As Washington cities consider whether light rail is right for them, this study on the performance of the six existing systems on the West Coast provides factual, real life examples of what taxpayers could expect here. Policymakers and the public should consider whether diverting transportation taxes away from other programs and services is worth the opportunity costs. Based on the data, this analysis concludes that it is not.

Often, public agencies try to estimate, with little success, how such a system in Washington would perform. Through unrealistic modeling and ambitious assumptions, they typically underestimate operating and capital costs, and overestimate revenue and passenger demand.

This is especially true with light rail systems.

For example, in 1996, Sound Transit officials in the Seattle area promised its first light rail segment would be completed by 2006 and would cost about $5 billion. Today, Sound Transit says the total cost is about $15 billion and the segment will not be finished until around 2020.

Analyzing the performance of existing light rail systems sidesteps these guesses and offers a factual picture.

Read More: The Facts on Light Rail

With rare exceptions, rail transit is a costly and foolish investment that is more about pork barrel than it is about moving people.

In the last few decades, some two-dozen cities have spent around a hundred billion dollars building rail transit lines, and many other cities want to follow suit. Proponents say rail transit reduces congestion, cleans the air, and promotes economic redevelopment. Yet a look at existing rail lines shows that rail transit does none of these things. This fact sheet will review some of the myths and facts surrounding the three most common types of rail transit.

http://americandreamcoalition.org/ADCFS1.pdf

Open/Download: Myths & Facts About Rail Transit (PDF)

This paper grades rail transit in twenty-three urban areas on thirteen different criteria:

1. The change in transit ridership from 1990 to 2000;

2. The change in transit's share of motorized passenger travel from 1990 to 2000;

3. The change in transit commuting in the 1990s;

4. The change in transit's share of commuting in the 1990s;

5. The reliability of construction cost forecasts;

6. The reliability of ridership forecasts;

7. Changes in congestion from 1982 to 2001;

8. Changes in per capita driving from 1982 to 2001;

9. The cost effectiveness of rail transit relative to freeways;

10. The cost effectiveness of rail transit relative to buses;

11. The safety of rail relative to autos and buses between 1992 and 2001;

12. The energy efficiency of rail relative to passenger cars in 2002; and

13. The effects of rail transit on land-use regulation and property rights.

Read more: Great Rail Disasters: The Impact of Rail Transit on Urban Livability