Finally. Here’s a study that analyzes some of the criticism of rail transit and points out where it’s on target and where it’s off. (Warning: It’s 52 pages.)
It’s from Todd Litman of the Victoria Transport Policy Institute in Victoria, BC. (That’s Canada, in case you don’t get out much.)
Among his findings:
— Several recent studies indicate that … rail transit does reduce congestion (Page 10).
— Average operating costs per passenger-mile actually tend to be lower for rail than bus (page 11).
— Both motorist and truck congestion costs decline in a city as rail transit mileage expands, but congestion costs increase as bus transit mileage expands, apparently because buses lure fewer travelers from driving and contribute to traffic congestion themselves. (Page 10).
Litman includes a lengthy section examining statements by Randal O’Toole, a prolific rail transit critic and darling of the Cato Institute and other rail critics. Litman finds some of O’Toole’s reports based on incorrect data and flawed analysis. (Example: “O’Toole states incorrectly and without citation that regions with rail system devote 30-80% of their total transportation capital budgets to transit.”)
Finally, there’s a very long point-counterpoint between Litman and O’Toole.
Happy reading.