Posted on 04/01/2015 6:06:46 AM PDT by TurboZamboni
Light rail is controversial because of its price tag -- the recently finished Green Line linking downtown St. Paul with Minneapolis cost $957 million. Supporters, though, say it's justified along dense routes where it can move many people more efficiently than buses can. <<>> Taxpayers shoulder the majority of the cost. In the metro area, fares account for about $100 million in revenue last year -- about 30 percent of the operating cost of transit. Federal grants play a big role in paying for new transitways and vehicles -- 55 percent of capital costs last year. But federal taxpayers covered just 7 percent of operating costs. State taxpayers are in the reverse situation. The state paid 62 percent of transit operating costs last year, but just 5 percent of capital costs. Local governments pay big portions of both types of spending: 43 percent of capital costs and 30 percent of operating costs. <<>> Taxpayers shoulder the majority of the cost. In the metro area, fares account for about $100 million in revenue last year -- about 30 percent of the operating cost of transit. Federal grants play a big role in paying for new transitways and vehicles -- 55 percent of capital costs last year. But federal taxpayers covered just 7 percent of operating costs. State taxpayers are in the reverse situation. The state paid 62 percent of transit operating costs last year, but just 5 percent of capital costs. Local governments pay big portions of both types of spending: 43 percent of capital costs and 30 percent of operating costs.
(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...
Glad I can fund urban hipsters passion for choo-choo rides so they can feel smug about 'saving the planet'.
If it takes cars off the road it does make your commute shorter at least. (assuming you happen to live in Minneapolis)
The Great Northern ran that line in the fifties and sixties but abandoned passenger service because the margins were much greater for freight.
The same is true now. No commercial carrier will pick up passenger service because so much more can be made by shipping oil, coal, etc.
Another boondoggle for "look at me" busybodies.
Mass transit, is that an anti- Catholic joke?
CC
$100 million dollars in fares pays for 30% of the operating cost. Over 2/3 of the operating cost is paid by taxpayers as well as the capital costs to cover the $957 million to build it.
I am from Minneapolis. There is no traffic jams except those caused by construction. I lived along Hwy 100 north of Duluth street. You can walk across that highway most times of the day as traffic is light. The similar highways here in the San Fernando valley in California on the other hand are crowded. Buses would be cheaper in Minneapolis that can change routes anytime then a train that is stuck on rails.
Traffic cams
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/tmc/trafficinfo/cameras_map.html
The joke is on us.
actually, in many places it makes traffic worse...long lines waiting for the train crossing.
and it takes very few cars off the road.
most mass transits, excepting things like the subway in big cities, are cheaper to give each rider a new car.
And a costly joke it is, too.
CC
people hate riding buses, too
Recently wound up (long story) having to take the bus over a route I routinely travel by car.
45 minutes by car, assuming traffic isn’t too bad, which it isn’t most of the time.
2:45 by bus. Not counting waiting for bus to show up.
Assuming I was commuting to work this way, that would mean at least a 6 hour commute each day vs. probably 2 to 2.5 hours, assuming my car commute was during rush hours.
Aside from the cliche discussion about removing communities from the Federal teat...
...how about raising fares commensurate with operating expenses (i.e., END THE SUBSIDIES).
Oh, yeah...’logic’...a foreign concept in government...
/s
It should be against the law in every State to fund operations at a loss (subsidies...no matter the argument). There should not even be a debate about subsidies in the genesis stage of a project. It would go far to begin to cease this Federal march for control over States & communities.
Even though the MBTA sucks, I can’t imagine the traffic in the Boston area if there weren’t any mass transit. Think of it as a subsidy for lessening wear and tear on the roads.
That said, can’t wait for driverless cars, but the whole infrastructure for that will probably take 20 years to get into place.
-—Even though the MBTA sucks, I can’t imagine the traffic in the Boston area if there weren’t any mass transit.-—
It would probably be a lot better if they decriminalized parking garages. I’m sure some would be built close to the city, where garages would THEN shuttle people to the city center.
The max capacity for a train on the Worcester commuter rail is 2000, and they usually run at 50% capacity. So without the commuter rail there would be 3000 more drivers each day coming in from the west. That doesn’t seem like a big deal.
Light rail (streetcars) routes have been come into criticism in two citys that I know of. Cincinati and Milwaukee. In both cases the use of fed handouts play a major role where the routings of the proposed lines are to areas picked out by the pols in office which critics state will never offer a manageable return covering the costs spent in yearly operation let alone future maintainence and upgrade.
In Milwaukee there are 4X daily each way Amtrack 90 mile runs to or from Milwaukee and Chicago using leased Burlington freight rail routes where those runs are tied up because freight is given preference and take much longer than in the 50’s. When a communter electric rail service between the two citys known as the Northshore “Electroliners” took 45 minutes or less on express runs who’s exclusive right of way lies abandonded.
In Milwaukee’s case the city is considering building a new arena for The Bucks basketball team but offers no incentive to its construction. But wants a streetcar line costing hundreds of millions going down a route few need or ride. In the Cinci case where there is no major development like an arena being considered there are probably existing projects where such transit funds could be better spent.
Government transit is not green. Total cost indicates how much total energy is required and pollution created in its construction and operation, including indirectly such as the carbon footprints of the thousands of flunky government hirelings. Government transit consumes so much energy and emits so much pollution that the rider fares can never come close to paying for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.