The Chronicle has had several transportation and transit related
articles in the last few days. The first, on different agencies and
plans for commuter rail, discusses Metro vs. the freight rail district
vs. the city of Galveston. All three proposed lines have flaws that
could potentially make them as stupid as Austin's new line (Christof's
word, not mine). Two stop at the 610 loop rather than getting into key
core destinations because of inside-the-loop rail congestion. The
third, Metro's 90a proposal, stops in Missouri City, rather than
continuing to where all those med center workers actually are in Sugar
Land. That's because Metro's service area does not include Ft. Bend
County.

It's almost like all of them want to build a white elephant so they can
then point to the low ridership and make an argument to sink a lot more
into extending it to where it actually should have gone in the first
place. And nobody is talking about the critical problems of commuter
rail in multi-centric, job-dispersed Houston: it is slower, less
frequent, far more expensive, and drops you farther from your
destination (in the heat, humidity, and rain) than express commuter
buses in HOV lanes - all of which will be canceled as the rail lines
get built. Why are we so hell bent on rushing headlong to a less
convenient and more expensive transit system?

The second story is on the mayoral candidates and their mobility plans.
Most of it sounds pretty reasonable. Except this:

[Peter] Brown said, “You can't serve a low-density city like Houston
with a bus system.” (huh?!) He did not specify what he wants Metro to
focus on instead, but called for the bus and rail systems to be
“integrated.”

“We've got to have a rationalized plan for rail, and bus to feed the
rail,” Brown said. “We've got to encourage people to live closer to
where they work.”
If transit can't serve a low density city with buses, what the heck is
the answer? It sure isn't rail, which is all about heavy density and
ridership. And if you look at what happened after the Main St. line
opened, "integrated" is a code word for "we're going to cut your
convenient, direct, single-bus route and make you transfer several
times to different trains and buses." Oh, and system ridership will
drop sharply as a result. Great plan.

As far as "encouraging" people to live closer to work: it's not like
people are idiots and want to live as far from work as possible. They
weigh up a lot of factors to make their housing decision, including
affordability, schools, home quality, amenities, and balancing the
demands of two different commuters that are likely to change jobs
several times. Every job center in Houston has tons of housing all
around it - but there are very good reasons most of the employees in
those job centers don't choose that housing.

Or maybe Peter wants the major employers of Houston to leave for the
suburbs where their employees are, draining the city's tax base?

Lastly, there is this op-ed today urging Metro to take care with the
light rail planning and construction. It ended with a challenge of
sorts:
Our city's brightest minds and most experienced voices need to
articulate a vision for the city's future growth and its transportation
solutions that is in-step with the historic heartbeat of Houston.For
the record, mine is here and here.

--
Posted By Tory Gattis to Houston Strategies at 10/05/2009 04:44:00 PM