Comment 42351

By Kiely (registered) | Posted June 23, 2010 at 11:23:39

…he's at the mercy of a parochial council that sees transit as a cost centre to be minimized rather than an investment in urban vitality - Ryan

When I worked at Bombardier they were doing a lot of studies on transportation (specifically rail) investment. The number often tossed around at Bombardier was a 10:1 return on investment. Yes you do have to consider the source (it is obviously biased) but other sources also support the findings.

U.S. rail transit services require about $12.5 billion annual public subsidy (total capital and operating expenses minus fares), about an extra $90 per Large Rail city resident. However, economic benefits more than repay these subsidies: rail transit services are estimated to provide $19.4 billion in annual congestion cost savings, $8.0 billion in roadway cost savings, $12.1 billion in parking cost savings, $22.6 billion in consumer cost savings, and $50 billion in traffic accident cost savings. Rail transit also tends to provide economic development benefits, increasing business activity and tax revenues. It can be a catalyst for community redevelopment. Additional, potentially large benefits include improved mobility for non-drivers, increased community livability and improved public health.

Excerpt from

Rail Transit In America - A Comprehensive Evaluation of Benefits, 16 December 2009

By Todd Litman, Victoria Transport Policy Institute

Comment edited by Kiely on 2010-06-23 10:26:24

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools