Purple Line Seven Years Late at Triple the Cost

Maryland state officials failed to indicate the slightest degree of embarrassment when they announced on Friday that the Maryland Purple light-rail line will be delayed again until Spring 2027 and cost an additional $148 million. When originally approved, the line was expected to cost just over $1.9 billion and to open in mid-2020. Even at that price it made no sense; although nobody but the Antiplanner read the full EIS, that document admitted that the line would significantly increase traffic congestion in Washington DC suburbs.

The executive summary of the Purple Line draft environmental impact statement implied that the purpose of the line was to reduce congestion, but a technical appendix calculated that it would make congestion far worse. However, hardly anyone but the Antiplanner bothered to read that appendix. Click image to go to a list of environmental documents and technical reports written for this boondoggle.

Now the line is $3.8 billion over budget, meaning it is costing about three times as much to build as originally projected. That number comes with a qualifier, however. Maryland is building the line through a public-private partnership in which it is contracting to the private partner to not only build it but to operate it for 30 years. The cost of the contract was originally supposed to be $5.6 billion and now is up to $9.4 billion but state officials refuse to say what portion of that is construction and what portion is operating costs. While it is possible that the operating costs grew which means the construction cost less than tripled, the $148 million increase includes a $205 million increase in construction costs and a $57 million reduction in operating costs. Continue reading

I Couldn’t Have Said It Better

Last week, I submitted a draft review of plans to expand St. Louis’ light-rail system to the Show Me Institute, Missouri’s state-based think tank. The region has the biggest light-rail system in the Midwest, yet it is a complete failure. Buses and rail together carried fewer riders in 2019 than buses alone carried in 1993, the year before the first light-rail line opened. Doubling light-rail miles in 2001 and another significant expansion in 2008 both resulted in an overall loss of riders. Yet Metro, the region’s transit agency, wants to build more light rail.

My draft report was more than 13,000 words long including an 800-word executive summary. While writing it, I was disappointed but not particularly surprised to find that local media failed to report any significant opposition to Metro’s billion-dollar plan to add 17 miles of new light-rail lines. So I was pleased to watch the above video, in which local reporter Sarah Fenske charged that it was “crazy” to build light rail when the local bus system was “failing” low-income riders and not getting people to their workplaces. To my chagrin, Fenske pretty much summarized in 35 seconds what my long-winded report said in 13,400 words. Continue reading

More Delays, Less Delays, But Always More Costs

Maryland’s Purple Line, which was originally supposed to open more than a year ago, now won’t open until 2026. But that’s supposed to be good news, because two months ago the state said it wouldn’t open until 2027. The bad news, other than the news that it is being built at all, is that it is at least $1.46 billion over budget.

That’s kind of a breathtaking number — $1.46 billion — at least for those who understand how much money that really is. For one thing, this cost of this one light-rail line would have been more than enough to construct all of the light-rail lines built in Buffalo, Portland, Sacramento, San Diego, and San Jose during the 1980s. At that time, light rail construction was costing around $10 million to $15 million a mile, or about $30 million to $40 million in today’s dollars. The Purple Line is costing more than $210 per mile, or five to seven times as much. Continue reading

Promise Rapid Transit, Deliver Streetcars

On November 2020, in the midst of the pandemic, Austin voters foolishly agreed to raise property taxes in order to build 28 miles of light rail at a projected cost of $5.8 billion. To avoid congestion, the downtown portion of light-rail lines would go through a four-mile-long tunnel.

Artist’s impression of light rail running near downtown Austin.

No one reading this blog will be surprised to know that, in the short amount of time since then, projected costs have nearly doubled to $10.3 billion. Early this week, the city’s transit planners announced a new plan that would build fewer than half as many miles of light rail. Continue reading

Metro Transit Spends Millions on Transit Security

Minneapolis-St. Paul’s Metro Transit is going to spend $3 million a year hiring private security to deter crime at six of the region’s light-rail stations. As the Antiplanner recently documented, light rail attracts more crime than any other form of transit and the Twin Cities’ light rail attracts far more crime than any other light-rail system in the United States.

Patrons of the Twin Cities’ light-rail system suffer nearly twice as much crime as those of the next-highest system and at least six times as much as those of all but three other systems. Click image to download the Antiplanner’s report on Minnesota transportation in a post-COVID world.

Light rail attracts crime because fare enforcement is spotty and potential criminals figure that, if they can ride the trains for free, they can get away with other crimes as well. The Antiplanner recommended that Metro Transit install gates at every light-rail station, similar to those used for heavy-rail lines, but Metro Transit rejected this idea. Continue reading

East Side Access Project Opens Today

Today, more than a decade late and after spending $11.2 billion, the Long Island Railroad will begin running trains to Grand Central Terminal. This 3.5-mile project, known as the East Side Access tunnel, cost a mere $3.2 billion a mile, which is a trifle compared with the Second Avenue Subway, the next segment of which is expected to cost $4 billion a mile.

Architect’s vision of what new LIRR platform will look like in Grand Central Terminal. Source: STV Inc.

Meanwhile, New York transit has a $26.6 billion capital funding gap over the next two years. One result of this is that more than a quarter of the region’s transit vehicles are beyond the end of their expected service life. Continue reading

You Get What You Pay For

Addis Ababa, the capital of Ethiopia, has a 19.6-mile light-rail system that consists of a north-south line intersecting an east-west line. It cost $475 million, or less than $25 million per mile. That sounds like a good deal compared with U.S. lines now under construction or in planning, the least expensive of which is more than $135 million a mile and the average cost is more than $275 million a mile.

Addis Ababa’s light-rail line. Photo by A.Savin.

There’s just one little problem. Although the light-rail system is just seven years old, it is already suffering serious maintenance problems. Only eight of the city’s 41 light-rail trains are functional, and the city has resorted to operating just every other day in order to do track maintenance. The city estimates it needs $60 million to restore the system to full capacity, which it doesn’t have. Continue reading

Seattle’s Sound Transit Is Officially Insane

Mariya Frost, of the Washington Policy Center, has alerted me that Seattle should be added to the list of cities with transit projects gone wild. Sound Transit, the region’s rail transit authority, has raised the projected costs of projects built between 2017 and 2046 from $54 billion to $142 billion.

An artist’s impression of a planned Seattle light-rail line. Notice that the artist didn’t project any decline in automobiles or driving. Photo from Siemens.

Most of the increase is for the cost of building 62 miles of light-rail lines. Seattle already had the most-expensive light-rail system in the nation, but the latest costs are completely insane. Continue reading

Transit Construction Costs Run Wild

America’s transit industry has been heavily criticized for spending so much on construction. Yet the industry continues to roll up cost overrun after cost overrun for projects that should have been too expensive to build in the first place.

VTA’s planned single-bore tunnel into downtown San Jose. Figure by VTA.

Take, for example, the BART line to San Jose, which is being planned and built by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), which has never displayed much competence in the past. Rather than cut and cover two small tunnels into downtown San Jose, which is the usual practice, VTA wants to bore one gigantic tunnel three to four stories underground. The 6-mile line was originally projected to cost $4.1 billion, but last October the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) announced that it expected the cost to be $9.1 billion, or $1.5 billion a mile, and the agency expressed doubts that VTA had the funds to cover this cost overrun. Continue reading

LA Metro Celebrates Losing 138 Million Bus Riders

Los Angeles Metro recently celebrated the tenth anniversary of the opening of its Expo light-rail line. Construction on the line began in 2006, a year in which LA Metro buses carried 409 million trips, and the line opened in April, 2012.

The LA Expo line shortly after it opened. Photo by Gary Leonard for Los Angeles Metro.

To help pay for the Expo and other new light-rail lines, LA Metro cut bus service by nearly a quarter between 2006 and 2019. This contributed to the loss of a third of its bus riders, or nearly 138 million trips per year. The Expo line, meanwhile, boosted light-rail ridership by about 2 million annual trips, enough to make up 1.5 percent of the loss in bus ridership. Continue reading