What do you think the chances are of a Metro Rail Extension? (New York: 2015, apartments)

[Thundarr457]

The original construction started in 1979 almost 40 years ago. It has been stated here that money for a 5 million dollars review funded by the Buffalo Billion 2 will take place over the next 2.5 years. Congressman Higgins is not completely on board and wants the money spent to improve the existing line. The cost of an Amherst extension is 1.2 billion and will certainly rise. What do the forum members think the chances are that the extension will be built?

[VA Yankee]

What kind of demand is there to justify the expense, other than college kids without cars is there really much need?

[droc31]

Realistically, not much of a chance. Though I would like to see it not only extended, but new lines established. Perhaps extend the current existing line out past the suburbs toward say Pendleton and put a park and ride lot there for residents of Niagara County to use. Then add a line going east toward a second park and ride lot in Depew/Lancaster. Throw in a line to the southtowns with a park and ride somewhere near New Era Field or along Southwestern Blvd. in Orchard Park. Other cities have mass transit lines and corresponding park and ride lots running 30 or more miles from a city center.

[RocketSci]

Originally Posted by VA Yankee

What kind of demand is there to justify the expense, other than college kids without cars is there really much need?

Its a chicken and egg situation. How can demand be measured when the option doesn't exist today? UB Stampede buses account for about 10,000 riders per day, so yes that could account for a significant ridership increase (over 50%) if the rail displaces the bus service, along with a transfer of cost/expense (the state already pays for these buses). It would also reduce many of the Park&Ride riders already using the UB South lot, so although not much change there it is fewer cars on the road at least.

Besides that group, there are likely few people along the new route who currently use public transit at all (34 Bus is considered a "secondary" route and only runs buses every 30 to 45 minutes on weekdays). That means anyone could be potential riders, especially as the latest route follows the most densely populated parts of Amherst and now abuts Tonawanda. It seems as if all the recent routings are considered, the NF Boulevard route provides the best access to retail, Park&Ride options, proximity to existing apartments, and potential for TOD development (such as proposals at Boulevard Mall areas). Amherst is also still growing in population (although not as much on the western side), and the Main Street corridor is also gentrifying in Buffalo, so the extension provides access to Buffalo residents to the shopping areas along NF Blvd and Maple without a car.

Is it "worth" building? It would be great if this country could get serious about providing reliable and better (more frequent/extended hours) public transit, and this could be a great part of it. NF Boulevard and Maple are already crowded auto corridors, along with the 290 at times. As long as the rail system is able to bypass traffic and not have to share the road with cars (i.e. must have a dedicated lane and must travel at least as fast as a car or faster) then this is a good thing for passengers, and offers a real option with benefits.

Will it happen? Maybe as part of a sweetener package to upstate cities in order to expand funding to the NYC system, but who knows. I'll give it 30% today.

As far as other transit options, how about restoring the 2nd set of tracks between downtown and the NF train station to improve Amtrak reliability, and allow an option for a commuter or seasonal excursion service between Buffalo and Niagara Falls? With GO service being extended to NF Ontario, this could become a decent option to improve connections between Toronto and Buffalo (but still require a hike or shuttle over the bridge if not on Amtrak).

[VA Yankee]

/\

Yes it is a chicken or egg scenario and with gas at or below $2.00 a gallon in many states ($2.60 average in Amherst) you will be hard pressed to convince someone to take public transit over driving which is cheaper. Most if not all rail based transit systems are losing money https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brook...per-passenger/ and https://www.citylab.com/transportati...vestment/8838/. The tax obligation is too all ready and I would bet that the more affluent suburbs such as Amherst have no desire to promote the modest urban dweller from coming out their way.

Amtrak also runs in the red and there just isn't the demand beyond the North East corridor runs to expand service.

[RocketSci]

Originally Posted by VA Yankee

/\

Yes it is a chicken or egg scenario and with gas at or below $2.00 a gallon in many states ($2.60 average in Amherst) you will be hard pressed to convince someone to take public transit over driving which is cheaper. Most if not all rail based transit systems are losing money https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brook...per-passenger/ and https://www.citylab.com/transportati...vestment/8838/. The tax obligation is too all ready and I would bet that the more affluent suburbs such as Amherst have no desire to promote the modest urban dweller from coming out their way.

Amtrak also runs in the red and there just isn't the demand beyond the North East corridor runs to expand service.

Not a single road "makes money" either. I think that argument of road vs rail is myopic. Roads end up being more expensive in total (public + private) as usage requires additional $Millions of spent cost on vehicles, loss of taxable land, continued maintenance, etc.

The first trip downtown from UB costs no more than $2 by bus or rail to the user. Using a car, the first trip costs
- the price of a car
- the cost of insurance
- the cost of gas and maintenance
- the cost of parking
- the cost, time, and ability to get a driver's license
- the health and ability to drive

Now that may sound silly to a suburbanite who already has a license and a car, but not everyone has that as a starting point. This also opens up possibilities to reduce the number of vehicles per family, and overall cost to individuals and families.

Gas always changes price, its the cost of housing and cars that is becoming more prohibitive and drives down ownership among young people.

Per the latest reports, Amherst is all onboard with the expansion, as they realize that the NF Boulevard commercial corridor and UB area would benefit, and the snooty folks in Snyder and Williamsville are untouched. As far as "modest" people along the Main Street corridor include North Buffalo, Central Park, Parkside, Delaware District, Allentown, and the CBD - it's not just poor people there. There are plenty of people in Amherst who also regularly attend restaurants and events downtown, which continue to expand and grow.

Amtrak is what it is because of limited routes and shared lines with Conrail - the state is already putting dollars into new stations, and getting away from shared rail lines would improve service. Better connectivity with either VIA rail or GO Trains would improve Buffalo-Toronto connections greatly, and doubling the rail provides an option for a more frequent rail to NF without the cost of new right-of-way or additional infrastructure. An excursion train may even make money, and combined with a potential commuter service could allow more frequent and easier exchange of the millions of tourists between NF and Buffalo.

[VA Yankee]

Originally Posted by RocketSci

Not a single road "makes money" either. I think that argument of road vs rail is myopic. Roads end up being more expensive in total (public + private) as usage requires additional $Millions of spent cost on vehicles, loss of taxable land, continued maintenance, etc.

The first trip downtown from UB costs no more than $2 by bus or rail to the user. Using a car, the first trip costs
- the price of a car
- the cost of insurance
- the cost of gas and maintenance
- the cost of parking
- the cost, time, and ability to get a driver's license
- the health and ability to drive

Now that may sound silly to a suburbanite who already has a license and a car, but not everyone has that as a starting point. This also opens up possibilities to reduce the number of vehicles per family, and overall cost to individuals and families.

Gas always changes price, its the cost of housing and cars that is becoming more prohibitive and drives down ownership among young people.

Per the latest reports, Amherst is all onboard with the expansion, as they realize that the NF Boulevard commercial corridor and UB area would benefit, and the snooty folks in Snyder and Williamsville are untouched. As far as "modest" people along the Main Street corridor include North Buffalo, Central Park, Parkside, Delaware District, Allentown, and the CBD - it's not just poor people there. There are plenty of people in Amherst who also regularly attend restaurants and events downtown, which continue to expand and grow.

Amtrak is what it is because of limited routes and shared lines with Conrail - the state is already putting dollars into new stations, and getting away from shared rail lines would improve service. Better connectivity with either VIA rail or GO Trains would improve Buffalo-Toronto connections greatly, and doubling the rail provides an option for a more frequent rail to NF without the cost of new right-of-way or additional infrastructure. An excursion train may even make money, and combined with a potential commuter service could allow more frequent and easier exchange of the millions of tourists between NF and Buffalo.

Myopic, I disagree you can implement a road and it will serve far more people, can expand, interconnect and support far more people and businesses than a light rail line ever will. With roads business and industries can develop anywhere and aren't tied to the rail lines as in days gone by, they create more taxable land which the rail lines do not.

You sound like all the college age people here who don't want to be creating a carbon footprint but want everyone else to pay for subsidized bus routes so they can go to the mall when they want, if demand from the campus exceeds current bus routes then add another bus, way easier and cheaper. The first trip is $2 dollars no make that at least $4.00(Round trip) if your destination is not within a bus/rail stop then your looking at a cab/Uber or walking to get to your location, odds are the car (which most have already) will not even use $2.00 in gas to run to the mall and back. Good luck finding a job when you have to be near a rail/bus route...

Amtrak runs in the red period, down here they share CSX rail lines but even if the number of trains increased ridership will not and that's the just the way it is. If Amherst wants the extension that's fine they can enjoy paying for it but based on what posters have stated on CD downtown events are limited and the phrase "ghost town" is often used so we'll see. Start working on the list of sites for all the tourists, beyond the falls there's not much demand to see Niagara Falls or Buffalo. Heck the Metro North & LIRR which have extensive stops and high ridership operates in the red and you think a light rail extension will be a cash cow.....good luck.

[drinkthekoolaid]

Slim and none.

[JWRocks]

An article related to costs


https://www.citylab.com/transportati...the-us/551408/

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by VA Yankee

Myopic, I disagree you can implement a road and it will serve far more people, can expand, interconnect and support far more people and businesses than a light rail line ever will. With roads business and industries can develop anywhere and aren't tied to the rail lines as in days gone by, they create more taxable land which the rail lines do not.

You sound like all the college age people here who don't want to be creating a carbon footprint but want everyone else to pay for subsidized bus routes so they can go to the mall when they want, if demand from the campus exceeds current bus routes then add another bus, way easier and cheaper. The first trip is $2 dollars no make that at least $4.00(Round trip) if your destination is not within a bus/rail stop then your looking at a cab/Uber or walking to get to your location, odds are the car (which most have already) will not even use $2.00 in gas to run to the mall and back. Good luck finding a job when you have to be near a rail/bus route...

Amtrak runs in the red period, down here they share CSX rail lines but even if the number of trains increased ridership will not and that's the just the way it is. If Amherst wants the extension that's fine they can enjoy paying for it but based on what posters have stated on CD downtown events are limited and the phrase "ghost town" is often used so we'll see. Start working on the list of sites for all the tourists, beyond the falls there's not much demand to see Niagara Falls or Buffalo. Heck the Metro North & LIRR which have extensive stops and high ridership operates in the red and you think a light rail extension will be a cash cow.....good luck.

We all understand that there is a public subsidy to mass transit including rail, but there is also numerous public subsidies for automobile travel.

Having better mass transit isn't just relegated to its benefits in terms of a smaller carbon footprint, which is a fairly worthwhile cause, but it also encourages business along its route and encourages walking and denser development which is helpful for cities though less so for more scattered suburbs. You say good luck finding a job when you have to be near a rail/bus route, but that is the same argument that can be used for expanding mass transit so that it might be doable.

If you looked at the recent financial report and how things have been for the last several years for Amtrak, you'll see that this year has been the best in terms of operating performance to date with a revenue with 3.38 billion in revenue ending at a loss of 168.0 million. Now having an overall loss isn't great, but there have been a number of improvements to the system in recent years and that takes time (and lost fare as these improvements can be disruptive) and money which affects both ends of Amtrak's ledger and sets the stage for better financial performance in the future and Amtrak is projecting an end to operating loss by 2021.

Also, this being the Buffalo subforum of the New York subforum, it makes sense to talk about the routes that affect Buffalo and New York which for the most part are decently well-trafficked and can be better used. The items that are the real money losers for Amtrak are the long-haul trains that go through several cities where there is little development around the station (and thus nothing to go to) and often far outside the downtown areas). That isn't Buffalo with its current Exchange Street street station (to be replaced by a new downtown station in 2020) which also connects to its light rail line.

As for operating costs of mass transit in general, most developed countries tend to fund mass transit in one of two ways. One is that the mass transit agency itself owns at least some of the land and/or buildings where the mass transit stations are (not necessarily all of them) and directly recoups the value they've added to that land through transit access as landlords. These agencies tend to be in East Asia and generally operate at significant profit margins that are then used to further expand and invest--this is similar to how the old private operators used to do things. The other is that the mass transit agency operates at a loss and then general funds are adequately directed to it for good, frequent service and expansions, with the understanding that the general increased land value and business activity generated from a well-functioning system is an economic force multiplier. Generally, European countries and Australia and Canada operate on those principles as does the US, but the difference is that the US greatly prioritizes its infrastructure subsidization and attention towards roads rather than mass transit. I say attention, because it isn't just the money committed to it, but also the level of expertise and oversight which have contributed to the much higher costs of mass transit construction in the US.

This doesn't necessarily have to be the case, but it's also a hard argument for Buffalo, because you'd have to believe that Buffalo can actually infill around the station and turn people to mass transit after putting significant funding to its system and that there can be something different about its bid and development process for mass transit that can buck US trends.

Anyhow, the craziest thing about Buffalo light rail is that its grade-separated further away from downtown and street-running downtown. That's pretty much the exact opposite paradigm that any other light rail service tries to do or they do street-running the whole way to save costs.