http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/magazine/14Train-t.html

With the number of express buses you could buy for the rail line, you probably could have some that made one, two or zero stops. This would probably speed things up. Although it is possible that to really make it work would require a dedicated lane of some kind.

In short, automobile drivers pay nearly all of the cost of their travel (55 cents out of 62 cents per automobile mile), while commuter rail passengers pay only a fraction of theirs. FrontRunner passengers typically pay 25 cents out of a total cost of 90 cents per passenger mile.

The government subsidy for commuter rail travel along the Wasatch Front is approximately 65 cents per mile, while the net subsidy for automobile highway travel is ~8 cents per mile. The target for the latter is zero – aside from the recent stimulus all federal highway funding comes from gasoline taxes. There is a net state subsidy in Utah at the moment because we are in a major road construction phase that is not likely to slow down anytime soon.

People need to realize that the U.S. is not Europe. Europhiles and pork-happy politicians shouldn’t be the ones driving transportation policy. The U.S. is big and relatively uncrowded. Commuter rail is rarely a worthwhile investment here, despite being a perfect fit for Europe. Every time I see a Smart Car on a Utah road with 12 feet wide lanes, I can’t help but laugh. It’s just ridiculous. Americans love their wide-open space, and because of the size of the country, we can afford to love that space for many years to come.

That said, if someone finds a way to do commuter rail profitably in the US, I’m all for it. Just don’t find another way to waste my tax money and tell me it’s a good investment.

Gonzo, this shows the skewed perception we have in this country of capital spending. To many, roads are an “investment” and transit it “subsidized.” Trust me, every time we drive on the roads, there are also massive “subsidies” enabling those trips to happen as well.

We have a superior road network which must be maintained, it’s time to invest in “the other half of the system.”

Could UTA build an express bus service that draws as many riders as the Frontrunner using only the state/local funds that have been dedicated to the system? I doubt it. There has been some argument in previous comments about whether an express bus might be faster than rail. This is easy enough to evaluate: There is currently a competing express bus (route 472) between Ogden and Salt Lake that basically parallels the commuter rail. During the peak hour it takes about 90 minutes to get from downtown Ogden to downtown Salt Lake, whereas it only takes 60 minutes by commuter rail. Even if the buses can take advantage of the carpool lanes on the highways, they still take a lot of time getting on and off of the freeway to pick up passengers (especially in rush hour). As discussed in previous comments, rail also provides more reliability, a more comfortable ride, and has a better image.

Rail generally provides a superior, albeit more expensive, transit service than buses. The question is whether the better service draws enough extra riders to justify the additional expense. If someone else (i.e., the FTA) is covering your capital costs, this tilts things heavily in favor of rail. I guess you could reject the federal money on principle – like all those governors promised they would with the stimulus money.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/magazine/14Train-t.html

True. As I mentioned before, the biggest mistake NYC made was when they stopped investing in their transit infrastructure in the 1960s and 70s. Luckily we have more enlightened leadership at the moment:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/transportation.shtml

In New York, in addition to the subway, we have buses, express buses, commuter rail, taxis, pedicabs, ferries, bicyclists, and a few people who enjoy the hassles of waiting long periods to cross bridges and tunnels and then looking for parking. The investments in every part of the transportation infrastructure have more than paid for themselves in economic development.

In comment 34, Kent mentioned the $8.7 million new rail tunnel to NJ (necessary because 9 of 10 new NY commuters come from west of the Hudson, and current NJ transit is at full capacity) as well as the Second avenue subway. These projects have already begun to stimulate the economy and will return benefits for years after their completion.