METRORail University Line

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Before the light rail was installed downtown, it was illegal to make left turns off of Main. But if you didn't go down there often, you wouldn't know and would do it anyway.

Are you for real? Dont blame rail for the ignorance of people that cannot and or will not read and comprehend signage that outlines the do's and dont's when driving on streets with LRT.

[urbanspace]

I can somewhat see the argument, but most of the businesses between Shepherd and Greenbriar generally has parking in the back. further down the line, there isn't that much parking to start with, especially those businesses on the north side of Richmond between Shepherd and Yokum. But as I have stated before, there is usually parking in the back, so I don't see the added issue. Even if parking is a problem, it's not that big of a deal to walk around the corner from additional parking in the area.

Of course, this can be a major pain if it's during the summer or one of our thunderstorms (of which, most people stay home anyway).

Parking may be a problem east of Shepherd. Metro has already expressed its support on this issue to provide additional parking, whether that's through additional lots or aesthetically pleasing parking structures, but the businesses have to be in a position to want to even discuss with Metro. Unfortunately, they have refused to speak with Metro because they have been on the Anti Rail wagon whose position is not to compromise on anything short of killing rail on Richmond.

My fear is that if Metro calls Culberson's bluff and proposes the line down Richmond and Culberson settles for a modified alignment, these businesses may have missed the boat in being able to get their wishlists in front of Metro. Consequently, many of the same arguments they have today may very well come true if rail goes down Richmond, but it will be because they put all their eggs in one basket and weren't willing to come to the table and compromise.

[musicman]

Yes the accident rate the first year was high. But if you look at the full statistics on accidents, they have steadily declined. That Wikipedia has not been updated to reflect what's happened over the last two years.

And as for the confusing signs on our light rail line -- what is so confusing about "no left turn," "no right turn," and "one way ->"? That, plus standard traffic lights, make up the majority of the traffic control signs and devices along the light rail line. They are not confusing. People who don't have the intelligence to understand those basic traffic signs should not be a licensed driver. Instead of blaming Metro for building light rail in the street, a concept that has worked well all over the world with good safety records, why not hold the actual stupid drivers who run red lights and make illegal turns accountable for their own actions? These are drivers who are probably making the same dangerous maneuvers in other places as well. I find it very hard to believe that a driver who never runs red lights anywhere else in the city suddenly can't help running a light and being hit by a train when crossing over Main St.

True about the Wiki data but at least it is a starting point.

The signs aren't confusing to me. BUT some drivers are confused between the lights specifically for cars vs. the lights specifically for the light rail. The light rail lights aren't obvious to drivers unless you know where to look. When the unintelligent driver sees a red light, he/she has made the assumption that the light rail also uses these specific signals for guidance. i'm specifically talking about the "bar" lights for trains. the "|" means the train can go and the "--" means the train should stop. These drivers are the ones who would probably ride thru a stop sign anyway and would risk going thru a red light in this instance. The concept has worked all over the world because they have been exposed to it. We haven't. I first saw this bar light concept in Italy. We had to ask just exactly what was happening because it wasn't intuitive. Another thing that wasn't intuitive was that you had to take a left from the right most lane. It is a habit there. Just different designs.

Unfortunately when you think of Main St. many visitors think of it as a good staring point. But it's not til you're on there that you can't make lefts in most places unless you're familiar.

Edited August 2, 2006 by musicman

[AftonAg]

As long as people ignore traffic signals and signage, there will always be accidents. Trains don't jump off tracks and careen into cars. Stupid drivers are the cause and no amount of whining about about "familiarity"

will change that.

"OH! Officer! I wasn't familiar with that sign

because I hardly ever get out of Afton Oaks!"

And I am sure you heard about the Afton Oaks Aggie at the stop sign . . . . . I'm still there.

Parking may be a problem east of Shepherd. Metro has already expressed its support on this issue to provide additional parking, whether that's through additional lots or aesthetically pleasing parking structures, but the businesses have to be in a position to want to even discuss with Metro. Unfortunately, they have refused to speak with Metro because they have been on the Anti Rail wagon whose position is not to compromise on anything short of killing rail on Richmond.

My fear is that if Metro calls Culberson's bluff and proposes the line down Richmond and Culberson settles for a modified alignment, these businesses may have missed the boat in being able to get their wishlists in front of Metro. Consequently, many of the same arguments they have today may very well come true if rail goes down Richmond, but it will be because they put all their eggs in one basket and weren't willing to come to the table and compromise.

On the other hand since METRO isn't likely to foot the bill for the Richmond line the Federal funding is still a bargaining chip for the compromise and parking structures (I am still hoping to see one that is aesthetically pleasing), and I don't think Metro wants to jeopardize future rail projects by hosing businesses on Richmond that will lose parking spaces.

[Original Timmy Chan's]

I'm also curious about this year's number of light rail accidents. My wife and I were just talking about this last night....I don't remember the last time I heard about one.

I'd like to see the numbers, but apparently Metro's done a fantastic job implementing signage and doing other things to make the rail more auto-friendly. I assume these same features would be built into the Universities line.

[IHB2]

Parking may be a problem east of Shepherd. Metro has already expressed its support on this issue to provide additional parking, whether that's through additional lots or aesthetically pleasing parking structures, but the businesses have to be in a position to want to even discuss with Metro. Unfortunately, they have refused to speak with Metro because they have been on the Anti Rail wagon whose position is not to compromise on anything short of killing rail on Richmond.

My fear is that if Metro calls Culberson's bluff and proposes the line down Richmond and Culberson settles for a modified alignment, these businesses may have missed the boat in being able to get their wishlists in front of Metro. Consequently, many of the same arguments they have today may very well come true if rail goes down Richmond, but it will be because they put all their eggs in one basket and weren't willing to come to the table and compromise.

so true, and evidence of a flawed strategy where the whole anti-rail group has chosen to throw out every objection possible and hope at least 1 sticks. that left them open for defeat on points that conflict w/each other.

for example, another corner that the east of Shepherd AND the AO anti-rail people have painted themselves into is the insistence that "we voted for rail b/c the ballot said Westpark"

now that unwise choice of strategy will come back to haunt them b/c 1. they are on the record as voting FOR rail somewhere in the "corridor" so they can't say they support no rail at all if Wpark proves unfundable, and 2. if they go to court and lose on the strict definition of ballot language METRO doesn't have to give them any more consideration than already offered in planning the line down Richmond.

[Trae]

WELCOME TO PAGE

Edited August 2, 2006 by Trae

[nmainguy]

so true, and evidence of a flawed strategy where the whole anti-rail group has chosen to throw out every objection possible and hope at least 1 sticks. that left them open for defeat on points that conflict w/each other.

for example, another corner that the east of Shepherd AND the AO anti-rail people have painted themselves into is the insistence that "we voted for rail b/c the ballot said Westpark"

now that unwise choice of strategy will come back to haunt them b/c 1. they are on the record as voting FOR rail somewhere in the "corridor" so they can't say they support no rail at all if Wpark proves unfundable, and 2. if they go to court and lose on the strict definition of ballot language METRO doesn't have to give them any more consideration than already offered in planning the line down Richmond.

The parking issue is yet another unsuccessful ploy.

The ballot language was somewhat flawed-Wheeler to Hillcroft never existed-but never-the-less, the majority voted for a rail line regardless of the flaw. Many people also voted for North Hardy and Uptown-roads that don't exist.

A loss in court for the AOers would be a big win for Houston. I'm assuming since so many of them brag on their wealth-money should be no object.

[PapillionWyngs]

The last thing we need. Absolutely!

[KatieDidIt]

Well, I guess the upside of the Richmond line is that traffic will decrease in the area. Most people I know don't want to drive anywhere near the light rail lines.

[H-Town Man]

Crossed over @ Greenspoint? Well ok H-Town man but I think you must mean Greenway Plaza - whacha got in that lemonade of yours?

You'll have to forgive me. I'm an Aggie too.

[AftonAg]

You'll have to forgive me. I'm an Aggie too.

No doubt an honest mistake in the heat of thought!!! Darn fingers!

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metrop...an/4088362.html

Question: If rail does happen along Richmond, can we expect as many rail accidents there as we've seen already with the existing line?

As heavily travelled as Richmond is it would be my guess that there will indeed be an adjustment period for drivers getting used to new signage, and not being used to trains. I expect it to be much like the first light rail line with numerous accidents over the first three months or so and then it will begin to decline. Hopefully METRO will close Newcastle to left turns both to and from Richmond. It should cut down on people cutting through AO by 49% - I would have said 50% but then I might have slighted Ricco, because I know he's going to cut through anyway. . . . .

Well, I guess the upside of the Richmond line is that traffic will decrease in the area. Most people I know don't want to drive anywhere near the light rail lines.

We can only hope Katie - we can only hope.

[AftonAg]

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.

Where are those snail darters when I really need them, maybe we can get a spotted owl to nest in the oak trees in th AO median.

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.

But he is from Texas, and it is in his district and his opinion will carry a lot of weight on that committee.

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.

I would expect a lawsuit challenging the wording on the ballot unless an acceptable compromise on the route is reached. But basically you are right Transitnut - it is very early in the process on the "Railroading of Richmond" and it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

The parking issue is yet another unsuccessful ploy.

The ballot language was somewhat flawed-Wheeler to Hillcroft never existed-but never-the-less, the majority voted for a rail line regardless of the flaw. Many people also voted for North Hardy and Uptown-roads that don't exist.

A loss in court for the AOers would be a big win for Houston. I'm assuming since so many of them brag on their wealth-money should be no object.

Somewhat flawed? no it was a BAIT & SWITCH IMO. Not an outright lie, but certainly a deception on METRO's part. I am still waiting for anyone to define exactly what the Northern and Southern boundaries are on the "Westpark Corridor". It should be fairly simple. I was on Bellaire today inside the loop and it is also 6 lanes wide, and goes right to the TMC, seems like it might be a good alternative route up to Rice, then turn North to Westpark and on to Hillcroft - perfect.

We have enough lawyers in the neighborhood that we get our legal services free.

[CE_ugh]

Where are those snail darters when I really need them, maybe we can get a spotted owl to nest in the oak trees in th AO median.

But he is from Texas, and it is in his district and his opinion will carry a lot of weight on that committee.

I would expect a lawsuit challenging the wording on the ballot unless an acceptable compromise on the route is reached. But basically you are right Transitnut - it is very early in the process on the "Railroading of Richmond" and it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Somewhat flawed? no it was a BAIT & SWITCH IMO. Not an outright lie, but certainly a deception on METRO's part. I am still waiting for anyone to define exactly what the Northern and Southern boundaries are on the "Westpark Corridor". It should be fairly simple. I was on Bellaire today inside the loop and it is also 6 lanes wide, and goes right to the TMC, seems like it might be a good alternative route up to Rice, then turn North to Westpark and on to Hillcroft - perfect.

We have enough lawyers in the neighborhood that we get our legal services free.

Youre absolutely correct for once about Bellaire. That bus route is probably the busiest in the city and long ago had rail down its median, so there are no right of way issues. However I guarantee there would be as big of an uproar from West U, Southside Place, and Bellaire about it as you guys over in Afton Oaks have done about Richmond. It would probably for the same reasons, except maybe "It's Beechnut, stupid!"

Plus if I'm not mistaken, Bellaire was taken off the Solutions 2020 list for bus improvements to get more rail for the rest of the city

[matth1231]

Rep. Culberson alone can't kill this line, he can only attempt to restrict federal funding.

At the rally on Tuesday I spoke to Culberson after everyone was done speaking; when people started driving away in their SUVs.

I am for the rail being on Richmond and as one of his constituents I felt like I should tell him. I introduced myself to him and was very humble and told him that I was a student at UH and that this line would really be a great thing for the students of the universities in Houston and that I was really disapointed in his position. I was really soft spoken and sounded kinda vulnerable because I really just wanted him to listen and not think I was trying to challenge him at all.

I was shocked when instead of just listening he acted like I was initiating a debate. He blurted that, "I'm in support of rail just not on Richmond." I told him that it would be alot more beneficial to Houstonians and students if it ran down Richmond. Again I said this in a very calm tone and was surprised when he told me that it wasn't what the businesses and residences wanted because it was going to take some of their land. After he told me this I kinda relised he wasn't just going to shake my hand listen and let me run off so I asked him how this was different from when txdot took away all that land from all the citizens and businesses along I-10. He was rude and told me that you couldn't move I-10 (which is true...) and then he told me, "there just isn't going to be rail on Richmond."

The point I'm trying to get around to though is that he seems pretty determined for it not to be on Richmond and I wouldn't be surprised if he tried to pull the same stunt Delay pulled when it came to funding Metro.

Also, I'm not sure if this is true. Its a rummor, I suppose. But someone told me that culberson wanted the rail to be on Westpark because it would benefit tx dot in some way and that tx dot gives money to Culberson. I don't know what tx dot would have to gain though so it doesn't really make sense. Does anyone know about this?

[firstngoal]

At the rally on Tuesday I spoke to Culberson after everyone was done speaking; when people started driving away in their SUVs.

I am for the rail being on Richmond and as one of his constituents I felt like I should tell him. I introduced myself to him and was very humble and told him that I was a student at UH and that this line would really be a great thing for the students of the universities in Houston and that I was really disapointed in his position. I was really soft spoken and sounded kinda vulnerable because I really just wanted him to listen and not think I was trying to challenge him at all.

I was shocked when instead of just listening he acted like I was initiating a debate. He blurted that, "I'm in support of rail just not on Richmond." I told him that it would be alot more beneficial to Houstonians and students if it ran down Richmond. Again I said this in a very calm tone and was surprised when he told me that it wasn't what the businesses and residences wanted because it was going to take some of their land. After he told me this I kinda relised he wasn't just going to shake my hand listen and let me run off so I asked him how this was different from when txdot took away all that land from all the citizens and businesses along I-10. He was rude and told me that you couldn't move I-10 (which is true...) and then he told me, "there just isn't going to be rail on Richmond."

The point I'm trying to get around to though is that he seems pretty determined for it not to be on Richmond and I wouldn't be surprised if he tried to pull the same stunt Delay pulled when it came to funding Metro.

Also, I'm not sure if this is true. Its a rummor, I suppose. But someone told me that culberson wanted the rail to be on Westpark because it would benefit tx dot in some way and that tx dot gives money to Culberson. I don't know what tx dot would have to gain though so it doesn't really make sense. Does anyone know about this?

Good job! You did the right thing in approaching him....

I approached one of his reps at the last METRO forum (at Saint Paul's) to tell him of my support of rail on Richmond and I got a very similar response. I too was very respectful... and they acted put off - and rude, rude, rude!! I came home and drafted the following letter - which still has gotten no response from his local or Washington offices. "Overwhelming" response from his constituents against rail on Richmond?? - that is total BS!!!! There were many, MANY people at the church that night who were documenting their support for rail on Richmond. I was in a group of 16 people... all begrudgingly recently brought into Culberson's district (thanks to Tom DeLay).

Here is the letter I sent:

Dear Honorable Congressman Culberson:

I am writing you today to express my strong support of METRO's proposal to construct light rail on Richmond Avenue from Midtown to - at least - Greenway Plaza. After researching the proposed alignments and attending tonight's University line meeting at St. Paul's United Methodist Church, I firmly believe the best solution (from east to west) is to:

Start the line at the intersection of Wheeler and Calhoun at the University of Houston and run it straight down Wheeler through TSU to Midtown.

From the Wheeler Station in Midtown, run the light rail westward on Richmond Avenue to just beyond Buffalo Speedway, then turning south THROUGH Greenway Plaza and across the Southwest Freeway to Westpark, then running west along Westpark to the Hillcroft Transit Center.

Once on Westpark, I would like to see a direct connection onto Post Oak Blvd (not a transfer point - a direct line) to the Galleria and to other points north to the Northwest Transit Center.

As both a resident and an employee of a company based within your district (in Greenway Plaza), I provide an example of a constituent who will use this transportation option for both professional and personal reasons. It will have a tremendous, positive impact on inner city Houston from both a transportation and land use perspective. The University line will provide strong linkages to Houston's businesses, educational and cultural resources, and diverse neighborhoods. The alignment I support also serves some of the highest population densities in the metropolitan area.

I hope you will consider my support of this alignment equally with those who may be more vocal against rail on Richmond. As I mentioned, I have researched the issue and listened to both sides... and feel that running through Greenway Plaza (and not through Afton Oaks) provides a healthy compromise. Please, let us come to a good solution and move forward with this project. I would be quite disappointed to see further setbacks - of any sort - in developing a truly efficient transportation system in Houston. Like the Katy Freeway expansion, light rail is a key element to a well-executed, multi-modal system that serves all Houstonians - and all of your constituents.

Thank you.

[AftonAg]

Youre absolutely correct for once about Bellaire.

Would you mind telling my wife - she wouldn't believe it otherwise.

[nmainguy]

At the rally on Tuesday I spoke to Culberson after everyone was done speaking and he told me, "there just isn't going to be rail on Richmond."

Good job, matth. I think his statement nailed it on the head-all the more reason to keep the pressure on the Mayor and Metro to expose the lies of Culberson and the AOers and get this line going on Richmond.

BTW-I'm sure Culberson isn't accustomed to being confronted like that so you get the Hero of the Day award and a free drink at your choice of venue.

[dp2]

Somewhat flawed? no it was a BAIT & SWITCH IMO. Not an outright lie, but certainly a deception on METRO's part. I am still waiting for anyone to define exactly what the Northern and Southern boundaries are on the "Westpark Corridor". It should be fairly simple. I was on Bellaire today inside the loop and it is also 6 lanes wide, and goes right to the TMC, seems like it might be a good alternative route up to Rice, then turn North to Westpark and on to Hillcroft - perfect.

We have enough lawyers in the neighborhood that we get our legal services free.

Ya know, I have no problem with someone raising honestly felt concerns such as about how rail will affect traffic, property values, noise, etc., but this whole "They said Westpark" argument is such a transparent red herring tactic. It is quite evident now that you, like the most annoying NIMBY's, will throw out any BS just for argument's sake, just like a used-car salesman or sleazy lawyer.

You want Clintonesque-style parsing of the meaning of "Westpark"? Fine, here we go:

1. There is no Westpark road for 2 miles from east of Kirby to Midtown (vicinity of "Wheeler Station",) so even under your definition of the ballot language Metro is free to use any street or path it chooses in that section. The map accompanying the Metro Solutions proposal that was voted on showed a route going from west of 610 to across the existing light-rail line at Midtown and east towards the university.

http://www.lightrailnow.org/images/hou-met...ns-rail-map.jpg

So it was clear that a rail line was proposed for the section east of where Westpark ends at Kirby, which also makes it clear that Metro was proposing using more than just the road named Westpark in this corridor. Thus your argument is fallacious. But let's go further:

2. Neither your group nor Culberson have ever actually advocated placing the rail line on Westpark road. Instead you have advocated using the abandoned railroad ROW, formerly owned by the Southern Pacific railroad, and parts of the US 59 ROW near Midtown. None of that railroad line was ever named Westpark, only the parallel road. So if we want to use your strict definition of "Westpark", you are also engaging in bait-and-switch tactic.

3. If you want to change your argument and widen the definition of "Westpark" to say that it is included in the Westpark Tollroad corridor that was built on part of the railroad ROW (with part of it reserved for rapid transit), fine, but the Westpark Tollroad's east end is at 610. Using this definition still allows Metro to pursue other options east of there.

4. If you want to change your argument to widen the definition of "Westpark" even further to include the former railroad ROW east of 610 since it is parallel to Westpark road, then how wide does one go? What precedent can you cite to establish the limits when defining the width of a general transportation study corridor? I'll give some. TXDOT uses a 10-mile width for some of its initial corridor planning, then narrows it down to 1-mile. The centerline of the Hardy Tollroad deviates from the centerline of Hardy Road by more than 1800' in Spring and Westfield, more than 2000' north of Beltway 8, and by approx. 1000' in the planned southern extension. So we have several precedents where a transportation project included in its ROW land extending out 1800'-2500' feet from the centerline of the corridor's namesake. East of 610 all of Richmond is within 2000' of the centerline of Westpark, most within 1800'. All of Richmond is within 2100' of the centerline of the abandoned railroad ROW, most within 1900'. Also note the vagueness of the line on the Metro Solutions map, illustrating that Metro wan't advocating a specific street, but rather a general corridor.

5. Ballot language itself:

########################################

Authorization of Metro to issue bonds, notes and other obligations payable, in whole or in part, from 75% of Metro's sales and use tax revenues in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $640,000,000 for Metro's transit authority system, including the Metro Solutions transit system plan (as described in Exhibits A and A-1 of Metro Resolution No. 2003-77 and the official notice of election, which are incorporated herein), which includes bus service expansions (including new buses, bus routes, transit centers, and Park & Ride facilities) and construction of extensions and new segments of Metro's rail system known as "MetroRail," approval of such plan and construction of all segments of the MetroRail and commuter line components (including approximately 64.8 miles of light rail and 8 miles of commuter line, as described in Exhibits A and A-3 through A-9 of such resolution and the official notice of election, which are specifically incorporated herein and generally summarized below), and dedication of 25% of Metro's sales and use tax revenues through September 30, 2014, to street improvements and related projects as authorized by law, and with no increase in the current rate of Metro's sales tax.

* * * * * * *

The following summary lists the components and segments of MetroRail and commuter line, as described in Exhibits A and A-3 through A-9 of such resolution and the official notice of the election, and is a part of the ballot and the proposition being submitted to the voters at the election. The segments marked ** are expected to be completed by the end of 2012 utilizing the proceeds of the $640 million of bonds, if approved at the election.

1. NORTH HARDY

**A. UH-Downtown to Northline Mall

B. Northline Mall to Greenspoint

C. Greenspoint to Bush IAH Airport

2. SOUTHEAST

**A. Downtown/Bagby to Dowling

**B. Dowling to Griggs/610

C. Griggs/610 to Park & Ride in the vicinity of Hobby Airport

D. Sunnyside: Southeast Transit Center to Bellfort

E. Sunnyside: Bellfort to Airport Blvd.

3. HARRISBURG

**A. Dowling to Magnolia Transit Center

B. Magnolia Transit Center to Gulfgate Center

C. Gulfgate Center to Telephone Road

4. WESTPARK

**Wheeler Station to Hillcroft Transit Center

5. UPTOWN/WEST LOOP

Westpark to the Northwest Transit Center

6. INNER KATY

Downtown/Bagby to Northwest Transit Center

7. SOUTHWEST COMMUTER LINE

Fannin South Park & Ride to Harris County line

########################################

A. Northline Mall is more than a mile from Hardy Road and the N. Hardy Tollroad.

B. UH-Downtown is 2/3rd's of a mile from Hardy Street and 1/2 mile from the closest point of the planned N. Hardy Tollroad southern extension.

C. Greenspoint (both the namesake mall and the center of the general district) is more than a mile from Hardy road and the N. Hardy Tollroad.

D. All of Bush IAH Airport is more than a mile from Hardy road and the N. Hardy Tollroad.

E. Gulgate Center is more than a mile from Harrisburg Blvd.

F. Wheeler Station is 2 miles east of Westpark road, 4.25 miles from the Westpark Tollroad.

Thus it is quite clear that Metro and the ballot language were about general corridors, with those corridors extending beyond any namesake and being defined as at least a mile either side of the centerline of its namesake (since Northline Mall is more than a mile from the centerline of the N. Hardy Tollroad, which parallels and continues past it.) Since Richmond is within 1/4 to 1/2 mile of any road or rail ROW being claimed as the namesake, clearly its use is not precluded based on any ballot language.

Edited August 3, 2006 by dp2

[Highway6]

Ya know, I have no problem with someone raising honestly felt concerns such as about how rail will affect traffic, property values, noise, etc., but this whole "They said Westpark" argument is such a transparent red herring tactic. It is quite evident now that you, like the most annoying NIMBY's, will throw out any BS just for argument's sake, just like a used-car salesman or sleazy lawyer.

You want Clintonesque-style parsing of the meaning of "Westpark"? Fine, here we go:

Thus it is quite clear that Metro and the ballot language were about general corridors, with those corridors extending beyond any namesake and being defined as at least a mile either side of the centerline of its namesake (since Northline Mall is more than a mile from the centerline of the N. Hardy Tollroad, which parallels and continues past it.) Since Richmond is within 1/4 to 1/2 mile of any road or rail ROW being claimed as the namesake, clearly its use is not precluded based on any ballot language.

Are you a lawyer ?

You go on with yo bad self.

Nicely laid out.

[nmainguy]

dp2,

You make a good argument-one that has been used to explain the ballot time and again to hapless voters with a myopic view. I suggest you save your energy because it is useless when dealing with the antis and AOers. The foundation of their argument is based on scare-tactics, miss-information and lies. The foundation of yours rests on facts, knowledge and logic.

A little off topic-but not really-it is interesting to note how the No Rail On Richmond petition

http://www.mobilitycoalition.org/sign.html with 20 signatures and the Save the River Oaks Shopping Center & Alabama Theater petition http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/riveroaks/signatures.html with over 20,000 signatures informs the public how very different 2 passionate issues are dealt with. It is a clear illustration of one group

Edited August 3, 2006 by nmainguy

[KinkaidAlum]

dp2-

Great post. Factual and precise. Of course, I expect the great anti-rail debaters to come up with some special retorts like "nuh-uh," "you're wrong and I am right", and "I am rubber you are glue..."

Also, there is FRAUD on the NO Rail On Richmond petition. Signee #4 (Richard Whitelely) and Signee #5 (anonymous) wrote the exact same address and exact same message. I take it there are truly only 19 signatures but all of them should be thrown out!

[Houston19514]

Thus it is quite clear that Metro and the ballot language were about general corridors, with those corridors extending beyond any namesake and being defined as at least a mile either side of the centerline of its namesake (since Northline Mall is more than a mile from the centerline of the N. Hardy Tollroad, which parallels and continues past it.) Since Richmond is within 1/4 to 1/2 mile of any road or rail ROW being claimed as the namesake, clearly its use is not precluded based on any ballot language.

Well said dp2! Great post! You should send that to every reporter for that sorry excuse for a newspaper, the Chronicle. I've noticed they routinely and mindlessly repeat the idiotic "argument" about the ballot language without any challenge or explanation.

[Transit Nut]

Well said dp2! Great post! You should send that to every reporter for that sorry excuse for a newspaper, the Chronicle. I've noticed they routinely and mindlessly repeat the idiotic "argument" about the ballot language without any challenge or explanation.

I agree, dp2's reasoning is well thought out. You may also want to share this with RichmondRail.org, and even METRO themselves (so that they can better reason with anti-Richmond people).

Actually, regarding the "we voted for Westpark" argument, you don't hear any of the people on the eastern end of the University Corridor arguing that (even though "Westpark" was supposed to end at Wheeler Station). They want light rail, although maybe not on Wheeler, but at least they are willing to work with METRO.

[Original Timmy Chan's]

1. NORTH HARDY

**A. UH-Downtown to Northline Mall

B. Northline Mall to Greenspoint

C. Greenspoint to Bush IAH Airport

2. SOUTHEAST

**A. Downtown/Bagby to Dowling

**B. Dowling to Griggs/610

C. Griggs/610 to Park & Ride in the vicinity of Hobby Airport

D. Sunnyside: Southeast Transit Center to Bellfort

E. Sunnyside: Bellfort to Airport Blvd.

3. HARRISBURG

**A. Dowling to Magnolia Transit Center

B. Magnolia Transit Center to Gulfgate Center

C. Gulfgate Center to Telephone Road

4. WESTPARK

**Wheeler Station to Hillcroft Transit Center

5. UPTOWN/WEST LOOP

Westpark to the Northwest Transit Center

6. INNER KATY

Downtown/Bagby to Northwest Transit Center

7. SOUTHWEST COMMUTER LINE

Fannin South Park & Ride to Harris County line

THANK YOU so much for clearing this up for me!

I've been driving around for months trying to find "Southeast Road", "Uptown Street", "Inner Katy Boulevard" and "Southwest Communter Line Ave." so I can take a look at the light rail alignment that I voted on...

"I VOTED FOR 'SOUTHWEST COMMUTER LINE', SO THAT'S WHERE IT SHOULD BE BUILT!!!"

[VelvetJ]

After he told me this I kinda relised he wasn't just going to shake my hand listen and let me run off so I asked him how this was different from when txdot took away all that land from all the citizens and businesses along I-10. He was rude and told me that you couldn't move I-10 (which is true...) and then he told me, "there just isn't going to be rail on Richmond."

Yes it's true that I-10 could not be moved but if I'm not mistaken, some citizens in that area suggested stacking the freeway, like in many other cities across the world, so a lot of land would not have to be taken along the corridor. But if I recall correctly, that option was dismissed. So no I-10 did not have to move but it could have been elevated. If he listened to those citizens like he is listening to those in AO, many of those business and homes would probably still be in existence on the Katy Freeway.

Culberson is a hypocrite.

[MiDTOWNeR]

I am also infinitely dumbfounded by the fact that CALIFORNIANS have no problems keeping their car away from the front of a train, when all that separates them from a certain collision with a big red train is two measely yellow lines.

Because overall they are much better drivers!!! I just got back from having driven around San Diego County for a few days and was pleasantly reminded how much better folks drive there than in these parts. I know I know, "GO BACK!" Believe me, I wish I could...in a heartbeat!

The San Diego Trolley totally kicks A$S! Putting the Houston light rail down Richmond would be awesome for this town. Making it much more pedestrian friendly would really improve the quality of life here! From there, Metro could concentrate on the commuters outside the loop.

Ya know, I have no problem with someone raising honestly felt concerns such as about how rail will affect traffic, property values, noise, etc., but this whole "They said Westpark" argument is such a transparent red herring tactic. It is quite evident now that you, like the most annoying NIMBY's, will throw out any BS just for argument's sake, just like a used-car salesman or sleazy lawyer.

You want Clintonesque-style parsing of the meaning of "Westpark"? Fine, here we go:

1. There is no Westpark road for 2 miles from east of Kirby to Midtown (vicinity of "Wheeler Station",) so even under your definition of the ballot language Metro is free to use any street or path it chooses in that section. The map accompanying the Metro Solutions proposal that was voted on showed a route going from west of 610 to across the existing light-rail line at Midtown and east towards the university.

http://www.lightrailnow.org/images/hou-met...ns-rail-map.jpg

So it was clear that a rail line was proposed for the section east of where Westpark ends at Kirby, which also makes it clear that Metro was proposing using more than just the road named Westpark in this corridor. Thus your argument is fallacious. But let's go further:

2. Neither your group nor Culberson have ever actually advocated placing the rail line on Westpark road. Instead you have advocated using the abandoned railroad ROW, formerly owned by the Southern Pacific railroad, and parts of the US 59 ROW near Midtown. None of that railroad line was ever named Westpark, only the parallel road. So if we want to use your strict definition of "Westpark", you are also engaging in bait-and-switch tactic.

3. If you want to change your argument and widen the definition of "Westpark" to say that it is included in the Westpark Tollroad corridor that was built on part of the railroad ROW (with part of it reserved for rapid transit), fine, but the Westpark Tollroad's east end is at 610. Using this definition still allows Metro to pursue other options east of there.

4. If you want to change your argument to widen the definition of "Westpark" even further to include the former railroad ROW east of 610 since it is parallel to Westpark road, then how wide does one go? What precedent can you cite to establish the limits when defining the width of a general transportation study corridor? I'll give some. TXDOT uses a 10-mile width for some of its initial corridor planning, then narrows it down to 1-mile. The centerline of the Hardy Tollroad deviates from the centerline of Hardy Road by more than 1800' in Spring and Westfield, more than 2000' north of Beltway 8, and by approx. 1000' in the planned southern extension. So we have several precedents where a transportation project included in its ROW land extending out 1800'-2500' feet from the centerline of the corridor's namesake. East of 610 all of Richmond is within 2000' of the centerline of Westpark, most within 1800'. All of Richmond is within 2100' of the centerline of the abandoned railroad ROW, most within 1900'. Also note the vagueness of the line on the Metro Solutions map, illustrating that Metro wan't advocating a specific street, but rather a general corridor.

5. Ballot language itself:

########################################

Authorization of Metro to issue bonds, notes and other obligations payable, in whole or in part, from 75% of Metro's sales and use tax revenues in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $640,000,000 for Metro's transit authority system, including the Metro Solutions transit system plan (as described in Exhibits A and A-1 of Metro Resolution No. 2003-77 and the official notice of election, which are incorporated herein), which includes bus service expansions (including new buses, bus routes, transit centers, and Park & Ride facilities) and construction of extensions and new segments of Metro's rail system known as "MetroRail," approval of such plan and construction of all segments of the MetroRail and commuter line components (including approximately 64.8 miles of light rail and 8 miles of commuter line, as described in Exhibits A and A-3 through A-9 of such resolution and the official notice of election, which are specifically incorporated herein and generally summarized below), and dedication of 25% of Metro's sales and use tax revenues through September 30, 2014, to street improvements and related projects as authorized by law, and with no increase in the current rate of Metro's sales tax.

* * * * * * *

The following summary lists the components and segments of MetroRail and commuter line, as described in Exhibits A and A-3 through A-9 of such resolution and the official notice of the election, and is a part of the ballot and the proposition being submitted to the voters at the election. The segments marked ** are expected to be completed by the end of 2012 utilizing the proceeds of the $640 million of bonds, if approved at the election.

1. NORTH HARDY

**A. UH-Downtown to Northline Mall

B. Northline Mall to Greenspoint

C. Greenspoint to Bush IAH Airport

2. SOUTHEAST

**A. Downtown/Bagby to Dowling

**B. Dowling to Griggs/610

C. Griggs/610 to Park & Ride in the vicinity of Hobby Airport

D. Sunnyside: Southeast Transit Center to Bellfort

E. Sunnyside: Bellfort to Airport Blvd.

3. HARRISBURG

**A. Dowling to Magnolia Transit Center

B. Magnolia Transit Center to Gulfgate Center

C. Gulfgate Center to Telephone Road

4. WESTPARK

**Wheeler Station to Hillcroft Transit Center

5. UPTOWN/WEST LOOP

Westpark to the Northwest Transit Center

6. INNER KATY

Downtown/Bagby to Northwest Transit Center

7. SOUTHWEST COMMUTER LINE

Fannin South Park & Ride to Harris County line

########################################

A. Northline Mall is more than a mile from Hardy Road and the N. Hardy Tollroad.

B. UH-Downtown is 2/3rd's of a mile from Hardy Street and 1/2 mile from the closest point of the planned N. Hardy Tollroad southern extension.

C. Greenspoint (both the namesake mall and the center of the general district) is more than a mile from Hardy road and the N. Hardy Tollroad.

D. All of Bush IAH Airport is more than a mile from Hardy road and the N. Hardy Tollroad.

E. Gulgate Center is more than a mile from Harrisburg Blvd.

F. Wheeler Station is 2 miles east of Westpark road, 4.25 miles from the Westpark Tollroad.

Thus it is quite clear that Metro and the ballot language were about general corridors, with those corridors extending beyond any namesake and being defined as at least a mile either side of the centerline of its namesake (since Northline Mall is more than a mile from the centerline of the N. Hardy Tollroad, which parallels and continues past it.) Since Richmond is within 1/4 to 1/2 mile of any road or rail ROW being claimed as the namesake, clearly its use is not precluded based on any ballot language.

WOOHOO!!!

[RedScare]

The San Diego Trolley totally kicks A$S! Putting the Houston light rail down Richmond would be awesome for this town. Making it much more pedestrian friendly would really improve the quality of life here! From there, Metro could concentrate on the commuters outside the loop.

If only our neighbors and elected officials were concerned about quality of life and pedestrian friendly activity. They appear to be trying to single handedly save GM and Ford from bankruptcy.

[zebra]

dp2 is the bomb! You should speek that point at the next publik meeeting.

I think the Culberson guy is ful of CRAAP. I say we al start riting lettres to the Mayer, esposing CulbertSon for whut he reely is: A LIER. I can undrestand the cuncern AO resdints have but why do they need to hold the city bak as a hole? And why is Culbertson beeeing such a jakass.

Maybee our buluvud Aftonag guy can spred more lite on whuts reely going on?

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Culberson is a hypocrite.

And a jackass!!!