Utah is so intent on building rail transit that it is willing to cook the books and systematically overestimate ridership in order to support its ridiculously expensive rail projects. One commuter-rail line, for example, is expected to attract a 6,100 new transit riders a day, or 3,050 new round trips, for a mere $612 million. At 4 percent interest, that’s enough money to give every one of those new round-trip riders a new Toyota Prius every other year for the next 30 years.
The latest development is that state archeologists have warned that a proposed commuter-rail station and mixed-use development is on a 3,000-year-old archeological site. Erectile deficiency is a common disease in men above 40 seanamic.com order levitra online but a well versed study has revealed that ED can be reversed with lifestyle changes. Health experts have recognized exercise as one of the key ingredients in Shilajit ES capsules, which is one of the best natural supplements for anti generic cialis mastercard aging, has got anti-inflammatory properties to cure knee pain and back pain. If keeping a full bladder for too long time, a male driver may get urine infection. sildenafil discount The National Popular Vote Plan will make every vote equal and will provide every voter with an equal amount of sugar. generic viagra in stores The solution? Fire the archeologists. Of course, the state maintains the firing has nothing to do with rail transit; they just don’t have the funds to keep the archeologists on staff. Maybe that’s because they are wasting so much money on rail transit.
Oh come on libs, no defense for this boondoggle? What’s the world come to!
What boondoggle? Employing archaeological hertiage bureaucrats? They are right up there in uselessness and stupidity with the natural resource and historic preservation folks in my estimation, and as useful as Iceland’s mandated Elf investigations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulduf%C3%B3lk
As to the Salt Lake City project, I can only say that having visited Salt Lake this spring and also toured this line, I was quite impressed with the general layout of the city and suburbs, its human scale, its delightful architecture and streetscapes, and the apparent attractiveness of the commuter rail and light rail system Utah is building mostly with local funds. Bravo to them – its one of the few western cities I would ever think of moving to.
The boondoggle is the rail line. Sure, the archeologists are somewhat of a boondoggle too, but they don’t cost hundreds of millions of dollars. I also like Salt Lake City, and have been there many times. It does not need commuter rail or light rail.
I also like Salt Lake City, and have been there many times. It does not need commuter rail or light rail.
Apparently the majority of the local residents disagree with you. That is certainly how they voted.
Why can’t you respect the democratic process?
Majority in a democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner. ‘Nuff said.
Besides, these plans are always sold to the public with a variety of false claims: understated costs and overstated benefits.
So what’s the alternative, metrosucks?
I don’t have all the answers, but one solution, especially in the transit arena, is to return mass transit to private hands, where it was before government took over it.
The fact is that democracy has utterly failed to achieve its objectives. And a democracy where the people are voting on items that are presented to them in a biased manner is even worse. All the politicians have to do is lie enough to get 51% of the vote, and then that gives them, in their mind, a mandate to do whatever the heck they like. It always happens with these fraud rail projects.
“Why can’t you respect the democratic process?” -Andrew
Is the democratic process merely about voting in an election and any opposition that isn’t in line with the outcome of that vote disrespecting the process?
And to get to that non-presidential year election where the majority of voters (not all citizens; just those who showed up to vote), they had to act contrary to previous votes in the region where funding for proposed rail projects were rejected. So did the proponents disrespect or respect democracy?
Receiving over half a billion in Federal funding doesn’t exactly strike me as a locally funded. (Railway Age, March 2008, page G2)
Either way, for some fun on Utah numbers games check out the SL Tribs series on the state’s changing demographics from 5-7 years ago. My fave was that if the LDS church loses track of a member they assume that they remain LDS and they assume that person lives to the age of 114.
I like the public votes in theory, but the ballot is so rigged that the elections are worthless. The ballot questions are essentially “You are paying 80% of the light rail costs of other cities. Do you want to get a light rail system with an 80% subsidy?”
I rode the Phoenix light rail system last week. It cost less than $1 to ride. Almost all the riders were going to the baseball game, and all the ads on the train were about the upcoming All Star game in Phoenix. So the Phoenix light rail is a huge subsidy to billionaire baseball team owners. My friends say during the winter that most of the riders are Arizona State University students, as the light rail connects several campuses and students ride for free.
So the transportation system is worth $1 or less to the users. What a boondoggle.
metrosucks:
Besides, these plans are always sold to the public with a variety of false claims: understated costs and overstated benefits.
It appears the Utah plans are coming in on-time, under-budget and over the modest ridership projects. So where are the false claims?
All the politicians have to do is lie enough to get 51% of the vote, and then that gives them, in their mind, a mandate to do whatever the heck they like.
51% is a mandate. Its called a majority, and the majority gets to take the positions of power and advance their agenda. If the minority has such great ideas for governance, they should be able to get enough people to agree AND COME OUT AND VOTE that they win the election. Whining about election results of the past is just sour grapes by the losers. Take your medicine, man up, and come up with a new plan that puts your agenda in the position to move forward with majority support. This is not a hard concept for most successful politicians.
prk166:
Is the democratic process merely about voting in an election and any opposition that isn’t in line with the outcome of that vote disrespecting the process?
Oppose all you want, but you have to respect that you lost the election when phrasing your opposition. No winner is going to turn to the loser and say: “So sorry, old chap about that. Here, tell me what you wanted to get done if you had won, and I’ll make sure it happens.”
Receiving over half a billion in Federal funding doesn’t exactly strike me as a locally funded.
Utah is using mostly local funds for the entire program of five new rail lines. The funding ratios were juggled between various lines to make some all local funded, and some partially federal funded.
So did the proponents disrespect or respect democracy?
They respected it by accepting thier loss and changing their plan to something that would be acceptable to a majority of voters. They also overcame regional opposition to larger plans by building a successful starter line in an area that supported it and opening it on-time, on-budget, and to higher than expected ridership, so that previously opposed residents and politicians now became supporters. The same things has played out in Dallas, Atlanta, and San Francisco. Bold plans were put forth, some opposition developed and was respected by eliminating opposed area from the plans and funding mechanism, then later some previous opponents become supporters and the old plans are dusted off and service extended to the politically converted areas once they are willing to tax themselves to pay for it.
metrosucks and prk166:
The 2006 election won with 64% approval. 64-36 is not exactly a “close” election, where a few more votes goign the other way would have swung it.
Its not surprising it won. UTA’s stated plan is to have a rail transit stop within 1 mile of 90% of residents of the Wasatch Valley – in other words, near universal rail transit options for at least some trips. Survey after survey has shown that people think the best solution to transportation problems is more mass transit, and that they will use mass transit if it can be brought near to where they live and work and play. A 90% within one mile goal is audacious but doable in a place like Salt Lake-Ogden-Provo, and fulfills this desire.
“My friends say during the winter that most of the riders are Arizona State University students, as the light rail connects several campuses and students ride for free.”
People say this about CapMetro and University of Texas students. I’m not sure how it works in AZ but I’d take a look at the tuition bills for these students before making this claim. I can tell you that in Austin it’s far, far, far from free. In fact you might argue that UT students are subsidizing rides for the general public.
As a Salt Lake City (area) resident, let me toss in my two cents.
First, Utah, the home of the anti-social medicine rant, is the biggest per capita Federal transit dollar mooch in the nation. Fact.
Second, last night, I visited my local station to greet the throng departing from UTA’s diesel-belching, FrontRunner commuter behemoth. Five people got off: three employees, two mooches.
This morning, after the last train disappeared behind a cloud of black diesel soot, I visited that same commuter parking lot and counted the vehicles: 9 cars/trucks. And that was after four train -loads’ departed.
A couple of weeks ago, just for the funnovit, I bought a $5 ($70-subsided) round-trip ticket Ogden-Salt Lake City. Except for employees, my friend and I were the only riders.
And if you really want to get into UTA’s head, try this: two weeks ago a teenager was executed by an LRT out for a shakedown joy-ride on the new Draper line. That particular crossing couldn’t pass the even the grade-5 test. Except for a yellow line painted on the sidewalk, nothing: No drop-down barrier, no signage, and an angled crossing that the only way you can tell a train is coming is stop and lean out and look. And if you don’t, it’s a mere two steps to the tracks and disaster. To increase the likelihood of an “accidentâ€, UTA’s morons erected a 15-foot high sound barrier. And if that weren’t enough, they installed power pole right on the corner to further reduce the sight line. Afterward, they did at least erect a sign. Upside down. And even after they corrected that, they forgot to trim an overhanging tree, so you can’t see it anyway. Welcome to Utah!
Andrew, have you even read Randal’s analysis and considered the exorbitant cost, per rider, of this boondoggle? Enough to lease new a new Prius every other year for the next thirty years. Come on!
I looked up the Phoenix Light Rail and found they let ASU students ride free 2008-2010, but now they charge $150 for one academic year pass.
Phoenix light rail is just another boondoggle. Does anyone honestly think that traffic patterns would have been affected, at all, had it not been built? One more feel-good toy for the mayor and city council.
When I spoke in PHX in March (ASU), I didn’t rent a car because the LR went right past the airport and right to ASU. No need. Lots of folks on the train with luggage. We did the same in BAL and CHI as well, not so much in ATL. When gas is permanently above $5-6/gal, the citizenry will appreciate the LR.
DS
Oh, here we go, the planning troll speaketh again. Light rail works because it happens to haul the propaganda mouthpiece from the airport to Nuremberg where he spoke to, and brainwashed, thousands of naive young students.
So Metrosucks you were told what to think while on the Autobahn?
I’ve never been on the Autobahn, but you’ve only been there when you were high. Then of course you did not get my reference.
“When gas is permanently above $5-6/gal, the citizenry will appreciate the LR.” -Dan
While I don’t doubt that some people will change their habits one has to look at total cost of ownership and also how much people value what they get for their car. Historically the use of the automobile boomed during times that gas was above $2/ gallon. Heck it was about $2.50, with a dip at the start of the depression, in constant dollars through the 1930s. The automobile use grew fast enough and became widespread enough in the 1920s and 1930s to be a major factor in a hundreds of street cars companies dropping operating street cars or at least in abandoning routes.
Total cost of ownership of vehicles back then was a lot more expensive back then. Cars were not as reliable as they are today. It wasn’t cheap and yet people turned to them in droves. I wouldn’t be so sure if $5 gas prices, even in constant dollars, will cause people to reduce using their vehicle very much.
But that’s because we just saw how people reacted when gas prices spiked from 2004 to 2008. Sure, some people appreciated light rail (LRT) more than they used to. But even less people actually changed their behavior. Sure, the estimated trips taken had a nice increase. But in pure #s compared to their respective metros they weren’t anything big. Especially not when compared to how people’s vehicle purchases shifted.
Why do we think the change will be significant next time? It didn’t happen last time. And every year that goes sees technologies that make working remotely that much more acceptable and practical in the work place. What are the chances people’s driving will drop 20% because they’re taking LRT versus because they’re working from home 6 days a month?
To get back to where I was getting with total cost of ownership, the other part of the equation is value. Right now the average transit rider spends twice as much time commuting as the average car driver. How much do people value an extra 30 minutes a day that’s free to something other than commuting? That’s the question. It’s not about how much gas prices rise but how much people value what they’re getting for the price.
“Is the democratic process merely about voting in an election and any opposition that isn’t in line with the outcome of that vote disrespecting the process?” -prk166
“Oppose all you want, but you have to respect that you lost the election when phrasing your opposition. No winner is going to turn to the loser and say: “So sorry, old chap about that. Here, tell me what you wanted to get done if you had won, and I’ll make sure it happens.†– Andrew
But that’s the thing. LRT and rail projects like SLC’s lost at the ballot box, often several times over decades. Yet rail referendums kept coming up for vote. So why is it when they finally win one, those against it are being anti-democratic by not dropping their opposition to the projects? Why is one positive outcome becomes concrete proof that it’s “what the people want” yet several negatives are not? And at that, all the times the issue wasn’t brought to the ballot because those pushing the projects felt they didn’t have a good chance of their rail referendum passing (e.g. another tax increase for Fastracks hasn’t been brought to the voters in 2010 nor 2011)?
“When gas is permanently above $5-6/gal, the citizenry will appreciate the LR.†-Dan
I drive to Vancouver BC regularly. Gas is already $5 a gallon there, and has been for some time. I have not noticed any difference in congestion levels on Vancouver’s busy roads. Plenty of people driving their big pickup trucks and SUVs. In fact, the Transportation Department is in the middle of a massive Highway 1 (freeway) upgrade and the construction of a new Fraser River bridge, all costing billions of dollars.
So to conclude, suck on that planner.
metrosucks:
Transit use in Canadian cities is much higher than in the US (except for NYC), and the rail lines are especially popular.
Calgary – 268.5K on light rail, 247.9K on bus
Ottowa – 14.2K on light rail, 532.7K on bus
Vancouver – 381.1K on subway, 10.9K on commuter rail, 744.7K on bus
Toronto – 299K on light rail, 923.6K on subway, 167.8K on commuter rail, 1,325.8K on bus
Montreal – 1,065.4K on subway, 66.1K on commuter rail, 1,378K on bus
Tornto and Montreal ridership, for example, is similar to Chicago, even though Chicago metro area is twice the size of Toronto and three times the size of Montreal. Montreal is double the ridership of Boston or Philadelphia or Washington, even though the metro area has half the population of those cities. Vancouver has 1/3 the population of Boston or Philadelphia or Washington, and a similar level of transit ridership.
Transit ridership per capita in Canada is obviously a couple of times higher than the US.
prk166:
But that’s because we just saw how people reacted when gas prices spiked from 2004 to 2008. Sure, some people appreciated light rail (LRT) more than they used to. But even less people actually changed their behavior. Sure, the estimated trips taken had a nice increase.
Oil consumption in the US is off 10% from its peak with no sign of rebounding. If you watch what people with money in the game are doing – i.e. oil refinery owner/operators, they are shuttering their marginal refineries in a way which looks permanent.
That is because the supply to be refined and the demand to use it are not there.
Right now the average transit rider spends twice as much time commuting as the average car driver.
I suspect they spend the extra time because either commuting is more tolerable when you can do something besides driving, or the commute is slow because it is on a bus and they are people whose time has no value.
But that’s the thing. LRT and rail projects like SLC’s lost at the ballot box, often several times over decades. Yet rail referendums kept coming up for vote. So why is it when they finally win one, those against it are being anti-democratic by not dropping their opposition to the projects?
That is my whole point, they lost 42-58, regrouped, and reformulated their plans to come up with something that could eventually win, and then they won 64-36. When they built their first line, they obviously did it without the tax that was defeated at the polls with certain political leaders putting their neck on the line to support a project within existing resources. Instead of them being defeated in the next local elections, it was the leading vocal light rail opponenets who lost in landslides 1999, one candidate losing over 75-25.
If you want to shut TRAX down as a collosal waste and live in Salt Lake, organize a ballot initiative to do so and see how far you get.
Andrew, give me a straight answer. Why malign highways, which receive a small subsidy, yet benefit all of society, and celebrate passenger rail, which receives a huge subsidy (often approaching 100%) and benefits a very small segment of society?
The percentage of voters that support TRAX is essentially meaningless.
1) Most of the supporters don’t, and won’t ride TRAX (clearly obvious, considering the ridership of the line vs the number of people who supposedly support it).
2) Any support of the line must be weighed against the fact that the line isn’t completely funded by Salt Lake area residents (much less TRAX riders), and is supported by boondoggle funding stolen from federal taxpayers.
3) At what point does this become a bad idea that doesn’t warrant support, regardless of the results of biased polling or lies drummed up by the transit agency? $600 million for 5000 riders a day? 4000? 3000? 2000? Would you support spending $600 million for 500 riders a day? How about 300 million for 500 riders? There’s plenty of excess capacity on local freeways and expressways. What’s the point of this boondoggle? How much is the ever elusive “transportation choice” worth? Should we pay for people who want to ride monorail to downtown and back? What about horse & buggy? Scale steam engines? What makes light rail more viable than these modes?
When honestly appraised, they’re all civic boondoggles designed to make mayors and city councils feel good about their metro area and funnel millions in the pockets of local contractors.
metrosucks:
Why malign highways,
I don’t.
which receive a small subsidy
Hundreds of billions per year is not a small subsidy. Especially, the amount of American lives and treasure spent securing oil supplies for us as 4% of the worlds population to consume 20% of the world’s production is not trivial.
yet benefit all of society
They do not benefit those who do not and cannot use them – i.e. non drivers.
and celebrate passenger rail
I like riding on trains.
which receives a huge subsidy (often approaching 100%)
Hardly.
benefits a very small segment of society?
They only benefit a small segment of society because the highway lobby was permitted to destroy the rail system we had circa 1950 or 1930 and convert our transportation investment priorities to asphalt and rubber. If limited access highways had been limited to pay-go toll roads, we would have nowhere near the system of roads we have today, so they too would only benefit a small segment of society – mainly people who go on long-haul intercity car journeys.
Most of the supporters don’t, and won’t ride TRAX (clearly obvious, considering the ridership of the line vs the number of people who supposedly support it)
I support all of my local rail lines, but obviously I cannot ride on all of them every day. Just because I cannot ride all 28 rail lines around Philadelphia every day doesn’t mean they should not exist or that I am hypocritical in supporting them. When Salt Lake City has a similarly comprehensive system, I think you will see much higher ridership as well.
Any support of the line must be weighed against the fact that the line isn’t completely funded by Salt Lake area residents … and is supported by boondoggle funding stolen from federal taxpayers.
Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, meet pot. What do Interstate Highways get? 80-90% federal funding?
Would you support spending $600 million for 500 riders a day?
No. There would obviously be far more useful rail investments. The San Jose VTA LRT is an excellent boondoggle example.
What makes light rail more viable than these modes?
I suppose it would depend on what is being proposed in every instance, wouldn’t it? The streetcar line that ran half a block from my childhood home carried 30,000 riders per day and was one of the busiest lines in the city, with a trolley coming along about every 3 minutes. There was nearly always one in sight. There are plenty of examples of successful light rail/streetcar systems with heavy ridership and good cost recovery – Boston, Philadelphia, Edmonton, Calgary, San Diego, San Francisco, Toronto are all great examples. This is obviously a mode that can be made to work and can be done inexpensively if desired.
Even some heavily criticized systems come off smelling great when they are looked at objectively. Los Angeles, for example, with a handful of lines carries 146K daily riders, 14% of the total bus system. Houston, with a single line, carries 34K daily riders compared to just 225K on the entire bus system. Phoenix carries 40K daily riders on a single line compared to just 129K on its entire bus system. Portland carries 123K daily riders on 4 LRT lines compared to only 185K riders on the bus system.
In my mind, those statistics show something very simple and basic – rail transit gets people to actually ride mass transit. In cities with fairly comprehensive rail systems – NY, Boston, Washignton, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Toronto, Chicago, Montreal – 50% of or more of daily transit riders are on rail, and transit mode share starts becoming a significant factor in daily travel patterns. Hence the fear and loathing it inspires in the minds of highway advocates.
I think this is the real reason for the hatred towards expanding systems in Portland, Salt Lake City, Los Angeles, Denver. More cities and regions will soon see rail giving a majority share of transit ridership.
This is the real secret behind the conversion and destruction of streetcar and interurban systems in the 1930-1965 period – the point wasn’t to sell buses to transit agencies but to destroy voluntary transit ridership among those with a financial choice and sell cars and highways and new homes and new places of business to former transit riders driven from the systems and their own neighborhoods by disgust at dirty smelly and slow loser-cruiser buses.
There is also no question that it can also be overbuilt, routed to nowhere, and boondoggled, just like highways to nowhere can be. But most of what you guys cite as a boondogle is nothing of the sort.
millions in the pockets of local contractors
Most of the contractors are regional or national scale contractors, and the specialty design/managerial/supervision workforce is frequently from out of the region. Few local contractors can take on multi-hundred million $$$ projects. The Salt Lake lines are currently being built by firms like Kiewit Western, which is a national contractor.
They do not benefit those who do not and cannot use them – i.e. non drivers.
An outright lie. And you know it, but choose to ignore it. Your mail doesn’t arrive via rail. It arrives via the road in front of your house or apartment. Same for UPS/Fedex deliveries, and a billion other services. When I say “rail”, of course, I mean the pork-laden, subsidy dependent passenger rail that you so glorify.
The age of passenger rail is largely over. The only reason rail persists is because of nostalgia driven, anti-car ideologues. Planners despise true mobility. They lust after tools that help destroy the mobility offered by the automobile. Rail is a fantastic way to do so, while at the same time coming out smelling like a rose.
Though Metrosucks your only-auto ideology makes you no better than those with an anti-auto ideology.
I don’t want to be forced to drive, just as you don’t want to be forced to walk & ride a train. Though if we can both walk, ride a train & drive that’s good.
Also passenger rail has a rightful place in our transportaion make up as well, whether you acknowledge it or not.