A rail broke on DC Metrorail’s Red Line last week, leading to “major delays.” Such problems are increasingly frequent now that the rail system is 30 years old and Metro can’t afford to replace worn out equipment.
Heck, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) ” can’t even afford to operate, much less maintain, the system it has. It expects a $176 million shortfall in its budget next year. Somehow, officials think they can trim $103 million from the budget without cutting service, but that still leaves $73 million in service cuts.
Despite these problems, WMATA “is committed” to building new rail to Dulles Airport. The Dulles transit plan originally called for a 23-mile bus-rapid transit line that would cost less than $300 million to start and $38 million a year to operate.
Unless the act continues, there is no such reason for having anxiety or levitra viagra cialis stress. You can buy Booster capsules, Kamdeepak capsules and Mast Mood oil are so effective to fix the problem that it will never return to men to levitra generika downtownsault.org spoil their sexual pleasure for obvious reasons. Erectile Dysfunction Effecting Self Esteem Because sexual issues are often a big part of self-esteem of a man, experiencing impotence issue can be devastating not only to a sexual life but his entire sense of being. illustration of human energy against a black background Otherworldly mending is a procedure through which you can go to, in order to find all the tools for its use (for medical reasons,. vardenafil price Red, swollen gums, which are seen bleeding while brushing viagra spain http://downtownsault.org/author/saultdda/page/2/ or while floss, are the usual signs.
Then, in 2004, it got changed to a 12-mile rail line that would cost $1.5 billion to build and $67 million to operate. At the latest count, the rail line — still only 12 miles long — will cost $3 billion to build and $83 million a year to operate.
The pressure to build the Dulles rail project is coming from Virginia politicians. But I am sure that WMATA officials are only too happy to add to their rail empire. After all, it is always someone else’s money. And when service cuts are made, you can be sure they won’t cut the services to politically important board members.
Meanwhile, I hope they fix that broken rail before I next go back to DC. It was on the line to 2Amy’s Pizza, the best pizza I can find on the east coast, and I’d hate to miss a good pizza because of poor transit management. Oh well, there is probably a bus.
Yet another “Al Gore zombie”…?
“The chief executive of Exxon Mobil Corp. for the first time called on Congress to enact a tax on greenhouse-gas emissions in order to fight global warming.
To continue beating the dead horse, I would like to point out that O’Toole’s beef with rail applies to highways as well. Portions of I-35 between Austin and Dallas (200mi) have been under construction, well… FOREVER. And because TexDOT has gone way over budget on so many projects and high-balled revenues generated by toll roads they don’t have enough money to complete many plans for highway repair, particularly in the low income areas in Dallas. Now, in Austin, they are converting once “free” highways into toll roads. Seeing as how development patterns in Texas (heavily touted by antiplanners) have made it impossible to do anything without driving, low income families are tuck getting screwed by TexDOT.
I think the name of this blog should be changed to the Anti-transit/urban/walking/etc.-planner. O’Toole you are either completely ignorant of the fact that suburban subdivisions and highways are planned, or you actually like the planning that supports you ideology. How can you be against something when you are actually for it?
How do you feel about the Metro rail and it’s problems, I’m not seeing much defense of it, only the regulars changing the subject, again!
“How do you feel about the Metro rail and it’s problems, I’m not seeing much defense of it, only the regulars changing the subject, again!”
I’m not defending it. Just pointing out the continual double standard. I don’t know much about DC rail, but it seems to be poorly planned, particularly from from a revenue/expense perspective. So there you have it… A planner admitting that a rail project isn’t perfect! Big deal. We are often the first ones to admit that plans aren’t perfect, despite the claims that we are trying to design utopia.
But why is it when the same set of standards the antiplanners use to criticize rail are applied to roads and highways, and we reach the same conclusions, we are accused of “changing the subject.?” It seems relevant to me.
I haven’t seen the double standard you are seeing. A bad project is a bad project no matter what they are building.
Such as the big dig, which seemed to more about redeveloping a water front, than transportation.
ROT: We Can’t Afford What We’ve Got, So Let’s Build More
THWM: A lot of road projects fall into this category too.
craig Says:
I haven’t seen the double standard you are seeing. A bad project is a bad project no matter what they are building.
THWM: Yes a bad project, is still a bad project. Though many of the so called libertarians on this blog keep pushing for double standards.
To hate rail projects just because, they are rail projects makes no more sense than hating some people for the color of their skin.
Craig: Such as the big dig, which seemed to more about redeveloping a water front, than transportation.
THWM: One of the things that made the Big Dig a big mess was the lack of including a North Station-South Station rail link.
“I haven’t seen the double standard you are seeing.”
My point exactly.
bennett said:
“I haven’t seen the double standard you are seeing.â€Â
My point exactly.\
———
Road projects paid for by user fees.
Transit usually 100% subsidized for construction and 50 % subsidized ( In Portland) for operation.
all projects should be self supporting by the users
I see why you disagree bennett
For the 724th time on this site, non-federal roads are not 100% paid for by user fees. That is: they are partially subsidized.
DS
On January 14th, 2009, Dan said:
For the 724th time on this site, non-federal roads are not 100% paid for by user fees. That is: they are partially subsidized.
DS
Do you mean by the 97% of people that live and work on those streets and use them every day to get to work and play and also use them to service the properties.
Or by the developers that originally put them in and pass the cost on the the buyers
Id say those are users that pay the fees.
For the 725th time
oops! correction
Transit usually 100% subsidized for construction and 50 % subsidized ( In Portland) for operation.
81% subsidized for operation
“all projects should be self supporting by the users
I see why you disagree bennett”
Craig you are completely missing my point. To some extent I’m for user fees (although I’m for subsidies in some cases too). Your an idiot if you think ALL roads projects are either paid for by user fees or the private sector. Your an idiot if you think all road projects are well planned. Your an idiot if you think that most road projects come in under (or on) budget and on time (to be on time they usually have to be subsidized. see T-REX in CO). The same applies to people that believe these things about rail projects.
I’m not calling you an idiot Craig, I’m saying that people that believe these things are idiots. I’m just being a prick, to see if I can get you to recognize that most of the antiplanner’s criticisms of rail projects apply to many road projects. To criticize one and not the other using the same criteria and coming to the same conclusions is a… DOUBLE STANDARD.
p.s. every once and a blue moon throwing the most corrupt project ever (big dig) on the table doesn’t count as fair and balanced.
“User fees only account for about 60% of highway spending by all levels of government. The rest comes from non-users and in 1990, non-highway users subsidized roads at the rate of $18 billion per year.”
-Source: Highway Statistics 1990,
Tables HF-10 and SMT, Federal Highway Administration
Bennett you are a idiot if you think that idiotic argument will change my mind.
But I’m not calling you names, even if it looks like I did and I did use the word idiot to describe you. Do you think we broke any blog rules by lowering ourselves in the the muck.
I would guess our discussion is finished and there is no point in responding to each other. bye
Perhaps we need to put in a farebox and crossing arm at the end of every driveway and at intersections so users can pay their share, instead of property owners who repave streets that they never drive on, or tourists who buy cr*p and whose taxes go into the General Fund to repave streets they never drive on.
Sure, that’ll work. Fare boxes. Better than GIS units that some politician will use to track your movements to the liquor store, then the corner in the hood, then to the “day spa” while your spouse is away.
DS
DS
It is good to know we have people that never use roads for transit or for the goods and services they use. But still have to pay.
It’s also good to know that some pay far more than others for the privilege of the freedom. TPD is never equal amongst users.
DS
DC’s heavy rail system has a fare recovery ratio of about 60%, behind NYC’s almost 70% fare recovery rate. The buses in DC recovery a smaller 30% through fares.
http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/committee-documents/t11YWVY20041108130152.pdf
Our infrastructure has a backlog of 1.6 trillion dollars that needs repairs in the next 5 years. It’s easy to criticize rail, but is due criticism going to roads?
craig Says:
“I haven’t seen the double standard you are seeing.â€Â
My point exactly.\
â€â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€
Road projects paid for by user fees.
THWM: It’s great to know that you think property & income taxes count as road user fees.
For that matter less than 2% of the roads in the US are freeways.
Pingback: Don’t Reform MPOs, Reform Federal Funding of MPOs » The Antiplanner