Friday, December 09, 2005
Lots of money for transit, none for roads
The Portland area spends about $630 million on transportation projects each year, about half for transit and half for roads. Congestion is getting worse and businesses are complaining that it is dramatically increasing their costs. Yet the city and region say they have no money to build new roads to relieve congestion.
Yet they seem to have money to build light-rail lines, streetcar lines, and other transit boondoggles. In 2003, transit carried just 2.3 percent of passenger travel in the Portland area, about 0.9 percent of which was rail and the rest bus. Of course, transit carried virtually none of the region's freight. Why should the region spend half its money on 2.3 percent of travelers?
A study paid for by the Portland Business Alliance and various government agencies found that every dollar spent on congestion reduction in Portland would return $2 in benefits. But that is a gross generalization: some dollars will produce far more benefits than others.
Yet they seem to have money to build light-rail lines, streetcar lines, and other transit boondoggles. In 2003, transit carried just 2.3 percent of passenger travel in the Portland area, about 0.9 percent of which was rail and the rest bus. Of course, transit carried virtually none of the region's freight. Why should the region spend half its money on 2.3 percent of travelers?
A study paid for by the Portland Business Alliance and various government agencies found that every dollar spent on congestion reduction in Portland would return $2 in benefits. But that is a gross generalization: some dollars will produce far more benefits than others.
- According to estimates made by the Federal Highway Administration, a dollar spent on traffic signal coordination can return as many as $40 in benefits.
- A dollar invested in rail transit returns no more than 50 cents in benefits and traffic calming produces negative benefits (i.e., increases congestion).
- Nor are all highway construction projects worthwhile: some might return $10 to $20 dollars of benefit per dollar spent while others produce less than a dollar.
Comments:
Of course being the intellectually dishonest extreme auto-apologist you are, you're not counting the negative externalities of auto usage, nor the out of pocket expenses paid by people for automobiles when you claim that "half" of the regional expenditure for transportation is for transit.
Very bizarre math, Mr. O'Toole.
Very bizarre math, Mr. O'Toole.
"...the intellectually dishonest extreme auto-apologist you are ..."
My,my, you have learned the socialist name-calling trade well. Try dealing in content for a change.
"...negative externalities of auto usage ..."
"Negative externalities" !!! Talk about generating meaningless concepts! Your university profs have brainwashed you well.
"Very bizarre math"
They weren't his figures and all you can do is cast aspersions, not provide any facts.
Typical liberal muddleheadedness.
Post a Comment
My,my, you have learned the socialist name-calling trade well. Try dealing in content for a change.
"...negative externalities of auto usage ..."
"Negative externalities" !!! Talk about generating meaningless concepts! Your university profs have brainwashed you well.
"Very bizarre math"
They weren't his figures and all you can do is cast aspersions, not provide any facts.
Typical liberal muddleheadedness.