Replies

I live in Dallas, have ridden the new trains to Plano, and can verify that they are packed, parking lots are full,

Packed trains at rush hour and full parking lots says nothing of a system's success. Some of the worst and most heavily subsidized systems in the nation meet both of those criteria.

and ridership has exceeded projections.

Only because DART INTENTIONALLY underestimated those projections so they wouldn't look bad when the stats came out.

For Dallas it was a wise investment.

Okay then - tell me. How much does it bring in from ticket sales annually? How much does it cost to operate annually? If the latter exceeds the former, which I suspect to be the case, then it is a government-subsidized wasteful money hole.

How much revenue does a freeway bring in annually? Only the difference between the amount of gas burned on it after construction and the amount burned by those same cars before it was constructed - not much.

Packed trains at rush hour are a good thing. Most cities with rail systems would need to double or more their freeway lane-miles to get the same throughput.

What's cheaper and more aestehtically pleasing? 20+ new lanes of expressway into a city (with a concomittant increase in parking lots and automobile servicing businesses), or a basic rail system to handle the peak load?

More baloney from a Wendell Cox leaflet. How ridiculous to claim that high ridership and packed rush hour trains are not component measures of success. Most roadways are underutilized except during rush hour, no different than with transit. Of course your assumption that the trains are empty off-peak is completely wrong, but that seems to be par for the course. And I'll repeat that I am talking about Dallas only, so it is irrelevant what other systems have done. Though residents of many other cities judge their transit a success, judging by their votes for expansion and the taxes or bonds to pay for it.) This isn't some Seattle boondoggle.(

Other measures of success are the degree and type of development that transit stimulates(just like with roads), how many riders are taken off the already congested roads(speeding it up for the remaining drivers) and the convenience/personal utility it offers to riders and commuters. Trains are packed for sporting events/concerts/etc.(more than 100 nights per year in Dallas), as it allows persons to bypass arena traffic tieups(and reducing the overload on Stemmons and Woodall Rogers Freeways pre and post event) and save on high parking fees.

Bottom line, it is no different than a city/county/regional coalition deciding to invest in roads, utilities, landscaping, zoning, police, firefighters, etc. You don't like transit, and that's fine. However it seems that what really burns you & others up, is that citizens are showing their approval of transit by voting to pay for it. While it is true that the Feds usually pay a portion of the construction, no Fed funds are allowed to pay for operational costs. Now that DART light-rail is a success, other subrubs have begun discussions on how to join and add service to their towns. You may not like it, but that is their choice.