View Single Post
  #42  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2020, 11:38 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doady View Post
Wait, am I an idiot, did I read the numbers wrong? $22.5 million fare revenue? Not $28 million? It just reinforces my point even further.

It's odd USA has much more socialist mentality than Canada, the transit fares have to be super low in US while in Canada transit gets much less subsidy and riders are forced to pay closer to the actual cost (50-70%). I think the "equity framework" is a large part of why the ridership is so much lower in US.



Grade separation is only needed for extremely narrow corridors or high ridership lines with very high frequencies, so transit doesn't intefere with regular traffic. Otherwise what benefit does grade separation provide?

Transit needs to be built one step at a time. Building subway or elevated rail is skipping at least two major steps. Not successful with regular bus, BRT, or light rail yet but now it's time for elevated rail or subway? I don't see any nuance in that approach. Nuance means building up the system and the ridership gradually, and it's hard to do that with $1.25 fares and throwing billions into subway construction.
I mean, it seems like a lot of the best systems in the world aren't cheap to ride, which makes complete sense.

Riding the London Tube is infinitely more valuable than riding Jonesboro Arkansas' three bus routes.
Reply With Quote