METRO Budget 2011

[ricco67]

Metro just released their proposed budget. Seems that they're pondering cutting back a bit on the airport express, changing some bus routes, but also building some bike paths near some of the Park and Ride lots.

Interesting stuff, as far as budget reads go.

[DrLan34]

Found this in the report...

"Revenue Opportunities - Pursue advertising on buses."

i like it.

Metro just released their proposed budget. Seems that they're pondering cutting back a bit on the airport express, changing some bus routes, but also building some bike paths near some of the Park and Ride lots.

Interesting stuff, as far as budget reads go.

[DrLan34]

Oh ya, one more, i think i remember some people saying bus was almost as reliable as rail (or something of the sort).

Under Customer Service they put:

Service reliability (On-Time) - Weighted Average 69% for Bus; 96% for Rail.

Found this in the report...

"Revenue Opportunities - Pursue advertising on buses."

i like it.

[ricco67]

Found this in the report...

"Revenue Opportunities - Pursue advertising on buses."

i like it.

I'm not THAT fond of that.

While I appreciate that they can get more revenue, would they be able to cherry pick who they wish to advertise with?

To be honest, I don't want buses to advertise the upcoming attractions of the local genetlmen's club.

Odds are they will have to take whoever has the money or else we will see lawsuits for discrimination.

[JamesL]

Seems that they're pondering cutting back a bit on the airport express, changing some bus routes, but also building some bike paths near some of the Park and Ride lots.

I didn't see any mention of Airport Direct or bike paths. I've heard board members say that the airport service will be reevaluated and I know the Energy Corridor is pondering the expansion of bike paths, but that's not related to METRO. Where did you see that?

[samagon]

I'm not THAT fond of that.

While I appreciate that they can get more revenue, would they be able to cherry pick who they wish to advertise with?

To be honest, I don't want buses to advertise the upcoming attractions of the local genetlmen's club.

Odds are they will have to take whoever has the money or else we will see lawsuits for discrimination.

hopefully, it can be like cigarette adds, and they can say we don't want to advertise that kind of stuff to kids.

[ricco67]

I didn't see any mention of Airport Direct or bike paths. I've heard board members say that the airport service will be reevaluated and I know the Energy Corridor is pondering the expansion of bike paths, but that's not related to METRO. Where did you see that?

Page 132 and 135 respectively. "Find" feature on PDF is your friend.

[kylejack]

To be honest, I don't want buses to advertise the upcoming attractions of the local genetlmen's club.

Odds are they will have to take whoever has the money or else we will see lawsuits for discrimination.

"strip club" is not a protected class in discrimination law. Protected classes are things like gender, age, etc.

[TheNiche]

"strip club" is not a protected class in discrimination law. Protected classes are things like gender, age, etc.

Morals clauses are commonplace in contract law, and the effective prohibition of sexually-oriented businesses or even just ordinary bars occurs in many municipalities. I don't think that there'd be a problem, here, if METRO wanted to be picky about the content of ads.

[IHB2]

Metro just released their proposed budget. Seems that they're pondering cutting back a bit on the airport express, changing some bus routes, but also building some bike paths near some of the Park and Ride lots.

In 2006 I got some incredulous looks from METRO planners when I suggested that, rather than run the Univ Line down the Westpark old rail ROW - a ridership desert inside the loop, that the ROW would make a perfect linear hike/bike park from the Hillcroft TC to Montrose or Main. Then the Univ Line could remain on a route west of the loop where people live and work and turn west of Fountainview to the Hillcroft TC w/o having to cross 59, eventually continuing west on the Westpark ROW as a commuter line.

I still think that kind of bikeway, w/water stops, shelters, etc would encourage an alternative form of transit on the southwest side.

[JamesL]

At the very least they could be working with the city to advance a hike/bike trail on the ROW from Wesleyan to Montrose since there are no other plans for that section. I agree, it would be a very highly used facility.

[VicMan]

Same here. It's about time that METRO puts ads on buses. From a revenue standpoint, to me it's a no brainer.

Found this in the report...

"Revenue Opportunities - Pursue advertising on buses."

i like it.

[rsb320]

I don't think we should bring back advertising on the outside of buses. We're still trying to rid the city of those stinkin' billboards. Advertising on the interior of Metro vehicles is another story, though.

[20thStDad]

If Metro would build real bus stops I would be for ads on those. I just got back from Chicago where I was reminded how a real bus system should be operated.

[totheskies]

Morals clauses are commonplace in contract law, and the effective prohibition of sexually-oriented businesses or even just ordinary bars occurs in many municipalities. I don't think that there'd be a problem, here, if METRO wanted to be picky about the content of ads.

Sexually-Oriented Businesses... SOBs

[totheskies]

I salute METRO's new attitude of accountability and honesty. I am hurt that our rail construction is being postponed, but at least METRO is now letting us know why.

And THANK YOU for pursuing new revenue streams!!!! Allowing ads on buses and converting more HOT lanes won't create a fortune and it certainly wouldn't solve METRO's budget woes, but it will the the agency some extra income as "breathing room". They are also great measures to increase the visibility and notariety of METRO.

[ricco67]

If Metro would build real bus stops I would be for ads on those. I just got back from Chicago where I was reminded how a real bus system should be operated.

Kinda' wish you would have included a picture of a "real" bus stop.

Just to compare, of course.

[20thStDad]

Kinda' wish you would have included a picture of a "real" bus stop.

Just to compare, of course.

Not worth pictures really. They just have a roof on them. Here I just see crappy poles, and maybe a bench.

[Houston19514]

Not worth pictures really. They just have a roof on them. Here I just see crappy poles, and maybe a bench.

Seriously? you need to get out a bit more.

[DrLan34]

FTA Finds Houston METRO in Violation of Federal ‘Buy America’ Requirements and Procurement Laws

var addthis_header_color = "#ffffff";var addthis_header_background = "#00397c";var addthis_brand = "FTA";var addthis_pub="dotfta";var addthis_options = 'email, favorites, facebook, digg, twitter';

What is this? 09-08-10

Contact: Paul Griffo

Telephone: (202) 366-4064 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (202) 366-4064 end_of_the_skype_highlighting

FTA findings indicate a ‘series of systematic efforts’ by former management to bypass numerous federal rules

HOUSTON – The Harris County METRO system “violated both federal procurement law and the Buy America requirements” during the procurement and subsequent award of two light rail vehicle (LRV) contracts to Spanish rail car manufacturer Construcciones y Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles (CAF), Federal Transit Administrator Peter Rogoff announced today. These findings come at the completion of a four-month Federal Transit Administration (FTA) investigation into METRO's procurement practices.

In a letter hand-delivered to METRO’s newly appointed leadership, Board Chairman Gilbert Garcias and Acting President and CEO George Greanias, Administrator Rogoff wrote, “The results of the investigation are both alarming and disturbing. They reveal a series of systematic efforts through which METRO and CAF sought to bypass numerous federal rules. These rules are designed to ensure the integrity of procurements involving taxpayer funds and the requirement to use taxpayer funds in a manner to maximize the creation and sustainment of well-paying jobs here at home. The Administration will vigorously enforce these requirements, both now and in the future.”

The Rogoff letter said that while the violations are very serious, “the Administration believes that the commuters of Houston should not be denied needed transit improvements due to the actions of prior METRO management. The Administration still believes that the North and Southeast Corridor projects have merit and we stand behind our Fiscal Year 2011 budget request of $150 million for the two projects.”

In order for the FTA to continue to direct federal funds to these projects, METRO will be required to submit a written affirmation of its intention to rebid the contract and detail its plan to achieve full compliance with all federal requirements.

The Rogoff letter goes on to say that the FTA is prepared to take a number of steps designed to keep METRO’s expansion projects moving forward and keep workers on the job, once METRO makes clear its commitment and plan to achieve compliance.

The Rogoff letter concluded by stating that FTA looks forward to a continued involvement with METRO under the transit agency’s new management, and hopes that relationship “will be characterized by trust, transparency, respect, and full compliance with all pertinent federal laws.”

The estimated cost of the North and Southeast Corridor projects is more than $1.5 billion total, with a projected federal investment of $900 million combined.

A copy of the entire letter from Administrator Rogoff, as well as a letter from FTA chief counsel Dorval Carter to METRO’s chief counsel and a full report of the investigation can be accessed here.

from FTA website... "The Rogoff letter goes on to say that the FTA is prepared to take a number of steps designed to keep METRO’s expansion projects moving forward and keep workers on the job, once METRO makes clear its commitment and plan to achieve compliance."

I wonder what these steps will be.

Seriously? you need to get out a bit more.

[mfastx]

Seriously? you need to get out a bit more.

I rode METRO today (route #25) and while both of the bus stops I used had shelters, the bus system could use some work, especially on reliabliity. Going westbound in the morning, I had to wait 30 minutes, while about 3 buses went by on the other side. Buses are supposed to come every ten minutes at that time. Other than that, I was reminded of why I love public transit so much, it's just so refreshing to be able to interact with people during your commute. If there was a more reliable route along my commute (cough..rail..cough) then I'd gladly take public transit every day. I'm just risking too much taking public transit now, I can't afford to be late.

Edited October 14, 2010 by mfastx

[totheskies]

I rode METRO today (route #25) and while both of the bus stops I used had shelters, the bus system could use some work, especially on reliabliity. Going westbound in the morning, I had to wait 30 minutes, while about 3 buses went by on the other side. Buses are supposed to come every ten minutes at that time. Other than that, I was reminded of why I love public transit so much, it's just so refreshing to be able to interact with people during your commute. If there was a more reliable route along my commute (cough..rail..cough) then I'd gladly take public transit every day. I'm just risking too much taking public transit now, I can't afford to be late.

And that's the inherent chicken vs. egg scenario for Houston METRO. In one post, you managed to convey your disappointment for the lack of frequency and reliability of the busses and a bias towards rail. But the only way that the busses will become more reliable is if more people start riding the busses. But if they ride, and get discouraged after one trip, then the cycle of unreliable and infrequent service will continue.

[kylejack]

They don't need increased ridership to perform to their stated schedule. They simply need to perform to their stated schedule, which they do a real bad job of.

[Trae]

Yeah, if the buses were more reliable and on time, I think more people would use it. But, I think you need to expand rail first. In my opinion, I think more buses would be on time if a lot of their former routes have been replaced by rail. Baby steps.

[20thStDad]

Seriously? you need to get out a bit more.

Why? Going somewhere else won't make better bus stops appear magically in the places I pass every day. I know they have better stops downtown and at transit centers, but that's pretty much the only place I've noticed them.

[JamesL]

They don't need increased ridership to perform to their stated schedule. They simply need to perform to their stated schedule, which they do a real bad job of.

This is my biggest issue with the METRO bus system. Their OTP goal is in the 60% range. Really? Unforeseen events befall one out of every three buses on the road? I think the two main issues are 1) lack of feedback from drivers on which schedules could use more or less time; and 2) supervision, since most drivers don't seem particularly concerned with sticking to the schedule.

[ricco67]

This is my biggest issue with the METRO bus system. Their OTP goal is in the 60% range. Really? Unforeseen events befall one out of every three buses on the road? I think the two main issues are 1) lack of feedback from drivers on which schedules could use more or less time; and 2) supervision, since most drivers don't seem particularly concerned with sticking to the schedule.

I agree, but you have to take quite a bit of other factors into account:

Railroad crossings.

School Zones

Those damned School Buses (all traffic stop at red flashing, remember?)

Traffic Accidents interfering with their routes.

Drivers needing a potty break.

Drivers getting sick DURING their routes. I would hate to imagine what would happen if they got the runs on the job!

Buses breaking down/flats

Inoperable traffic lights

Let's not forget rush hour traffic!

While I'd LOVE for them to have an 80% or higher, there are going to be times when things happen which is out of Metro's hands.

[MetroMogul]

At one time in the 90s I believe Metro's OTP was at 96%. That, much like ridership, went into a freefall around the time Metro decided to focus on rail expansion.

I remember when it was common for a bus to flag (skip) stops if they were behind 10 minutes or more. I remember one Metro exec was looking over a report about a particular trip on the 37 - El Sol route. At one point the bus was 12 minutes behind schedule but when it reached the end of the line it was two minutes early. I suggested that the driver must have flagged several stops to accomplish this. His reply was, "When you're 12 minutes late, I don't care who you pass up." The days of buses playing leapfrog is over as well. During rush hour in the 90s when bus ridership was healthy and rising, bus bunching was common during rush hours. If one bus caught up to another it would leapfrog around it to pick up passengers and allow the later bus (or buses) to drop off only or flag stops. Now however, if one bus catches up to another, it follows it which in turn makes it late as well since it doesn't pick up the excess load but instead waits while the late and overloaded first bus picks up all the passengers.

[Trae]

At one time in the 90s I believe Metro's OTP was at 96%. That, much like ridership, went into a freefall around the time Metro decided to focus on rail expansion.

I remember when it was common for a bus to flag (skip) stops if they were behind 10 minutes or more. I remember one Metro exec was looking over a report about a particular trip on the 37 - El Sol route. At one point the bus was 12 minutes behind schedule but when it reached the end of the line it was two minutes early. I suggested that the driver must have flagged several stops to accomplish this. His reply was, "When you're 12 minutes late, I don't care who you pass up." The days of buses playing leapfrog is over as well. During rush hour in the 90s when bus ridership was healthy and rising, bus bunching was common during rush hours. If one bus caught up to another it would leapfrog around it to pick up passengers and allow the later bus (or buses) to drop off only or flag stops. Now however, if one bus catches up to another, it follows it which in turn makes it late as well since it doesn't pick up the excess load but instead waits while the late and overloaded first bus picks up all the passengers.

Wow. The solution to Metro's problems would be.....common sense.

[editor]

At one time in the 90s I believe Metro's OTP was at 96%. That, much like ridership, went into a freefall around the time Metro decided to focus on rail expansion.

I remember when it was common for a bus to flag (skip) stops if they were behind 10 minutes or more. I remember one Metro exec was looking over a report about a particular trip on the 37 - El Sol route. At one point the bus was 12 minutes behind schedule but when it reached the end of the line it was two minutes early. I suggested that the driver must have flagged several stops to accomplish this. His reply was, "When you're 12 minutes late, I don't care who you pass up." The days of buses playing leapfrog is over as well. During rush hour in the 90s when bus ridership was healthy and rising, bus bunching was common during rush hours. If one bus caught up to another it would leapfrog around it to pick up passengers and allow the later bus (or buses) to drop off only or flag stops. Now however, if one bus catches up to another, it follows it which in turn makes it late as well since it doesn't pick up the excess load but instead waits while the late and overloaded first bus picks up all the passengers.

Skipping stops in the fashion you describe is a recipe for legal disaster.

I know of a large city transit agency that did this once. They called it the "Skip Stop System" and under certain conditions, if you were at a stop with a "B" sign instead of an "A" sign, you'd get skipped. It didn't last very long.

As soon as you start creating two classes of anything, you end up with people feeling "disenfranchised," no matter what the reality is. Then you can count the seconds until the first lawsuit, and the years until the last one is settled.

I'm a bus rider, so I know all about being delayed or late or worse. But until you either fix the street-level traffic, or separate the transit from the traffic, you have no chance of improving bus performance.