, that transit is a necessary part of the solution to our mobility problems, it is frustrating to see the money for transit going to these other cities," said Metro board Chairman David Wolff. "It's not like the money is going to come to this city instead for highways or parks or health care."

The FTA lists 20 projects in 15 cities it would like to help fund next fiscal year. Another six are mentioned as potential funding candidates, including a third light rail line in Dallas.

Houston has long struggled to obtain federal funding for its light rail system, the first 7 1/2 -mile piece of which opened last year. Metro paid for that initial $324 million segment on its own after U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, wrote a provision into law barring any federal grants because the transit authority had not obtained voter approval to build rail.

After Metro passed a 2003 referendum calling for an 80-mile rail network by 2025, DeLay and other congressional critics dropped their opposition to federal funding, though they have continued to voice concerns over whether investing in light rail is a wise use of taxpayer dollars.

Tuesday's report from the FTA is not the final word on which cities obtain $1.53 billion in transit capital grants next fiscal year. The report is a recommendation to Congress, which crafts the transportation appropriations bill later this year.

"They still have an opportunity to receive funding this year as long as their submission is on track and the FTA approves it," said DeLay spokeswoman Shannon Flaherty.

DeLay's office has been informed by the FTA that it received a revised application from Metro in November and is still evaluating it, Flaherty said.

Metro submitted its application for federal funding by last summer's deadline. It wants to extend the Main Street light rail line to Northline Mall and build a second line from downtown to the southeast side.

Without a favorable recommendation from the administration, transit projects were ineligible for funding in the president's budget for the fiscal year that starts Oct. 1. President Bush's budget was released Monday.

Metro officials over the past few months have been responding to numerous questions from the FTA on their application and waiting for a rating. The FTA rates rail projects on criteria including construction and operating costs, land use, mobility improvements, and environmental benefits.

FTA spokesman Paul Griffo did not return a phone call Tuesday seeking an explanation for the delay in rating Houston's rail plans. Typically projects submitted by the August deadline appear in the February report to Congress, though not all projects with a recommended rating are budgeted funds the first year they make the document.

If the FTA doesn't soon rate Metro's proposal, the authority could ask the Houston-area congressional delegation to fund light rail expansion.

That occurred in this fiscal year's bill, when Metro got $8.5 million to continue planning efforts

[MidtownCoog]

Not sure if I should blame DeLay, or the losers who run Metro.

I think we can start by rebuilding Metro from the Top down, even all the way to those rogue bus drivers.

[citykid09]

It's all way something.

[Talbot]

god, that irritates the hell out of me.

[Sunstar]

I don't think anyone should be surprised about this. Despite the referendum and everything that Metro has done to make light rail a reality here, it's unlikely that we'll ever get any help from the FTA. Nevertheless, we've gotten this far without a single federal dollar and we have a pro-rail mayor. I don't consider us beat just yet.

[Talbot]

^true, I am glad also that the congressional delegation is trying to help us out a bit. But I have no clue why the fools in Washington can't help us out.

[VelvetJ]

I still smell a rat. Is it typical for the FTA to drag their feet like this?

Also, note Tom Delay "stopped" his opposition indeed, but he hasn't helped Metro with the progression like we were led to believe. His version of "helping" is not having any organized opposition, instead of actually going to bat for Houston.

This is disappointing but not discouraging.

[Lowbrow]

I still smell a rat. Is it typical for the FTA to drag their feet like this?

Also, note Tom Delay "stopped" his opposition indeed, but he hasn't helped Metro with the progression like we were led to believe. His version of "helping" is not having any organized opposition, instead of actually going to bat for Houston.

This is disappointing but not discouraging.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I wonder how Delay would feel about rail to sugarland? Ahh he doesnt care about his constituancy, what am I thinking. I'm so old fashioned sometimes.

[VelvetJ]

Not sure if I should blame DeLay, or the losers who run Metro.

I think we can start by rebuilding Metro from the Top down, even all the way to those rogue bus drivers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

MidtownCoog, could you elaborate on this? What could David Wolff do better? What type of views or actions should the leadership of Metro have and do so they wouldn't be classified as 'losers'? What did they do wrong to contribute to this refusal of Federal Funds?

[kjb434]

I wish HCTRA and METRO can form a coalition so that some Toll Road funds can be diverted to light rail initiatives. Legally it would take an act of the Texas State legislature to do this, but it makes sense since HCTRA is rolling in toll revenues especially from the West Belt. Both entities are in charge of promoting mobility in and around Houston.

[houstonsemipro]

My honest opinon is they trying to hurt houston. It's like houston always be put in the mist of things, and it's not right. We're the 4th largest city in america, hell we should get things first then anyone in texas. This is so ____y! I'm tried of people putting houston on the back burner.

[N Judah]

Well, this is definitely a turning point. In which direction remains to be seen...

[GovernorAggie]

I think that Houston can improve its application to FTA by making these more than just rail projects. The New Starts criteria involves the effects on the environment, land use, and, yes, mobility improvement.

My suggestion is that METRO and the City get together and propose that every 1/2-mile radius of every planned rail station become a TIRZ district. That would show FTA that Houston is taking a more active approach to the full development of its transit lines.

I know of four cities that got money--NYC, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, and Charlotte. As you all know, I'm most familiar with Charlotte, so I went to the Observer's site today and saw that Charlotte got $199 million from the Feds for its first rail line. Even before the Feds decision was made, they were so confident that they had already awarded train bids to Siemens and had already condemned and bought land for the rail and parking lots.

The most important statement in the article was from Jenna Dorn, who heads FTA. She said (paraphrased) that Charlotte had become a national model for getting private development investment along its rail lines. In other words, they're doing all they can to make the rail line as feasible as possible (and this is despite the very poor ridership forecasts, IMO).

Charlotte has zoning and used it for station area plans around each station. Since Houston doesn't have zoning, the TIRZ could work, and actually work better than a station area plan. And if the Planning Dept. (hopefully) picks back up the area planning initiatives of last year, then that could be another tool to make Houston's rail lines a no-brainer for getting help from the Feds.

[713 To 214]

Well, this is definitely a turning point.  In which direction remains to be seen...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think the handwriting is on the wall.

[bachanon]

DeLay's office has been informed by the FTA that it received a revised application from Metro in November and is still evaluating it, Flaherty said.

this is the issue.

[MidtownCoog]

What could David Wolff do better

How about finding a way to get things done?

In the private sector, you drop the ball, you get fired.

In Metro, you can lie about your degrees, wreck your company car, have proposals fail, and still get paid.

Simply amazing.

[713 To 214]

How about finding a way to get things done?

In the private sector, you drop the ball, you get fired.

In Metro, you can lie about your degrees, wreck your company car, have proposals fail, and still get paid.

Simply amazing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Those are very Naive statements. Honestly, do you think sometimes before you post?

[kjb434]

GovernerAggie: Very good point. TIRZ concept would have shown the FTA the forward thinking for the needs of Houston and future economic development. Maybe you can suggest this to Metrol? Maybe start sending constant emails to Metro, Mayor, some other officials.

They may be able to add an addendum to the Report.

[UrbaNerd]

CONDEMN, AGAIN!

[VelvetJ]

I think that Houston can improve its application to FTA by making these more than just rail projects.  The New Starts criteria involves the effects on the environment, land use, and, yes, mobility improvement.

My suggestion is that METRO and the City get together and propose that every 1/2-mile radius of every planned rail station become a TIRZ district.  That would show FTA that Houston is taking a more active approach to the full development of its transit lines.

Call me naive but I truly believe David Wollf and most of Metro want to expand rail. GovernorAggie, you make it sound so obvious and simple. Is it your opinion that they just didn't think of these things? I wonder why no one at Metro thought of this? Or did they? What would prevent them from including something like TIRZ districts if it were to be such a factor in the approval process? Are those at Metro that incompetent? Or could there possibly be something else at play here?

[GovernorAggie]

VelvetJ,

I mentioned those ideas because it seems to me that METRO has been trying to answer the call of the congressmen here by trying to show how the rail lines would specifically reduce congestion, when the truth of the matter is that rail does NOT really reduce congestion. It just provides a 'viable' alternative to car travel. I mentioned Charlotte because the rail line that they won funding for parallels I-77, the busiest road in both Carolinas. I-77 is knocking on 200,000+ cars a day on a 6-lane freeway that is clogged a good chunk of the day (When some classmates and I went out into the city to do field work, there was so much traffic in the middle of the day that someone said "Don't these people have jobs?!"). What's worse is the state of North Carolina likely won't widen that part of I-77 until 2025-2030, when traffic will easily be over 250,000 cars a day.

That rail line will not even make a scratch in the congestion on I-77, even with its best ridership forecasts. And the project has also ballooned from $371 million to $427 million. Funny thing is that this line is supposed to be one of five that were all approved by Charlotte voters in 1998 as part of a $1 billion rail/busway system paid for by a 1/2-cent sales tax (much like what funds METRO). The sales tax vote also established CATS--just like METRO, the local transit agency, which took over for the city's DOT.

What impressed the Feds, however, is the amount of work that's been done concerning developing the land around the transit stations. I feel that Houston would be a hands-down winner with that extra ace.

So I think the problem with METRO may just be too narrow of a focus, but I could be wrong. They may have looked at land use-type planning around the stations, but I don't know what extent they may have gone to.

Just in case anyone was wondering, I was a planner for the government there, and I think that Charlotte and Houston have more in common than people would think.

kjb434, I just applied for a planning job wiith METRO . If I got on, I would try my best to emphasize more collaboration with the planning department and even MUD districts and local improvement districts like Greenspoint and Uptown Houston.

[london0868]

I think metro should cancell all of its relationships with the outlying areas of the metro Houston area and only focus on mobility within the city limits. They should then use the left over money for rail only. So much of their money is being used for road projects in the suburbs, it would be nice to use those funds within the city limits only. I would also cancell all park n ride service from those outlying areas and as I said focus on mobility within the city limits. This would force folks in the suburbs to realize how much metro is needed in the region and then maybe pressure could be put on Tom Delay to get out of office. Just my thoughts.

[713 To 214]

I think metro should cancell all of its relationships with the outlying areas of the metro Houston area and only focus on mobility within the city limits.  They should then use the left over money for rail only.  So much of their money is being used for road projects in the suburbs, it would be nice to use those funds within the city limits only.  I would also cancell all park n ride service from those outlying areas and as I said focus on mobility within the city limits.  This would force folks in the suburbs to realize how much metro is needed in the region and then maybe pressure could be put on Tom Delay to get out of office.  Just my thoughts.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Theoretically, I like that approach. Realistically, it won't work. . . Houston's city limits are infinite.

[ssullivan]

The big problem if Metro ends service to everything outside the Houston city limits - they lose a lot of their most heavily used routes - park and ride service. And those DO remove thousands of cars from the freeways. Service to some lots, especially Addicks and Kingsland on the Katy Freeway, Monroe and Fuqua on the Gulf, and Kuykendahl on the North, is so popular that the lots are overflowing most days and Metro keeps having to add more parking spaces and more buses to those routes. Why anger all of those passengers, who are paying a lot more than a $1 local bus fare for the service, by saying "we're not going to serve outlying areas anymore?" And think of the impact of all those cars being put back on the freeways during rush hour. Many of the park and ride lots with the heaviest usage are well outside the city limits. Keep in mind that those outlying areas also contribute a very significant amount of Metro's local sales tax revenue. Eliminating them from Metro would mean less money would be available for inner-city transit projects than there is now. I agree that too much is being spent on road improvements, however, Metro has been reducing the amounts redirected to road improvements and wants to phase it out completely. But even with those road projects, the bulk of Metro's money is being spent on transit service within Houston, not outlying suburbs.

I just got home from a day trip to Dallas (don't ask) and read the article in the Chronicle about this just a few minutes ago. But I did first learn of it early this morning on the local news on NPR. The good thing is that this isn't the end of the line for Metro - it's just a "DeLay" at this point. However I'm suspicious of the involvement in some way of two Congressmen, both of which will be getting rather nasty letters from me next week concerning this. Even if DeLay and Culberson haven't campaigned against Metro, they haven't campaigned for rail expansion either in Congress and that's just as bad. I encourage everyone on this board who supports expansion of mass transit in Houston to write both of these Congressmen, as well as the other members of the Houston delegation. Maybe if they get enough backlash they *might* help out a little.

From what I know about some of the people involved with this inside Metro, I don't think the problem is with Metro or its staff. I think the problem is in Washington and our lack of quality representation there.

[Talbot]

I emailed DeLay about the issue about a week ago and still haven't recieved an email back.

I think that they'll be recieving quite a few emails from me.

[N Judah]

Heh...that reminds me of the scene in Fahrenheit 9/11 where Michael Moore interviews some guy in Flint about its economic troubles...the guy says with absolute sincerity, "But George W. Bush *knows* about this corner! I sent him an E-MAIL!"

[KinkaidAlum]

Seriously, in fairness to METRO, what more could we/they possibly do to impress D.C.?

So sure, Charlotte was out awarding bids and doing other things in anticipation of getting the funding. Big Deal.

All we did was BUILD AN ENTIRE FIRST LINE without federal help, fight off a horrible campaign financed by the folks that have bought our reps like DeLay and Culberson (developers, home builders, tort reformers, contractors, etc...), and win in an election that aggressively called for expanding light rail service.

Oh, and as for TIRZ claims, we've already done that on the first line. Compare midtown today to midtown of 5-10 years ago. Check out buying a loft downtown and you'll find you'll receive over a decade remaining on no taxes. That can save a chunk of change over time.

Call me jaded, but this whole ordeal stinks of foul play. Someone's back is getting scratched by our "rejection" and it sure isn't the citizens of Houston.

[MidtownCoog]

Those are very Naive statements. Honestly, do you think sometimes before you post?

Obviously you don't remember all the Shirly DeLibero fiascos. She even lied about what college degrees she had.

And since I pay Metro tax, I expect a little more than never ending construction projects.

[GovernorAggie]

Seriously, in fairness to METRO, what more could we/they possibly do to impress D.C.?

So sure, Charlotte was out awarding bids and doing other things in anticipation of getting the funding. Big Deal.

All we did was BUILD AN ENTIRE FIRST LINE without federal help, fight off a horrible campaign financed by the folks that have bought our reps like DeLay and Culberson (developers, home builders, tort reformers, contractors, etc...), and win in an election that aggressively called for expanding light rail service.

Oh, and as for TIRZ claims, we've already done that on the first line. Compare midtown today to midtown of 5-10 years ago. Check out buying a loft downtown and you'll find you'll receive over a decade remaining on no taxes. That can save a chunk of change over time.

Call me jaded, but this whole ordeal stinks of foul play. Someone's back is getting scratched by our "rejection" and it sure isn't the citizens of Houston.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its true that METRO took a lot of initiative, but if I remember correctly, they were planning on asking FTA for funding on the CURRENT rail line as a refund, as well as help on the future lines. They haven't even gotten that money, otherwise we would have heard about it.

As far as the TIRZ goes, was the midtown stuff because of the rail line? I'm not familiar with that situation but someone else might. What I was talking about was making the TIRZ a part of the New Starts application.

[MidtownCoog]

Midtown TIRZ was around before the rail was even voted on.