Rep. John Culberson’s office sends along word that the congressman will be announcing his position on Metro’s proposed Richmond Avenue rail this morning at 10 o’clock at the James Coney Island parking lot, 3607 South Shepherd Drive, Houston.
Metro is set to announce its preferred alignment on Monday.
KEVIN WHITED ADDS: The Chronicle‘s Rad Sallee has a story today that covers both anti-Richmond and pro-Richmond groups. The story does not once mention the 2003 referendum on light rail on Westpark, instead focusing on the assertions of those who favor and oppose Richmond rail.
Doug Childers makes another appearance in a Chronicle story:
Doug Childers, president of richmondrail.org, said Monday that he has 1,200 signatures on a petition favoring Richmond over Westpark as the route.
The story does not make clear that Childers is an associate principal at a firm that hopes to capitalize on light-rail development in dense areas, as the Chronicle reported previously:
One proposed Midtown project could have been a model for urban development: Morris Architects planned an energy-efficient new building combining offices, apartments and retail, but because of high construction costs and depressed office rents, the firm is now considering existing buildings on or near light rail, said Morris architect Doug Childers.
Childers is also a member of the Greater Houston Partnership’s Transit Committee. As we’ve noted before, what the downtown establishment wants, it tends to get in Houston, and the downtown establishment seems particularly keen on putting light rail on Richmond. News consumers may find that background on Childers useful, since most reports to date have suggested (by omission) that he fronts just another citizens’ group.
Speaking of citizens’ groups, the Citizens’ Transportation Coalition’s Robin Holzer makes an appearance at the end of Sallee’s story:
Robin Holzer of the Citizens Transportation Coalition, a volunteer group that analyzes local road and transit projects, notes that some parties have not taken sides on a route but favor “a full, detailed planning process.”
“This rail infrastructure will shape Houston for the next 20 to 30 years,” just as the Loop and Beltway have, she said. “It’s imperative to build the University line and others in the right place, where they will serve the most people. Finding the right place requires detailed, thoughtful analysis.”
Holzer questioned why Culberson would announce a decision four months before Metro’s environmental impact studies will be completed.
Because of the phrasing, a casual news consumer probably wouldn’t realize that “some parties [that] have not taken sides on a route” would not include Holzer’s group, which has strongly supported Richmond rail on its website, going so far as to question the accuracy of one anti-Richmond group skeptical of METRO’s utopian promises that Richmond rail won’t take lanes from traffic, property from landowners, or trees from the environment (see this photo collection, which illustrates that those concerns are real). One could draw the conclusion that perspectives different from those of the CTC are not part of detailed, thoughtful analysis.
In the end, it remains unclear why the preferences of Christof Spieler, Robin Holzer, architects who hope to benefit from Richmond rail development, Galleria/Greenway realtors, and bloggers from the Heights should trump the preferences of 2003 voters and Richmond homeowners and businessowners who oppose METRO’s Westpark/Richmond bait and switch.
It will be interesting to see if Rep. Culberson shares that view.
UPDATE (10:59 am): Rep. Culberson announced his opposition to rail on Richmond, citing communications from Richmond constituents opposing rail on Richmond by a margin of well over 90%. That brought cheers from anti-Richmond activists. Pro-Richmond activists expressed displeasure, but were mostly respectful during the Congressman’s announcement (interrupting a couple of times). I didn’t try to count heads (the professional journalists can do that), but I did get a number of photos that I will post and link after work today.
UPDATE (12:35 pm): Responding to the line that today’s story does not mention the 2003 referendum, Chronicle assistant city editor Don Mason emails the following:
True, but the accompanying graphic does mention it under “pros” for the Westpark route, and we’ve hardly ignored that argument in our coverage.
Those are fair points. The graphic in question is located here.
UPDATE (4:15 pm): Dan Patrick says he will be speaking to Rep. Culberson in the 5:00 hour on KSEV-700.
UPDATE (9:41 pm): Some photos from the event are posted to this Flickr set.
UPDATE (08-02-2006): The good folks at Lone Star Times have posted my captured audio mp3 of Dan Patrick’s interview with Rep. Culberson here.
BLOGVERSATION: TBIFOC.
