Railway Age Blogger (and fellow rail advocate) Lyndon Henry has felt the pain. Last fall he simultaneously celebrated and suffered as he helped defeat a proposal for more passenger rail service in Austin, Texas's state capital.
It's always tough for advocates to oppose any U.S. passenger rail project, even flawed ones. I know the feeling myself, as I supported the demise of Access to the Region's Core (ARC), a proposal originally linking New Jersey and New York's Penn Station, a plan that de-evolved seemingly by the week into a stub-end, parallel railroad separated from the Northeast Corridor (and missing Penn Station almost altogether). If I finally had a trump card to the charge "You rail people never oppose a project," that didn't make ARC's deserved downfall any less problematic: The NEC needs a real capacity boost – and fast.
Austin faces different circumstances; though it has one diesel rail line, it needs to initiate more service. Despite that need, Mr. Henry found it necessary to oppose a project that went down to defeat last year.
Others, of course, question Mr. Henry's stance even as they (along with Mr. Henry and his allies) look forward to the next steps Austin must take. In an effort to foster such a focus, or at least offer fair play and equal time, herewith an opinion from transportation and land use consultant John Langmore (pictured below), who served as a board member for Austin’s Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Capital Metro) from Jan. 2010 to August 2014. My thanks to him for offering his views.
***
"In War: Resolution. In Defeat: Defiance. In Victory: Magnanimity. In Peace: Good Will." The words of Winston Churchill could certainly serve as a template for the post-election atmosphere in Austin, Tex., following the decision of the electorate to not adopt the City of Austin's Transportation Bond (commonly referred to as Proposition 1).
As elections often do, it's fair to say that the debate over Prop 1 divided people throughout Austin. But in looking back, it's safe to say we finally have the most statistically accurate feedback we're ever going to get about Central Texans' views on transportation. Voting results from Austin's Prop 1 make clear the region's straightforward response to resolving mobility issues.
As the map published in this Nov. 6, 2014 Austin American-Statesman article by reporter Ben Wear revealed, those living and working in the highly congested regional core strongly desire rail transit and they're willing to pay for it. Those living outside central Austin, particularly in the Northwest and Southwest, aren't willing to pay such a heavy price for something that only indirectly benefits them. Furthermore, the road improvements in Prop 1 weren't enough to convince them to make a substantial investment in the form of a "yes" vote on Election Day.
That central Austin wants and understands the benefits of rail transit is an undeniable conclusion from this year's election results. That's no surprise given the increasing density in the core, the constrained right-of-way and the high capacity of rail transit. It also promotes the vision the region has set for itself over years of public input in the form of mixed-use, walkable activity centers connected by high capacity transit.
At the same time, while having a sustainable central Austin benefits the entire region, the $600 million of local funds proposed to be spent on rail does little initially to resolve the very real mobility needs for those living in the far Northwest, Southwest and Southeast. Those regions' strong opposition to Prop 1 was perfectly logical given the congestion they're battling and the increase in their property taxes that would have followed.
So where does that leave us? If we do nothing traffic is obviously only going to get worse and take our precious quality of life with it. While the failed adoption of Prop 1 is a setback, it does not push the reset button on years of hard work.
We need a more comprehensive package of mobility solutions tailored to the needs of the particular part of the region it serves. While Central Austin wants and needs rail transit, for the outlying suburbs that don't currently have the density to justify rail's cost, they need additional options like more roadway improvements and bus service to meet their mobility needs.
That is the mobility package that should be constructed and put to voters by the City of Austin, Travis County and Capital Metro in conjunction with the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO), Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (the regional toll authority) sooner rather than later.
Those that argued over Prop 1 (myself included) did all Central Texans a disservice by failing to adequately acknowledge that different mobility solutions have merit in different environments. I'm confident Central Texans would be willing to pay for a significant transportation package if tailored for the region's differing needs. Under such a scenario rail riders would be sharing the cost of appropriate road development costs and road users would in turn be supporting the costs of rail development. The fate of the entire region would be more appropriately tied together than it was in Prop 1.
Despite the outcome of the election, efforts to help improve the quality of life in Austin will continue. As Churchill once said, "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts."
Now the issue is simply whether or not our newly elected officials will do the hard work it takes to move something like that forward.
For everyone that loves Austin, I certainly hope so.