Mass Trasportation (Other)

Sunday’s Virginian Pilot had 2 definitively anti-light rail letters to the editor. The first, entitled “Hard Questions on Light Rail,” assumes that light rail is meant to replace the vehicles currently used by commuters actually commuting. The author, Arthur S. Poole, then goes on to suggest that the tax-subsidized nature of light rail means that, even with a complete system, the transit mode is not worth the time, money, or effort. He claims that the outcome of the light rail expansion study is ‘preordained,’ meaning that no matter what, the study will claim positive net effects. Mr. Poole claims that this is similar to the studies that came before projects such as ” Nauticus, the soccer stadium, the TPC golf course, and Waterside,” insinuating that the positive effects never came to fruition. While I have nothing against Mr. Poole personally, I would like to point out a few flaws in his argument.

I will start at the end and work back. While the soccer stadium and the TPC course might not have brought their positive effects to fruition for Virginia Beach, Norfolk’s Nauticus and Waterside have, overall, been successful. Over the past two years, for example, did you know that according to the city, Nauticus has operated at a slight profit. Its certainly not a windfall but black ink is black ink. The more important effects of Nauticus include the 300,000+ visitors it receives annually. Those people do not fall out of the sky, visit Nauticus, and the get sucked back to some heavenly origins. They spend time Downtown. They pay for parking. They purchase meals at Downtown eateries. The patronize MacArthur Center. Even if  they only spend one day Downtown, they certainly spend more than the $12 admission fee. Now for Waterside. It is true that Waterside is currently a drain on the city. It is true that the city is spending a fortune to keep it operational right now. It is also true, however, that the construction of Waterside was a monumental achievement for the City of Norfolk and it can successfully be argued that without Waterside, Downtown would not be what it is today. I will agree that it needs major renovations for a turn-around. It was not, however, a failure in any sense of the word.

Next, lets look at the subsidies. Yes, public transit in the United States, in general, depends on public subsidies to operate. But wait. Does the entire highway system not depend on the same heavy subsidies? Yes, you pay a gas tax. But does anyone really believe that this tax single-handedly pays for our roads? Of course not. Millions more are tagged for road-related projects from city, state, and federal budgets. Currently, the Tide will cost $45.7 million per mile. Some notable highway projects: Southeastern Parkway – $100 – 121 million/mile, 3rd Crossing – $131 million/mile. Our fuel tax in Virginia is $0.175/gallon. Even if you only got 10 MGP, you would only pay $0.35 for each trip on a road such as the Southeastern Parkway. Each transit trip in Hampton Roads costs $1.50 per passenger. Seems to me that the transit riders pay more out of pocket than the car drivers.

Finally, the part about replacing cars. Light rail (or any new transit system, for that matter), is not created to take current cars off the road. They are built to take future cars off the road. Nobody in Hampton Roads would argue that are population is never going to increase from what it is now. The goal of having a usable mass transit system such as light rail is to guide the construction of high-density, urban centers. The residents of these centers would be the most likely riders of fixed-guideway transit like light rail. 10,000 Downtown employees could move to Town Center. Without light rail, they would all take I-264. 10,000 more cars. With light rail, however, they would not increase traffic for those who live to far away to use light rail. The second letter to the editor (“Rail Stop,” by Dick Jones) fits this place as well .

In this age of huge deficits and debt, the government (both state and federal) cannot afford to continue pouring money into a wasteful roadway system. A road is not free once it is built. It takes continuous maintenance. A road without maintenance will turn into a gravel road. I am sure that you have heard the argument for using transit money to buy the people that use transit their very own cars. This would be great if we had a place to put them. HRT averaged 50,857 passengers per weekday in May 2010. Can you imagine if Hampton Roads suddenly had 50,000 more cars on our roads. The increased load would also wear our roads out faster. If this method were followed nationwide, the hundred of millions of additional cars would choke highways and increase demand for fuel (even hybrids use fuel), leading to higher prices. More cars also means more accidents which means higher insurance for everyone.

What I want everyone to get out of this is that  the visible day-to-day cost may look higher for transit, but that is only because you can actually quantify the cost. The cost to support individual car commutes is much higher. Even if you do not ride or plan to ride transit, don’t complain about or try to destroy those that do. As time progresses, fuel will only get more expensive. Land will get more expensive. Public transportation, like it or not, is the future.