We put in charge of our transit people who don't use it, who don't believe public transportation has delayed benefits, and are more concerned with balanced sheets and who fear upsetting the car drivers and the real estate owners

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

The lack of transit users making decisions about transit is a big problem

@sthelensson

Жыл бұрын

Balanced sheets are important too. Cities should be concerned about it. And sometimes it should take priority over expansions. Other things you said I agree.

@williamhansen9456

Жыл бұрын

@@sthelensson You are right. However good transit saves tons of money in the long run and thus makes it easier to balance the budget. The problem is that politicians tend to be more worried about the short term.

@Lucius_Chiaraviglio

Жыл бұрын

@@sthelensson Obviously those in charge aren't doing a very good job of the balance sheets, and those who scream the loudest about the balance sheets are routinely the ones that blow the budget the worst.

@rossbleakney3575

Жыл бұрын

Even if some of the people in charge use it, that doesn't mean they understand it. I know how to use a phone -- that doesn't mean I can design a telephony network. If anything, the occasional use of transit plays a big part in poor American design. Folks in charge are way overconfident in their transit knowledge, and they only consult experts after most of the planning is done. Streetcars, light rail, extremely long metros that lack urban coverage, light rail that basically operates like a light metro but without the advantages of it and are also way too big and lack urban coverage ... You get the idea.

If the guys in charge would actually use the infrastructure they build, they would build it very differently. And if it was their own money, they would be so much cheaper. But they don't care.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

While I wouldn't take it quite so far there are certainly some serious disconnects! If people use the service they are more likely to understand that THAT is where the biggest problems are.

@Luzgar

Жыл бұрын

@@RMTransit Of course you can't ask them to use their own momey (that would be privately owned transit infrastructure which doesn't sound like a great idea). But if you truly care about it, you will treat it like it is yours.

@AMPProf

Жыл бұрын

RIGHT. no more Private jets.. You get a bullet proof covid walking suit!

@Novusod

Жыл бұрын

The issue in America is the separation of powers in government. The Federal and state government will pay for the construction of an infrastructure project but it will be up to the local government to operate and maintain it. This is why the Hawaiian "Skyline" metro system cost 11 Billion to build but the local government will pay to operate it until 7pm. People who use the Skyline to commute have to rush home immediately after work otherwise they will miss the last train. Thus not many people are going to use the thing and locals are already screaming it is a waste of money.

@edwardmiessner6502

Жыл бұрын

@@RMTransit Of course you wouldn't go that far because Canada has come out of a public transportation drought and is actually serious at building robust public transit. But as I have noted in the main thread, politicians here in the US are just _not serious_ 🤡 about transit.

We must talk about multiple elephants in the room: California's refusal to build housing along their transit corridors which perpetuates their housing shortage and crisis (gee I wonder why their homeless situation is so bad) along with their anemic ridership. NYC was built by transit-oriented development, most of Queens was farmland, my particular neighborhood being farms well into the 1910s until the subway came and development occurred. Had NYC done what California's done, we would've been another LA or Houston and a far poorer city for it.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

Well, I think the need for TOD is overstated relative to the need for transit service, even if you live right next to the train station but the service is bad you'll probably still drive

@ronnyrueda5926

Жыл бұрын

@@RMTransit Speaking for LA specifically the lack of TOD at it's station is partially responsible for it's low ridership. The light rail lines were mostly built along legacy rail row that ran in mostly industrial areas/suburban areas with very few pedestrian amenities. As for the metro stations (B/D lines), many still have inactive plazas with little to no activity. 2 of the 4 downtown stations on those lines still have parking lots directly above or right next to them.

@themoviedealers

Жыл бұрын

LA Transit was built by transit oriented development and real estate deals. The statement you made about Queens applies in spades to Los Angeles County. Unfortunately the Pacific Electric and Los Angeles Railway were torn out.

@williamerazo3921

Жыл бұрын

@@themoviedealerswhere?

@sonicboy678

Жыл бұрын

You should see the photo of 207th Street under construction in 1906.

I recently saw a person trying to move around LA only by public transit. When commenting their "challenge" to other LA residents of only using buses and the Metro, most of them asked "LA has a Metro??"

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

A lack of basic familiarity is a pretty big issue!

@hargibson18

Жыл бұрын

This has been my experience as well, when I lived out there I started educating myself and now whenever I mention it to people almost no one is aware that LA actually has quite a few trains.

@edwardmiessner6502

Жыл бұрын

@@Alejandro-vn2si For free transit to work though California has to solve its homeless crisis.

@Geotpf

Жыл бұрын

@@Alejandro-vn2si BART most certainly does use government funding to pay for operations. Now they use it LESS than many other transit agencies, which means their farebox revenue percentage is higher than most, but it's not 100% or more. And relying on farebox revenue is their problem because ridership is still way down from pre-Covid levels mainly due to lots of tech workers working from home, which means they can't afford to run as many trains. Interestingly, LA Metro has the opposite issue. They collect so little in at the farebox that they literally spend 70% of farebox revenue just on the processing and collecting said revenue, not counting the costs to actually run the buses and trains. They are considering going fare free because of this.

@nickhiscock8948

Жыл бұрын

​@@edwardmiessner6502 that will require billions of dollars on public housing and even more drug rehabilitation programs every single year. It would also help if the flow of interstate migration could be limited to a more manageable level.

In Switzerland, which has fantastic public transit, the same thing is happening. Years and years of under-investement in the rail system led to the fact that they have to make expensive repairs everywhere and delay important projects. The government is planning to spend 19 billons $ in the next few years (for a country the size of Switzerland, it is a lot), and at the same time they plan to make budget cuts on the operation side in 2024. They have proposed worse timetables (because of all the repairs) for the future, despite planning to inject 19 billions into the system.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

Switzerland has a great system, but it certainly has some structural problems!

@MarioFanGamer659

Жыл бұрын

This... is concerning, really, since Switzerland is normally the leader of public transportation operations but lack of investment is something I couldn't imagine there.

@chickenpommes19

Жыл бұрын

@@MarioFanGamer659neoliberal ideology is everywhere

@joachimk6540

Жыл бұрын

@@MarioFanGamer659 I wouldn't call it lack of investment, but bad investment. A good example is the line between Neuchâtel and La-Chaux-de-Fond (if you want to look at the terrain on google maps). There is a mountain between these two cities, and the train goes on a long windy path up, reverse path at some point and goes down again, and is mostly single track. The whole trip takes about 30 minutes. A few years ago, they proposed building a tunnel which would cut the length of the trip by half and enable fast connections to bigger cities. Proposed budget was 1.2 billions $. The other solution was to revamp the whole historical line, create crossing points for allowing trains in both directions. Oh, and this renovation implied prolonged interruptions of the train line. Proposed budget: 600 millions. As it always happens in Switzerland, it was put to the vote, and the people refused the project. So they had to redo the historical line and still spend a significant amount of money. And guess what: 15 years later, this line is saturated, and they are again considering building the more direct tunnel. So in the end, we will have tried to spend a bit less money trying to over-optimise a saturated line, but lose in the end because at some point we are still going to spend the monney for a shiny new tunnel. There are countless examples: - renovating a station to close it down two years later because of a lack of passagers. - spending 200 millions to straighten a curve such that trains can gain 20 seconds - buying shiny new trains from bombardier (for a few billions ) which promised tilting technology to go faster in curves -> the system doesn't work but the railway company counted on this for the timetable ; there is backup solution - ...

@williamhansen9456

Жыл бұрын

@@chickenpommes19 The Swiss government is not neoliberal. It's conservative... Not in MAGA way that american selfproclaimed conservatives are 'conservative'. But in the actually conservative way. Meaning that they aim for minimal changes in their economy and culture. Neoliberals aim to reduce governmental influence and involvement in the society. Such changes would only be a hindrance to conservative officials who are trying to use that influence to prevent change. The American right like to associate themselves with these ideological terms, but really any movement as authoritarian as the american right, has no good reason to call themselves libertarians or neoliberals or any other kind of liberal. They're also not conservatives since they don't like the status quo and they don't have any interest in conserving it. They should really be called regressionists since their wish is to regress back to how the world was when they were kids or when they're grandparents were kids. It's literally what their name, Make America Great Again is referring to.

Anticipating future needs is so important. I remember reading about an old timber frame building that needed the large roof beams replaced. The builder had the foresight to plant trees on site that would be just the right size to replace those beams over a hundred years after construction. Now that is planning.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

Very interesting, foresight is undervalued!

@barryrobbins7694

Жыл бұрын

@@RMTransit The story is even more amazing than I remembered. The building mentioned is New College at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom. The plan was actually passed down forester to forester for five hundred years! It is in the book _How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They’re Built_ by Stewart Brand at the end of the chapter titled, _The Romance of Maintenance_ .

While you make some great points, it was disappointing that you didn’t mention the huge delays in construction caused by a myriad of dysfunctional political/bureaucratic processes. For instance, environmental review (CEQA in the California context) is a huge hurdle to getting transit projects approved, as agencies need to write up massive reports to cover all possible environmental costs. It also gives local governments and NIMBYs disproportionate veto power via litigation, even in metro areas where transit expansion is popular (LA/SF). CEQA has been used to delay transit/housing/bike projects all over California. It’s easy to blame politicians, but in my mind, transit costs in the NA have to do with a deeper malfunction of our political process.

@cooltwittertag

Жыл бұрын

environmental agencies exist in other countries too. And here in Germany, people will occupy places for years to prevent them from being torn down or to stop forest removals. The US isn't unique in its transit challenges.

@morat242

Жыл бұрын

@@cooltwittertag CEQA is about lawsuits, not regulation. And the scope is ridiculous, a judge blocked student housing on the theory that university students party more and therefore are a (noise) pollution source. A four story apartment building in a major city was blocked because a shade study indicated it would cast a shadow on a bus stop for a few days a year. Rail electrification has been challenged under the theory that overhead wires are ugly and therefore visual pollution.

@mb_1024

Жыл бұрын

Glad you brought this up. CEQA has a had a huge impact on myriad projects in California. There are some efforts by the governor to make some CEQA reforms. Not sure how that's going.

@stencil_ized

Жыл бұрын

@@morat242 exactly. I’m not so knowledgable about Germany. Obviously NIMBYism is everywhere. But our environmental regulations and property rights are enforced through litigation, rather than some ministerial approval process. In continental Europe, the civil law system leads to simpler and more efficient approval processes, and reduces the risk of lawsuits later on. Not to say Europe is perfect, but I think this explains in part why our projects take longer and cost more.

Just this week: MTA announced $7 billion for phase 2 of the Second Avenue Subway. Then it was announced the Feds were giving the same amount for the Gateway Tunnel plan (but that needs an additional $10 billion from NY and NJ.) I understand tunneling under the Hudson is not cheap, but it’s crazy that 3 new subway stations are going to cost that much!

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

Especially after the NYU report came out!

@ASQ1Fan

Жыл бұрын

Look at their renderings. The stations are overbuilt. A simple staircase and elevator with turnstiles at the bottom will suffice and be much cheaper. K.I.S.S.

@eriklakeland3857

Жыл бұрын

@@ASQ1Fanand they said they’d learned lessons from phase one and would have smaller stations… those ostentatious stations are criminal

@mtgibbs

Жыл бұрын

@@ASQ1Fan Unfortunately not quite...safety standards dictate that the station must have enough capacity for everyone on a loaded train to be able to exit the station within 90 seconds. Edit: in an emergency.

The no-weekend-service thing is ridiculous in most places. SO MANY crucial jobs to a city's economy still take place during a non-traditional 9-5 timeline. Bus lines to hospitals, train lines to communications hubs, and regional rail to airports should NEVER be cut as much as they are after a certain time on Fridays. Convenience is EVERYTHING when it comes to choosing transit over a vehicle, and you won't convince someone to take a train or bus vs just driving themselves, if you can't guarantee that the thing you're trying to get them to ride is actually gonna show up that day.

Reminds me of the 6.88B that just got given to the Gateway tunnel project over here in NY and Jersey... work on the tunnels should have been built YESTERDAY. They're 110 years old!

@edwardmiessner6502

Жыл бұрын

They would have already been replaced or renovated had Chris Christie not cancelled the ARC project right when construction just got underway. Damn foolish move made national headlines!

@Geotpf

Жыл бұрын

@@edwardmiessner6502 That's what you get when you elect Republicans. It's actually amazing how good our transit system is when one of the two major parties is actively hostile towards basically any transit, especially rail transit.

Over here in Germany, we have a shortage of train and bus drivers - in this city, they've had to close whole lines, and when train drivers get sick, trains don't run because there are no drivers to replace them. The city advertises for new drivers, but there are not enough applicants. Maybe it's the money, maybe something else, I don't know.

@AMPProf

Жыл бұрын

No matter What governments tell you.. If buss dont run.... Someone stealing the tax funds

@AMPProf

Жыл бұрын

Reappropriation of funding In a world over taxed and over priced! Still Germany is Pretty

@JarrodBaniqued

Жыл бұрын

In Germany and in general, there should be more federal support for transit driver apprenticeships and youth outreach

@cooltwittertag

Жыл бұрын

@@AMPProf Less delusional conspiracies and more realistic thinking. Big cities try to get away with relatively low transit worker wages on the on ehand, but its also a job that requires you to work inconventional hours and isn't traditionally seen as something to aspire to.

@laurencefraser

Жыл бұрын

@@cooltwittertag 'stealing' may be hyperbole, but 'redirecting the money from where it is needed and should be to elsewhere' (which may or may not involve fraud or theft, but is at least as likely to just be funding obvious and flashy pet projects instead of boring existing infrastructure) is often a contributing factor to such issues.

It is frustrating to see that the knowledge and good practices are there but the lack of political will and inefficient systems of governing cost us hugely at the end...

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

Indeed, we typically know how to get more bang for our buck and then just decide it doesn't matter

Very important points! Example: Spending $3b for 2 or 3 LR stations already well served by BRT in West Seattle is not a good value for an expected ridership of 27,000.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

You really have to look at opportunity cost, comparing potential uses of funding and their ridership impact!

@ianhomerpura8937

Жыл бұрын

not sure about that. as long as transit oriented developments are planned correctly around BRT and LRT stations, ridership numbers can boost beyond original projections. that is what Jakarta and Bogota did - densify the hell out of the land around transit corridors.

@mixi171

Жыл бұрын

@@ianhomerpura8937 Seattle has not done well with that: no upzone is planned, there are already some appartment buildings, but most of the area around the stations will still be SFH - most ridership is expected from dead-ending BRT/bus lines. There are plenty of other areas in Seattle which have upzone/construction opportunities and could be more easily/cheaply served by transit.

Also, Reece if you could do sequels to this video where you summarized the main takeaways of the transit costs project by NYU, I think that would be very informative in further pushing diuscouse on how to fix the very real problem of getting value for our transit money. I would argue this, before all other barriers is what we need to focus on to get more transit. White elephants and cost overruns kill promising projects

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

I covered most of the points, perhaps when the research develops further

I live in a suburb of Atlanta. Our local transit agency, MARTA, has had to cut back on projects from Sales Tax revenue from the "More MARTA" program from 17 projects to 7 projects. And, MARTA has cut back from having a Light Rail Route from Lindbergh Center MARTA station to Emory University to have a Bus Rapid Transit route from LIndbergh Center to Emory. Also, MARTA's Board of Directors and Local Politicians have gone on out-ot-town trips to study BRT.

@PresYB

Жыл бұрын

When Reece said “the trains ONLY run every 10 minutes” in LA, all I could think was how happy I’d be if MARTA’s ran that frequently (I mean, they did pre-COVID, but only during peak hours). Now if it’s a weekend, we face between 20- and 24-minute headways-and your connecting bus is liable to be significantly late or cancelled amidst the staffing shortage. The More MARTA projects will certainly be an improvement (although I wish Clifton Corridor were still getting light rail), but MARTA really needs to primarily focus on frequency and reliability if they’re going to get more ridership which can turn into more revenue to go toward more projects.

@macmckinnon3457

Жыл бұрын

@@PresYB I agree with you. Many times when I go to work--mainly nights and weekends--I had to deal with MARTA's reduced. rail services.

Pathetic land use policies. The way we infill sucks ! Can’t be called a transit station with parking lots for cars directly next to it . We need to pedestrianize within 1 miles of every stop,station,and depot near every hub to justify the construction period !

@ianhomerpura8937

Жыл бұрын

for some reason Americans and Canadians are allergic to any kind of densification. Australians meanwhile have been doing it quite well, i.e. Chatswood in Sydney

@Mr.Nyashty

Жыл бұрын

The best bet to change modal share in the states I believe in done by federal commitment. Similarly to when the highway system was built we need the DOD secretary to back rail travel the same way . I believe it’s feasible the planet is on a brink of a point of no return . Climate change will force sentiment soon .the big law for preventing density is the SZEA of 1916. I’m like the rest of us are waiting for Reese to break down the Esch Cummins act that’s the second more difficult hurdle in my opinion .As well as the death of the (ICC) interstate commerce commission. But, if any one can find out how to unlock the rail system it would be RM Transit.

@dominiccasts

Жыл бұрын

I know for a lot of people densification means stratas, and stratas have a reputation for being corrupt from top to bottom. Add to that the general status symbol of owning your own home, given how status-obsessed we are, but I expect that’s a status symbol everywhere.

@jasonlescalleet5611

Жыл бұрын

I think that Americans like to think of themselves as country folk, even if they live in an urban area with tens or hundreds of thousands of people. We like to live in “farmhouses” even if they are not actually on farms, and like to think of a trip to the store being like a farmer going into town, i.e. something you do no more than once a week, and it doesn’t matter that you have to drive for half an hour to get there because nobody expects a “farmhouse” to be that close to urban businesses. I don’t agree with this mindset, but I am forced to admit that the house in which I live does strongly resemble a farmhouse, despite the fact that I am within walking distance of downtown, in a city of around 50k. It’s far from the only house like that around. Furthermore, I suspect that racism and other forms of bigotry play an important part in this mindset. City-dwellers like to think they live on farms because “cities are for K***s, n****rs, and f****ts!” They are willing to forego the comforts and conveniences of urban living, such as good transit and stores a few minutes walk from home, in exchange for not having to live among those they hate. Thus, getting good transit will probably require reining in the hatred some, or at least waiting for the most bigoted generations to die off.

@ianhomerpura8937

Жыл бұрын

@@dominiccasts stratas?

Good points, Reece. Once you buy a car, it’s years until you might go back to transit. On the capital side, standardize vehicles. For operations, reliability and frequency are necessary.

@jasonlescalleet5611

Жыл бұрын

If transit is convenient enough, and driving inconvenient enough, car owners might still use transit for some trips. When I was in college I owned a car. I lived in an apartment with enough parking space that I didn’t have to leave it behind. On the other hand parking on campus was notoriously difficult to come by, and there was a bus stop literally outside my front door, and the bus that stopped there went straight to campus. Unsurprisingly, I took the bus to campus and back every day, because it was more convenient than driving. The same bus continued to downtown, where parking was also scarce, and so I rode it there too if I had to go there. If I had to go somewhere else, off the bus route and with ample parking, I drove. If the bus went to more places, more often, I would have ridden it even more.

@cooltwittertag

Жыл бұрын

@@jasonlescalleet5611 I actually just sold my car, specifically because of the transit my city gives me.

@jaysmith1408

Жыл бұрын

@@jasonlescalleet5611I have two vehicles, an almost obsolete electric vehicle (stored pending rebuild) and a conventional SUV. I currently live in a location where transit is a dial-a-ride service. I would love to use it as much as possible, and I do, for scheduled trips during operating hours, I.e. my chiropractor or a meeting, but my SUV otherwise, I.e. going to work, since the service ends before my shift, and emergency responses. Now where I used to live, and where I will return, has a more successful service, twenty hours per day, scheduled service. The routes are rubbish, they only go to the city centre (the grocery store a couple clicks away is on a completely different line) but it’s a start. I don’t drive if I have a choice, no matter how unreasonable (I’m on vacation, I took two trains, an airplane, and a subway to get here), but with even slightly above average transit services, there are trips where it is effectively impossible to take transit. I just read an article about a system we’ll to our south, whose marketing department in their infinite wisdom (though accurate) came up with SORTA. Why are taxpayers settling for ‘sorta’? I see it as making a false point, more than an attempt at remotely useful service. Make a wildly useless service so as to point out why we don’t have service. A former employer of mine had a scheduled service that legitimately only went one way. You could leave your town, and go into the city, but you couldn’t get back.

@rossbleakney3575

Жыл бұрын

@@jasonlescalleet5611 I agree. Car ownership is very much tied to wealth. In contrast, there is a very strong correlation between Vehicle Miles Traveled and the quality of the transit system. This is why so many people in Japan (for example) own cars, although they don't put that many miles on them. They are handy for going out to the country -- not the day to day.

I know this is about urban transit, but I'm reminded of how the debate around HS2 in the UK appears to be going at the moment. There's genuinely people now trying to call for the work to be stopped where it is now and just use what we've got because "running it properly will cost too much"

A lot of politicians in the US and Canada have it in their heads that transit needs to be profitable. They think that low ridership means low profit, which is why many of our politicians throw public transit under the bus, no pun intended, and they focus more on trying to promote car ownership by putting billions in highway projects. Highways don't make a profit, but if more highways are built, then more people will buy cars which means more profit for auto manufacturers. Public transit does not need to be profitable, and really shouldn't be profitable. If a goal is to make a profit from transit ridership, then transit becomes completely useless. Politicians need to get the idea that transit needs to be profitable out of their heads

@haydenlee8332

Жыл бұрын

this tends to be the problem with politicians of "capitalist" countries. South Korea's "conservative" politicians always bring up "electricity, water, sewers not being profitable" as an excuse to push for privatization. IF IT NEEDS TO BE PROFITABLE, THEN WHAT ARE TAXES FOR???

I'm in Evanston, IL for now, which is connected to CTA and metra. I own a car to commute to work in a northern suburb. So when I use transit it's to enjoy the city. The purple line does not have a reliable operating schedule and I cannot use it to get anywhere. "5 minutes" will be 30+. Metra downtown, maybe, but at $11 round trip it competes with parking/gas for 1 person. Besides, last time I took metra, I sat across someone with leprosy, and one of the last times I took the CTA my friend and I almost got jumped on the Northside. Security is a massive issue here, too. Driving is not that much faster than biking which is faster than transit many times so I am considering getting another commuter. I grew up in NYC, parents now live in NJ, and at least getting to the city is safe and somewhat reliable. So I use transit there and love it.

CDPQ Infra did a good funding job of what you've called REM A. I wonder if they consulted the research you mentioned from NYU when they planned/built it. And to your point about making sure operations are fully covered by an appropriate level of funding, yes; here in Montreal there was going to be a ~75M shortfall that fortunately the provincial government provided. Transit experts here were saying though, that only meeting the shortfall does not address plans to improve operations.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

Haha, I call it REM A and so do the maps! I do not think CDPQ paid much attention to their research, which is their loss. That being said they did design cost effectively!

Almost everytime I look at a transit line in America I cringe. Most stations are in industrial areas, in the middle of strip malls or in the middle of low density housing. Metro Vancouver did an amazing job building TODs around SkyTrain lines such as Metrotown and Brentwood. But there seems to be little to none of that in the States, which is just insane to me. I was looking at a station on the LRT line in San Jose, CA. Low density housing all around but what was even crazier was these neighbourhoods were surrounded by walls. So there were houses right by the station that I'm sure you would be able to walk to in less than 5 mins if it weren't for these walls. But instead you'd have to go the long way around, so instead of a 5 mins walk its now a 15 mins or more walk to the station. Absolutely stupid!

@kjhuang

11 ай бұрын

Oh yeah, I grew up in the San Jose metro area. We love our walls and cul-de-sacs and privacy lol.

Hey Reece, just wanted to clarify that the entire Surfliner route was *not* shut down. Only the under-construction portion from Oceanside to Irvine was closed, which was replaced with a bus to move passengers between the two disconnected sections.

@AMPProf

Жыл бұрын

Who reece?

@MarioFanGamer659

Жыл бұрын

@@AMPProf RMTransit.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

Through service stopped though?

@shopdog831

Жыл бұрын

and metrolink to oceanside

@mb_1024

Жыл бұрын

@@RMTransit Sort of. Depends on if you count the bus bridge. But the Surfliner train still operates from San Diego to Oceanside and from Irvine to San Luis Obispo, although the number of trains has been reduced, as I understand it. Don't get me wrong. It's still huge problem! And that they are just now starting to consider moving the tracks inland in San Clemente is absurd. The process should have started long ago.

Boston's MBTA is spending many millions of grant money, but not on upgrading or building new lines. They're spending it on the maintenance that should have been done years ago. When all that money is spent, the only result you might notice is that the trains run at normal speed more often and they don't break down or catch fire as often.

@eriklakeland3857

Жыл бұрын

Boston is a fairly polycentric city by US standards, uniquely suited to transit in the post-COVID, WFH world. Sad that the bare minimum state of good repair is so far off when transformative projects like North-South Rail Link and a circumferential subway line are teeming with potential.

@vrkoven

Жыл бұрын

Boston just built new lines--the Green Line extension to Somerville and Medford, but given the wretched state of the infrastructure in the whole system (and even the supposedly "new" lines) they shouldn't have done it until these more mundane tasks have been performed. Trouble is, politicians love to play Santa and bestow shiny new toys, but are MIA when it comes to the basic stuff. There are switches on the Boston T system that are 100 years old; then they wonder why trains derail.

@edwardmiessner6502

Жыл бұрын

The MBTA is a case study of what happens with decades of disinvestment in order to save on taxes to appease suburbanites stirred up by pressure groups demanding lower taxes (Citizens for Limited Taxation). The T collapsed: first slowly, then all at once

This is one of the reasons why I had an issue last year with Orlando's transit being funded, which unfortunately didn't pass during the election. The funding was only going to be limited to just one county for Lynx and Sunrail, while leaving the remaining two counties in the service area of those two entities with the existing bare minimum service. Even if the funding did get voted in, It's as you said, it'd be like winning the battle and losing the war. Nobody at FDOT or the city of Orlando for that matter wants to commit to having both systems fully funded throughout the entire service area on a regular basis. Yet we have the money to fund I-4 expansion, which has become one of the most poorly configured highways in the country and it shows with the amount of accidents taking place.

@Bobrogers99

Жыл бұрын

I nodded at the reference to I-4. When I was wintering in Florida I was always warned to stay off that highway! When they add more lanes, the traffic and accidents increase. A high-speed rail line between Tampa and Orlando would siphon off considerable traffic and make the trip faster and safer. I know Bright Line has plans, but a chunk of the federal highway dollars would make it happen sooner.

Just got back from Manchester, England. Trams are OK (every 12 minutes and generally on time, but slow and there aren't enough lines). Trains infrequent but reliable. Busses, of which there are many, have terrible frequencies from the early evening and on weekends and are often disasterously behind schedule or just don't show up at all. There is no communication on delays or cancellations. The busses simply can't be relied upon, especially if your trip involves a transfer. There are also three separate ticketing systems for trains, trams and busses, so multi-model travel is awkward and expensive.

Important fact: Operations and maintenance do not involve ribbon cutting ceremonies and photo ops.

Good public transit requires a functioning culture to make it work. At least in the US, I see a culture where ‘screw you, I got mine’ reigns supreme. Any money you throw at transit is going to be siphoned off by a bunch of overpaid bureaucrats and contractors, who are going to shield themselves behind reams of paperwork and the mantra of “Best Practices”.

The sense I get, especially with self-back-patting politicians involved, is that it's all about looking good and not about doing good. More concerned with publicity than actually creating a functional and useful system. I see this in Denver, so many train trips canceled due to lack of operators - because they don't pay enough and those people can earn more as Uber drivers. New lines being opened to great fanfare (though usually delayed due to lowest-bidder quality control issues), but designed in such a way, having simple and stupid oversights by someone who didn't think it through from the user's perspective, as to not be all that useful, and many lines operated so slowly they aren't time-compeitive with cars even during rush hour.

Everywhere is a bit different. I hope I can share our experience in San Francisco, my hometown, honestly. We had good cheap transit in the 90s. Then, Uber and Lyft, the two major ride share corporations, set up shop at here. Their HQ is here. Major autonomous driving companies also have their HQ here or around here, such as Cruise or Zoox. Suddenly, ride sharing was the future. Leaders here were sold the vision of autonomous ride sharing--taxis would get people around that don't even have a steering wheel. And yet, that vision has never become a reality, but our transit is now so neglected--maintenance deferred, bus lines canceled, rail projects scaled back. Everyone talks about GM destroying trams last century. But it has happened again.

Shoutout to Translink, who know how to balance excellent service and affordable infrastructure costs better than any other transit agency in North America.

I think the issue of public transit in NA is not lack of funding, it is the sprawling and lack of density, that makes driving faster and more attractive than public transit. If we want better public transit, we should first strengthen our urban core and increase density, then public transit can be justified. Otherwise, no matter how frequent the train is, if the train is going to nowhere, then there will be no ridership.

@rossbleakney3575

Жыл бұрын

It is a bit of a chicken and egg problem though. If you focus your transit system on the urban core (and not low-density suburbs) you are more likely to see density there (if you end up growing). It just becomes a lot more attractive to live in a place where driving isn't required.

@seanshen8325

Жыл бұрын

The demand for public transit is already there even urban areas are still car-centric and low-density. Roadways are already congested enough and the widening projects are already proved to be useless. Even in the most car-oriented cities like Atlanta, Miami and Dallas, public transit even rail infrastructures are necessary (although they should do much better)

Appreciate your work Reese!

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Such a shame Boston’s MBTA wasn’t mentioned - crippling slow zones, 22 minute headways on the busiest line (Red) every weekday (incl. rush hour). Movijg more and more people away from transit due to lack of funding and poor management over decades

The Eglinton Crosstown is a $10B dollar light rail line. This is a north american problem.

God is this too relatable as a Dane. Here in Denmark the national politicians have refused to provide the necessary relief funding for the pandemic and subsequent inflation. This is leading to massive service cuts and line closures around the country, especially in rural areas which already had it really bad. I mean people like IntercitySimon had the bus route through his original home town go from 11 departures per day in 2010 to just 4 today! All this unsurity in frequencies or plain matter of if the bus will run at all is turning people away from using transit! ESPECIALLY buses. It sucks even more that unlike in California, the people in power in Denmark don't want to increase transit funding, neither for new projects nor for service increases or even service stabilization. Instead they now want to reform the whole transit system nationwide, the very way transit agencies are structured! All because they think they can somehow get more out of less... which will likely result in a disjointed mess with dial a rides and subsidized carpooling in a lot of areas. And it doesn't help either that because of all the budget cuts to transit here, people don't see any other options and think endless service cuts are just inevitable. And that means they don't vote for anyone trying to fix this, because they think it's ludicrous to even try as if the destiny of our public transit is predestined

Unfortunately it seems like things are only getting worse. NYC's painted bus lane + a terminal to La Guardia airport cost $500 million. I fear for the day when painted bike lanes start costing $100 million / mile.

Just as clarification regarding LAs regional connector. Trains outside the connector run every 10-12 mins. Inside the connector it is supposed to be every 5-6 mins on average.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

I was talking about on a per line / service basis.

@edwardmiessner6502

Жыл бұрын

Yet on opening day it was a tram-train every 6 minutes on one line and every 8 minutes on the other.

For the Surfliner it’s only been fully open a few weeks this entire year! You could do an entire video on the LOSSAN Corridor since it is supposed to be the second busiest rail corridor in the US. San Diego put together a 2 billion 10 year long plan to address their cliff erosion it’s insane to think what Orange county would need since they are just now considering moving the line inland.

I feel like the funding battle & ref tape is why Ireland still hasn’t a friggen metro 😭 they do the same here, make a big jig and reel 💃 to open up a basic bus service

i think its probably important to remember that a lot of transit projects are very deeply corrupt, often in ways that are pretty much legal, such as paying executive hundreds of thousands a year, and giving them bonuses, along with the mutiple layers of contracting with money being pocketed at every layer. in house construction or railway routes, stations and trains by state rail operators would reduce this, but it would still probably be prevelant.

@whyamiwhat

Жыл бұрын

as in, projects like crossrail being constructed by a seperate company who was then also contracting to a number of other firms who would also contract out jobs to other firms, while still having crossrails executives pocketing hundreds of thousands in bonuses every few months even when the project was sliding off its budget and deadline

@whyamiwhat

Жыл бұрын

just found the exact salary of crossrail CEO from 2013 to 2018, which was an insane £476,772 with a "performance bonus" of £160000. ofc also privately educated, former army officer, and went immediately on to be managing director of BAE systems, and later the construction firm Laing O'Rourke (who were also contracted to work on Crossrail extensively) despite him being the person who covered up the slipping timescale and spiralling cost of the project

i got so mad as a california resident when newsom tried to spin existing transit funding that should be the BARE MINIMUM as proof he’s the best thing california transit has ever seen

One problem with LA Metro trains is that there's no way to move from car to car while the train's running. That's *devastating* to perceived safety which has been a hard sell since covid especially with LAPD and LASD publicly stating they won't do any more than necessary to enforce the law because they "won't be ordered around by a bus company"

@austriankangaroo

Жыл бұрын

The problem lies deeper, not beeing able to walk between cars shouldnt feel like a safety hazard

Really hoping when the D line extension happens in LA they invent in more trains to boost frequency of the D and B together, cuz they are far and away the busiest lines but 15 minute intervals is so rough

@ronnyrueda5926

Жыл бұрын

LA metro is building a turn back project to address the B/D Lines frequency issue. When completed it should allow those lines to have frequencies lower than every 10 mins which is the max they can handle currently.

Politicians need to commit to implementing the recommendations of the NYU study when announcing future transit projects and funding. Many will get the impression that infrastructure projects are money laundering operations and scams with how high costs are inflating.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

I think that they are not that is certainly something we ought to say more often!

@isaacliu896

Жыл бұрын

Sadly they sometimes are. 200/900 people on the eastside access project were being paid for doing absolutely nothing until an accountant discovered it...

Totally agree on the operations vs. capital improvement spending. Very, very few places in America have dedicated funding sources that are stable. Heck, even the gas tax doesn't cover roads so this isn't totally unique to transit, but unlike roads there's no guarantee we actually get proper funding

I watched this (excellent) video while waiting 11 minutes for an F train mid-day on a Sunday. At about 3:45, the station where I'm waiting showed up on the video. Very meta.

As a regular viva rider, the problem with viva, aside from frequency, is that york is so afraid of taking away lanes from drivers that the busway is pretty patchy throughout the route. When you do have bus lanes on both sides, you end up with these insane ungodly 8 lane stroads cutting through the region. Aside from maybe hwy 7, no street needs to be 6 lanes of car traffic... Just knock out a lane for the bus and the viva will be much more atractive.

Would love to hear your take on some Sub-Saharan Transit lines, mainly the Lagos Nigeria Blue Line opening up next month...supposedly

This is why I think the Strong Towns policy of "incremental transit" is the way to go. Only develop transit that can be funded locally and by good land-use. When you construct a transit line you want development to occur or increase around it. Don't rely on the state or federal government to give you a transit line that you can't afford to maintain. I think a lot of cities think that their problems will be solved if they could just get a higher level of government to give them more money for something.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

I don’t really agree with this view of transit and it’s viability

@microproductions6

Жыл бұрын

@@RMTransit ​ What do you think is the right way to do it?

@deric8

11 ай бұрын

@@microproductions6 The right way is the pragmatic but forward thinking incremental approach because the forward thinking objective ensures you don't value engineer something out of a project because some fly-by-night half baked study was done by a University. It is predicated on fundamentals of planning not bean-counting.

Politicians involved in transit= Free P.R. 😂😂

I think the culture in the U.S. has a lot to do with it. The only time taking a bus is not look down on is when you're at Disney World

@jasonlescalleet5611

Жыл бұрын

You know that is true, even among people who like transit. If I travel to a city with good transit, I will use it to get around, but now that I think of it this is almost always trains, not buses. The one exception I can think of off the top of my head was the science museum in Chicago, which is easier to get to by bus than fro the L. Even then, though, I wandered around the area afterward, walked to the Robie house, and then found an L station for the return trip. I guess there is a bus stigma on top of the transit stigma. Trains are for poor people and out-of-towners, but buses are only for poor people. Except at Disney World, but even there I suspect that people going from the magic kingdom to epcot would take the monorail instead.

@williamerazo3921

Жыл бұрын

And NY. A lot of people use the bus in NYC

@williamerazo3921

Жыл бұрын

In the last 24 years the bus went from a service and feeder service to the Rapid transit to what poor people use .

@HeadsFullOfEyeballs

Жыл бұрын

@@jasonlescalleet5611 To be fair, buses are just objectively worse to ride than trains. Public transit isn't stigmatized here in Germany, but I still go out of my way to use the subway, trams etc. and avoid buses whenever I can.

We are updating out Unified Transportation Plan here in TX and the public input process is pretty quiet and understated and not even voted on even though the 2024 amount is $100Billion (the vast majority is for roads). Contrast that with our local rail project at $8B over 10 years that was approved by voters that is still a political hot potato and currently being challenged by the state government.

I think mass transit in America is structurally handicapped and loss-making by the fact that urban planning is designed for the car, so distances have increased dramatically by the separation of city functions. Thus, industrial, commercial and suburban areas have come out of the ground, reducing population density. Here in Europe, urban planning rules prohibit buildings more than 600 meters from a metro, tram or high-level bus station. The path is still likely to be very long given the scale of the investments to be made. To speak of New York, the city has an effective network of public transport, but handicapped by the lack of investment in infrastructure. Having new trains is useless if the line is not well maintained

@joachimk6540

Жыл бұрын

Yes and no. Density plays and urban planning plays an important for transit viability, however, you can have very low densities and still have decent public transit. The canton of Graubünden in Switzerland has a population density of 28/km^2 (73/sq mi), and still has a more bus and trains lines than Atlanta (density: 1,422.96/km^2 or 3,685.45/sq mi). Oh, and Graubünden has a larger surface area than Atlanta, and it has very mountenous terrain.

@ambe5179

Жыл бұрын

@@joachimk6540 In Graubunden, certainly the population density is not high, but the town planning is relatively compact, with very urbanized areas and traversable on foot, which makes possible the development of the train in this region. Politics have had a big influence too.

@ambe5179

Жыл бұрын

The functions of the city (living, working, shopping, etc.) are grouped together, not scattered as in a city that has chosen the car for its only mode of transport

@ambe5179

Жыл бұрын

Example in this region is Chur

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

The structural issue is service, not land use honestly. Transit can survive bad land use, it can't survive bad service

Building new things instead of maintaining existing things is deeply American

I think its also important for governments to invest in pre-transit activities. Data collection to show which forms of transit best serve different areas (i.e. LRT vs Subway in Scarborough) it became highly political but with effective demographic information we could have eliminated (reduced more likely) the politicization of that debate. If the demographics aren't there then it shouldn't be built. Effective trades schools and training. We are absolutely lacking in all aspects when it comes to the trades. We need to reintroduce this to highschool kids and push people to get involved. Part of the costing issues is the labour issue. We don't have enough tradespeople to effectively deal with all of these projects. Consistent funding, we go through these busts and booms but its impossible for companies to invest in the long term if we spend 100 Billion on year and then 0 in 10 years. We need that 10 Billion consistency every year. Hopefully eliminating the political fingers in the salad bowl and consistency for labour and funding we can see these projects drop in cost.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

I certainly agree with what you are saying, that being said I'd push back on the idea that we just need more data!

@ianhomerpura8937

Жыл бұрын

It might be better to replicate what they did in Jakarta and Bogota - they built the BRT, then when demand surged far beyond projections, they used it as leverage to push and lobby to build a railway line above/under existing BRT corridors. In both cities, it worked wonders.

@rossbleakney3575

Жыл бұрын

@@ianhomerpura8937 There is a lot to be said for this iterative approach, instead of the magical-thinking leap-frogging that permeates so many projects.

The future of public transit should be 10% new lines, and 90% maxing out the capacity of existing lines and moving more people onto said lines. My expansion plan is to only build new high speed rail, and then run it at subway frequencies. It may be less efficient than an urban subway, but it is free capacity that will serve dual purpose for local and national travel, the same way interstates are used by both long haul truckers and suburban commuters.

Meanwhile me living in melbourne with trains coming every 10 minutes, bus running every 30 minutes and trains usually running a lot less at night or not at all

I’m from Sydney, Australia, so I might be biased. The NSW State Government, over the last 15 years, has been investing in driverless metro trains and light rail, which is the right decision. In addition, it has added more trains, buses and ferries to improve service frequency. It has also rolled out an extensive digital ticketing system covering all public transport. The NSW Government has upgraded train stations and added a new BRT line. All in all, it has done a brilliant job. It does get some funding from the federal level, but the NSW Government has mainly funded the projects.

Go off, Reece! It's important that this stuff is said.

I feel like this video didn't answer the question it raised. Why is it so expensive in the US and Canada? Over burdensome regulations? Useless red tape? Only hiring union labor at the most expensive prices possible? Giving out blind bids where you just take whatever cost is given by the constitution company? Is there too little or too much oversight and oversight by the wrong kind of ppl?

@edwardmiessner6502

Жыл бұрын

All that plus multiple layers of consultants and contractors each getting their own cut, and NIMBYism too.

@SpidermanandJeny

Жыл бұрын

@@edwardmiessner6502 well, I wouldn't say contractors are the problem. I work for and have worked for others in the past. They have to bid on a project at the lowest profitable price. That's not different from any other country. That might get worked out differently in other countries. Maybe they just hand out jobs w/o bids but that would not seem to lower prices. Also, the entire building industry is layered with many sub contracts each specializing in one trade thus giving higher quality work for a given task. If a job isn't being done that way I would question its quality.

@deric8

Жыл бұрын

It seems to be a running thread on Reese's videos lately, which is why I unsubscribed. There's no solution to the problem, just whining.

New York politicians announce these huge numbers, $4 billion for the PATH Calatrava station, $7 billion for SAS, or $10 billion of the Port Authority Bus Terminal replacement, with a huge, big-shot, imperial, impressive swagger-brag. When in reality, it's such a waste.

In Portugal politicians love to do this, always waiting for the spotlight to say smth... Then we have the prime minister saying on TV that changing from iberian to standard gauge will be relatively simple... That's one of the most debated topics in Portugal when it comes to railways btw...

@CreatorPolar

Жыл бұрын

Tbh changing to standard gauge would be a stupid idea since Portugal only borders Spain and they still use Iberian gauge, unless they plan to build high speed rail between the two

@tomasbarbosa8654

Жыл бұрын

@@CreatorPolar Even Spain has high speed rail in iberian gauge so our plans to high speed lines connecting to Spain are also in iberian gauge. Together with new dual gage technologies beeing developed both for passanger high speed trains and potentially freight trains I see no need to both countries to change their gauge (despite beeing smth that's frequently debated by both). What annoyed me was the fact that someone trustworthy made such a false claim... Not only the infrustructure but also the buggies would need to be changed. It's the kind of thing my country, plagued with other issues, can't afford and it's by no means simple...

@CreatorPolar

Жыл бұрын

@@tomasbarbosa8654 no spains high speed rail uses standard gauge, look it up

Ridership as a goal would be refreshing

There's just more glory in posing in front of a brand new train, high speed line or railway station than committing to maintain an existing line that is struggling or to increase the frequency of existing bus lines.

Good Collaborations

Thanks from Roger Sexton for another excellence video. Your complaint that governments spend not enough on repairs/maintenance and not enough on supporting current running costs is equally applicable here in Britain.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

It's quite a global problem!

I highly recommend Alon Levy's blog, Pedestrian Observations, for people who are interested in this topic. Alon Levy is an expert in this topic, and has been studying it for over a decade. He writes in a technical but accessible way and there is no blog like it I can think of.

Could you potentially make a video on what the research you talk in the video about says would help mitigate the rising cost of building infrastructure? Seems to me like it would help further understand what is so flawed about the ways we do public transport in the americas (as someone from south america i can say we are also incredibly car centric it's so maddening)

Here in Houston, there's a $300MM+ project to build bridges into heaven above a two mile-ish stretch of road, to dump cars at a dead end (google the Spur 5 project)... that's almost half this California budget for something that can just use better traffic signal timing. Lord help us.

I would like to see something about regional transit in rural areas between cities. Oregon could be a good case study for something that exists, and the Niagara Peninsula (isthmus?) in Ontario for something that could exist.

In The Netherlands the National Railway Company wants to increase ticket prices in rush hour with 40 to 60 percent in order to get rid of overcrowded trains in rush hours. As compensation the ticket prices in quiet times would go down. They want to spread the passengers more during the day. We already have an increased tariff during rush hours and that will be far more in 2026. I don’t think it’ll work, people need to go to work and almost all offices start at the same time. It will chase people out of the train into the car for three reasons: one is that train fares are already very high in our country, second because companies won’t change office hours, or university their lecturing hours and third is because almost every employee wants to work on regular office hours. The company I work for has free office hours, be it between 06:00 and 19:00hrs, most start at 07:00 or 07:30 and only a few start at 08:00 or 09:00 and only one starts at 10:00, she has a 35hr contract and we all have 40hr contracts. Everyone has a company car and a company train card, so everyone can use the car or public transport to come to the office.

I would love if funding went to building the bare-bones low hanging fruit of a functional transit system in major US cities. That includes a regional rail and/or bus network that would connect all the major urban centres in a region with 15-30 minute frequency depending on the line, it's mode type, and its ridership, as well as a decent frequent bus network that connects neighbourhoods in between regional transit stops with a 10-20 minute frequency. Next throw in a light rail line with 5-10 minute frequency along a few highly important corridors, and/or a simple downtown streetcar system to connect services. This is such basic infrastructure and frequency for the rest of the world. A system like this should only cost $10 billion to construct.

Only cost 1 billion dollars per mile here in NYC. 😢

Honestly, what I'm hoping will help us would be private ventures, such as Brightline. Even though it's intercity rail and not public transportation within a city, there's less red tape and hardly any taxpayer dollars involved, it can expose more people in the country to competent transportation and might invigorate public support.

I would disagree with you on the built new track vs run more service on the existing system: Except for Minneapolis Blue and Green, Phoenix Valley Metro and Houston Red Line most new-built LRT system have horrendous design issues and no amount of service will get Baltimore, Cleveland, Denver and Dallas any meaningful ridership on their stupendously located lines. In these cities you have to start from scratch building transit in areas where there will be ridership (f.e. Colfax Avenue in Denver). Also integrated fares and a german style verkehrsverbund regional body for each metro area would really do wonders without needing big bucks funding (Also german transit map topology/nomenclature is superior, people don't care for how an infrastructure is named they care where the service takes them so a S8 to Wiesbaden Hbf beats all the Anglo naming schemes where u don't know which service takes u where. Naming stuff the Elizabeth or whatever line with multiple not legible service pattern and terminals sucks , sorry not sorry.)

All governors and mayors shouod be forced to take public transit. Matter of fact it should be a requirement for all government employees (obv with some exceptions).

At least in the US at the federal level, there's another problem. There are 525 members of Congress, so you need a big bill to have direct payoff in 250-300 different districts. $2B sounds like a lot, but split it into 200 capital projects with a $10M average cost and it becomes much less ambitious. It's really a problem with the human inability to really grapple with thinking at scale. "We just spent $2B and my bridge didn't even get fixed." Yeah dude, because there are 2 million bridges to deal with, and $1000 each won't even get the lines repainted.

The Hottest Collab of 2023?

@MicahtheDrumCorpsPseudoboomer

Жыл бұрын

I'm unaware of any hotter collaborations that occurred in 2023.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

I think it may well be!

we really need a real sea wall along the san clementine section of the surf line not just a wrip-wrap along eroding sand.

@dynasty0019

Жыл бұрын

Or we can run it along the 5 which also gets rid of several curves and speed restrictions.

Reaganomics really has people screwed up. People think that government spending is bad by default. That’s why you get low effort transit projects pushed by politicians. You made a great case transit systems being self sustaining without having to go to the government every time they need money. 🤦🏾‍♂️

Any information on the NYU research he spoke about?

Agreed. I get so fed up of Network Rail in Great Britain trying to make a big story of basic maintenance or renewals

6:25 Oh man...I feel called out with this shot😆I'd take UTA a lot more if it didn't run so infrequently, especially with the recent operator shortage

Capital funding leads eventually to photo ops and ribbon cutting ceremonies, where the politicians involved can make sure everyone knows what they've been doing to help. Operating funding doesn't get any publicity, so politicians don't like to fund it as it increases taxes without getting any political benefit in return.

There's a good Strong Towns podcast called "Why building transit in the United States costs so much".

In some relation to cost efficiency and such; have you found any patterns in the different transit operation styles. Like fully government run, fully private or some place between. Am curious due to recent issues SL in stockholm has had with their train operator MTR

Can you do a Trams VS metro/Subway video please? Generally interested in the real world reasons why you'd choose one over the other! Plus Cities Skylines 2 is coming out and I wanna know what would be the logistical choices for both types of transport, Thank you! 💜🚋🚅

$100 billion doesn't even fix the NYC subway.

@edwardmiessner6502

Жыл бұрын

Damn. Their expressways desperately need a lot of expensive fixing too, like Route 278 in Brooklyn which surely will cost tens of billions of dollars by itself. Maybe it's time to shut down and abandon New York City. ☹️😞

I searched but didn't find. Is there not a vid on the T in Boston. Seems odd considering its the oldest in the country.

You have to love the US for this. We do not want to spent taxpayers money for this. I remember two stories in Florida. One was about 20 years ago when there was a vote to build a high speed train between Orlando and Miami. For months, the slogan was "Vote yes for the train" and weeks before the actual vote, the Republican run state, changed the ballots to "Yes, I do not want the train". So over 60% voted to "Not get the train" as they thought they voted for it. Another one was in Miami just a few years back. An extension of the Metrorail. A majority of people voted to extend the Metrorail, yet, politicians afterwards decided to build a rapid bus line as it is way cheaper.

What about having the capital funding for a transit project including a trust fund to pay for operators for decades to come? Its crazy that we might have to do it but it might end new transits systems running with rediculously long headways.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

In some ways thats how operations P3s work

I would be interested to see your opinion on the new NYC update that messed up transit for Long Island

$4 Billion for an about 2-mile tunnel for Amtrak trains through the poor, old and dilapidated near westside of Baltimore which could be built for much less mostly at grade giving affected homeowners a premium on their property to relocate. I don't think the whole city of Baltimore has a property valuation of $4 Billion. What a waste. Other options include hiding it by building much of it in a landscaped trench.

@RMTransit

Жыл бұрын

Indeed, it often feels like decisions are not made from the perspective of balancing cost, transit outcome and community considerations

The perception of lack of safety is a big reason for low ridership. Those who don’t have to use transit avoid it because it feels unsafe.

The UK is just the same. The HS2 spending is obscene for a minimal reduction in journey time. Those funds could be better spent on incremental improvements to stations, running stock and signalling.

One issue my brother and I have discussed is how for some reason the building costs are far higher in NA than in Europe. And yet the Europeans have superior quality of rail lines and actual trains. I suspect it is also because the freight companies here have a stranglehold on existing tracks and their governmental pawns, uh, I mean elected officials. I honestly don't know how such powerful lobbying groups can be thwarted or subverted out of power, either. I also suspect that the construction companies are not under strict enough scrutiny to prevent cost overruns and other corruptible antics.

One ass backwards thing I can think of is that there’s a dedicated fund for highway spending and no one cares. But for transit, agencies have to beg for money. (US)

US also pays more money for worse healthcare, and more money for worse real estate, and more money for worse infrastructure - why would transit be any different.

In some ways I wonder if Sydney has made the right decision by building all of its Light Rail lines. Perhaps they could be improved by having more flyovers or underpasses across major streets?