As things look, it appears that the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County will be moving forward with Phase 2 of its Metro Solutions plan passed in November 2003. The intent is to build bus rapid transit along most of the routes, but rail along the others. The bus rapid transit routes would be then converted to rail, based upon improved transit patronage. It is clear that various groups intend on steering Houston towards a public transportation policy in whose intent is to spend large amounts of capital to supplant current bus service along routes where there is a known market for public transportation. It also seems to be the intent of downtown groups to push guideway transit to Houston's two main airports, a project whose ultimate cost will probably be at least $2-3 billion if not more.
In a rational sense, the primary questions one has to ask surround the building of any transportation project is whether the current existing infrastructure is adequate for handling the demands being placed on it. This is particularly relevant in transportation areas and corridors whose primary use is intended to be for transportation purposes. In other words, does an airport have enough runways to handle incoming traffic? Does a freeway have enough lanes or a pricing structure which would avoid crowding to the point where traffic jams result in congestion for substantial periods of the day? Is the available public transportation mode adequate to meet the demand curve for public transit? If the answers to questions like these are yes, yet the result is the building or supplanting of infrastructure, then we are indulging in the building of transportation infrastructure for no really good reason.
One of the observations (or complaints depending upon your point of view) surrounding the keeping and writing of boards and weblogs is that blog writers and board members seldom do anything more than link to mainstream media sites and comment on their stories. In other words, bloggers and board posters seldom do any of their own journalism, reporting, or original research on various topics. Well I intend to do my two cents worth to help rectify those complaints. I have a minor project surrounding HISD which I will comment on in the near future, but this blog entry will be used to announce a project surrounding the one of the primary claims made on behalf of building interurban rail systems. Namely, will the building of a guided transit system or light rail system result in substantial revitalization or redevelopment of real estate along the proposed routes in Houston?
There are a number of reasons why various groups support the indulgence of building of fixed guideway passenger systems in cities in an age where such transportation is often ill suited to often fast changing land use patterns and which faces stiff competition from low cost telecommuting, walking, and personal motorized transportation. Rail seems to act as a kind of perfume to civic boosters who look at passenger rail as a way of adding prestige to their city or their area within a city. They also often look at other cities who may boast of their rail offerings irregardless of what the demand curve for public transportation is, whether that demand could be met by improving bus service whose capital costs are a fraction of rail, or whether or not rail positively contributes to social welfare. Rail enjoys near universal support amongst environmentalists and urban planners who seem appalled at ongoing driving habits amongst urban dwellers. City officials and members of politically powerful downtown interest groups who are tied into the municipal establishment also support fixed guideways and rail, looking on them as a way to try to bolster downtown areas from deterioration. There are the various contractor groups who would stand to gain from building passenger rail, and there are members of the public who seem to think that rail alleviates traffic congestion or improves air quality irregardless of whether it actually does or not. Finally, there are a few members of the public who support rail for the simple matter that they fans of rail and prefer rail over other forms of transit. Rail would be viewed as a normal good amongst such groups. In other words, there is a significant political market for guideways.
But those are not the end of claims made on behalf of building passenger rail. Putting guideways and tracks into the ground creates definitive new realities and facts on the ground. Among them are that transit operators seldom set prices for public transportation at rates which will cover capital costs (the proposed rail line running from the eastside Universities through to the Hillcroft transit center is expected to cost over $600 million), or for that matter ongoing operating or maintenance costs. In other words, fixed guideways might be a winner in political markets, yet the fact that they are so does not alleviate them from having to face the realities of economic markets. It is likely that if light rail is put along the Phase 2 routes as envisioned, annual operating costs will reach about $75+ million per year in 2006 dollars which is about 25 percent of Metro's current operational expenditures. If the public private partnership that Metro intends to enter into results in financial distress borne by the private partner (and bear in mind that Washington Group International - the current contractor chosen for initial buidling - is responsible to shareholders), then Metro would be faced with the possibility of having to take over and operate the guideways on its own. Moreover from a social welfare perspective, small miles of fixed guideways will often not get poorer patrons to areas where there are jobs whereas longer reaching bus routes can. Therefore other rationales are often used to justify the concentrated spending of such large capital costs into relatively small areas.
One of these primary claims made on behalf of rail is that it boosts real estate values of property located along rail routes. It is my intention to show whether this will end up happening along guided rapid transit light rail routes in Houston.
To this end, last weekend I walked along the Northside transit route and took about 750 photographs of properties along the route. I also noted that Metro has over 30 bus stops and seven main bus routes currently running along the corridor. This is to be replaced or supplanted by a 5.4 mile transit line which will have five stops (10 stops since the transit will be running in both directions) between the existing UH downtown rail station and Northline mall. Over the upcoming weeks, I will be walking the remaining routes to document their current state of development. I anticipate that I will end up with about 4,000 photographs depicting what current development is like. After the project is completed, I hope to repeat the exercise and compare the results.
I also have started a project to determine what real estate values are like in the areas along proposed routes. I intend to sample 1,000 random properties along each of the proposed routes and hope to compare the results after the project is completed. In general, the sampling will focus in particular on real estate values within 400-600 yards of proposed stations. However I also intend to sample properties directly along routes, but further away than this. I also intend to sample properties in neighborhoods where routes are, but which may be set back say 1/2 mile or so away from routes. I also intend to do some sampling of business or commercial properties. The source will be the Harris County Appraisal District website, which for all of the district's known issues surrounding property appraisals, will serve the purpose of keeping the source of data consistent for purposes of sampling.
Enough for now. I've got some work cut out for me if I am to complete this project. I also have an update on the boardings spreadsheet updated through March 2007 which I intend to publish soon. Until then.
Later.
Addendum: Federal transit rules in the United States Code allow local transit agencies to use federal grants to purchase land and then sell it at a discount to would be developers if that land will be developed, not for its highest and best use, but for its highest transit oriented development use. Here is one such story.
Sigh...
Posted by The Mighty Wizard at June 9, 2007 05:35 PM