METRORail University Line

[Furious Jam]

How can we get a subway option on the table? It must be possible, given that we have a whole system of tunnels downtown. It would give Culberson a chance to be a hero - the guy who saved Richmond and who built a better rail line.

Knowing Richmond and the current opposition, what parts of the line would have to be sunk?

And could a subway be more affordable in the context that Metro wouldn't have to condemn as much property?

Edited August 14, 2006 by Furious Jam

[H-Town Man]

Forget about subways. We have a beautiful surface rail line on Main Street, and we could have a beautiful line on Richmond that will enhance our city if selfish interests do not succeed in thwarting it.

[tierwestah]

How can we get a subway option on the table? It must be possible, given that we have a whole system of tunnels downtown. It would give Culberson a chance to be a hero - the guy who saved Richmond and who built a better rail line.

Knowing Richmond and the current opposition, what parts of the line would have to be sunk?

And could a subway be more affordable in the context that Metro wouldn't have to condemn as much property?

I agree that the idea of a subway portion is probably the best and most viable solution right now. Now that Metro is backed up into a corner, we might need subway after all. I agree with dp2, there needs to be a trade off since Culberson is opposing rail on Richmond. He needs to secure funds to build the line right whether if its subway or elevated. Only elevating the line might run the risk of taking away from asthetics.

[TheNiche]

I've looked at this some more, and am convinced that regardless of Culberson's original intent, this is a tremendous opportunity IF Metro takes advantage of it (of course it can also easily end up being a disaster.) The key to making this work is smart design (duh) and extracting a tradeoff from Culbertson in return...

Deep, well-thought-out analysis. Where do I sign the petition?

[KatieDidIt]

How could you stabilize a subway built in gumbo? They haven't even won that battle with streets yet.

[Pumapayam]

The only thing Culberson mentions in the latest Chronicle article is how easy it will be for people to get to Lakewood Church.

Should this be called the "Lakewood Church" line now?

So where is all this $$$ going that we spent to review Richmond Ave. as a viable route. It is truely over for Richmond? :closedeyes:

Edited August 14, 2006 by Pumapayam

[tierwestah]

How could you stabilize a subway built in gumbo? They haven't even won that battle with streets yet.

I remember some years back, MEtro was considering a subway portion in the downtown area but was never done. In spite of the soil, they did confirm that it was possible.

tierwestah jones

[KatieDidIt]

The only thing Culberson mentions in the latest Chronicle article is how easy it will be for people to get to Lakewood Church.

Should this be called the "Lakewood Church" line now?

Wouldn't surprise me that Joel has politicians in his pocket...

[TheNiche]

I remember some years back, MEtro was considering a subway portion in the downtown area but was never done. In spite of the soil, they did confirm that it was possible.

tierwestah jones

Nearly anything you could dream of is physically possible. The constraint is $$$.

Subways downtown have the potential to be particularly costly on account of all the historical oddities and unknowns that are beneath the streets. Remember how a massive block of buried concrete was discovered during the construction of the Red Line? Its still there.

But even with more predictable routes, there is always the problem of ripping up and replacing storm sewers and other utilities that cross the streets. Houston also has a huge number of underground NG/oil/products pipelines that can pose a major barrier to subway construction.

[Pumapayam]

Some photos to liven up the thread.

Looks safe enough. The lightrail on Richmond, the way it was supposed to be!

They even have some shrubbry in the center median, how nice!

Here we have the Olsteen followers, dropping money each week so that Joel can lobby for the "Lakewood Church" line. If only this church was in Afton Oaks, would we see the day on lightrail all the way down Richmond.

It almost seems like they waste space under the elevated portions to allow for wider lanes.

If I know Westpark, the only thing there are "Illegal Day Laborers", neither of which wear pin skirts or carry breifcases? These people must be lost!

[Highway6]

Some photos to liven up the thread.

Looks safe enough. The lightrail on Richmond, the way it was supposed to be!

Some of Metro's photos are flawed though. This shows a concrete curb all the way across Edloe - therefore making a left from Edloe to Richmond impossible and cutting off that elevated ramp to the parking garage at the NW corner of this intersection.

I would hope this isn't the case and I certainly doubt it is... probably just a case of not thinking all the way through on the rendering.

[Double L]

Has their been any studies on the cost estimates of elevated rail down Richmond?

[Furious Jam]

Has their been any studies on the cost estimates of elevated rail down Richmond?

Elevating is too much of an eyesore. I don't think anyone will go for it.

[ricco67]

Elevating is too much of an eyesore. I don't think anyone will go for it.

that was one of the original arguments made by the a-oaks residences when the monorail was proposed.

[Furious Jam]

that was one of the original arguments made by the a-oaks residences when the monorail was proposed.

Hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

I personally wouldn't mind an L, but I can see how people would differ.

[TheNiche]

Elevating is too much of an eyesore. I don't think anyone will go for it.

A good architect can make use of even the most seemingly useless spaces. Photos from underneath the big ol' bridge built by Huey P. Long in Shreveport are testament to that fact. They are as follows.

[Furious Jam]

A good architect can make use of even the most seemingly useless spaces. Photos from underneath the big ol' bridge built by Huey P. Long in Shreveport are testament to that fact. They are as follows.

As great as those pics are, that particular design would have a big footprint, thus erasing a lot of the benefit of elevation. Can you really see shops in the median on Richmond?

[TheNiche]

As great as those pics are, that particular design would have a big footprint, thus erasing a lot of the benefit of elevation. Can you really see shops in the median on Richmond?

The pics are just an example of what a good architect can make of an akward space. I don't pretend to think that it'll come out looking the same in just any other locale. After all, good architects don't just take what's already been done and reapply it over and over to different places. They innovate.

I've drifted away from the 'Rail on Richmond' argument. I was big on it at first, but have come to believe that routing it along the Southwest Freeway ROW in a grade-seperated format may cost a couple of stops along Richmond, but would make the LRT a true and efficient rapid transit system. Go back and read my informal dissertation, won't you?

The only thing that irks me about METRO's elevated cross-section is that the median at ground level is so wide. Having said that, METRO's graphic artists don't seem to be too concerned with technical issues, so I'm not quite sure whether my complaint is even all that valid.

However, the big benefit to elevation is speed. Without the possibility of traffic/pedestrian interference, the operator can accelerate quickly and glide throughout the city at top speed. That would add a whole lot of value to Houston's LRT system.

Edited August 14, 2006 by TheNiche

[Double L]

I think an elevated rail line down Richmond would look great. I think it would enhance the beauty. Iff you look at those renderings the elevated portions look good. Rail could be considered an eyesore anyways but I think rail on ground or in air would look really good and "space city" like.

Elevated is faster but also avoiding traffic accidents would get us more support.

[Pumapayam]

I think an elevated rail line down Richmond would look great.

As silly as it sounds, it will provide shade and protection from rain if they decided to make a sidewalk below it.

[Double L]

To me, Richmond and Westpark are going the same direction, but Richmond goes through more important neighborhoods. The only benefit of Westpark is less traffic accidents. If we elevate it we can get it down Richmond with less traffic accidents.

[ricco67]

Well, if it's done correctly, i'm sure the mayor and metro can trap culberson in his own wording.

If they can get him to word it "I will send money to it as long as it's not ON richmond", that should open it up for a subway.

Then he can be blamed for pork after it's approved.

[aftowl]

Having lived in Afton Oaks for over 15 years, I think I

[Pumapayam]

Having lived in Afton Oaks for over 15 years, I think I

[westguy]

I like that elevated line. I think it would look good around the retail areas of Richmond.

I just realized that Afton Oaks isn't that big of an area along Richmond. The road also has a weird curvature to the north. Could they just buy out the 10 or 15 residences on the south side, straighten the road, and leave the rest of the ROW as a green buffer between the neighborhood and line? The rail could also run in the middle of a large median. I've always liked the way Bellaire was set up around S. Rice.

[CE_ugh]

I like that elevated line. I think it would look good around the retail areas of Richmond.

I just realized that Afton Oaks isn't that big of an area along Richmond. The road also has a weird curvature to the north. Could they just buy out the 10 or 15 residences on the south side, straighten the road, and leave the rest of the ROW as a green buffer between the neighborhood and line? The rail could also run in the middle of a large median. I've always liked the way Bellaire was set up around S. Rice.

Because Bellaire used to have a rail line running down the middle of it.

[ricco67]

I have heard outright falsehoods against and exaggerated arguments for. Based on the last few pages I

[Furious Jam]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/4117024.html

Go figure

Rep. Culberson is still placing impassable obstacles in Metro's path.

Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

U.S. Rep. John Culberson says he will not tell Metro where to build its University light rail line. However, he declares, the transit agency can't use Richmond Avenue.

If Culberson is going to prevent Metro from using the most advantageous route with the largest potential ridership, he has a duty to specify an alternative or admit that he opposes any practical proposal.

In July 2001, Culberson said in a letter to the editor that he would support funding for any specific plan approved by the voters. In 2003, Metro area voters narrowly approved an ambitious plan to expand both bus and rail transit. The ballot initiative referred to a proposed light rail line along Westpark.

Now Culberson says he won't support any line if the people who live and work on the route object. If there is no feasible way to run light rail tracks from the Main Street corridor to Westpark without using Richmond, that's too bad.

The congressman, who once tried to press criminal charges against Metro for an alleged discrepancy in its financial reports, recently wrote to Metro Chairman David Wolff regarding rail on Richmond. In his letter, Culberson claimed that more than 90 percent of the people who lived or worked along Richmond opposed the rail project. But Culberson's staff could not state the total number of residents, business operators and property owners along Richmond. It is impossible to calculate 90 percent of an unknown quantity. Culberson's pronouncements regarding the opposition are meaningless.

In an attempt to appear cooperative, Culberson suggested that Metro use the Southwest Freeway to connect the Main Street corridor with Westpark. But he forbade Metro from taking any traffic lanes or private property.

From an engineering standpoint, it would be easier to get the camel through the needle's eye than to meet Culberson's demands. Even if such a line could be built, it would be too expensive and probably would fail federal ridership standards.

"Metro created this dilemma," said Culberson, the man who for a decade helped to block all federal aid for rail transit in Houston, placing this city behind its competitors and sending tax dollars paid by Houston motorists to Dallas and other cities.

When he supported the widening of I-10, the Katy Freeway, Culberson paid no attention to the objections of nearby residents. Suburban commuters needed the extra lanes. If scores of businesses had to be sacrificed, so be it.

The marked difference in Culberson's approach to two transportation projects suggests he is less concerned about neighborhood sanctity than about placing highways above transit.

Unfortunately, Culberson's shortsighted policies will affect all Houston area residents. No one still believes this region can build enough highway lanes to ensure mobility for a swiftly growing population.

[Furious Jam]

The Chronicle is only stating the obvious, time and again. It's so obvious that a relatively small group of people and one congressman are holding the entire city hostage for purely selfish reasons. Even worse is that the smallest part of that small group, a vocal minority in AO, has the least to lose in all of this, yet is driving the entire campaign against rail. Politics at its worst. How did 610 ever get built through Bellaire? God himself must have dropped it there on top of a score of NIMBYs.

I'd like to see Metro select Richmond or at least delay the decision until after the election. The only thing to do might be to throw our support behind Henley.

[AftonAg]

Knowing Richmond and the current opposition, what parts of the line would have to be sunk?

I think that the Richmond Route is already sunk! Thanks again Rep. Culberson.

The Chronicle is only stating the obvious, time and again. It's so obvious that a relatively small group of people and one congressman are holding the entire city hostage for purely selfish reasons. Even worse is that the smallest part of that small group, a vocal minority in AO, has the least to lose in all of this, yet is driving the entire campaign against rail. Politics at its worst. How did 610 ever get built through Bellaire? God himself must have dropped it there on top of a score of NIMBYs.

I'd like to see Metro select Richmond or at least delay the decision until after the election. The only thing to do might be to throw our support behind Henley.

I have said it before, and you all know it to be true - There are far more people than just Afton Oaks residents against Rail on Richmond - The businesses by and large are against it, many other neighborhoods are against it. Politics at it's best, even the Mayor has told Metro to listen to what Culberson says regarding the route - because without his backing it won't get built at all.