METRORail University Line

[dbigtex56]

Wilson has admitted the Main St line was a boondoggle on every level during construction, but blames the COH and CofC requirement it be finished before the Super Bowl, and has promised METRO will do better next time.

we'll see. talk is cheap.

Talk is indeed cheap.

Mind providing a source for this alleged statement?

[TheNiche]

The Washburn has never flooded. The Holland tunnel has never flooded. The Chunnel has never flooded. Tunneling technology is so advanced-that's why they can build projects like the Chunnel. You don't think we could built a simple cut-and-cover one mile stretch under Westhiemer?

Logic would suggest yes...empirical evidence often dictates otherwise.

The big tunnels have pumps that prevent that kind of thing from happening. Some trenched underpasses have them...some don't warrant them...some warrant them, but weren't built that way for some mistaken reason.

[IHB2]

Talk is indeed cheap.

Mind providing a source for this alleged statement?

1st let me clarify that Mr. Wilson in no way said that the Main St Line is a boondoggle, nor do I remember him using the word boondoggle. That's my choice of words. He has, however, discussed in detail improving construction techniques on future LRT and BRT lines after admitting that the many mistakes made in the construction of the MSL increased the vehemence of the opposition to rail in the University Corridor.

The full texts of Mr.Wilson's public statements at each of the METRO neighborhood meetings, held in April in the districts of Edwards, Clutterbuck, and Holms, were recorded at each session by a stenographer. Most of these transcripts were available for public examination at the June 29 Scoping Meeting. I'm sure they are still accessible although I don't know if you could just ask to see them at METRO or need a FOI request.

I attended all the meetings in Clutterbuck and Holms districts, 1 in Edwards district, and the Scoping Meetings. About 20 meetings in all.

In response to the questions of Richmond rail opponents re: impact on business, quality of life, neighborhood preservation, traffic flow, etc, Mr. Wilson explained (many times) that the COH-mandated speed of completion of the Main St Line led METRO management (before he took over) to make decisions that resulted in negative impacts on all of those things.

He went further and discussed questions re: stray voltage and its effects, wiring integrity, roadbed construction, standing water issues, noise abatement, eminent domain, and more. In each case he said that METRO learned lessons from the mistakes made at every phase during Main St construction that would ensure that construction of future lines would be less intrusive, less damaging to businesses, more coordinated with other transit agencies' projects, and so on.

I guess we have to wait and see if that will be the case. For the past almost 30 yrs, METRO talk has rarely matched performance. Wilson says he'll change that.

[zaphod]

The big tunnels have pumps that prevent that kind of thing from happening. Some trenched underpasses have them...some don't warrant them...some warrant them, but weren't built that way for some mistaken reason.

im pretty sure the beltway has them. over around westpark there are some concrete outhouse things that have pumps in them i think.

I would imagine if they did have to trench LRT then they'de most definetely put big pumps in if the trains are really that vulnerable to water.

[Pumapayam]

In response to the questions of Richmond rail opponents re: impact on business, quality of life, neighborhood preservation, traffic flow, etc, Mr. Wilson explained (many times) that the COH-mandated speed of completion of the Main St Line led METRO management (before he took over) to make decisions that resulted in negative impacts on all of those things.

I think they will plan this phase better, Richmond make sense, we can plant more trees people. I love the trees too, but trees grow, as do traffic problems.

Edited July 14, 2006 by Pumapayam

[IHB2]

here is a link to last night's KHOU story on yesterday's METRO meeting with Culberson's re: rail on Richmond:

http://www.khou.com/news/local/stories/kho...10.dc9505f.html

and here is today's letter to constituents from Culberson re: METRO rail plan for Richmond to be shown at a public meeting next week:

FROM: U.S. Representative John Culberson

Metro's proposals to build rail on Richmond:

"Yesterday afternoon I had a very productive meeting with Metro Chairman David Wolff and President Frank Wilson to discuss Metro's proposed alignments for a rail line along Richmond. I told them what I have told everyone who asks my opinion - my job description is representative and I will protect the quality of life of the people I represent. Therefore, Metro does not need to sell this plan to me but to the people I represent who will be most affected - the people whose homes or businesses or properties are on Richmond. I will decide whether to support or oppose rail on Richmond based on the opinions of my constituents, and the opinions that matter the most to me are those of the people who have the most at stake - the people who live or work or own property on Richmond. Obviously, I will listen to all of my constituents, but no fair minded person can disagree that I must give the greatest weight to the opinions of those people who have the most at stake.

"Metro claims that they are prevented from sharing the proposed alignments with the public until next Tuesday, so I have asked, and Metro has agreed to show the public their plans for rail on Richmond next Tuesday at the first of a series of public forums they will host where Houstonians will be able to ask questions and Metro can begin to sell their plans. Metro asked for two weeks from Tuesday to make their case to the people on Richmond, and I agreed to wait for two weeks before making a decision based primarily on the input I receive from Richmond residents and business and property owners. I also asked, and Metro agreed, to post their plans on their website so people can see them in great detail beginning next Tuesday.

"Metro has clearly listened to the public comments they have already received from neighborhoods and done their best to incorporate those ideas and suggestions into proposals for rail on Richmond. I have heard from a number of my constituents who are concerned about other possible alignments. Let me be clear, any proposed line stands on its own merits and must have community support. It is now up to Metro to convince the people on Richmond of the merits of their proposals. It is not my job to tell Metro where to build rail, or to help them sell it, but it is my job to protect my constituents when they tell me where they do not want Metro to build it. Any neighborhood in any part of my district can always count on me to protect their quality of life in the same way."

[ricco67]

here is a link to last night's KHOU story on yesterday's METRO meeting with Culberson's re: rail on Richmond:

http://www.khou.com/news/local/stories/kho...10.dc9505f.html

and here is today's letter to constituents from Culberson re: METRO rail plan for Richmond to be shown at a public meeting next week:

FROM: U.S. Representative John Culberson

Metro's proposals to build rail on Richmond:

"Yesterday afternoon I had a very productive meeting with Metro Chairman David Wolff and President Frank Wilson to discuss Metro's proposed alignments for a rail line along Richmond. I told them what I have told everyone who asks my opinion - my job description is representative and I will protect the quality of life of the people I represent. Therefore, Metro does not need to sell this plan to me but to the people I represent who will be most affected - the people whose homes or businesses or properties are on Richmond. I will decide whether to support or oppose rail on Richmond based on the opinions of my constituents, and the opinions that matter the most to me are those of the people who have the most at stake - the people who live or work or own property on Richmond. Obviously, I will listen to all of my constituents, but no fair minded person can disagree that I must give the greatest weight to the opinions of those people who have the most at stake.

"Metro claims that they are prevented from sharing the proposed alignments with the public until next Tuesday, so I have asked, and Metro has agreed to show the public their plans for rail on Richmond next Tuesday at the first of a series of public forums they will host where Houstonians will be able to ask questions and Metro can begin to sell their plans. Metro asked for two weeks from Tuesday to make their case to the people on Richmond, and I agreed to wait for two weeks before making a decision based primarily on the input I receive from Richmond residents and business and property owners. I also asked, and Metro agreed, to post their plans on their website so people can see them in great detail beginning next Tuesday.

"Metro has clearly listened to the public comments they have already received from neighborhoods and done their best to incorporate those ideas and suggestions into proposals for rail on Richmond. I have heard from a number of my constituents who are concerned about other possible alignments. Let me be clear, any proposed line stands on its own merits and must have community support. It is now up to Metro to convince the people on Richmond of the merits of their proposals. It is not my job to tell Metro where to build rail, or to help them sell it, but it is my job to protect my constituents when they tell me where they do not want Metro to build it. Any neighborhood in any part of my district can always count on me to protect their quality of life in the same way."

it is my belief he is seeing how many votes it will get him by seeing who writes him the most.

i dropped one letter to him already, i guess i need to write a couple more.

[RedScare]

it is my belief he is seeing how many votes it will get him by seeing who writes him the most.

i dropped one letter to him already, i guess i need to write a couple more.

I think his theory on whose complaints carry the most weight is complete and utter BS, but since I would only USE the rail line, rather than live near it, he would not listen to my complaint about his thought process either.

[Highway6]

I think his theory on whose complaints carry the most weight is complete and utter BS, but since I would only USE the rail line, rather than live near it, he would not listen to my complaint about his thought process either.

Totally.

He needs to be reminded by lots and lots of Houstonians, thats he is supposed to look after the interests of what is best for his entire district ( and Houston as a whole) and not just a 4 mile stretch fo a single street.

Since he is so closeminded.. I wish the ProRichmond peeps that live and work on Richmond were more vocal.

"You represent me too, assmunch"

[TheNiche]

we can plant more tree people.

Are you communicating with these tree people? Are they telling you things? Violent self-genocidal things?

Inquiring minds want to know...

[Highway6]

METRO will have three openhouses to show the alignment alternatives based on feedback from people at the scoping meetings.

http://metrosolutions.org/go/site/1068/

Date: Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Time: 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Location: Holiday Inn Select

Address: 2712 Southwest Freeway

Parking: Parking garage - expense covered by METRO

Date: Monday, July 24, 2006

Time: 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Location: Third Ward Multi Service Center

Address: 3611 Ennis

Parking: Surface parking lot and surrounding side streets

Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Time: 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Location: St. Paul's United Methodist Church

Address: 5501 South Main Street

Parking: Lot across from Church and surrounding streets

Edited July 14, 2006 by Highway6

[IHB2]

Date: Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Time: 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Location: Holiday Inn Select

Address: 2712 Southwest Freeway

Parking: Parking garage - expense covered by METRO

that sound you hear is the hired help sharpening knives in Afton Oaks.

Wouldn't miss it for the world. I'll be the guy in shorts, flipflops, and a flak jacket.

[Pumapayam]

Are you communicating with these tree people? Are they telling you things? Violent self-genocidal things?

Inquiring minds want to know...

Ok grammar police, it is fixed!

[T 2 THA C]

Hey can someone give me a link to the discussion about the proposed brt/lrt in the south east corridor.

Edited July 14, 2006 by T 2 THA C

[IHB2]

His is a degree of selfishness and blatant action against his constituents that hasn't been seen since DeLay.

apple don't fall far from the tree.

[KinkaidAlum]

Ugggh. Just look at that Congressional District Map.

Montrose, Museum District, Southampton, The Village, Upper Kirby, etc... lumped together with Jersey Village, Cypress, and Northwest sprawl?

That mess needs fixing.

[ssullivan]

Ugggh. Just look at that Congressional District Map.

Montrose, Museum District, Southampton, The Village, Upper Kirby, etc... lumped together with Jersey Village, Cypress, and Northwest sprawl?

That mess needs fixing.

Yes, thanks to Tom DeLay's illegal involvement in the redistricting process, that's what Culberson got. And we're probably stuck with it as long as the current administrations in Austin and Washington are both in existence.

[The Voice of University Oaks]

Culberson's philosophical opposition to rail is well-known. He knows that the best way to keep any more rail from being built in Houston is to interfere with the University Line's PE / EIS process to ensure an unfavorable outcome, and that is exactly what he is doing.

Culberson knows that the FTA is unlikely to fund a Westpark alignment because the ridership thresholds won't be met. Basically, the only way it gets built is if it gets put on Richmond. By using his political weight to effectively tell METRO that Richmond is off-limits, he's basically ensuring that nothing gets built. He can hide behind the "business owners and residents along Richmond don't want it" excuse so that he himself doesn't come out looking like the bad guy. Pretty clever, huh?

He can get away with it, too; his congressional district is gerrymandered such that his seat is safe no matter what he does.

[ricco67]

Well, the trick is to let our voice to be just as vocal.

Someone such as Culberson is always aware of his need to be elected. If the possibility of that being threatened, even by someone of his own party; then it should definately catch his attention.

now the question is, how shall we hold up the sword while we dangle the carrot?

I may be an independent, but I'm not above voting a republican in his district if he doesn't support the wishes that would be best for ALL Houstonians in spite of those those narrow minded A-oaks.

[Trae]

How damn hard is it to realize a route from the Wheeler Station out to Weslayan would work. That would cover the main parts of Greenway and Lakewood. The north on Weslayan. A stop at Westheimer (make a left on Westheimer). Then out towards the Galleria. This would go by real dense developments that we all now are being announced. It should go down Westheimer to West Oaks. That should happen whenever feasible, but is a real good option. Metro needs to think about this.

[Transit Nut]

For those of you that support light rail on Richmond, you may be interested in this website and their petition: http://www.richmondrail.org/blogs/. A person representing this group spoke at one of the City Councilpeople's meetings and mentioned their website (I found it in one of the METRO transcripts).

The Gulf Coast Institute also has some interesting information: http://www.gulfcoastinstitute.org/ (click on the "University Line Light Rail" box). Read the report at the very bottom of the page, too. Apparently, not all the people who at first seem to oppose a Richmond alignment really do oppose it; they just have many concerns on many different aspects of the project. Hopefully the upcoming meetings will help them (and all of us too) to understand better what will be happening in the next few years.

Although GCI appears to prefer a Richmond/Westheimer route (they don't actually officially recommend any particular alignment, though) based on job and population growth in the next 30 years, it appears the total population and jobs they project for 2035 actually shows the Richmond/Westpark/San Felipe (really Post Oak) route may connect more of the denser areas better. In other words, the University Corridor would actually share some track with the Uptown Corridor. However, if might be best if we all wait until after the first meeting on Tuesday to see what the professional engineers and planners have found out.

[IHB2]

Culberson's philosophical opposition to rail is well-known. He knows that the best way to keep any more rail from being built in Houston is to interfere with the University Line's PE / EIS process to ensure an unfavorable outcome, and that is exactly what he is doing.

Culberson knows that the FTA is unlikely to fund a Westpark alignment because the ridership thresholds won't be met. Basically, the only way it gets built is if it gets put on Richmond. By using his political weight to effectively tell METRO that Richmond is off-limits, he's basically ensuring that nothing gets built. He can hide behind the "business owners and residents along Richmond don't want it" excuse so that he himself doesn't come out looking like the bad guy. Pretty clever, huh?

Is it possible, however, that METRO might be flush enough with its capture of sales tax $ to build the line itself w/o fed $$ as it did with the Main Line?

[ricco67]

It's easy to say "I'm philosophicaly opposed..." until you are pinned down. I've never heard him lay out exactly what his philosophy is other than he is anti-government. That's a catch-all with little foundation.

Is he an Ann Coulter Republican? A Tom DeLay Republican? An Eisenhower Republican? No one asks these guys to lay it out. They continue to get an easy pass without having to clearly state their philosophy.

Personally I think he's a Coulter/DeLay Republican; expert at demonizing any honest opposition.

I'm not overly thrilled about the prospect either.

But the thing is that we need to make it uncomfortable for him to sway back and forth. The question is; how can we realistically make him uncomfortable?

Send a copy of a check to his opponant, threaten to support his opponent, or simply write letters alluding to that effect?

[wakester]

Send a copy of a check to his opponant, threaten to support his opponent, or simply write letters alluding to that effect?

I am a Democrat living in his District. He has not competion, this is a very Republican district.

[MidtownCoog]

In my mailbox this morning:

Representative John Culberson issued the following statement regarding Metro's proposals to build rail on Richmond:

"Yesterday afternoon I had a very productive meeting with Metro Chairman David Wolff and President Frank Wilson to discuss Metro's proposed alignments for a rail line along Richmond. I told them what I have told everyone who asks my opinion - my job description is representative and I will protect the quality of life of the people I represent. Therefore, Metro does not need to sell this plan to me but to the people I represent who will be most affected - the people whose homes or businesses or properties are on Richmond. I will decide whether to support or oppose rail on Richmond based on the opinions of my constituents, and the opinions that matter the most to me are those of the people who have the most at stake - the people who live or work or own property on Richmond. Obviously, I will listen to all of my constituents, but no fair minded person can disagree that I must give the greatest weight to the opinions of those people who have the most at stake.

"Metro claims that they are prevented from sharing the proposed alignments with the public until next Tuesday, so I have asked, and Metro has agreed to show the public their plans for rail on Richmond next Tuesday at the first of a series of public forums they will host where Houstonians will be able to ask questions and Metro can begin to sell their plans. Metro asked for two weeks from Tuesday to make their case to the people on Richmond, and I agreed to wait for two weeks before making a decision based primarily on the input I receive from Richmond residents and business and property owners. I also asked, and Metro agreed, to post their plans on their website so people can see them in great detail beginning next Tuesday.

"Metro has clearly listened to the public comments they have already received from neighborhoods and done their best to incorporate those ideas and suggestions into proposals for rail on Richmond. I have heard from a number of my constituents who are concerned about other possible alignments. Let me be clear, any proposed line stands on its own merits and must have community support. It is now up to Metro to convince the people on Richmond of the merits of their proposals. It is not my job to tell Metro where to build rail, or to help them sell it, but it is my job to protect my constituents when they tell me where they do not want Metro to build it. Any neighborhood in any part of my district can always count on me to protect their quality of life in the same way."

[ricco67]

I am a Democrat living in his District. He has not competion, this is a very Republican district.

So support his Republican opponant. I live in his district as well and I'm an independent with Democratic leanings, but if it would get someone that would support MY cause, i'll vote Republican.

[ricco67]

Here is a great analysis by Christof Spieler in the run-up to Tuesday's meeting: http://ctchouston.org/blogs/christof/wp-co...ng%20Cmmnts.pdf

While I have a couple of disagreements regarding routes, I defer to Christof's knowledge of Houston's past, present and future transit issues.

I really can't dismiss the routes that were shown in the PDF file, but in my insomniatic stupor (it's amazing what will cross your mind when you're TRYING to sleep), is that A kirby line would be kinda' cool as well, but I know THAT will never happen. The people in River oaks would hate it, I would imagine, plus the congestion is almost insane.

I had it pictured going down Allen Parkway from downtown to Kirby, connecting to the Richmond line and down south to kirby and either go past the Dome or hit south main and then either jog over to the fannin line or go straight down to sugarland.

I was so out of it last night I actually started drawing a sketch and did some number crunching when the ambien FINALLY took effect.

[musicman]

Here is a great analysis by Christof Spieler in the run-up to Tuesday's meeting: http://ctchouston.org/blogs/christof/wp-co...ng%20Cmmnts.pdf

While I have a couple of disagreements regarding routes, I defer to Christof's knowledge of Houston's past, present and future transit issues.

lots of wishful thinking on paper but in real life, would be too controversial because lots of land acquisition would be necessary.

[Highway6]

So support his Republican opponant. I live in his district as well and I'm an independent with Democratic leanings, but if it would get someone that would support MY cause, i'll vote Republican.

I don't know much about Culberson, except what I'm seeing and hearing about him in regards to this Rail issue.

I'm a independant that leans conservative and I usually vote Republican.. but seeing his stance on this issue.. there is no way I could support him.

It doesn't seem to me his stance here is a overly conservative or Republican stance. IT seems like he is all "must protect the rights of this little group of individuals from the bad big city government".. hardly sounds like your typical republican. If all republicans are all so 'help business first'.. I would think a conservative would want rail that would stimulate growth and development.

Someone commented earlier trying to pin him down.. "is he a Ann Coulter Republican, a Tom Delay Republican.. what is he"

I don't know the rest of his ideals, but for how he is arguing aginst rail.. I just don't see him as the "big bad conservative".. and eventhough I am conservative, if it were only based on this issue, he wouldn't get my reelection vote.

What am I missing here.. on one hand, I can understand that pro-transit would be a liberal platform on the macro level in that it gets cars off the road and helps the environment... but at the micro level, new transit disrupts neighborhoods and stomps on the rights of some individuals... so I hardly see it as.. " ooo.. if we only had a democrat in office, we'd get our rail."

Just wondering since the last dozen posts have thrown around 'conservative' 'republican' 'too much like Delay' ... hearing all this, unless i'm greatly missing something, I would think that would be what we need to get rail in place.... just not one like Culberson

Edited July 17, 2006 by Highway6

[ricco67]

I don't think it's a Republican or Democratic issue, I think it's just his stance on this matter and being compared to Delay with his opposition to it. along the way he is just going which way the wind blows instead of watching what's best for Houston.