And, when they do, the Chron is all over it pushing a narrative that started with their "Out of Control" series which advocates for fewer lanes of traffic, slower speeds, more at-grade walking paths and a reduction of traffic lanes to allow for at-grade "green lanes".
It's even bleeding into their supposed straight news reporting on the wrecks. This is a problem because there's a fine line between "reporting" and "advocacy" and, as they did on light rail, the Chron appears to have decided they have no problem crossing it.
Has a streets memo been sent out to all staff as their was with light rail?
One of the biggest problems that comes with trying to argue this is that people won't read what's actually written about the issue, or listen to what's said. They'll just read the intro and then go into "Well, actually" that you're either anti-bicycle or anti-pedestrian or other some such, which is why I usually refuse to engage people on the matter. I'm writing my piece, you're welcome to comment, or don't, but it's highly unlikely that you or I would gain anything by debating this any at all. Because any suggestion that David Crossley's European vacation fever-dream for Houston is a bad idea, or at the minimum, one that will cost Billions of dollars but which will not alleviate the problem is treated as anti-mobility gibberish by the left, and any suggestion that bicycles and pedestrians have a place in the transit mix is treated as "greenism" by the Right.
Both can be true.
One thing lacking from the reporting is whether or not any of the grand plans of Crossley would have done anything to prevent the incidents that occurred yesterday. The Pedestrian accident appears to be caused by inattention, while the incident on the Grand Parkway appears to have been caused by an unfortunate man with a seizure condition making a bad choice. All of the speed cameras, reduced speed limits and traffic enforcement in the world would not have prevented any of that.
While I'm sure you're getting bored hearing it I will continue to beat the drum for the following:
1. Increased bike and pedestrian trails that are GRADE SEPARATED from lanes of automobile traffic. Of course people bike and walk to work, as a matter of fact, I ride up in the elevator with a couple of bicyclists every morning, but the solution is not to put multiple vehicles that are going to travel a varying speeds on the same grade.
2. Better road engineering/maintenance. Too many "exit only" lanes, too many on ramps that enter a freeway into them, forcing drivers to merge quickly into a mess of traffic creating slowdowns and other issues. The way Houston's freeway on/off ramp systems are designed is a mess. There needs to be a better way to fix it.
3. A reduction of speed VARIANCE. The biggest lie being told in this entire tale is that "speed kills". That's a load of bull that's been all but debunked in several studies in Europe. In fact, what "kills" is more often a variance in speed. Fast vehicles mixed in with slower vehicles mixed in with slower bicycles mixed in with slower still pedestrians, all sharing the same road space.
4. Better lane discipline. In Germany, it's a bigger fine for undertaking (passing on the right) than it is for speeding. Because the German's understand that the most dangerous thing is not going the proper speed in the proper lane. In Texas, the left lane on a road (when there are two) is usually designated as "for passing only". You should only be in it when you're passing another vehicle (this includes bicycles fwiw) then you are expected to move back right. In most cases there are more drivers in the left lane than the right lanes, and some of them are driving too slow.
5. Reducing Distracted driving. Texas does have a law against distracted driving, but it's rarely enforced. They also have a law against texting while driving, which is enforced even less. We have convinced ourselves, wrongly, that our work-a-day lives are so busy that we cannot afford to just sit in the car and drive. The result of this is that we're on our phones, texting, doing our make-up, eating, drinking coffee, taking the lid off of a soft-drink, rummaging around the floor-board for something we think we need right now while peering over the dashboard and trying, unsuccessfully, to maintain our lanes.
None of the above can be fixed by any of the prescriptions that Crossley and his acolytes (and the Chron) are promoting. You can't legislate away either stupidity or carelessness, nor can you improve a bad car situation by designing less room for them in a vain hope that people are going to freely give up their one remaining means of freedom to live asshole-to-elbow in a downtown high-rise and take a pretty crappy public transit system where you want them to go.
The harsh reality is that a lot of this boils down to personal responsibility and defensive driving.
Don't drink and drive.
Don't speed excessively.
Don't fiddle around while driving.
Respect others and yield the right-of-way
Use your turn signals (and then turn them off!)
Practice lane discipline.
Until people decide that they're going to be willing to follow the rules of the road, none of the changes that are being proposed are going to help. At some point the Houston driver has to decide that they're going to follow the rules and laws of the road.
Two huge steps to helping them do so would be to fix the roads (correctly, with quality pothole repair) and properly sequence traffic lights. The latter alone would result in far-fewer drivers running red lights and causing potential wrecks for no other reason then that they would not be stopped so often.
Thus getting them where they want to be more safely.
Shouldn't that, and not ridding Houston of cars, be the goal in the first place?
Sadly, you won't read THAT in the Houston Chronicle, which has forgone journalism for advocacy. And that's part of the problem as well.
