David

“• The critics also claim that buses cost less than rail. This is true of capital costs, but
not of operating costs. In St. Louis, Light Rail had an operating cost per passenger
mile in FY 1995 of 224 compared to 684 for buses, a cost per passenger trip of
$1.18 compared to $2.31 for buses, and a farebox recovery ratio (FY 1997) of 41.8%
compared to 20.3% for buses.19 In Portland, Oregon, the operating cost per boarding
passenger is $1.67 for buses, $1.40 for Light Rail.20 In Dallas, the operating cost per
passenger mile of the DART Light Rail system is just 60% of that of buses.21 On a
nationwide basis, the latest figures, from the Federal Transit Administration 1999
National Transit Database, show the operating cost of Light Rail as 454 per
passenger mile, compared to 554 for buses.”

That includes the 2006 vote for Transit Now. During the campaign, it was emphasized that buses could be brought online in terms of months, not years (a dig at light rail construction times). So, the measure passes, and we find out that RapidRide won’t see the light of day in Ballard or on Aurora until 2013. That’s seven years out from 2006. Central Link is being built in six, groundbreaking in 2003 and completion in 2009. All we’ve seen is a few busses added to sparsely populated locations in outlying King County, and a few off-peak trips added to the 8 and 44.

Now, we’re finding that gas prices are eating up the funding for even that.

Sims’ last minute meddling in ST2.1 to funnel money into Metro Transit is disappointing, especially considering he sits on the board and could have voiced these opinions as 2.1 was being crafted over the last several months. He should have spent the spring lobbying the state Legislature if Metro Transit was having budget issues.

I wonder if Sims will even run for re-election next year. He seems a bit disengaged from all of this debate, except now to say at the very last minute, “more money for local bus systems instead.”

My opinion is that we’ve put off building a real mass transit system for 40 years, and now we’re suffering the consequences. Gas prices suck, busses in Seattle are standing-room only, we all sit in wretched traffic and there really is no immediate short-term relief. We need to bite the bullet, account for our lackadaisical transit planning, and get this thing passed. In our current system, we will have to suffer through it for a few years, but there is still light at the end of the tunnel (pardon the pun). Central Link opens next year. Hopefully, we will have a federal government and executive administration more friendly to funding transit, and perhaps a state Government that will re-think how we do transportation around here (regressive sales tax funding, tolls, etc).

Secondly, geat insight in your recent post on how area politicians often maske their true stance on rail, by using the term “transit”. That single word means rail to us rail supporters, and bus to the bus people. I’ve had occassion to speak with Sims in a small group setting, and I can vouch that he is the biggest offender in this regard, and is no rail man.(Not to imply that buses do not have their place; I simply believe in the primacy of rail, and am tired of seeing us goldplate bus service at its expense).

A request: can you break down the maintenance and refresh cost of bus cars vs. rail cars? I’ve always been struck how that is missing from the discussion of which mode we put our emphasis on. It seems to me that rail cars would have much longer lifecycles than a bus, and perhaps lower maintenance costs (fewer moving parts?). That theory seemed to be supported by a recent discussion with the project manager of the Lake Union tram (although a big difference I am sure between tram and light rail).

I’m not sure how you would do an accurate cost comparison; perhaps an entire train set for light rail, compared to its passenger capacity equivalent in terms of buses.

Any thoughts?