Furious Jam

Yes, accurate on both counts. There are many Republicans who fiscally conservative, yet socially liberal. I did not mean to indict all Republicans. I feel that people like AftonAg are social conservatives who are opposing the rail because they feel like it will bring an undesirable social change to their neighborhood.

Sorry, I didn't mean to get off-topic. I just wanted to make it clear that the neighborhood opposition to rail on Richmond is predominantly conservative, so you can hardly expect them to favor something progressive like clean, urban, mass transit. Conservatives are typically only interested in government projects that directly benefit them, and it's obvious that the deep pockets in AO and the surrounding areas won't be riding the rail anywhere. I'll say it again - if this was just about widening Richmond, you wouldn't get anywhere near the resistance that the rail faces. For example, San Felipe is being expanded and several businesses will suffer, but where's John Culberson? Why does putting rail in a median change the whole equation? The answer is that this isn't about businesses. No, this is really about class and perhaps about race. I just want people to read between the lines when they listen to anti-rail folks - otherwise, you'll miss the whole story.

Believe it or not, there is a large contingent in Bellaire that is against sidewalks. A lot of these residents want the convenience of living in an urban environment, but they also want the security of a gated, "master-planned" community. They all want to be islands unto themselves... until they need the city to do something for them - then they're "taxpayers".

Manhattan is not small. Sure, you can walk across it on a good day, but it is very long. And anyway, there are four other boroughs. Houston is much bigger in terms of physical size, but NYC is very large as well.

If you want to talk about poor analogies, I can spin that right back at you. The Katy Freeway expansion cut a huge swath of destruction. Will rail on Richmond do that? Or will only a few businesses be permanently affected directly by the construction? And you say there was no other place for the Katy Freeway to go, but has anyone come up with an alternative route for the rail that is (1) technically feasible, (2) would be anywhere near as effective as rail on Richmond, and (3) would have a significantly lesser impact on the businesses and neighborhoods along its route than rail on Richmond would have on its vicinity? People on this board have put a lot of thought into it, as I'm sure Metro has, and no legitimate answers have been produced as of yet. As such, you could easily argue that a university line has no other place to go. Surely you don't think that Richmond was chosen at random, do you? Anyway, does it really matter that I-10 or 610/59 were already there? Haven't brand new freeways been plowed through subdivisions in the past when progress demanded it? You say I make a poor analogy, but I still say that the only difference is that this rail line is coming within spitting distance of a pocket of rich folk - otherwise, you wouldn't hear a peep about it. And isn't that just typical?

It's more correct to say that the opposition to rail on Richmond is stifling our city's future. They are against change. Of course, I'm not saying that change is always painless, because the opposite usually holds true. I acknowledge that businesses along Richmond could be hurt by the rail in a variety of ways, and that a few of them might even suffer severe or permanent damage. And if a person places the absolute well-being of those businesses ahead of progressive change in this city, then I have to respect that person's point-of-view, though I may disagree with it. That being said, the forces that are driving the opposition aren't really concerned with the Richmond businesses. If John Culberson cared that much about businesses, then why did he allow the Katy Freeway expansion and the 610/59 interchange expansion, both of which crushed many businesses in the name of transit? The neighborhoods driving the opposition, like AO, are those who would have the least to lose from rail on Richmond. They wouldn't blink if rail on Westpark took out a thousand businesses, just so long as it's not in their backyard. It's this disingenuous and shameless "defending" of the businesses on Richmond which truly aggravates. They have no legitimate point-of-view. But is anyone here really surprised that Republicans have no interest in progressive policies? Especially something as egalitarian as mass transit? To a man, they have always fought rail in this city. You won't see John Culberson endorse any meaningful rail plan unless that train is bringing Jesus or tax cuts to town. You love Jesus, don't you AftonAg? And you looove tax cuts too, huh? Thank God for John Culberson, and for W too! Mission Accomplished!

One of the many, many problems with Westpark is that it's on the other side of 59 from Greenway Plaza and the Galleria. I'm interested in your arguments for using the 59 ROW to bypass Richmond, but only so long as all passengers are deposited north of the freeway. Very few people will cross under 59 on foot, mostly due to the stench of bum urine. For all intents and purposes, Westpark is no closer to Greenway Plaza and the Galleria than the moon. In my opinion, the only thing Westpark is good for is commuter rail, and we already have vast freeways (with HOV lanes) to serve people outside the Loop. Anyway, what's the point of commuter rail if commuters on foot can't transfer to decent mass transit in the interior? Commuter rail is the last piece to add, not the second.

This is so true. I work in Bellaire and my folks live there. You think AO is bad? Bellaire would burn down heaven and earth before they'd let a rail line come through. You might as well not even speak of it.

Okay, was it a poll? Or was it an anti-rail petition? You seem like a smart guy, AftonAg, so don't pretend those two are the same thing or that they can be done in conjunction without one tainting the response to the other - especially when administered by anti-rail foes. If this is indeed the "poll" that Culberson is citing, I think the Chronicle might want to take a closer look at how this "poll" was conducted. As to my undergrad degree, I've never used it to sell fries. Mainly I used it to get into law school, and it helps from time to time when my clients ask me to sue windbag neighborhood associations for them.

This is hysterical. A door-to-door poll conducted by whom? Anti-rail shills? Letters sent by whom? And in what form? AftonAg, I've got a degree in political science, and I wouldn't wipe my @$$ with your poll or your letters. Only you could hide behind such dubious evidence, then accuse others of lying.

Yeah, I never got why Uptown should start off as BRT. Are you telling me that there's not enough ridership demand in Uptown right now? The Galleria area is one place you actually do see a lot of pedestrians.

A line that hits UH, TSU, the Red Line, St. Thomas, then hugs 59, hits Greenway Plaza on its south side, goes under the Loop, then turns and hits the Galleria and Uptown Park (and comes within walking distance of Memorial Park) would be acceptable to me. I think you lose a huge opportunity by jumping over to 59, but that's what you get with a "leader" like Culberson who lacks vision. To me, this plan would be an okay alternative. It's certainly head & shoulders above Westpark, which isn't even there until you hit Kirby (quote AftonAg: "But Westpark must run all the way to UH because it was on the ballot!"). BUT.... You'll have people fighting you on Yoakum, on Post Oak, wherever you go. If you run from Richmond because of opposition, where do you run to? The great problem with appeasement is, where does it end? Since Richmond is the logical route to begin with, I say make your stand there - offer the TIRZ and see if it flies.

Like I said, I'd build Richmond out to make inserting rail easier at a later date, so the whole thing wouldn't have to be torn up again. But you're probably right - there would be some significant waste. Like I said, I'm just ticked off. Any posts that have attempted to incorporate rail into Westpark and/or 59 have not agreed with me for one or more of the following reasons: (I) don't link the Red Line to anywhere near the Galleria area AND/OR (II) would require tearing up some other street (or even taking whole properties) that would bring out opposition from businesses and residents along that corridor similar to what you face along Richmond AND/OR (III) look like commuter rail that wouldn't significantly help inner loop residents. To me, you need a line that links UH, TSU, the Red Line, Greenway Plaza, and the Galleria area. It needn't have a bunch of stops or be all things to all people. But how do you meet that criteria without ticking off somebody along that line? Lord knows no one has ever represented Richmond as being the perfect option. But the question is, what's better? No one in the opposition has come up with an acceptable alternative, which is what the Chronicle op-ed I posted complains of. You know what I would do to solve all of this? You're right - building out Richmond would be needlessly destructive unless rail was already involved. Instead, let's make Richmond along the proposed rail line a tax-free zone - tax incentives for every business and residence within 100 yards on either side of Richmond, Greenway Plaza excluded. I think you'd see 90% of all opposition quickly disappear. Could you see Culberson coming out against a tax cut?

Many stores, with Stelzig's Western Wear being the most prominent one. A huge place like that, steeped in tradition, gets plowed for an on-ramp, and John Culberson doesn't blink. But the Brass Maiden? Jeez, can't lose her! The fact is that this isn't about any of the businesses on Richmond - again, they're just red herrings. I'm sure that AftonAg and his ilk are happy to have them on their side, because otherwise this whole power play would be exposed for what it is - a handful of fatcats who have no use for mass transit and who, as such, don't want it disrupting their daily commute in the slightest. A major public works project in the heart of a metropolis will always have an adverse effect on a number of businesses adjacent to it. The question is, what makes this project different? The answer is the fatcats in AO and their neighboring subdivisions. If you can't see that deep, maybe it's because you're one of them and therefore have no perspective. I'm so bitter about all of this that I think Metro should just announce that they're widening Richmond with their own funds, no matter what, and that every business along those narrow sections will just have to deal with it. That way, the businesses become a non-issue that the AO-et al opposition can't hide behind. I say just widen the street right now and reserve a space for rail after Culberson's tenure. I'd rather see that than rail wasted on 59 & Westpark.

It is a business decision to buy or lease a location with little parking, one with corresponding benefits, detriments, and risks that everyone is aware of. And it's dishonest for anyone to suggest that this is about the Brass Maiden or any business. Where was Culberson when the I-10 expansion swallowed so many businesses? Where was Culberson when the interchange at 59 & 610 swallowed so many businesses? Culberson would tell you that I-10 and that interchange were "already there", but then so is Richmond - the rail is no less an expansion of transportation capacity than adding lanes. The small businessman angle is just a red herring. This is really about a few fatcats in AO who want unobstructed left turns at every intersection, so they can get to the Galleria that much quicker. It just so happens that the Brass Maiden will benefit from their whims, and that is nothing more than luck on its part.

And it's been pointed out time and again, this time by the Chronicle, that no one has produced any real data on how many residents are against rail on the Richmond corridor. As such, you can believe anything you want. For example, I don't believe the majority of those residents are as short-sighted as you. Not that any of those residents have a (legal or moral) right to block a project that would benefit the city as a whole, especially when such a project wouldn't take any of their private property. As far as the businesses, I can understand how they feel. Construction will hurt their bottom-line in the short-term, true, and a few may even fail as a result. But Metro says it has learned from the Red Line and it can minimize that impact in a variety of ways, including financial assistance to those businesses - I'm sure you don't trust that, but it's more trustworthy than your blanket assertions of a mass collective opposing the rail. That being said, there are a very small number of businesses, like the Brass Maiden, who would see what little parking they have now eliminated by the rail. But I don't think you can block an entire rail line just because someone picked a poor location for a business. Why should our city be penalized because the Brass Maiden only has 3 parking spaces? Since when should a city concern itself with ensuring enough parking for any particular business? The city is widening San Felipe right now and taking parking to do that, but who is fighting for Brucette's Shoes? The only difference between the shoe shop (and all of the Katy Fwy businesses) and the Brass Maiden is that they don't have Culberson's fatcat contributors on their side. In the end, it's not about what's right or best for everyone as a whole - it's only "politics at its best", as you categorize it. Sorry, but when the minority can hold the majority hostage because that minority is more affluent, and so has a congressman's ear, that's politics at its worst. You sir, are what's wrong with the system. I hope that keeps you happy as you make your precious left turn on to Richmond.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

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?

Call me a pessimist, but I've just about lost all hope for rail on Richmond. Can anyone come up with a viable alternative (as supposed to running it through a dead zone like 59 or Westpark)? Could it be put on Westheimer without upsetting so many fatcat homeowners and businesses with tiny parking lots? I know that building it would be havoc on traffic, but would it be that much worse than the Katy Freeway? Is a subway the answer? If Culberson really cared about mass transit, you'd think he'd ask for federal funds to bury the line down Richmond. Metro could create a tunnel system down there with retail that connects to the Galleria - might pay for itself. Let's get proactive here.

Culberson said last week that "to my mind, the only way Metro can make this work is to find a way to do an elevated line down the Southwest Freeway that doesn't destroy traffic lanes or homes or businesses." Basically, rail isn't allowed to touch a single inch of anything, but the Katy Freeway can gobble up everything around it. Why the difference? Rich people will drive the Katy Freeway out to their giant homes in the suburbs, but they won't use public transportation. This is evil at its best. Of course, if the rail isn't allowed to go near anything else, that makes it completely pointless. Can we just have another vote next year whereby the city as a whole expressly authorizes rail straight down Richmond to the Galleria area? Then Culberson wouldn't be able to claim this will-of-the-people garbage. I'd rather have that vote and slow the process down by another year or two rather than throw away millions of dollars building rail down the middle of 59.