I think there’s a simple way to interpret this article about how John Culberson has forced Metro into a box by publicly opposing a Richmond Avenue route for the Universities rail line.
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.”
The congressman said the details are up to Metro.
“I’m not going to tell Metro how to build it or where to build it,” Culberson said, adding that he will not support rail on Richmond.
Culberson gave Metro a little wiggle room on Friday, saying that although he prefers no rail at all on Richmond, he might allow a “tiny fragment” near Main, if necessary to connect the line to Metro’s existing rail system.
Such support, however, depends on whether “the community is comfortable with it,” he said.
Metro has been deeply involved in studying the costs and benefits of putting the line on Richmond, Westpark or a combination of the two.
Culberson said the time for such study ended three years ago, a reference to the November 2003 referendum in which voters narrowly approved Metro’s rail expansion plans and a prior vote by Metro’s board to put a line designated “Westpark” on the ballot.
[…]
Culberson said Friday it makes sense to suspend tracks on the north side of the freeway, so they would not interfere with traffic.
He also said that an elevated design on that side would not require riders to cross the freeway to reach Greenway Plaza and Lakewood Church, if the elevated portion continued that far.
[Mayor Bill] White said last week that he has consulted Texas Department of Transportation district engineer Gary Trietsch on how such a structure might be built. Any construction on or over the freeway or its embankment would require TxDOT permission.
White’s Aug. 4 note asked Metro to “seriously consider … some structure, presumably elevated in some portion,” from St. Thomas to a point where it could cross the freeway.”
[…]
Neither Culberson nor [City Council Member Anne] Clutterbuck offered suggestions on how Metro trains could fit over the walled, below-ground freeway without endangering vehicles or taking space now occupied by the Museum District’s decorative bridges, or on where passengers would board.
“Metro created this dilemma,” Culberson said.
“They did this to themselves with deceptive bait-and-switch (ballot) language that said Westpark, and Westpark ends at Kirby.”
The 2003 referendum was an up-or-down vote on the future of light rail in Houston. The pro-rail forces won, and the anti-rail forces have been doing everything they can since then to deny that victory. The phony insistence that the ballot language specified routes and not corridors is just the current incarnation of this attempt to overturn the vote.
Culberson was on the board of the anti-rail advocacy group Texans for True Mobility. The opposition from some segments of the Richmond business community has given him an opportunity to do by fiat what he couldn’t do at the ballot box.
The plan is simple: If Richmond is off the table, Metro is forced to put forth a lesser plan, such as this elevate-it-over-the-freeway scheme. The required feasibility studies then show that ridership will be insufficient and the expense will be excessive. Naturally, the Federal Transportation Administration refuses to provide funding, leaving Metro with the choice of finding its own money or giving up. And thus the anti-rail forces win.
I don’t know what to do about this right now. Frankly, I think Sedosi has the right idea – Mayor White needs to be a little less deferential to Culberson and really push for what’s best for the whole city. That’ll get ugly, and likely cost him some popularity, but that’s why we pay him the big bucks. I just hope he realizes this, and the sooner the better.