Cite 2

November 1982

Editor’s Note

On October 28 the Rice Design Alliance wrote the Mayor and City Council expressing its opinion that "neither the City Council nor the public have enough information to make an informed and binding decision on the proposed heavy rail transit system along Main Street." That letter further stated that "until such time as other alternatives are presented and studied by the Council and public, it would not be prudent to commit to any plan that will so radically affect the future of Houston." Since that time very little new information has been released by the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA). Therefore, on November 9 the Board of the Rice Design Alliance adopted the following motion:

The Board of the Rice Design Alliance is opposed to the construction of the 2.3-mile downtown Main Street elevated rail system proposed by MTA. It is the opinion of the Board that future proposals by MTA must address the broader issues related to a transit system of this type.

MTA has by its own description proposed the most economical and expedient method for constructing the first phase of a rapid rail system to ameliorate our transportation problems. The system responds to transportation needs, but there are other basic urban and social issues this development must also address.

Criteria for evaluating the feasibility of any proposed system must, at a minimum, demonstrate its impact upon existing and anticipated:

  1. pedestrian circulation—sidewalks, tunnel systems
  2. vehicular circulation—automobiles and trucking
  3. public transit interfaces—routes and connections
  4. offices, stores, homes and public institutions along the proposed routes
  5. growth and development patterns in Houston.

In presenting the physical, financial and aesthetic ramifications of their transit system proposals, MTA should clearly explain the alternatives they have considered, demonstrate their comparative advantages and disadvantages and justify their recommendations.

Our freeway system, considered capable of meeting Houston's anticipated growth and development needs when it was proposed in 1951, has become the transportation noose around Houston's neck. Given this compelling example, it is not the time for poverty of thinking. The cheapest transit system that can be built today may not be the most economical system for its anticipated 100 year life span. The most expedient construction schedule today may not serve the long term interests of Houston.