METRORail University Line

[Highway6]

What a surprise.

Forget the emails, bombard the man's office with phone calls.

713-682-8828

I just called. Kinda fun. The lady acted totally surprised that I would support light rail!

We should pass thie # to everyone at richmondrail.org

[AftonAg]

As you suggest, he is not above lying about the percentage to justify his position. Afton Oaks residents are merely an excuse to do what he intended to do all along. "90% of his consituents"? I'm one of his constituents, and he never asked for my opinion.

He neither knows nor cares about what percentage of his constituents favor rail. His agenda was in place before this issue ever came before the public. Perhaps 90% of the comments reaching his office opposed rail on Richmond, but that's not the same thing, now is it?

Most politicians don't go dooor to door asking their constituency for their opinion on each issue. They rely on the constituency to write letters, or sign petitions to let them know how they feel about issues. If it wasn't important enough for you to write a letter to him he probably assumes you don't have a strong opinion one way or the other.

I am guilty of relaying information that I received from someone that was at the rally and told me that Culberson said, "That he intended to support the 90% of his constituents that were against rail on Richmond." I do not know if that means that 90% of his constituents are against rail or if of the letters he received 90% were against rail on Richmond. You are correct that isn't the same thing.

[ricco67]

We should pass thie # to everyone at richmondrail.org

I just called and apparently she was rehearsed as to what to say.

She stated that HE is not against light rail, but rather is against the light rail on richmond because of the 2000 letters he had from people "that live or work on the proposed light rail route are 90% against it."

I expressed my disappointment in some of the harshest (diplomatic terms) possible and said I as someone who is in his DISTRICT I'm disappointed in his decision.

[musicman]

I'm no expert on the proposed ridership numbers, but how would this affect only those living or working on the Richmond line?

If it took a measly 10,000 people off the road (those traveling North/South) it would have an immediate effect on 59 traffic.

Someone else with the numbers chime in here.

To be honest, it has been my impression that majority of the people here would not ride the light rail, IF they had to get on a bus to access the system. currently I have to ride a bus to get to the rail. If i have the time, I don't mind riding the bus to get to the rail. But it definitely adds time to the trip vs. me driving. Now if i lived along the rail, I would be MORE LIKELY to ride the light rail because it is more easily accessible. Many of those farther from the station could potentially drive to the station, park and take the light rail. But quite frankly most residents have NO idea where the train actually is. They've heard "Main St," and that's about all they know. I've attempted to get many coworkers to ride it when they are closer to town and noone will do it cause they aren't familiar with the area. I had hoped that during the first line construction, they would have added more than one parking area designated for rail parking for those that MIGHT consider it if there was some designated parking.

To be successful, it has to be easy, secure, comfortable and most importantly save time. This is the reason the Park and Ride system is so popular. Drivers are willing to overlook minor inconveniences because the system does save them time. Right now the light rail almost meets all 4 criteria i mentioned above. The most important one, saving time, isn't being met with the current system. The richmond line won't save any travel time either at least based on the current proposals.

I definitely support light rail as long as it alleviates congestion and so are most Houstonians. Daily i'm either Downtown and/or in the Museum area and the congestion is the same, if not worse for vehicles in those areas since the light rail opening.

On your comment about those traveling North and South, I think you mean east and west because that is how the university line is oriented. Yes it should help some, however the vehicular traffic along Richmond would most likely be worse (and confusing) as it is along the current line at times.

Edited August 1, 2006 by musicman

[AftonAg]

I just returned from the rally. I was not surprised. Culberson lied and twisted his internal numbers into a pretzel. He pulled the tried and true Republican trick of inferring opponents to rail as patriotic and Pro-rail folks as...well, you all know how slick people like Culberson can be.

The anti-rail folk placed all their signs on city right away and when confronted they yelled, "You want us to get off the public right of way too? I'M part of the public."

When the ordinance was calmly explained to them and were shown the ordinance rules printed at the bottom of the pro-rail signs, about all you got was sneers and one woman calling another a "nazi". It was shortly after when someone turned on the sprinkler system, spraying the pro-railers while the antis remained dry and comfortable under their tent on the parking lot-courtesy of James Coney Island.

All in all it was the circus I expected. AOers and anti-railers behaving boorishly and put upon.

It's time to leap-frog these clowns and Culberson and turn up the pressure on the Mayor.

It was a truly disgusting morning. Thanks, AO, for showing your truest, most ugly colors.

That's a lie. The letter from Culberson says "My office has received well over 2,000 letters, emails, phone calls and petition signatures expressing an opinion on this important issue, and over 90% of THOSE are opposed to building rail on Richmond"

NOT 90% of his constituents. That is a lie.

I won't call you and your fellow AOers or Culberson jackasses. That would only insult jackasses. There's a far more succinct term we're not allowed to use on this board.

Stop lying, AftonAg.

So did I quote the letter . . . . no, as I explained in another post I relayed what someone that was at the rally told me - and that person is a fairly reliable source in my eyes. So I posted it as a quote - Again with the personal attack on Afton Oaks residents in genera - cute, but old - from the movie "A Fish called Wanda" I believe, and it was Jamie Lee Curtis to her boyfriend except she used the word stupid. I haven't knowingly posted any lies on this (or any other) forum. It would be very easy for me to gloat and make fun of all of the pro-railers after the Culberson statement but thankfully I have more class than that.

[The Voice of University Oaks]

Here's the guy running against Culber-scum this fall:

Henley for Congress

[AftonAg]

To be honest, it has been my impression that majority of the people here would not ride the light rail, IF they had to get on a bus to access the system. currently I have to ride a bus to get to the rail. If i have the time, I don't mind riding the bus to get to the rail. But it definitely adds time to the trip vs. me driving. Now if i lived along the rail, I would be MORE LIKELY to ride the light rail because it is more easily accessible. Many of those farther from the station could potentially drive to the station, park and take the light rail. But quite frankly most residents have NO idea where the train actually is. They've heard "Main St," and that's about all they know. I've attempted to get many coworkers to ride it when they are closer to town and noone will do it cause they aren't familiar with the area. I had hoped that during the first line construction, they would have added more than one parking area designated for rail parking for those that MIGHT consider it if there was some designated parking.

To be successful, it has to be easy, secure, comfortable and most importantly save time. This is the reason the Park and Ride system is so popular. Drivers are willing to overlook minor inconveniences because the system does save them time. Right now the light rail almost meets all 4 criteria i mentioned above. The most important one, saving time, isn't being met with the current system. The richmond line won't save any travel time either at least based on the current proposals.

I definitely support light rail as long as it alleviates congestion and so are most Houstonians. Daily i'm either Downtown and/or in the Museum area and the congestion is the same, if not worse for vehicles in those areas since the light rail opening.

On your comment about those traveling North and South, I think you mean east and west because that is how the university line is oriented. Yes it should help some, however the vehicular traffic along Richmond would most likely be worse (and confusing) as it is along the new line at times.

Nice post Musicman - I agree with you and as always you are a class act.

[RedScare]

Nice post Musicman - I agree with you and as always you are a class act.

This, coming from the guy who brought you this...

It would be very easy for me to gloat and make fun of all of the pro-railers after the Culberson statement but thankfully I have more class than that.

....such a classy thing to say. Do you also have to tell people that you are a Christian?

[AftonAg]

Regardless of his opinion on the matter, the fact that he considers himself as the end-all be-all of the routing of this rail line, before any detailed engineering work is done, makes him a jackass.

I have some familiarity with projects that involve routes, pipelines to be exact. In order to be cost effective the route is decided on first. It would be prohibitively expensive do the detailed engineering on several routes, and then choose which one to build. The only thing that makes him a jackass is that he doesn't share your opinion.

This, coming from the guy who brought you this...

....such a classy thing to say. Do you also have to tell people that you are a Christian?

I am? Darn after all these years of celebrating Hanukkah -

[DJ V Lawrence]

I am? Darn after all these years of celebrating Hanukkah -

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

I definitely support light rail as long as it alleviates congestion and so are most Houstonians. Daily i'm either Downtown and/or in the Museum area and the congestion is the same, if not worse for vehicles in those areas since the light rail opening.

ABSURD!! Still swimming in the "me and my" syndrome. The population of the city is on an upswing and will be for the near and distant future. You think things are congested now, just wait a little while longer. LRT is not only for the present, but the future as well. Houston is a very unique city. More and more it is attracting residents that are not gung ho for driving thier own cars. Residents from other cities and countries that are very pro rail and mass transit. As i said before, we as a city should be OUTWARDLY ASHAMED to not have an extensive LRT system in place in the major business and population centers in this city! AO people that are so opposed to positive change in the form of LRT on Richmond are...........

As for Park and Ride, a great deal of its success is the simple fact that it is cheaper than driving. People using the Park&Ride are probably not using it in order to make the streets and highways less congested. Its done for economic reasons.

[Highway6]

Fun times out there this morning. I too enjoyed the sprinkler trick.

Okay.. so now what ?

If they put forth a plan just on Westpark, which apparently they just have to do according to the balloteers, then it will nixed for funding for lack of ridership and there will be no University Line.

If they put forth a line that includes anything on Richmond, Culberson will kill it ?

We knew what Culberson was going to say today. We know basically what Metro will put forth next week. So where does that leave the line ?

Will Culberson truly kill anything on Richmond ? Will he only kill it if it goes through AO and some of his constituents keep biatchin ? Will the Mobility Group sue Metro if its not on Westpark ?

Is there anyway around Culberson ?

What do we have to look forward in the coming weeks ?

What if they did put forth a Westpark plan, and it is canned. Could they then submit a Richmond plan ?

WHat would be the chances of success if this went back to the voters, more carefully worded ?

Edited August 1, 2006 by Highway6

[KinkaidAlum]

This is the EXACT same crap the anti-rail crowd pulled with the Main Street Redline.

They even halted construction, forced a worthless and expensive election, and then were able to get DeLay and Culberson to deny federal funds. Both men PROMISED to support light rail if it won at the polls.

Well, last time I checked, it DID win at the polls.

Oh well. So much for being men of honor and men of their words.

The loser in all of this mess is Houston. Meanwhile, up in Dallas, they are getting funding out the wazzoo. Too bad our public leaders care only about their bottom line.

[Gary]

ABSURD!! Still swimming in the "me and my" syndrome. The population of the city is on an upswing and will be for the near and distant future. You think things are congested now, just wait a little while longer. LRT is not only for the present, but the future as well. Houston is a very unique city. More and more it is attracting residents that are not gung ho for driving thier own cars. Residents from other cities and countries that are very pro rail and mass transit. As i said before, we as a city should be OUTWARDLY ASHAMED to not have an extensive LRT system in place in the major business and population centers in this city! AO people that are so opposed to positive change in the form of LRT on Richmond are...........

As for Park and Ride, a great deal of its success is the simple fact that it is cheaper than driving. People using the Park&Ride are probably not using it in order to make the streets and highways less congested. Its done for economic reasons.

Thank you.

Oh and I did make the North /South mistake in regard to the line in question. I was actually referering to 59 North/South.

[nmainguy]

Expose the miss-information being spewed by Culberson and his AO thugs and demand he stand up to this very small minority.

Population Dist 2000 census: 651,620

90% of the 2000 letters Culberson received=1800

1800 is .27% of Culberson's constituents.

Stand up and expose the Culbersons and AftonAgs for the liars they are.

Email, write and or call Mayor White.

Mayor Bill White

City of Houston

P.O. Box 1562

Houston, TX 77251

PHONE: 713.247.2200

mayor@cityofhouston.net <mayor@cityofhouston.net>

[urbanspace]

This really pisses me off!!! On one hand I understand why Culberson would keep his constituants interests in mind, but on the other to blatantly disregard the betterment of several million people is just, well political. I'm a conservative at heart (not Republican) but these guys (Republicans) are holding this city back.

I'm also a little ticked off at myself for not getting more involved in this. Where's that petition, and where's that picket line?

Here's the petition.

http://richmondrail.org/support/petition.php

[Trae]

Let's see what happens when they hear a 15 year old calling for rail on Richmond.

Edited August 1, 2006 by Trae

[Highway6]

Expose the miss-information being spewed by Culberson and his AO thugs and demand he stand up to this very small minority.

Population Dist 2000 census: 651,620

90% of the 2000 letters Culberson received=1800

1800 is .27% of Culberson's constituents.

Stand up and expose the Culbersons and AftonAgs for the liars they are.

Email, write and or call Mayor White.

Mayor Bill White

City of Houston

P.O. Box 1562

Houston, TX 77251

PHONE: 713.247.2200

mayor@cityofhouston.net <mayor@cityofhouston.net>

I've written.... but ultimately, what can he do ? He knows Culberson is full of it, he knows that a good portion of his city realizes this too.

What can the mayor do at this point ?

[ricco67]

I've written.... but ultimately, what can he do ? He knows Culberson is full of it, he knows that a good portion of his city realizes this too.

What can the mayor do at this point ?

As popular as the mayor is, he can through his endorsement to his competitor.

I've opened a new thread covering this subject that way we can take this back to it's original topic.

[Highway6]

As popular as the mayor is, he can through his endorsement to his competitor.

I've opened a new thread covering this subject that way we can take this back to it's original topic.

The mayor is a democrat, Culberson is rebublican... has the mayor endorsed culberson in the past ?

[The Voice of University Oaks]

What do we have to look forward in the coming weeks ?

There might be some more legal maneuvering, but without Congressional support for a Richmond alignment, the project just isn't going to be built. There isn't enough ridership along the Westpark ROW to make the project competitive for federal funding.

Unfortunately, I think rail on Richmond is dead for as long as Culberson is in office, or at least until he loses his seat on the House Transportation Committee. And the chances of either of those happening are slim: Henley's not likely to take Culberson's gerrymandered Republican district from him, and the Democrats probably aren't going to pick up enough seats to regain control of the House (and its committees) this fall.

All this should come as a surprise to no one. Cluberson is anti-rail. He co-chaired the Texas for True Mobility organization that opposed the 2003 referendum. He was never going to support the construction of more rail in this city regardless of what he said or what the voters did.

What if they did put forth a Westpark plan, and it is canned. Could they then submit a Richmond plan ?

WHat would be the chances of success if this went back to the voters, more carefully worded ?

Not great. The only reason the 2003 referendum squeaked through is because of the support from the people in the near north side, east end and near southeast. And now they're upset becuase they're getting buses instead of the trains they voted for. A re-vote on the plan would easily be defeated, IMO.

[H-Town Man]

This, coming from the guy who brought you this...

....such a classy thing to say. Do you also have to tell people that you are a Christian?

What is your hang-up with Christianity? Seems like you are always bringing up religion in the most bizarre contexts, as if you are reading posts the rest of us aren't reading.

[MidtownCoog]

Red is just polite with his insults.

I think it's a mutal Aggy love thing so he's going soft on Afton ;-)

[H-Town Man]

Most politicians don't go dooor to door asking their constituency for their opinion on each issue. They rely on the constituency to write letters, or sign petitions to let them know how they feel about issues. If it wasn't important enough for you to write a letter to him he probably assumes you don't have a strong opinion one way or the other.

I am guilty of relaying information that I received from someone that was at the rally and told me that Culberson said, "That he intended to support the 90% of his constituents that were against rail on Richmond." I do not know if that means that 90% of his constituents are against rail or if of the letters he received 90% were against rail on Richmond. You are correct that isn't the same thing.

Since when do letters to a congressman decide whether rail is going to be built? As far as I knew, the decision was made by a 2004 referendum covering the Metro service area, in which a majority of voters agreed that this line would get built, and that Metro would determine the final route.

If you folks had such a problem, you should have spoken up about it then. Stop putting the interests of your pretentious little enclave in front of the rest of the city.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Not great. The only reason the 2003 referendum squeaked through is because of the support from the people in the near north side, east end and near southeast. And now they're upset becuase they're getting buses instead of the trains they voted for. A re-vote on the plan would easily be defeated, IMO.

I would be pissed too if i voted for trains and will end up getting busses instead. The BRT thing is stupid.

[dp2]

Rep. Culberson alone can't kill this line, he can only attempt to restrict federal funding. As long as Sen. Hutchison's office is kept aware of the situation, it is almost certain that nothing of the sort will make it out of the Senate. She always been pro-transit, at least for wise proposals. Plus there is also the possibility of the Democrats taking control of the House in January. And of course Metro has once before built a rail line without fed funding. Would be difficult, force a reprioritization and delays, but all that is certainly possible. For starters that could postpone construction of their ill-placed joke of a "Grand Central Intermodal Bus Stop With a Pseudo-Iconic Plaza."

If anything, Culberson just made it more likely that the Afton Oaks alignment will be chosen. It has been obvious for awhile that the only viable and sensible options required using at least part of Richmond. By avoiding total rejection, he and AO were in a position to at least bargain and win concessions. But with Culberson now declaring against any Richmond use, why would Metro need to appease and work with him anymore?

This pretty much seals the deal. In one week Metro will chose either Richmond to the UP or Richmond all the way to Rice, and the deciding factors now will be in regards to overall cost and alignment/terminal issues west of 610. Metro is now free to go with the best new rider/cost option. Since Richmond to Rice via AO is probably the most simple and cheapest option, I'd wager that this will now be chosen.

With today's announcement the anti-Richmond group may think that they've just crossed the Rubicon, but it actually appears that they've fired on Ft. Sumter.

Edited August 1, 2006 by dp2

[CDeb]

I have some familiarity with projects that involve routes, pipelines to be exact. In order to be cost effective the route is decided on first. It would be prohibitively expensive do the detailed engineering on several routes, and then choose which one to build. The only thing that makes him a jackass is that he doesn't share your opinion.

First of all, I have never shared my opinion regarding rail on Richmond on this forum because I am honestly not familiar enough with the areas involved to make an intelligent decision. So your presumption regarding the reasons behind my views of Culbertson is ludicrous.

However, I also know a good deal about route planning, project engineering and transportation and I share your views. The difference is: YOU AND I KNOW WHAT THE HELL WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IN OUR JOBS. Culbertson does not, and frankly, on this issue, you and I do not either. The professionals at METRO do, and the professionals hired by METRO do. Ergo, the man's premature attempt to nix what could be the best route for this line without having seen a METRO recommendation nor any reason behind it smacks of jackass-ism.

[musicman]

Houston is a very unique city. More and more it is attracting residents that are not gung ho for driving thier own cars. Residents from other cities and countries that are very pro rail and mass transit. As i said before, we as a city should be OUTWARDLY ASHAMED to not have an extensive LRT system in place in the major business and population centers in this city! AO people that are so opposed to positive change in the form of LRT on Richmond are...........

I work with many foreigners on a monthly basis from all over the world. Russia, Japan and Italy are the big three. I've taken groups of Russians and Italians to the Museum District to boast about our town. The Russians really enjoy the Menil everytime they come. The Russians I know have ridden the light rail because I rode with them. They were not at all impressed. To them, our line was a joke because I couldn't give them an EXACT time of when the train was arriving! The stations were the most embarassing aspect. If you've ever been to Moscow, their system is VERY efficient and always on schedule. I've only been once but really did take advantage of it because the system works.

I found this link. Moscow rail stations Just click on the M's for pics of the stations.

From my experience, we are not even in the same class as Russia, Italy nor Japan when it comes to mass transit. Much of it has to do with population density and we just don't have a large density comparatively to make is as effective.

Many here are making the Afton Oaks people out to the the worst offenders in the mess. While they are vocal, businessmen like Tony Vallone are against it as well. So you can't just crucify AO.

[Transit Nut]

OK, let's all take a deep breath.

Now, let's review where exactly in this process we are and where Culberson fits in. If I recall correctly, these are the steps that have to be taken before any money is allocated by anyone and construction starts.

The University Corridor is currently around the Alternative Analysis (AA) stage. METRO, with input from the community (which it has already gotten), will determine the best alignment (or two).

Next, it will go to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), which is written by METRO and its consultants with assistance from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The official scoping meetings at the end of June were the first step towards this. The East End and Uptown Corridors are probably about to get to this stage.

After the DEIS is approved by the FTA, the public gets to read it and comment on it. The North and Southeast Corridors are at this stage. After the comments, a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) is written to respond to comments made on the DEIS.

Based on the FEIS and Preliminary Engineering (PE), the FTA will evaluate all the projects in the U.S. that are submitted for federal funding each year. The FTA is not deeply involved in any one region (like we are to Houston), so they will evaluate all the projects nationwide more impartially.

The FTA will then give each one a rating based on things like ridership and cost effectiveness, ranging from high to low. The projects rated high, medium-high, and medium will be recommended to Congress for funding.

Only at this point, after the FTA has recommended certain projects, will Congress get involved. Prior to this, John Culberson can't do much; although he doesn't support rail on Richmond, he can't really prevent METRO from evaluating Richmond. Although Culberson is the only representative from Texas on whatever House transportation committee he is on and much of the University Corridor is in his district, he is not the only person in the committee or in Congress, and the fate of federal funding doesn't fall solely on him.

Basically, Culberson said nothing new today that we couldn't already guess based on his previous actions. We are only at the beginning of a long process towards a new rail line; we must remember that the University Corridor is not nearly as far along, in terms of engineering analysis and development, as the other Corridors. Once METRO staff recommend the preferred alignment(s) next week, METRO will probably continue going through all the following steps toward FTA funding recommendation despite whatever Culberson says. One elected official can't stop the whole process, but he will probably make it more challenging.

Of course, if someone sues or forces another referendum, that's another story. METRO will probably win, but there will probably be a delay (lowercase, not the person) in the timeline.

Don't worry too much about METRO; they have the technical experience and knowledge and will not give up on their long range plans just because Culberson said he won't support rail on Richmond.

[RedScare]

Rep. Culberson alone can't kill this line, he can only attempt to restrict federal funding. As long as Sen. Hutchison's office is kept aware of the situation, it is almost certain that nothing of the sort will make it out of the Senate. She always been pro-transit, at least for wise proposals. Plus there is also the possibility of the Democrats taking control of the House in January. And of course Metro has once before built a rail line without fed funding. Would be difficult, force a reprioritization and delays, but all that is certainly possible. For starters that could postpone construction of their ill-placed joke of a "Grand Central Intermodal Bus Stop With a Pseudo-Iconic Plaza."

If anything, Culberson just made it more likely that the Afton Oaks alignment will be chosen. It has been obvious for awhile that the only viable and sensible options required using at least part of Richmond. By avoiding total rejection, he and AO were in a position to at least bargain and win concessions. But with Culberson now declaring against any Richmond use, why would Metro need to appease and work with him anymore?

This pretty much seals the deal. In one week Metro will chose either Richmond to the UP or Richmond all the way to Rice, and the deciding factors now will be in regards to overall cost and alignment/terminal issues west of 610. Metro is now free to go with the best new rider/cost option. Since Richmond to Rice via AO is probably the most simple and cheapest option, I'd wager that this will now be chosen.

With today's announcement the anti-Richmond group may think that they've just crossed the Rubicon, but it actually appears that they've fired on Ft. Sumter.

My thoughts exactly. Just over one year ago, Rep. Culberson promised to secure funding for Metro Solutions, which included BRT, commuter rail, AND the Richmond line.

METRO press release

Now, he is reneging on his promise. METRO has no other options. Running the line down Westpark, IF it could be done, will not generate enough ridership to get FTA approval. METRO has nothing to lose by following the agreement it made with Rep. Culberson in 2005. Culberson can either keep his promise to secure funding, or go on record as an absolute liar. Either way, METRO should proceed with the agreement it made and put the line where it will attract the most riders. If that route is Richmond, so be it.

METRO is trying to be diplomatic by not exposing Culberson's 180 degree reversal from June 2005, but that doesn't mean WE have to keep quiet about it.