May 9, 2005, 10:43AM
When it comes to traffic jams, Houston ranks No. 5 in U.S.
By RAD SALLEE
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle
Traffic congestion remains severe in Houston and the nation despite roadbuilding, improved transit and other coping tactics, says a report released today.
The annual Urban Mobility Report by traffic researchers at Texas A&M University also says Houston, with the nation's 11th largest metro area population, ranked fifth in annual delay per traveler — 63 hours in 2003, the last year for which data is available.
That compared with 93 hours for Los Angeles, 72 for San Francisco, 69 for Washington and 67 for Atlanta.
The report, prepared by A&M's Texas Transportation Institute, shows traffic congestion in Houston eased in the late 1980s and early '90s after a spate of roadbuilding, but the trend has been generally upward again since then, with a few bumps along the way.
Houston's annual delay per traveler has surged from 39 hours in 1982, when the data was first compiled, and although the 63 hours logged in the most recent report is down slightly from 65 hours the previous year, the decrease is statistically insignificant.
The report also calculates a city's total annual delay — the difference between average commute time at rush hour and free-flow conditions, multiplied by the number of commuters.
For Houston, total delay was 137 million person-hours in 2003, eighth among U.S. metro areas. In 1992 it was 49 million (12th), and in 1982 it was 47 million (third).
Meanwhile "rush hour" has expanded from 6.4 to 7.8 hours a day.
The delay in Houston would have been 13 percent greater if not for transit, the report says. For specific areas such as downtown, the added burden would increase by 30 percent or more if transit were not available, said Tim Lomax, who wrote the report with colleague David Schrank. "And you'd have 30 percent more cars needing places to park," he added.
As in each of the past several years, TTI recommends a mix of roadbuilding, car pools, transit, working from home, signal coordination and incident management — like the city's Safe Clear towing program — to ease the future crunch.
"It's become increasingly clear that no single mode will solve the problem," Lomax said.
Meanwhile, congestion has gotten worse faster in Austin, Atlanta and a number of other cities.
Among Texas cities, delay per traveler was 60 hours for Dallas-Fort Worth, 33 for San Antonio and 51 for Austin. In 1982, when the data was first compiled, Austin's delay was just 11 hours compared to Houston's 39.
"It's due to rapid growth, and they (Austin officials) didn't build up their transportation system while they were growing," Lomax said.
"For a long time they had a policy of trying to sort of manage the growth and not add more transportation facilities. Now they have a lot more congestion," he said.
The report is based on statistics provided by state and national agencies. Most of the numbers change little from one year to the next, but civic planners and boosters watch them closely for trends and use them to compare their cities with others competing for businesses and skilled workers.
Source: Houston Chronicle
When it comes to traffic jams, Houston ranks No. 5 in U.S.
By RAD SALLEE
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle
Traffic congestion remains severe in Houston and the nation despite roadbuilding, improved transit and other coping tactics, says a report released today.
The annual Urban Mobility Report by traffic researchers at Texas A&M University also says Houston, with the nation's 11th largest metro area population, ranked fifth in annual delay per traveler — 63 hours in 2003, the last year for which data is available.
That compared with 93 hours for Los Angeles, 72 for San Francisco, 69 for Washington and 67 for Atlanta.
The report, prepared by A&M's Texas Transportation Institute, shows traffic congestion in Houston eased in the late 1980s and early '90s after a spate of roadbuilding, but the trend has been generally upward again since then, with a few bumps along the way.
Houston's annual delay per traveler has surged from 39 hours in 1982, when the data was first compiled, and although the 63 hours logged in the most recent report is down slightly from 65 hours the previous year, the decrease is statistically insignificant.
The report also calculates a city's total annual delay — the difference between average commute time at rush hour and free-flow conditions, multiplied by the number of commuters.
For Houston, total delay was 137 million person-hours in 2003, eighth among U.S. metro areas. In 1992 it was 49 million (12th), and in 1982 it was 47 million (third).
Meanwhile "rush hour" has expanded from 6.4 to 7.8 hours a day.
The delay in Houston would have been 13 percent greater if not for transit, the report says. For specific areas such as downtown, the added burden would increase by 30 percent or more if transit were not available, said Tim Lomax, who wrote the report with colleague David Schrank. "And you'd have 30 percent more cars needing places to park," he added.
As in each of the past several years, TTI recommends a mix of roadbuilding, car pools, transit, working from home, signal coordination and incident management — like the city's Safe Clear towing program — to ease the future crunch.
"It's become increasingly clear that no single mode will solve the problem," Lomax said.
Meanwhile, congestion has gotten worse faster in Austin, Atlanta and a number of other cities.
Among Texas cities, delay per traveler was 60 hours for Dallas-Fort Worth, 33 for San Antonio and 51 for Austin. In 1982, when the data was first compiled, Austin's delay was just 11 hours compared to Houston's 39.
"It's due to rapid growth, and they (Austin officials) didn't build up their transportation system while they were growing," Lomax said.
"For a long time they had a policy of trying to sort of manage the growth and not add more transportation facilities. Now they have a lot more congestion," he said.
The report is based on statistics provided by state and national agencies. Most of the numbers change little from one year to the next, but civic planners and boosters watch them closely for trends and use them to compare their cities with others competing for businesses and skilled workers.
Source: Houston Chronicle
Comment