Last night, March 20 2006, I attended a townhall meeting held at St.Luke's Church at 3471 Westheimer on a public meeting whereby the Metropolitan Transit Authority held a public meeting on whether to implement Light Rail along Richmond Avenue. The church was packed with attendees on the matter, some estimates having it at about 500 or more people there, with Congressman John Culberson, Mayor Bill White, the Metro president and Houston City Council members Anne Clutterbuck and Pam Holm all in attendance.
The crowd was probably 90 percent against the building of light rail along Richmond. I signed up to speak, only to find myself at number 38 on the list of speakers. We were given only 60 seconds to make our speel, but such was the number of speakers that only 20 or so speakers got a chance to speak before the meeting was adjourned. More public meetings will follow, in fact I will try to post when these meetings will take place.
Overall, many of the points I was to make against LR were in fact made by speakers. One woman denounced Metro's eminent domain powers (Metro has the power to condemn property up to 1,500 feet around a Metro station) and should get out of the real estate redevelopment business. Other business owners spoke of how they had been in the area since the 1970's and were unanimous in their opposition to rail being built. One woman survived the Richmond street expansion over 20 years ago (I remember when this was done - The Mighty Wizard has lived in H-Town for a very long time), and barely held on to her home and business. Another woman said an LR line would be within but a few yards of her apartment complex and would make life unbearable.
I wanted to devote part of this epistle to one woman, Christina Campbell, who spoke saying that she had owned a Supercuts in downtown / Midtown when the LR line was built. She recounted how she had invested $185,000 in her entrepreneural effort only to have to lose it all due to LR construction. With much effort, she then regrouped and opened a new hair salon on Richmond near Kirby and now fears getting railroaded again by Metro. In this month's In Town Magazine, David CrossleyMr. "Smart Growth" himself pronounces that it is "a little surprising" to him that opposition to LR along Richmond is being spearheaded by Richmond business owners. Maybe that is because those business owners know what happened to businesses along the downtown LR line WHILE THE CONSTRUCTION TOOK PLACE - NOT AFTERWARDS! When I first came to the event last night, I overheard several people say something to the effect of "is that Crossley here?". Mr. Crossley, I will tell you that you would have found a few allies in the audience, but you also would have encountered Ms. Campbell and many many more like her. You will still get your funding for your political advocacy venture, Mr. Crossley, but those business owners aren't so lucky. They depend on their through car traffic for their lives.
While I am at it, I will take a moment out to dissect Mr. Crossley's article linked to above. Mr. Crossley mentions that Portland's Yellow Line was a catalyst for 50 new businesses along with more home sales. What Mr. Crossley doesn't mention in his article is that in many municipalities, rail advocates, desperate to show that rail spurs development, manage to push through tax breaks, create TIRZ areas, throw public dollars, and make zoning changes, all in an attempt to command that the promised development will take place. Randall O'Toole makes this clear in his book, The Vanishing Automobile and Other Urban Myths. Mr. Crossley himself publicly stated that he was "disappointed" that more development had not taken place along the Houston LR line. In fact, outside of the new Metro castle downtown, little or no new development has taken place. One speaker last night derided the lack of development that has taken place since LR has been built. In any event, the only reason why any public transportation infrastructure should EVER be built is to relieve traffic congestion. If anybody in this world says that a project should be built for ANY other reason, then that person quite bluntly has another agenda altogether.
Mr. Crossley proports to be concerned about the health issues surrounding areas of heavy auto traffic, citing higher cancer rates correlated with road traffic bearing 20,000 or more vehicles per day. This is interesting in the light that Mr. Crossley has located his political advocacy organization along Richmond Avenue near Kirby, a stretch of road that carries many thousands of vehicles per day. He says he is concerned about the health effects of such traffic patterns, but his actions in locating his organization along such a busy thoroughfare indicate otherwise.
Lastly, Mr. Crossley says that projections are that 3,538,000 people will be added to the population of the Houston area by 2035. The other day I read in the paper that recent population estimates are that Harris County has added 292,000 residents since the 2000 census. If that were the case, it is likely that the Houston area will add more along the lines of 1.5 - 2.0 million residents by 2035, if growth patterns stay as they are. Houston's city population in 1960 was 938,000, 1,232,000 in 1970, 1,595,000 in 1980, 1,630,000 in 1990, and was set at 1,900,000 in 2000. Harris County's population was at 1.9 million in 1970, 2.4 million in 1980, 2.8 million in 1990, and 3.4 million in 2000. Again, it is likely that in 30 years that the population will gain will be more in the range of 50 percent, not 100 percent. In fact I will put my money where my mouth is and will be willing to wage a $1,000 bet against anyone that I am within 10 percent of the actual figures in 2035.
Crossley goes on to say that a church can now throw open its doors during a celebration because of a lack of noxious fumes. That is not a reason for someone to point a gun at my face and compel me to pay tax dollars for light rail or else face jail time. Mr. Crossley talks about the densification of the inner city. Houston's density is probably now in the 3,500 person per square mile range. New York's is in the 25,000 per square mile range and 60,000 in Manhattan. He finishes his piece by saying we need to get serious about adding clean, quiet transit to our streets. Let's see: Metro runs the 73 and 82 bus routes along Westheimer, the 25, 53, and 73 bus routes along Richmond, the 18 along Kirby, number 9 along Westpark, and so on, and so on, and so on.
Two weeks ago, my car broke down and I elected to take Metro to work. This was only the second time I have ever done this, my first attempt being a horrid disaster. I live at Briarhurst and Westheimer, which has a bus stop right at the corner. I knew I could catch the 82 going east bound along Westheimer and then catch the 18 along Kirby to get to my downtown job. It is about a 9.5 mile commute for me to get to work. I bought a $2 day pass, which if my car didn't get repaired in time would allow me to get back home. I walked 3 minutes to the bus stop, waited 5 minutes for the bus to arrive, then it took 18 minutes to reach Westheimer and Kirby whereby I got off and made the connection to the 18 bus. It was a 4 minute walk to that bus station and I waited another 5 minutes before the 18 arrived (the 18 along Kirby used to run every 15 minutes. I know this because I lived in an apartment along West Main and Kirby for 8 years before I moved into my condo and saw countless thousands of empty buses run along Kirby - hence my transit activism). When the 18 arrived, it took another 17 minutes to get to Bagby, whereby I walked 3 minutes to get to work. Overall trip time from door to door: 54 - 55 minutes. In my car it takes 20 - 28 minutes depending on traffic and I have a 5 minute walk in. I now know for a fact that my car saves me 50 - 60 minutes per day in commute time. Having a single bus trip with no transfer would have knocked 8 or so minutes off the trip, but that still would have left me 35 - 45 minutes longer in commute via mass transit. That is why mass transit, outside of New York, Chicago, Boston, Washingon D.C, and San Francisco only has 1 - 5 percent of market shares.
Over at Off the Kuff, The Kuffmeister proclaims that West U. "gets it" about light rail. They do, Herr Kuffner. They love light rail as long as an LR line does NOT run along Westpark, but along Richmond. In other words, they have the exact same opinion about LR that the vast majority of Richmond people do. Rail is a beautiful thing... as long as it is built over in the other guy's neighborhood and not theirs.
And that brings up my last rant. It was pointed out during the meeting that the 2003 referendum says that a rail line will be built along Westpark (don't forget that the buses already go anywhere where any proposed rail line is to go). Several people stated that if Metro wanted to change their routes to build along Richmond, then they wanted another election. Indeed one could argue that since there is a heated debate about where the Westpark installment is to be built that the 2003 referendum could be challenged in court over vagueness grounds. Otherwise, why would we Houstonians be fighting over this to begin with?
BTW: As always, I really am a nice guy, so you have a nice day! :)
TMW
Posted by The Mighty Wizard at March 21, 2006 11:33 PM