What do we call the new rail line? (Austin: sales, apartment)

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by austin-steve

You still haven't defined "cheap". What's the cost per passenger trip for this thing. I know it cost $120 Million to build. What are the ongoing operating costs and what do tax payers receive for that, and was a rail line the only way to accomplish whatever it is we are receiving?

Steve

Cost per passenger is not a bad way to look at it. But cost per trip is ok too. They are estimating 2000 trips/day. I believe it mostly operates on weekdays so lets say 260 days/year. That is 520K trips/year. The operating cost is approx 6.7M, of which 5.1M is covered by taxpayers. $9.8/trip. I suspect if they could find a way to run nights and weekends, they could increase revenue without increasing marginal costs by much (but I could be wrong).

Let's take a look at the library system. They budget is $25M and it serves 3.7M visits/year, a cost to the taxpayers of $6.8/visit

We spend 5274/year per student in school. Estimated # of school days is 200 so around $26/visit per student. Not a bad value considering a visit lasts around 6 hours. One school by the way costs about $100M which is about the cost of the rail system.

The trail of lights is about $800K with 278K visitors at about $2.78/visit

[oldtoiletsmkgdflrpots]

Has anyone here even ridden the doggone thing yet?

[ROY DUBOSE]

"will's folly"

[jobert]

Originally Posted by Austin97

We spend 5274/year per student in school. Estimated # of school days is 200 so around $26/visit per student. Not a bad value considering a visit lasts around 6 hours. One school by the way costs about $100M which is about the cost of the rail system.

But instead we've spent this money on rail for people who didn't want to send their kids to public schools in Austin, instead of upgrading those very schools they have run from. Getting downtown for the northern suburbanites is now less painless, they get to keep their cheap houses, decents schools, and they still don't have to live next to minorities. Yay!

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by austin-steve

I saw the interview with the guy on the news. His explanation seemed perfectly reasonable. Apparently the flask is still full, which supports his story.

I think he used poor judgment though, and made a mistake that brings with it big consequences. And his timing is super bad.

I suspect there may have been other factors, and maybe this put him over the top. The most incriminating thing is not the flask with alcohol, it's the fact it was in the glove compartment. If it was truly to help him sleep at his hotel, why wouldn't it be in his overnight bag? I don't keep anything in my glove box EXCEPT things I might need while driving. Do you?

Not saying he deserved to be fired. Zero-tolerance policies are usually flawed, IMO. Plus there are other disciplinary and probation actions that could be taken.

[oldtoiletsmkgdflrpots]

Originally Posted by jobert

But instead we've spent this money on rail for people who didn't want to send their kids to public schools in Austin, instead of upgrading those very schools they have run from. Getting downtown for the northern suburbanites is now less painless, they get to keep their cheap houses, decents schools, and they still don't have to live next to minorities. Yay!

Where exactly are you making reference to jobert?

[twange]

Originally Posted by oldtoiletsmkgdflrpots

Has anyone here even ridden the doggone thing yet?

That's the point exactly. Other than for fun, who will benefit from riding it? Especially since it's schedule only serves a very, very small portion of Austin's workforce/general population. I wish I could take it to work, but lack of connections makes it completely impossible. So other than curiosity, I don't need to ride it. Would anyone ride a bus just for the hell of it, even if it didn't take them anywhere they needed/wanted to go? Other than its functionality as it pertains to transportation or convenience, what do you need to know? Is it comfortable? Smooth ride? Cool looking on the inside? Can you take your dog with you?

Seriously though (and without rhetoric), it might be beneficial for people who have never ridden a commuter train to check it out just for its own sake, especially if it helps get more people interested in PT.

[SeaToby]

Originally Posted by austin-steve

You still haven't defined "cheap". What's the cost per passenger trip for this thing. I know it cost $120 Million to build. What are the ongoing operating costs and what do tax payers receive for that, and was a rail line the only way to accomplish whatever it is we are receiving?

Steve

Metrorail is fairly cheap relative to other commuter rail startups across America.
Metrorail (Austin) = $120 Million over 32 miles = less than $4 Million per mile.
WES (Portland) = $160 Million over 15 miles = $10.67 Million per mile.
Sprinter (North San Diego) = $484 Million over 22 miles = $22 Million per mile.
DCTA (Denton County) = $315 Million over 21 miles = $15 Million per mile.
DART Green Line (Dallas) = $1,900 Million over 28 miles = $68 Million per mile.

How else would you define cheap other than being cheaper than your contemporaries? CapMetro's Metrorail comes in more than $6 Million per mile cheaper than its closest contemporary. All the examples except one I listed above are commuter rail corridors using DMUs, some of which are using the same DMUs as CapMetro. The sole exception being the DART Green Line which is a light rail corridor.

As for comparing operations & maintenance costs, several factors come into play including how many railcars there are to maintain, how often the trains are running, whether all new tracks were laid before commencing operations, how many train stations, and how long the corridor is. That's a very difficult statistic to compare between different commuter rail operations.

Costs per ride also varies in relation to many factors, especially when looking at variations with operations and maintenance, and the average length of a ride. Some might consider it to be better for comparison purposes to compare costs per passenger mile. Then there's always the disagreements over how long to factor the life of the rolling stock and rail infrastructure. It seems almost every piece of equipment has a different life span. The numbers of riders vary from year to year too. Should we use the estimated riders per day at startup, 10, 20, or 30 years in the future? So some assumptions must be made indiscriminately which results in unreliable data. I'm not able to predict the future, so I refuse to play that game.

[austin-steve]

How else would you define cheap other than being cheaper than your contemporaries?

Gosh, I hope you're not an investor. I have some "cheap" stuff I could sell you based on your evaluation method.

I view expenditures in terms of the value returned. I could care less how much other cities spent on their rail systems.

If the rail is supposed to solve a problem, what problem is it solving?
And specifically how is the effectiveness of the solution measured? How is Austin now better?
And what would have been the cost and effectiveness of alternative solutions, or uses of the funds expended?

Finally, my favorite question - the best questions, really, to hold up against any idea, no matter how good or bad it seems:

What bad thing would happen if Austin didn't have rail? What bad eventuality does the rail rescue us from?

Steve

[jobert]

Originally Posted by oldtoiletsmkgdflrpots

Where exactly are you making reference to jobert?

Leander - it's pretty obvious. The last leg out to Leander is an whopping 10 miles of uninterrupted track. That's a whole lot of track/wear/fuel to service a few people in a remote location. Very inefficient waste of resources.

$4/gallon gas for a one-hour-commute isn't Leanderites problem anymore, but $4/gallon diesel for a one-hour-train-commute is now the Austin taxpayers problem.

Thanks, Leander.