One would think that effectively closes the argument that no Federal dollars are available, and our only choice is to do it ourselves with primarily local money, right? No. In fact all that shows is that the wrong choice has been made for this corridor from the beginning.
Federal money is available, but only if it's being used for a sensible mass transit project for the expected ridership. Such projects exist. Instead of trains, they use buses and are called Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). This option would be ideal for the North Corridor. Just as importantly, the Federal Transportation Authority (FTA) is open to funding them.
Here are some recent examples:
Here are the corresponding project details:
New Britain – Hartford Busway
-Capital Cost. $572.69m, FTA Share: 48.1%, Annual Operating: $22.06m
-Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2013): 13,400 Average Weekday Trips
Jacksonville BRT North Corridor
-Capital Cost. $572.69m, FTA Share: 48.1%, Annual Operating: $22.06m
-Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2013): 13,400 Average Weekday Trips
Jacksonville BRT North Corridor
-Capital Cost. $33.48m, FTA Share: 80.0%, Annual Operating: $3.08m
-Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2013): 4,600 Average Weekday Trips
Jacksonville BRT Southeast Corridor
-Capital Cost. $23.88m, FTA Share: 80.0%, Annual Operating: $3.37m
-Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2014): 4,700 Average Weekday Trips
-Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2013): 4,600 Average Weekday Trips
Jacksonville BRT Southeast Corridor
-Capital Cost. $23.88m, FTA Share: 80.0%, Annual Operating: $3.37m
-Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2014): 4,700 Average Weekday Trips
-Capital Cost. $37m, FTA Share: 80.0%, Annual Operating: $2.4m
-Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2013): 7,200 Average Weekday Trips
Compare this to the numbers for the Red Line...
-Capital Cost. $452m, FTA Share: 0.0%, Annual Operating: $10-15m
-Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2017): ~4,000 Average Weekday Trips
As you can see, money is available for projects carrying passenger counts similar to the proposed Red Line. Also, a LOT of money could even be available for BRT projects as can be seen by the New Britain-Hartford example from Connecticut. On top of the increased possibility of Federal funds, the beauty of changing the Red Line plan into a BRT is that much of the heavy lifting is already done, and it removes many obsticles that have popped up recently.
The planned expansion of I-77's HOV lane into an HOT lane up to Exit 28 provides the high-speed corridor into Uptown from the northern half of Mecklenburg County. The major development projects at Grtiffith Lakes, Eastfield, Bryton, Cornelius and Davidson all have close access to 77 making this very usable. Some, if not all of the planning work and Station Area improvements would still be applicable depending on the exact locations of the BRT stops. Finally, Norfolk Southern would not need to be paid a dime of public money, and they would be free to expand their own freight capacity on their own schedule.
So what's the hold-up?
If you watch the video in the Connecticut link, at about the 5 min 30 second mark the speaker from the FTA alludes to the tension between train and bus project supporters. That's what we're experiencing here with the Red Line. The planners, consultants, development community and most of the politicians have been blinded by train envy - blinded to the option of a BRT system that could serve the exact same purpose at a fraction of the cost.
UPDATE: Charlotte's Blue Line Extension makes the cut in the President's budget along with the BRT projects mentioned here. That should tell the Red Line supporters something.
US Dept. of Transport recommends $2.2 Billion to strengthen Transportation network
-Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2013): 7,200 Average Weekday Trips
Compare this to the numbers for the Red Line...
-Capital Cost. $452m, FTA Share: 0.0%, Annual Operating: $10-15m
-Opening Year Ridership Forecast (2017): ~4,000 Average Weekday Trips
As you can see, money is available for projects carrying passenger counts similar to the proposed Red Line. Also, a LOT of money could even be available for BRT projects as can be seen by the New Britain-Hartford example from Connecticut. On top of the increased possibility of Federal funds, the beauty of changing the Red Line plan into a BRT is that much of the heavy lifting is already done, and it removes many obsticles that have popped up recently.
The planned expansion of I-77's HOV lane into an HOT lane up to Exit 28 provides the high-speed corridor into Uptown from the northern half of Mecklenburg County. The major development projects at Grtiffith Lakes, Eastfield, Bryton, Cornelius and Davidson all have close access to 77 making this very usable. Some, if not all of the planning work and Station Area improvements would still be applicable depending on the exact locations of the BRT stops. Finally, Norfolk Southern would not need to be paid a dime of public money, and they would be free to expand their own freight capacity on their own schedule.
So what's the hold-up?
If you watch the video in the Connecticut link, at about the 5 min 30 second mark the speaker from the FTA alludes to the tension between train and bus project supporters. That's what we're experiencing here with the Red Line. The planners, consultants, development community and most of the politicians have been blinded by train envy - blinded to the option of a BRT system that could serve the exact same purpose at a fraction of the cost.
UPDATE: Charlotte's Blue Line Extension makes the cut in the President's budget along with the BRT projects mentioned here. That should tell the Red Line supporters something.
US Dept. of Transport recommends $2.2 Billion to strengthen Transportation network
Again, another general purpose lane on I-77 first. Then a HOT lane.
ReplyDeleteConverting the HOV lane to a HOT lane south of I-485 makes as much financial sense as the Red Line. There is never any congestion there, so why on Earth would anyone pay to drive in a lane when it's no faster than the cheapskate lanes?