14 January 2008
Frank "Procurement Disaster" Wilson will chat online Tuesday*
File this under "Short Notice" (see update below):
Got a question for Metropolitan Transit Authority president and CEO Frank Wilson?
If so, get to a computer at noon today, log onto www.ridemetro.org, then click on "chat" to take part in an hour-long once-a-month online chat room.
Metro spokeswoman Raequel Roberts said in a statement Monday that Transit Chat "will give our customers an opportunity to ask Metro's top executives questions about Metro's programs and services, from the Q Card to the new light rail lines we're building."
"It will be live, but we do ask participants to exercise the same principles of politeness mandated on our blog," Roberts said. "Our guidelines: Be respectful, no name-calling, stay on topic."
Note: You can't call in to converse by voice, or send a text message by phone, or chat by e-mail.
Participants will type their messages into a window on the Metro Web bag and read the replies there.
UPDATE: As Matt Bramanti notes in the comments on the Chron.com story, this chat is scheduled for Tuesday -- tomorrow! The story is written for tomorrow, but posted on Chron.com today, not noting that the date for the chat is Tuesday. I have edited the headline and this post accordingly.
So, by all means available, head to Metro's site tomorrow and chat away with the dude. Respectfully, of course.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 01/14/08 03:09 PM |
06 January 2008
METRO rolls out 2008 service "improvements," fare increases
KHOU-11's Wendell Edwards reports that a Houston non-profit isn't too pleased with planned fare changes:
At the Star of Hope, caseworkers hand out small tokens to help some clients get to appointments and job interviews.
The tokens, worth a dollar each, are used for Metro fares.
“It will help them get on the bus to get them to their necessary destination,” Star of Hope case worker Ural Williams said.But under new plans, Metro will change the system for charities.
In the past, they could purchase the tokens from Metro at a discount. But now the dollar tokens will become a thing of the past, replaced by $5 vouchers.
Williams says that’s a bit much for charities to just give away.
“They can abuse the system with it. They could sell it or it could become a temptation,” he said.
[snip]
The changes aren’t scheduled to take place until the end of March. The charities are hoping they still have enough time to convince Metro to change the plan.
A Metro spokeswoman said officials are sympathetic to the problem.
“We will be talking with these agencies to develop an alternative that best serves both our needs,” she said in a statement.
Let's hope so. Because the regional mobility organization frequently seems less concerned about the people who most need its services than about affluent types who want light-rail to be like a cheap, heavily subsidized "world-class" taxi that will take them right where they want to go (and about affluent developers, architects, consultants, planners, and others who hope to secure business from METRO).
The big news to start the year, of course, is that METRO has finally rolled out the Q Card (and associated fare increases) after weeks months years of inexplicable delays. Cory Crow gave that about the best treatment we've seen in the local blogosphere, and it's certainly a more skeptical treatment than one is likely to find among the local METRO cheerleaders at the city's big daily newspaper.
Speaking of skepticism, we meant to post about this Free Press Houston story on METRO that we found weeks ago via the B.S. Houston Arts Blog, but just never got around to it. While the story is a bit lacking in terms of editing (it comes from a tiny alt-weekly after all), the author's willingness to analyze METRO instead of simply regurgitating the organization's press releases and attacks on critics is refreshing. Perhaps some of the city's other print journalists will follow that lead in 2008!
RELATED COVERAGE: METRO rolls out new fare system (KPRC-2 News), METRO bus riders learning the 'Q' lingo (KHOU-11 News).
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 01/06/08 03:26 PM |
21 December 2007
Metro: Bus complaints are up and we're victims of success!
KHOU-11 tells a tale of Metro's fine customer service:
As the workday ends, the adventure begins for Veronica Young. She is not a fan of the bus system, but a passenger anyway.
“They run stupid. I hate the way they run,” said Young. "You'd rather ride a car than take a bus."
This year there are more people like her than ever before.
According to METRO's year-end report, customers are losing patience with Houston’s public transportation system.
Complaints about buses being late are up 39-percent. Complaints about bus driver behavior are up nearly 43-percent.
Metro's excuse?
"We're almost a victim of our own success,” said METRO’s Raequel Roberts. “We have a much better call system now, so the wait time is less than a minute on most calls.
“So, people realize if I do call, I will get somebody that'll take my complaint. And if you realize you're going to get somebody you're more likely to call."
"We're almost a victim of our own success." I think we've heard that before out of a Metro official -- maybe Frank Wilson. Ms. Roberts is keeping up with the talking points!
So, Metro's customer service problems are because it has a better complaint call system now? It couldn't possibly because Metro has put so much emphasis on light rail that it has shortchanged bus service, now could it?
After a wave of retirements, 310 new bus drivers were behind the wheel this year. Roland Perez is sure he's been a passenger with one of them.
"I've been on one bus where everybody had to tell (the driver) where the route was,” said Perez. “He skipped like three or four stops and went the wrong way."
Maybe there's a hint in there!
METRO tells 11 News it's looking into why complaints are up.
Metro needs to commission a study.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 12/21/07 04:53 AM |
05 December 2007
FTA withdraws plan approval after METRO BRT/LRT switch
The Chronicle's Mike Snyder reports that METRO's light rail plans have run into problems:
An unexpected demand for additional justification for two planned Houston light rail lines raises doubts about Metro's relationship with a federal agency it is counting on for funding, Metro President Frank Wilson said Tuesday.
A letter from Sherry Little, deputy administrator of the Federal Transit Administration, withdraws that agency's approval of preliminary engineering studies and other elements of rail lines planned for the North and Southeast corridors.
The letter, which Wilson said arrived Friday, said Metro must do additional environmental studies, including public hearings, before it can acquire land and start construction. It said Metro's October decision to build light rail in all five of its transit corridors, rather than bus rapid transit that could be converted to rail in four of them, requires the extra information and review.
Wilson said Metro already had provided almost all of the requested information and can quickly generate the rest. He said, however, that the letter's content and tone suggest that the healthy working relationship the two agencies have enjoyed may be deteriorating.
"There is a very hard edge to this letter," Wilson said. "They're acting as if light rail transit is a whole different planet" from bus rapid transit, when "the only real difference is the vehicle."
Apparently, the difference is somewhat more significant, or the technical experts in the FTA wouldn't have asked for better documentation.
Just because the newspaper of record in Houston frequently rhapsodizes over METRO press releases and pretty graphs from transit organizations that merely advocate for community involvement (*wink*) doesn't mean the people in D.C. who actually approve the funding for these boondoggles are similarly pliant. That seems to have piqued Mr. Wilson!
In reality, METRO's zig from light rail for all corridors (as promised in the 2003 referendum), then zag to bus rapid transit for some corridors (nowhere mentioned in the 2003 referendum, but favored by the feds), then zig back to light rail for all corridors has created these difficulties, as the FTA letter makes clear -- although if we are to believe Christof Spieler, who is quoted once again in the article (and who, admittedly, does produce very pretty graphs), this is no big deal.
Unsurprisingly, no critics of METRO's light rail operations and policymaking are cited by Snyder.
UPDATE (12-06-2007): As Michelle Mittelstadt's story in today's Chronicle makes clear, METRO has only itself to blame for the possible delay to its construction plans:
Before Metro's board voted in October to rework its plan for new rapid transit lines, the agency's president was warned by the Federal Transit Administration that such a change could result in delays and force a return to the drawing board, federal officials said Wednesday.
That message was repeated with far greater detail when Metropolitan Transit Authority President Frank Wilson met with FTA officials in Washington on Nov. 14, FTA Associate Administrator Wes Irvin said.
"There was no blindsiding from this agency to Houston Metro," Irvin said.
Wilson said this week that the FTA's decision to withdraw its preliminary engineering approval for rail lines planned for the North and Southeast corridors, officially outlined in a letter to Metro on Friday, came as a shock.
Frank "Procurement Disaster" Wilson was not entirely forthcoming with the truth. How... shocking!
BLOGVERSATION: Lose an Eye, It's a Sport, TBIFOC.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 12/05/07 10:38 PM |
More on public-private Grand Parkway proposal
Following-up on yesterday's post about the county considering an unsolicited proposal to complete the Grand Parkway as a public-private partnership, here's Bill Murphy's latest reporting:
In other business, the court authorized employees to study an unsolicited offer for the county to enter a public-private partnership to build and operate the 197-mile Grand Parkway as a toll road.
County Judge Ed Emmett said he would like the county to control the road and have its profits benefit the region rather than the rest of the state.
Studying the plan put forward by Grand Parkway Constructors is prudent, but should not be taken as support for the concept, he said.
The Texas Department of Transportation has the final say over who builds and controls the Grand Parkway, the outermost ring around Houston. Grand Parkway Constructors' principals are Williams Brothers Construction and Dannenbaum Engineering.
We already know where Judge Emmett stands on the Grand Parkway. How it gets done is another matter.
Charles Bacarrise, who will be running against Emmett in the Republican primary for county judge, has sent along his reaction to the "Grand Parkway Constructors" proposal:
NO public private partnerships needs to be used in our region when the Harris County Toll Road Authority is sitting on a $700 million-plus cash reserve, with over $360 million in annual revenue income — and that’s BEFORE the $60 million Emmett toll tax increase went into effect in September. Second, the project presents an obvious conflict of interest based on the parties involved. Engineer Jim Dannenbaum and Doug Pitcock, CEO of Williams Bros, are major contributors to every member of commissioners court. Now they come to this body and ask them to give them an annuity? If I were county judge, I would lead the fight to reject this outright.
The "Constructors" proposal does raise eyebrows.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 12/05/07 05:00 AM |
04 December 2007
Private firms try to push construction of Grand Parkway
Without a lot of fanfare, something popped up on the latest Commissioners Court agenda:
Recommendation that an unsolicited proposal by Grand Parkway Constructors be subjected to review and fact-finding negotiations by county staff and consultants for a public-private partnership for a project delivery system for the Grand Parkway for the county's Toll Road Authority.
"Unsolicited." Nice.
Today the Chron's Bill Murphy has more information:
A joint venture led by a road construction company and an engineering firm has asked Harris County to enter into a public-private partnership to build and operate the 197-mile Grand Parkway as a toll road.
Commissioners Court will consider today whether it wants to study the unsolicited offer to undertake the $5.3 billion project to build an outermost ring skirting the metropolitan area.
"It's intriguing because we have not seen details of the proposal," said Art Storey, director of the county's public infrastructure department.
"It appears that it would allow us to retain some control of the project, (rely on) the local construction community and get financing for the project guaranteed."
If the court decides to go ahead with a partnership between the county and Grand Parkway Constructors, the joint venture would need approval from the Texas Department of Transportation.
Grand Parkway Constructors' principals are Williams Brothers Construction and Dannenbaum Engineering.
Executives at both companies did not return calls Monday.
Storey said the joint venture proposal envisions the Harris County Toll Road Authority serving as the project's managing partner.
Under a partnership, the county and the joint venture could agree to have the toll road authority operate the Grand Parkway and retain some of the revenue, Storey said.
The idea of a Grand Parkway encircling the metropolitan area outside Highway 6 has been around for decades. Critics long have contended that it is a highway sought by road builders and developers who intend to build subdivisions and strip malls in the still undeveloped areas.
Regardless of one's stance in that debate, the Legislature and TxDOT have decided the Grand Parkway will be built.
Delvin Dennis, TxDOT's deputy district engineer in the Houston area, said some areas where the highway would be built are rural now, but will not be in 10 to 20 years.
Critics contend it's being pushed by developers, because...it's being pushed by developers! Billy Burge is the president of the Grand Parkway Association, and former state Sen. Jon Lindsay held meetings with developers in an effort to further the project. Goodness knows what he's been up to these days, since he now has some free time on his hands.
As for the assertion that some areas are rural now, but won't be in a decade or two, Mr. Dennis should come and visit the Spring area where the F-2 segment has been mapped out. It's already a whole lot less rural than it was even a couple of years ago, and running a big highway through it will be devastating.
Judge Emmett has already said that completion of the Grand Parkway must occur, but I can't recall seeing where the other candidates for county judge stand on the issue.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 12/04/07 05:08 AM |
03 December 2007
Rail down busy streets hurts mobility? Who knew?!
In today's Move It column, the Chronicle's Rad Sallee addresses reader complaints about the progressive synchronization of downtown traffic signals.
One problem with synchronizing the east-west signals is, of course, METRO's transit backbone:
MetroRail on Main, which can override traffic signals, giving motorists a red light when the trains pass, makes it harder to time the crosstown lights.
After the train preempts a signal and passes by, "it typically takes about three cycles for the signal to get back in sync with the rest of the system," Weatherford said.
Public Works wants to reduce this to one cycle, but it isn't working as planned. "We will need to work with Metro to work out the bugs," he said.
Laying rail down/across busy streets hurts vehicular mobility.
I know what -- METRO should build even more rail down busy streets!
Genius.
BLOGVERSATION: Lose an Eye, It's a Sport.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 12/03/07 08:13 AM |
28 November 2007
Additional red light cameras help the city's coffers!
Those last twenty red light cameras the city hurriedly installed (to beat a state deadline) have provided Houston quite a tidy little stash of cash, according to the Chron's Matt Stiles. Stiles notes that the past several months had seen a downward trend in the number of tickets issued, but with the new cameras, revenues jumped quite nicely.
However, Chief Martha Montalvo assures us that sneaking those twenty cameras in had absolutely nothing to do with revenue. Oh no, no, no, no:
Police officials dismiss any suggestion that the cameras were installed to replace money being lost because of the new state law.
Montalvo said the department added the extra cameras because certain intersections still were seeing a lot of violations, even with the intense media publicity about the program.
"I never ever thought about those things," Montalvo said. "The whole purpose of the other approaches was to make people aware that their safety is important."
She never, EVER thought about the revenue!
Right.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 11/28/07 05:13 AM |
26 November 2007
Meyer: METRO's $3 billion limousine
Clear Thinker Tom Kirkendall has previously noted "the sheer lack of any perspective from the local mainstream media regarding the dubious nature of Metro's urban economics" and the "vacuity of media coverage of METRO."
For whatever reason, the Chronicle is particularly weak (and getting weaker) in terms of analyzing METRO and regional mobility policy in any critical, economic sense.
Fortunately, where the local media have dropped the ball, blogger Neal Meyer has stepped in with a lengthy post analyzing METRO spending, bus routes, revenues, and alternative mobility solutions. It's a fascinating post that mixes historical Houston transit data, economic analysis, and a good working knowledge of transit systems. There aren't pretty graphs (or simplistic cheerleading masquerading as analysis by an impartial transportation think tank), and the writing is a bit dense at times, so the approach may not interest the Chronicle. But for folks interested in a grown-up, cost/benefit-oriented discussion of local transit policy, it's a very interesting read (the first of several, we hope).
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 11/26/07 11:01 PM |
21 November 2007
New traffic signal timing causes rush hour headaches
The city is working through some traffic signal issues, as rush hour traffic was a mess Monday and Tuesday. From the Chron's Rad Sallee:
Motorists were supposed to be able to drive through downtown at 28 mph without encountering a red light. The new timing may have worked well enough with sparse weekend traffic, but problems multiplied Monday when people returned to work.
It was "a disaster" for drivers on Louisiana, the major northbound artery that leads from downtown to the Katy Freeway, according to motorist David Rodi.
"This morning, I was lucky to go two blocks at a time before getting stopped by a red light, and traffic is much more congested overall," he wrote in an e-mail to the Houston Chronicle.
And from KHOU-11:
Instead, drivers said the new system has led to gridlock during rush hour.
“It’s not working,” said one driver.
“Once we got into town on Smith everything started to back up,” said Kathie Miller who drives in the area.
[snip]
It’s a different story at rush hour. Drivers said in some cases their commute time through downtown has doubled or tripled.
So, after two days of rush-hour gridlock, the Public Works Department has put a so-called “tweak team” on the streets, making changes to unclog the trouble spots.
City spokesman Alvin Wright said the problems were not "entirely unexpected," but Rad Sallee's initial story on the new sequencing didn't mention that the city anticipated problems during rush hour.
Downtown drivers have had enough headaches, what with years of road construction and light rail. Here's hoping the city gets it right...fast!
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 11/21/07 04:49 AM |
20 November 2007
A community wins one against TxDOT
Well here's something you don't see every day: the little guy came out on top in a battle against TxDOT (via KUHF-88.7)
TxDOT has been planning to build two overpasses -- one at the intersection of Westheimer and Highway 6 and the other at the intersection of Bellaire and Highway 6. David Harbers, who owns a Shipley's Donuts franchise, and several other business owners and community members made comments at H-GAC's Transportation Policy Council, urging the members to vote against the project because they say it will destroy commerce and do nothing to truly alleviate congestion and mobility in the Highway 6 corridor. Turns out, the council agreed. Harbers says he's overwhelmed by the decision.
"The little man was finally able to win. They finally listened to the people that are in the public rather than just doing it because we got money."
And there definitely was money -- $36 million to be exact. The money was a chunk of safety bond funding awarded to the Houston region specifically for these overpass projects. And since the projects were scrapped, the money goes back to the state for use elsewhere. TxDOT District Engineer Gary Trietsch says he's not disappointed about losing the money, as much as he's concerned this decision will delay any progress in that corridor.
[snip]
Three members of the council voted to move forward with the project, but the remaining members voted it down, including Harris County Judge Ed Emmett, who says the voice of the community underscored the need for a long-term plan to relieve congestion in that area.
"There are a lot of cases where the community doesn't want a transportation improvement, but it's still the right thing to do.
I do hope that's not an omen for Grand Parkway F-2 segment. Judge Emmett has already said it's a top priority of his to get it completed, but, as long-time readers of bH know, Tomball and Spring residents do not want it. It will just devastate our communities.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 11/20/07 07:24 PM |
19 November 2007
Red light cameras get a mixed review on safety
Here's a local media outlet that has been keeping track of some red light camera stats: KPRC-2 has been keeping a tally of accident numbers at intersections with red light cameras. After one year, the conclusion is mixed:
We discovered at many intersections the cameras appear to be working.
On the west side, the intersection of Bellaire and Wilcrest had 23 accidents the year before red-light cameras. The year after, there were only 10. That's a 57 percent drop.
At Richmond and Dunvale, there were 16 accidents before red-light cameras. There were just eight after red-light cameras were installed. Accidents dropped 50 percent.
And I-10 east and Uvalde, the accidents went from 10 down to six -- a 40 percent decrease.
"We've seen a dramatic decline," said Houston Mayor Bill White.
White said the city's numbers show the total amount of accidents at all 50 intersections with red light cameras dropped from 529 to 345 this year compared to last year. "That is a dramatic decrease," White said. "It was cut down by a third."
But not all the intersections recorded decreases in accidents:
But we discovered intersections FM 1960 and Tomball Parkway tell a much different story. And it's one the mayor can't explain. There were five accidents at the intersection before red-light cameras and 16 after. That's a 220 percent increase in accidents.
At Gessner and Beechnut in southwest Houston, accidents increased from six to 11 -- up 83 percent.
In Clear Lake, at the intersection of Bay Area Boulevard and El Camino Real, accidents jumped from 16 before red-light cameras to 22 after they were installed. That's a 38 percent increase.
Out of the 18 intersections we tracked, 10 had fewer accidents, seven had more wrecks, and one intersection's accident numbers stayed the same.
Mayor White goes on to say the city has commissioned a study to figure it all out.
The first thing the city should do is make sure all engineering issues are dealt with at these intersections. That could be a big part of the problem, and could be a reason for the dramatic differences in accident rates.
RELATED: Matt Stiles notes on the City Hall blog that red light cameras may not be a "cash cow," after all.
We'll have to wait and see what Houston's numbers look like.
BLOGVERSATION: Houston's Clear Thinkers.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 11/19/07 08:06 PM |
18 November 2007
This is what happens when yellow-light times are too short
A Dallas TV station timed yellow lights at intersections with red light cameras and found something interesting (via TheNewspaper.com):
The city's second highest revenue producing camera, for example, is located at the intersection of Greenville Avenue and Mockingbird Lane. It issued 9407 tickets worth $705,525 between January 1 and August 31, 2007. At the intersections on Greenville Avenue leadding up to the camera intersection, however, yellows are at least 3.5 or 4.0 seconds in duration, but the ticket producing intersection's yellow stands at just 3.15 seconds. The yellow is .35 seconds shorter than TxDOT's recommended bare minimum.
"For 30 miles per hour, if your yellow time was less than three and a half, you would not be giving that driver enough time to react and brake and stop prior to getting to the intersection," TxDOT Dallas District office transportation engineer supervisor Chris Blain told KDFW.
Sounds like shenanigans! Too bad Dallas doesn't have a Mayor White to guard against such things.
A small change in signal timing can have a great effect on the number of tickets issued. About four out of every five red light camera citations are issued before even a second has elapsed after the light changed to red, according to a report by the California State Auditor. This suggests that most citations are issued to those surprised by a quick-changing signal light.
[snip]
Dallas likewise installed the cameras at locations with existing short yellow times. A total of twenty-one camera intersections in Dallas have yellow times below TxDOT's bare minimum recommended amount. The Texas Transportation Institute study also found that shorter yellows generate a 110 percent jump in the number of tickets, but at the cost of safety. Increasing the yellow one second above the recommended minimum cut crashes by 40 percent.
Maybe one day one of our local news outlets will undertake a yellow-light timing investigation, just to make sure Houston is shenanigan-free.
BLOGVERSATION: Mike McGuff
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 11/18/07 04:04 PM |
17 November 2007
Better late than never on traffic signal synchronization
The Chronicle's Rad Sallee reports that the city is finally beginning to synchronize traffic signals in a way that makes sense:
In recent years, the lights have changed color simultaneously in stretches several blocks long, a setting adopted to simplify traffic patterns during the Metropolitan Transit Authority's eight-year reconstruction of downtown and Midtown streets.
At the time, city engineers said deteriorating mechanical control boxes and a mix of new and old equipment would have made sequencing difficult.
Motorists responded by speeding to cover as much ground as possible before all the lights turned red. But the now-sequenced lights do not reward the speeder, who will have to slow down or stop at every intersection.
Sequencing makes driving easier and reduces long waits at red lights and their resulting emissions, Wright said.
The sequenced lights extend from Bagby to Chartres and Commerce to Webster — the inner freeway loop.
Wright said the cost of timing them was about $90,000. The program moves next into Midtown and then to north and west Houston, he said.
It was really nice of Sallee to help the administration push off blame for the first round of synchronization that wasn't done quite right. Funny, though, that the Mayor's press release announcing his big synchronization initiative in 2004 didn't mention any of that.
Back in June 2007, city officials seemed to treat Chron columnist Lisa Falkenberg in an exceedingly condescending manner when she raised questions about the city's flawed synchronization efforts. Five months later, it looks like the city is finally conceding her point(s).
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 11/17/07 09:49 PM |
16 November 2007
Survey respondents hope others will use mass transit
So, the new Houston Area Survey shows an overwhelming majority of residents "support mass transit as the best solution to traffic problems."
What most people support is others using mass transit to clear the roads for their own daily commute. That's what these surveys always find. The survey doesn't say that an overwhelming majority want to give up their cars and hop on mass transit to ease traffic problems.
Which is how we get to the point where Metro is spending billions on light rail, when less than one percent of Houston residents use Metro's services.
BLOGVERSATION: Houston Strategies, Lose an Eye, It's a Sport
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 11/16/07 05:09 AM |
15 November 2007
Metro cedes bus stops to criminals
What else can we conclude from this KHOU-11 story by Jeff McShan that details the problems at Metro bus stops:
Searching through pages of Houston Police Department reports, in October alone, when Pamela was attacked, there were 35 other incidents at bus stops.
More than half were robberies and assaults. Many of the suspects were carrying guns, some had knives and baseball bats, but they were all preying on people just waiting for the bus.
Law enforcement sources said stops for bus 77, which travels south along MLK to Selinsky and North along Liberty to Mesa, are perhaps the most dangerous places to wait for a bus.
On a two-hour long bus ride on the number 77, several passengers, especially women, told 11 News that waiting for the bus around here can be frightening.
“And I think it would be much safer if people were patrolling and whatever — at least the little Metro police — and everything that could come by and make sure everybody is safe,” one young woman said.
She said she recently witnessed two men attack a woman and take her purse.
“I really try to travel with someone if I have to ride the bus,” she said.
At the end of the 77 line is the Mesa Transit Stop in far northeast Houston. One bus patron said they never see Metro police out there.
[snip]
To get a complete picture of crime at Metro bus stops, 11 News examined reports from both Metro and HPD because neither has all of the incidents logged.
From January through October, there were at least 326 crimes reported at the bus stops. That number includes five rapes, 128 robberies and 42 aggravated assaults.
Many commuters say Metro police patrols around the bus stops would help.
“Yeah, have them close so they can keep us safe,” a patron said. “Because just like people downtown need safety, we need safety too.”
Metro has put a lot of its police force downtown. A confidential memo 11 News obtained outlines a major crime enforcement initiative along the rail corridor. And the Park and Ride lots received a $16 million security boost.
But what about the Metro stops?
So, while the 7.5 mile rail line gets the benefit of Metro's elite counterterror unit, and perhaps a beefed up police presence (to deal with downtown's homeless?), and Park and Pillages get the $16 million defensive camera system, Metro's bus stops get...what exactly?
There are more than 12,000 Metro bus stops in Houston, and Metro said there is no way they can patrol every one of them and keep everybody safe. They hope neighborhoods will take action, check out their Web site, and adopt a Metro bus stop to keep it clean and safe.
Metro bus riders get to fend for themselves! Which is why Metro reminded customers more than two years ago that it's legal to carry a gun on a bus, as long as one has a concealed carry permit.
What an abomination! Metro's patrons have been raped, robbed, and assaulted at bus stops, and Metro whines that there are just too many to patrol. The truth is Metro chooses what it will and won't do, and Metro has chosen to focus on the Main Street Rail Line, which leaves bus patrons out of luck.
If Metro can't handle the job, it should get out of the business. What part of safety doesn't Chief Lambert understand?
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 11/15/07 08:24 PM |
05 November 2007
Hole opens in freeway near Galleria
Various media outlets have reported on the large hole that opened on the West Loop near Richmond today, creating a hazard for traffic on the freeway and below.
Here is an excerpt from KHOU-11's Lee McGuire:
Drivers on the ramp from the southbound West Loop to Highway 59 got a scary surprise Monday when a chunk of freeway fell to the ground.
The hole, about 2-3 feet in diameter, mysteriously opened up in the road and went crashing onto Richmond below around 1 p.m.
Two of the three lanes on the ramp were closed until it was patched up.
Monday evening, the center lane remained blocked off, even though the hole was patched by 7 p.m. Traffic was backed up for miles well past rush hour.
“That’s kind of scary. Hope it doesn’t happen while I’m going under it,” driver Myron Blalock said.
For a while after the collapse, only orange cones marked the trouble spot.
“We are not sure what happened. We’re going to have to investigate that,” said Karen Olthon of TxDOT. “Our maintenance supervisor just happened to be in that area today at 11 o’clock this morning and drove over that lane and did not notice anything.”
That doesn't inspire much confidence.
Here's more from KTRK-13's Kevin Quinn:
Wayne Dolcefino and 13 Undercover happened to be on assignment nearby. They called police as they watched the pile of concrete on Richmond get larger and larger. They worried that someone might get hurt. It took a full 30 minutes for police to arrive and shut the street down.
"It's a little unnerving, particularly when I was walking over there to put the cones out," admitted wrecker driver Matthew Chernow. "I didn't know just how structurally sound that is."It wasn't police, though, that diverted traffic on the road above. A Safe Clear wrecker driver took it upon himself to come put out cones, to help people avoid what could have been a dangerous situation.
"If we can contribute to the safety of the citizens, that's what we're out here for," Chernow said.
No one was hurt. Richmond was completely closed to traffic for a time.
The 30-minute response time doesn't inspire much confidence either. Where was the Mayor's Elite Traffic Mobility Scooter Corps?
I cross under that stretch on Richmond on the way to work, and am thankful I wasn't greeted with a chunk of falling concrete today.
RELATED COVERAGE: KPRC-2, Chronicle.
BLOGVERSATION: Isiah Carey's InSite.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 11/05/07 11:40 PM |
Bazan responds to unusual broadside by Chron transportation columnist
The Houston Chronicle today ran an unusual broadside by transportation columnist Rad Sallee against a number of citizen activist/watchdog types who dare question METRO (and the ethically-challenged Frank Wilson), a task seemingly abdicated by the leadership of Sallee's newspaper years ago. Tom Bazan responded to Sallee's unusual broadside, and we're posting his comments below (since it seems unlikely the Chronicle plans to offer Bazan or other citizen activist/watchdog types named in the story any chance to respond in print).
To: Rad Sallee, et. al.,
There is the impression left by your column that I am or have been wrong in voicing my concerns and criticism of METRO and the electrified boondoggle legacy of Lee. P. Brown, named METRORail.
Stray Current:
FACT - The system was shoddily built, and not properly tested for stray current leakage prior to service start-up. It took three years, and a significant expenditure of taxpayer funds to identify and attempt to cure the sources of stray current leakage. The system still operates outside the design specifications. Stray current still exists, and no one knows the extent of cumulative damage to the infrastructure in the three years METRORail operated prior to the repairs and modifications, which has brought the stray current leakage down to where METRO claims is "manageable." No one at METRO can state the stray current leakage has been stopped, and that infrastructure will not be damaged in the future.
The industry forms Corrosion Committees, as METRO has, to manage the expense of future damage resulting from stray current. I am not convinced that there was NO cumulative damage, and that there is no danger of premature failure of city infrastructure and the 40+ year old substructures of the expressway bridges which span the METRORail.
I presented evidence of City-owned infrastructure damage, I contend from stray current corrosion, to the METRO board last month. From METRO's own stray current reports, there was a significant level of stray current detected in the vicinity of the Museum District platform situated on San Jacinto, just north of Hermann Drive. There was a premature failure of an 8-inch steel-reinforced concrete water line pipe, situated at San Jacinto and Herrman Drive, around February 26, 2006, which interrupted the METRORail operation. The city claims there was no record of any failure analysis of this pipeline. The intersection was rebuilt during the construction of METRORail, and infrastructure was being worked on in this vicinity around March of 2002. There was no contractor daily work report referencing that this pipeline was ever protected from stray current.
Regarding the recent speech made by Mr. Marcotte concerned FY2008, one might be curious if you asked Mr. Marcotte if the words "Stray Current" and METRO or, the corridor where METRORail operates, ever rolled off his lips during that presentation when the $2 million for corrosion control out of the CIP allocations was being discussed?
Is this the same Mr. Marcotte who was running the water system in Washington, D. C. back in 2004 when the EPA started enforcement action over unsafe levels of Lead in the drinking water? Didn't he claim he had no knowledge that the Lead levels were too high? This denial seemed reminiscent of the "I Know Nothing!" denial from the Sgt. Schultz character in the 1960's era TV Comedy series "Hogan's Heroes."
General Mobility Funds:
FACT: When I did sit down with the Mayor's staff, the first item mentioned was $44+ million which seemingly was not collected by the prior administration. Why did METRO refuse to disclose the information, seeking a TXOAG opinion so as to "stonewall" the information. According to the few documents "pried" from METRO, when compared with other agency documents, a huge discrepancy was observed. In my view $44 million is a huge amount.
The Mayor stated publicly that he had hired people to try and unravel METRO's financial statements and failed. There are still significant discrepancies that METRO will not explain in writing. Further, the City, also flush with sales tax revenue, does not seem to be anxious to invoice METRO for these funds. In April 2007, there was about $109 million unbilled, and that was reduced to $90+ million four months later. At that rate, METRO can sit on the GMP funds for years before distributing it, while METRO collects interest on the hoarded funds, and City taxpayers pay the project interest on the bonds.
Defeased Leases:
FACT: The actual data is detailed in the METRO annual financial statements, anyone who looks will likely be startled at the amount of payments, for decades! The facilities were already paid for, and METRO entered into these "finance" agreements so as to get a lump sum payment necessary to have enough cash to start building the METRORail boondoggle. Tax credits to investors still "short changes" federal taxpayers and are egregious!
The U.S. Congress BANNED the use of Defeased Leases by transit agencies in 2004.
=========
Excerpt from WSJ
Civic Duties
How Big Tax Shelter With Cities
Shortchanges Federal Treasury
Use of Sale, Leaseback Deals,
Worth Billions Each Year,
Is a Target of a New Bill
Chicago Sells Its 911 System
By JOHN D. MCKINNON
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
October 7, 2004:
"The essence of the deals -- which the Internal Revenue Service dubs SILO, for "sale in, lease out" -- is a sale of depreciation rights. If a city builds, say, a subway system, it can't deduct the cost from its income taxes over future years, for a simple reason: Cities don't owe income taxes. So the city sells the subway to someone who does.
The buyers, typically financial firms, then can depreciate the subway -- that is, deduct a portion of its cost from their income each year for several years running. In a final step, the buyers, having no use for a subway, immediately lease it back to the city. The terms of the deals are structured to leave the city with a packet of cash. (The city often conveys the property to the investors in a long-term lease, which is treated for tax purposes as a sale.)"
========
Might I suggest that each day that passes we learn that I was not wrong in my overall criticism of METRO, and I am confident the facts that emerge over time will support my contention that METRORail is an unsafe boondoggle.
-- Tom Bazan
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 11/05/07 10:27 PM |
Metro: Keeping focused on light rail...and little else
At the end of KPRC-2's story about a handicapped man whose wheelchair got caught in a light rail track, thereby causing the double amputee to tumble to the asphalt, Robert Arnold mentioned that a follow-up story the next day would explain why the wheelchair-bound man didn't use the nearby crosswalk. I didn't see the story posted to KPRC's website, so I sent an email inquiring about the piece.
KPRC's Investigative Producer Robert Sasser replied that the follow-up story noted that the man was likely unable to cross at the nearby crosswalk because the pedestrian signals didn't work. The signal always stayed on "Don't Walk," and those who worked in the area said the signal had been that way for about six months.
Apparently the signal is one that Metro's responsible for, so after KPRC asked about it, Metro said they'd get it fixed. As of Thursday, the signal had not been fixed, but maybe that's been remedied by now.
Anyway, it's always good to see Metro's priorities so publicly on display.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 11/05/07 01:39 PM |
04 November 2007
Metro ignores problems for the handicapped
Last week, KPRC-2's Robert Arnold told viewers of two problem situations for handicapped folks that Metro has known about for years, but ignored:
Watch closely as a double amputee in a wheelchair gets caught, falls and then becomes stranded on the METRORail tracks. Surveillance cameras from a wheelchair store near the Museum District catch it all on tape.
For two long minutes, the man is stranded on and near the tracks, unable to get back in his wheelchair. Finally, a passing car stops, and employees inside the store come out to help.
Less than three minutes later, METRO's train passes by.
"I figured something like that would happen," said Randy Burris, who owns Wheelchair & Scooter Express.
Burris says METRO knew about the potential problem, but ignored it. He says before METRO even began rail construction, he warned them about the gap between the rails.
"I said that wouldn't work because the gap is too wide and the standard wheelchair -- the wheels will get caught," Burris said.
One day after the accident, Burris -- who's clearly an outspoken opponent of rail -- sent a letter asking METRO to look at the video. Three months later, no one from METRO has responded.
"It falls on deaf ears," Burris said.
"We tracked down the man who fell on the tracks, but the proud veteran didn't want to talk with us on camera," said investigative reporter Robert Arnold. "However, he did say the accident you saw was the second time the gap in the rail caused him to fall."
"We hope the customer is OK," said Art Jackson, manager of METRO's paratransit services. "We appreciate Channel 2 and your reporting for bringing this to our attention."
We showed the accident video to METRO's Art Jackson. In a wheelchair himself, he says METRO worked hard to make rail accessible and safe. Despite no action after the previous warnings and letters, Jackson now promises METRO will take a closer look.
"Perhaps we need to convene a meeting to discuss safety issues and make sure the rail system is operating in a safe manner," Jackson said.
The second problem is one that was even written up on Metro's own blog, and still Metro didn't do a thing to address it...until Robert Arnold brought a camera to Metro's headquarters:
The space reserved for her wheelchair looks like a regular seat. While the sign may say it's priority seating for the disabled, there's no sign letting anyone know the seat flips up so her wheelchair can fit in.
"They think I'm already sitting down, I don't need to sit in the seat," Wiens explained. "If it would say the seat flips up, then they would know it's a spot for the wheelchair to be."
So, for three years Wiens complained to METRO. She thought the solution was simple, so she even e-mailed a sign change that would clear up the confusion.
We found METRO's own blog highlighted the problem back in April.
Still, nothing changed.
"Based on the results that I've gotten, I'm not very confident they even understand what I'm facing," Wiens said.
"We appreciate Channel 2 bringing this to our attention," Jackson said. "We'll be more than happy to take a look at implementing some sort of simple signage to make sure that point is communicated."
Even though Wiens complained for three years, one day after our interview, METRO put up new signs on all the trains.
A METRO spokesperson tells us she's now looking to see what took so long to make those sign changes.
I'd say this is unbelievable, but it's Metro, and we have seen time and time again how Metro does only what it wants, and disregards any public input -- on anything.
Posted by Anne Linehan @ 11/04/07 06:44 AM |
[Previous 20 Entries] [Next 20 Entries]