  Parkguy Member Username: Parkguy Post Number: 61 Registered: 04-2007 |
This is from a Reuters story on which states had the worst highway congestion. I don't know where Michigan ranked, but check out the yearly cost PER MILE to operate the state road systems on the list. That's not construction costs, just OPERATING costs per mile. "And for the eighth year in a row, New Jersey had the nation's worst overall road system, according to the group. "Gridlock isn't going away," said David Hartgen, the lead author and a professor at the University of North Carolina. To reverse this trend, the 50 states -- which spent almost $99 billion on roads in 2005 -- must prioritize their dollars on traffic-busting projects, added the Charlotte-based expert. That might be a bit of a challenge for New Jersey, whose Democratic Gov. John Corzine might partly privatize its toll roads. New Jersey's administrative costs were the nation's highest at $68,352 per state-controlled mile, the study said. Massachusetts was 49th at $60,807; next was California, whose overhead ate up $50,614. New York ranked 43rd -- but its $18,687 tab was less than one-third of neighboring New Jersey. Florida ranked 42nd at $16,109; Texas was much leaner, spending just $3,147 which put it in 9th place. North Dakota had the least expensive bureaucrats, spending only $1,786, followed closely by Arkansas, which ranked second at $1,805, and Missouri which was third at $1,989." | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 2205 Registered: 10-2003 |
Right now paving costs for any road, local or interstate, are running around $1 million PER LANE mile. That's right, a two lane surface street costs $2 million per mile to repave. A 6 lane interstate highway (3 in each direction) would cost $6 million per mile. It doesn't matter if you do asphalt or concrete, it's about the same cost these days. It seems that between the construction costs of a road and the operation costs of the road, mass transit is making a whole lot more financial sense these days. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1093 Registered: 02-2006 |
And what was the "ridiculous" cost per mile of rail transit? Less than $6 million per mile in capital costs every 3-5 years, for life, I'd bet. | ||
Slider Member Username: Slider Post Number: 3 Registered: 06-2007 |
Unfortunately I don't recall where I read this, but I remember reading a few years ago that the cost of rebuilding a traditional "cloverleaf" exit was comparable to laying 20 miles of light rail. If this is indeed true, the better civic investment is obvious. | ||
Jb3 Member Username: Jb3 Post Number: 39 Registered: 06-2007 |
Hey, you try dealing with MDOT. Frickin Nazi's man. Let me know how it goes! | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 499 Registered: 12-2006 |
Remember MDOT is a staff agency. They do whatever the government tells them to do. The capital cost of light rail ranges from $30 million per double-track mile for a streetcar-ish system to $55 million for the "regional" type system with larger cars. The operating and maintenance is about $140 to $180 per car-revenue-hour. There are examples that fall outside these bounds, but mostly for reasons that would not exist in metro Detroit, IMVHO. But our political leadership has to wake up, and I don't know if they ever will. All our Neros continue to fiddle while our Rome keeps burning. | ||
Jb3 Member Username: Jb3 Post Number: 41 Registered: 06-2007 |
Sooo, 180x12hrs/day=2160/day x100 cars (lets say)=216,000/per day x300(we'll make room for off peak and holidays)=64,800,000/year just to operate and keep the cars new. Is that right? Where do those numbers come from? Does that include electricity costs? Does the 55 million include the cost of the cars? | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 500 Registered: 12-2006 |
Jb3, First of all, most cars are idle most of the time, because all transit systems provide more service at peak hours than at mid-day and evenings. Second, weekend car-hours are reduced on most systems. Third, the capital cost includes everything; it's a turnkey cost. Fourth, the number of cars depends on the size of the system. Basically it comes down to: if you want to try to estimate the cost of a light rail system, you have to make a lot of decisions. How long is the system, how many hours a day does it operate, what is the time between cars and so on. It's the same for a bus system, of course. | ||
Jb3 Member Username: Jb3 Post Number: 42 Registered: 06-2007 |
I have no problem making decisions. Thought this was extremely funny, long, but funny. http://www.governing.com/archi ve/2000/may/sprawl.txt | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1218 Registered: 10-2006 |
Not to metion the cost in terms of land for interstates and interchanges both financially and environmentally. Building a freeway more often than not, means sprawl and car oriented whereas a rail system can be a much tighter system and urban oriented. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2790 Registered: 10-2003 |
Jb3, I've read that piece before. There are some scary quotes in there. I wonder how Staley, O'Toole, and their ilk can explain the economic competitiveness and resilience of cities like New York and Chicago if urbanism is so dated. I laughed out loud when I read the quote that taxis and jitneys would be more economical than public transit. I was trying to imagine hundreds of thousands of people in DC all trying to get a cab during rush hour. I really think these guys don't pay any attention to what goes on around them. |
