Subways -- underground or above-ground

[Dis]

ahh yes, I wasn't thinking about the rock in my city. My brother had to pay extra money to dig his pool because of the rock. Though the southwest part of town is worse than the rest, but not that any of it is that great.

We are too developed right now for any kind tracks now. Though that isn't entirely true. I'm sure New York was very developed when they went to mass transit. It just involves taking over businesses and residential areas...

[Perfection]

Trains belong in holes

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS


You are deliberately misconstruing my opinion. Intercity rail makes little sense, except in the NE corridor.

Intercity rail makes sense all over the God blessed USA, if you omit the word "passenger" Anyway the good people of Texas are gonna build em a highspeed network for passengers AND intermodal freight, IIUC, and its gonna connect Dallas, Houston and Saint Antoine, which in a few years time are gonna positively DWARF the damned Yankee hellholes, and theyre gonna buy like HUGE amounts of right of way alongside these rail-highway corridors for all the new development which is inevitably coming down Texas way.

Yah gotta think big, and down in Texas, they DO.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Perfection
Trains belong in holes

Sometimes, but not in the general case. Tell that to IK Brunel and he'd throw you off a viaduct.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Intercity rail makes sense all over the God blessed USA

Railroad Tycoon wouldn't be much of a game without it.

[DanS]

I'll tell you a funny joke.

Washington has a great metrorail system, but it does not yet have a ring line (purple line). Officials in Maryland want public transit between their population centers along the ring that are served by metrorail. So guess what they do? Drumroll please...

They look to the fed bureaucracy, who in their wisdom are doing studies that specifically exclude metrorail as a possibility on the purple line.

Great job guys! Wow, I'm impressed!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/03/AR2007120301813.html?hpid=moreheadlines

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS
I'll tell you a funny joke.

Washington has a great metrorail system, but it does not yet have a ring line (purple line). Officials in Maryland want public transit between their population centers along the ring that are served by metrorail. So guess what they do? Drumroll please...

They look to the fed bureaucracy, who in their wisdom are doing studies that specifically exclude metrorail as a possibility on the purple line.

Great job guys! Wow, I'm impressed!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...=moreheadlines

I dont see in the article that the FTA excluded a heavy rail line. In general its up the state/MPO to do the Major Investement Study on a corridor, and THEY propose the alternatives. They do the studies (or let the contracts to do the studies) In general FTA likes to see MORE alternatives, not fewer. FTA does NOT do ridership studies. feasibility studies - they simply dont have the funding or the staff. They review the submitted studies.

It appears Maryland didnt choose to spend the resources to study a heavy rail option. Why, youd have to ask them. There has certainly been much support in the past in MD for a light rail line instead.

OTOH, the ridership figures seem to show only 2000 more riders on LRT vs BRT, so depending on the costs, that may be a hard sell.

[DanS]

My bad. You're right. It's one of those "you'll never get heavy rail past the FTA, so let's not even consider it" kind of things.

[lord of the mark]

http://www.fta.dot.gov/planning/newstarts/planning_environment_2618.html

FY2008

Existing Full Funding Grant Agreements

Pending Full Funding Grant Agreements
CO, Denver/West Corridor LRT
OR, Portland/South Corridor I-205/Portland Mall LRT

Proposed Full Funding Grant Agreements
NY, New York/Second Avenue Subway Phase I
WA, Seattle/University Link LRT Extension

Other Projects
CT, Hartford/New Britain-Hartford Busway
MN, Minneapolis-Big Lake/Northstar Corridor Rail
TX, Houston/North Corridor BRT
TX, Houston/Southeast Corridor BRT
VA, Norfolk/Norfolk LRT
VA, No. Virginia/Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project ¨C Extension to Wiehle Avenue Extension

Small Starts
CA, Los Angeles Metro Rapid Bus System Gap Closure
MO, Kansas City/Troost Corridor BRT
OR, Springfield/Pioneer Parkway EmX BRT
WA, King County/Pacific Highway South BRT


Leaving aside the small starts, thats 2 Heavy rail, 4 light rail, and 2 BRT. Plus one more rail, Minneapolis, I dont know if its LRT or HRT.

The straw man is very strawwy.


Lets keep going back though


FY 2007 Funding Allocations and Recommendations

Existing Full Funding Grant Agreements

Pending Full Funding Grant Agreements
NY, New York, Long Island Rail Road East Side Access
PA, Pittsburgh, North Shore LRT Connector

Proposed Full Funding Grant Agreements
CO, Denver, West Corridor LRT
OR, Portland, South Corridor I-205 / Portland Mall LRT
OR, Washington County, Wilsonville to Beaverton Commuter Rail
TX, Dallas, Northwest/Southeast LRT MOS
UT, Salt Lake City, Weber County to Salt Lake City Commuter Rail

Other Projects
Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area, Largo Metrorail Extension
NY, New York, Second Avenue Subway MOS
VA, Norfolk, Norfolk LRT
VA, No. Virginia/Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project ¨C Extension to Wiehle Avenue
WA, Seattle, University Link LRT Extension

And


FY 2006 New Starts Allocations and Recommendations
A Word About Full Funding Grant Agreements
Figure 1. Existing and Anticipated Full Funding Grant Agreements
Figure 2. New Starts Projects in Preliminary Engineering and Final Design
Table 1. FY 2006 Funding for New Starts Projects
Existing Federal Funding Commitments
Anticipated Federal Funding Commitments
AZ: Phoenix/Central Phoenix East Valley LRT Corridor
NC: Charlotte/South Corridor LRT
NY: New York/Long Island Rail Road East Side Access
PA: Pittsburgh/North Shore LRT Connector 1

Other Projects
CA: San Diego Midcoast Corridor LRT
CO: Denver/West Corridor LRT
NY: New York/Second Avenue Subway MOS
OR: Washington County/Wilsonville to Beaverton Commuter Rail
TX: Dallas/Northwest-Southeast Light Rail MOS
UT: Salt Lake City/Weber County to Salt Lake City Commuter Rail


And

FY 2005 Funding Recommendations for Existing FFGAs
Atlanta/North Springs (North Line Extension)
Baltimore/Central LRT Double Track
Chicago/Douglas Branch Reconstruction
Chicago/North Central Corridor Commuter Rail
Chicago/Ravenswood Line Expansion
Chicago/Southwest Corridor Commuter Rail
Chicago/Union-Pacific West Line Extension
Denver/Southeast Corridor LRT
Ft. Lauderdale/South Florida Regional Transportation Authority
Commuter Rail Upgrades, Segment 5
Los Angeles/MOS-3 Extensions of Metro Rail (North Hollywood)
Minneapolis/Hiawatha Corridor LRT
New Orleans/Canal Streetcar Line
Northern New Jersey/Hudson-Bergen MOS-1
Northern New Jersey/Hudson-Bergen MOS-2
Northern New Jersey/Newark Rail Link MOS-1
Pittsburgh/Stage II LRT Reconstruction
Portland/Interstate MAX LRT Extension
Salt Lake City/CBD to University LRT
Salt Lake City/Medical Center Extension
San Diego/Mission Valley East LRT Extension
San Diego/Oceanside-Escondido Rail Corridor
San Francisco/BART Extension to San Francisco International Airport
San Juan/Tren Urbano
Seattle/Central Link Initial Segment
St. Louis/Metrolink St.Clair Extension
Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area/Largo Metrorail Extension Existing FFGAs Fully Funded in the President¡¯s FY 2004 Budget
Dallas/North Central LRT Extension
Memphis/Medical Center Extension
Pending Federal Funding Commitments
Los Angeles/Metro Gold Line East Side Extension

[lord of the mark]

Looks to me like Heavy rail can get funding, when it meets cost effectiveness criteria. Thats currently defined as a ratio of costs to new riders.

[DanS]

Those are only "fixed guideway" projects, no? Am I right in assuming that there are lots of bus projects being funded that are not on that list? If so, by definition, the list will skew toward rail.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS
Those are only "fixed guideway" projects, no? Am I right in assuming that there are lots of bus projects being funded that are not on that list? If so, by definition, the list will skew toward rail.

Theyre capital projects under the new starts program, which includes Bus Rapid Transit starts.

Of course it doesnt include money for new buses for the ordinary yukky local bus routes that enable carless poor people to get a couple of miles across town in the zillions of places where a fixed guideway makes no sense. Which is funded under a different line item and which FTA could NOT shift to new starts even if it wanted to (and given how important yuckky local bus service is to mobility in a million places, I cant imagine theyd want to - local bus service has received money under every recent admin, and I dont think its increased under the current one).

[DanS]

Then that list is very interesting but pretty worthless to prove your point, LOTM.

Anyway, since you want to start talking about poor carless people, I'll say outright that metrorail is perceived as too good and too expensive to provide to poor folks. Metrobus is good enough for them.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by DanS

Then that list is very interesting but pretty worthless to prove your point, LOTM.

My point is that in an MIS study, a corridor specific new investment study, which is what the Beltway corridor study (or whatever they call it) is, its quite feasible that FTA would accept a heavy rail option IF justified, an LRT option OR a BRT option. I dont see how local bus service is relevant at ALL.

Now it MAY be that they will reject ANY of the above options, cause there simply isnt enough money in the New Starts program. Or they will overly favor the cheaper options (LRT or BRT) over Heavy Rail, again cause there isnt enough money in New Starts. Guess what, FTA doesnt decide the level of funding in New Starts.

Anyway, since you want to start talking about poor carless people, I'll say outright that metrorail is perceived as too good and too expensive to provide to poor folks. Metrobus is good enough for them.

Lots of poor people take heavy rail. The problem is, while middle class people typically have cars and use transit mainly in corridors where there is considerable congestion, or where parking is difficult and costly at the destination, carless people use it WHEREVER they have to go. The former are typical the places where Heavy Rail makes the most sense, and the latter where it does not.

Also, some poor carless live in small relatively uncongested cities where no rail whatsoever makes sense in any corridor. They still need to get around.

[DanS]

Speaking from long personal experience, I disagree vehemently on the utility of heavy rail for carless people. Basically, you are my enemy -- you are doing what you can to stop me from getting around town in a pleasant, timely, and cost-effective manner. I bet you're from the suburbs. I bet you have a car. Why do you think that so many carless people move into new developments around metrorail stations?

Have you ever looked at population density maps of DC? Basically, wherever people are, metrorail isn't. It was a system built without regard to the city's needs. The city is fortunate that it is now making some use of metrorail despite the original plan.