Metro should seek transformation even after suspending University Line

The subway is easy to beat — and many do.

There have been so many broken promises in the first 45 years of Houston’s transit agency that it’s hard to recognize the successes: The light rail line built in the early 2000s from downtown to the Texas Medical Center transformed a tired, dilapidated Main Street, attracting developers who revived or built new high-rises, high-tech incubators, apartment buildings, bars and restaurants. It’s one of the most successful transit projects in the country in recent decades.

Another gem: Metro’s commuter bus network to the suburbs. In the last survey of downtown workers, before the pandemic, about a third of them chose to commute by transit. Today, even with remote and hybrid work, people are still lining up downtown to catch buses that use the HOV and HOV lanes, beyond the rush-hour traffic jams.

We urge Metro’s new leadership to study these successes and articulate a bold vision as it navigates a controversial reset of the MetroNext plans approved by voters in 2019.

Houston will remain a car city for the foreseeable future. And why not? Art cars, slabs, skyscraper highway bridges: these are some of our greatest cultural expressions. Our love affair with cars even includes a made-in-Texas Cybertruck decked out in Swangas.

BILL KING: University Line would financially cripple subway and bring few benefits |

And yet, Houston voters support ambitious transportation projects over and over again. Monorail, heavy rail, light rail, bus-bus. Anything, anything, to get more of us out of this rut. Just when we think we’re on the path to a city of choice and diversity, a scandal, a recession, or a new mayor with different priorities gets in the way.

Last week, Metro’s board accepted a staff recommendation to delay bus rapid transit along the University Line. The main reason given: Estimated construction costs have ballooned from $1.57 billion to at least $2.2 billion. Technically, there’s enough money to do it, but pouring most of the $3.5 billion approved by 68 percent of voters in the 2019 bond proposal into a single line would cripple Metro’s overall finances. Lower-than-expected ridership and higher interest rates haven’t helped either.

It’s a story that’s playing out across the country for all sorts of infrastructure projects. The Austin Transit Partnership ousted its leader after the estimated $5 billion cost of its voter-approved 28-mile light rail network doubled. In March 2023, the partnership unveiled five pared-down options for public comment.

The Metro, however, failed to offer voters any clear alternatives. The council didn’t even vote before deciding not to seek a federal grant that could have paid about $1 billion for the University Line.

Voters deserve a frank discussion, and Metro’s new board chair says she agrees.

“We need to do a communications tour, a tour of acknowledging where we are now, but also apologizing to the community for the promises that were made and the fact that we’re now going in a different direction, and why,” Elizabeth Gonzalez Brock said at Thursday’s town hall meeting. Metro’s previous leadership, she told the editorial board Tuesday, should have communicated the agency’s financial constraints sooner. “This deadline came up really fast,” she said, referring to the FTA grant. Six of Metro’s nine board members, including herself, were sworn in this year.

MORE OPINION: The University Line Metro is a visionary solution. Why abandon bus rapid transit now?

Despite everything, the metro management has already The agency has revealed some aspects of its new approach through its actions. The agency has quadrupled its budget for on-demand rides, or microtransit, to $1 million. In parts of the Third Ward and Second Ward neighborhoods, riders have given positive reviews to the state-funded version of Uber, though it’s in underserved areas like Acres Homes and Hiram Clarke where the curb-to-curb service has done a better job of meeting unmet demand.

Another measure was to allocate an additional $2.3 million to repave the bottom two lanes of Westheimer instead of focusing solely on improving shelters, sidewalks and adjacent lanes. Unfortunately, long-delayed plans to reduce the number of lanes and slightly widen sidewalks on Westheimer will not be implemented.

Brock told us his priority list also includes more police officers to ensure security and purchasing more buses to reduce delays on existing routes.

It makes sense to do things the right way and find ways to spend money wisely that benefit everyone, including drivers, but Metro should not be Houston’s slush fund for repaving streets or fighting crime. It’s a transit agency, and a quarter of every dollar raised for Metro already goes into general mobility funds that can be used to fix streets.

We applaud Brock’s innovative thinking and commitment to increasing ridership. Innovative ideas such as on-demand rides could increase access in some sprawling areas where there are few bus lines.

The laws of physics and geometry cannot be ignored. It is impossible to squeeze more people, alone or even in pairs, onto already congested roads, and our highways can only be widened and extended to a certain extent. These projects, it must be emphasized, are also expensive. More people, more traffic jams. Electric vehicles will not solve this problem. Neither will autonomous vehicles. All that is needed are lanes reserved for vehicles shared by many users.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Houston’s Bus Rapid Transit Isn’t a Vision, It’s Vanity

Brock told us not to confuse her goal of getting the basics right with abandoning transit. Bus rapid transit along the Inner Katy corridor is still a possibility, she said, and “we’re moving forward with Gulfton (BRT).”

We believe that a shorter, less expensive revision of the main east-west segments of the University Line connecting Houston’s major employment centers should also be considered.

And speaking of fundamentals, why not launch a sidewalk project in partnership with every city, county district, tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ), and Metro service area management district? Houstonians want ambition, too.

Forty years ago, Houston’s economy and public safety were in shambles. Then visionary people stepped in. A vast expanse of downtown surface parking became Discovery Green. Overgrown embankments frequented only by the adventurous or the impoverished became bayous lined with teeming trails. The Heights, shunned by some because of rampant murders and other crime, is now a sought-after neighborhood with hip enclaves along the MKT hiking and biking trail.

The transformation of some Houston neighborhoods into more urban and friendly places is not the result of chance, but of the collective action of city leaders, businesses and elected officials. Even as we sit in seemingly unavoidable traffic jams, trying not to let fear and anxiety overwhelm us, like wise men, we dream of a city 40 years from now that will be smarter, bolder and better.

Want to stay up-to-date with our latest and most thought-provoking editorials, columns and letters to the editor? Our opinion-driven newsletter “SaysHou” delivers our weekly highlights, straight to your inbox. Sign up now.