Old METRORail Plan

[musicman]

Who's forcing people to ride?

eliminating buses, eliminating med center parking bus, eliminating trolleys were done in an effort to improve ridership....at the expense of longer travel times for many.

[Trae]

Okay, this is what I really meant with rail having its own right of way. This is part of the "Beltline" project in Atlanta:

A streetcar would also be nice for Houston. I would love to see one go around Downtown to areas where the LRT does not reach. This is the proposed "Peachtree Streetcar", which will run down Peachtree. How about something like this for Westheimer?

[musicman]

Okay, this is what I really meant with rail having its own right of way. This is part of the "Beltline" project in Atlanta:

A streetcar would also be nice for Houston. I would love to see one go around Downtown to areas where the LRT does not reach. This is the proposed "Peachtree Streetcar", which will run down Peachtree. How about something like this for Westheimer?

there appears to be a street crossing the line. this doesn't have its own ROW.

Trae....you appear to be making proposal and proposal without thinking of the consequences first.

most importantly, where's the money coming from?

next, are you willing to displace more people than the line will serve?

answer these two questions and i think we can move on.

[Trae]

there appears to be a street crossing the line. this doesn't have its own ROW.

Yes it does have its own ROW. Cars will not be going along the route. It will pass by streets, of course, but cars won't be driving along side the thing.

Trae....you appear to be making proposal and proposal without thinking of the consequences first.

Whoops.

most importantly, where's the money coming from?

Just a proposal. Money would come from our pockets of course. If METRO got federal funding, still coming from out pockets.

next, are you willing to displace more people than the line will serve?

I doubt the line would displace people. It would be built to help move people. A line on Westheimer from about Midtown to say Westchase wouldn't displace people (I don't think it would). You might have to shrink Westheimer by a lane, but I am sure those who live in the area that drive on it would take the streetcar.

[Highway6]

Yes it does have its own ROW. Cars will not be going along the route. It will pass by streets, of course, but cars won't be driving along side the thing.

Dedicated ROW isnt achieved by just elimnating the cars from running parallel and adjacent to the tracks.

I imagine the majority of the rail accidents occured as streets cross the rail.

How fast do you think this rail would be able get up to just eliminating parallel runing cars but still having to deal with cars crossing its path every block or two.

What you are proposing is no better than what we have now and is certainly not equivalent to what people are talking about when they bring up deciated ROW.

To me, it looks likes this Peachtree Line is exactly the same thing we have here.

[CDeb]

Austin has light rail?

[Trae]

No, but they have 28 miles of commuter rail under construction now, and will be complete next year.

Dedicated ROW isnt achieved by just elimnating the cars from running parallel and adjacent to the tracks.

I imagine the majority of the rail accidents occured as streets cross the rail.

How fast do you think this rail would be able get up to just eliminating parallel runing cars but still having to deal with cars crossing its path every block or two.

What you are proposing is no better than what we have now and is certainly not equivalent to what people are talking about when they bring up deciated ROW.

To me, it looks likes this Peachtree Line is exactly the same thing we have here.

So basically what we have here in Houston is a streetcar? The Peachtree Streetcar is an addition to the MARTA subway lines already there. I was thinking my proposal would be an addition to the METRO LRT lines. The difference is, we don't have heavy rail, so I didn't really think about it. Still, a streetcar down Westheimer would be great.

I think it could go pretty fast. Maybe have those rail guards come down when it is passing by. Just look at Portland's streetcar system:

They don't have heavy rail either, but they still have a streetcar. Here is their LRT system:

[TheNiche]

FWIW, I would expect most of the BRT routes to switch to LRT by 2020. But I'm just guessing, in part based on the success of the Red Line. (Sorry naysayers, but it's pretty hard to maintain the myth that the Red Line is a dismal failure when it continues to post the numbers it does.)

I'd beg to differ. Ridership is not the sole figure that determines the success of a public investment in transit infrastructure. Ridership by itself isn't even the sole determinant of the benefit side of the cost/benefit calculus.

[Transit Nut]

Trae, thank you for introducing us (or at least me) to the Peachtree Streetcar idea they have in Atlanta. However, the Portland, Peachtree, and similar streetcars are essentially low-capacity, low speed light rail vehicles. According to your graphics, a streetcar holds about 2/3 the passengers and has a max. speed of 30 mph, less than the speed of Houston's light rail vehicles now, and less than half of its max. possible speed. It is also meant for shorter distances. There are some long term (stress the "long") plans for a circulator around the outer edge of Downtown and Midtown Houston, but that won't happen for a while, like at least post-2012.

Back to your original map. The plan still is basically the same; however, that is what things should look like in 2025, 18 years from now. It takes a long time to build these things. Every system starts out small and grows over time; no city builds there entire rail network at once, finishes, and never expands again. While they may seem neat and extensive now, systems like MARTA, New York's subway, and Washington's Metro were once much smaller. Even London's system was once just 1/3 of the Circle Line.

[citykid09]

No, but they have 28 miles of commuter rail under construction now, and will be complete next year.

So basically what we have here in Houston is a streetcar? The Peachtree Streetcar is an addition to the MARTA subway lines already there. I was thinking my proposal would be an addition to the METRO LRT lines. The difference is, we don't have heavy rail, so I didn't really think about it. Still, a streetcar down Westheimer would be great.

Trae you might as well forget it, the peole of Houston have spoken, they can't do stuff right. Even when Houston was #1 in the rap game they couldn't keep that because all they did was fight with each other instead of helping each other like Atlanta rappers. Thats why you don't see Houston rap on TV anymore and Atlanta music has taken over more than ever. Even rappers, singers, actors and other artist from other cities including Houston move there.

Well what I am trying to get at is Houston will never be the type of city you and I want it to be. We are better off in cities like Dallas & Atlanta. Places that have the kind of Urban development and real rail systems. I love Houston, but its missing many of the qualities I like to see in a city. I like entertainment (themeparks movie/tv production,) I Like urban development, I like real train transit. And Houston will never have that, at least not in my life time. Houston works for all of you that are against what I say, but it doesn't work for me. I like progressive cities that don't settle for the minimum in anything. END OF STORY!

[musicman]

Yes it does have its own ROW. Cars will not be going along the route. It will pass by streets, of course, but cars won't be driving along side the thing.

You really should go back and learn what a dedicated right of way is. a car driving along the track isn't a problem. The problems occur when cars cross the track.

Whoops.

Try saying that to a constituent. It wouldn't go over well.

Just a proposal. Money would come from our pockets of course. If METRO got federal funding, still coming from out pockets.

Trae, an answer like this makes me think you don't pay your own bills. It is fine to have big dreams, but in the world of reality, you must be realistic.

I doubt the line would displace people. It would be built to help move people. A line on Westheimer from about Midtown to say Westchase wouldn't displace people (I don't think it would). You might have to shrink Westheimer by a lane, but I am sure those who live in the area that drive on it would take the streetcar.

putting a line down Westheimer would result in a situation where Westheimer would no longer be a road, (inner loop). the ROW required would take up the entire two lanes each way. So what would happen? home owners couldn't drive to their townhomes, people couldn't access businesses by car, etc. businesses that would remain would bombard the smaller side streets with additional traffic. the nearby neighborhoods would suffer as a result.

[musicman]

No, but they have 28 miles of commuter rail under construction now, and will be complete next year.

Do you understand the difference between commuter rail and light rail?

So basically what we have here in Houston is a streetcar? The Peachtree Streetcar is an addition to the MARTA subway lines already there. I was thinking my proposal would be an addition to the METRO LRT lines. The difference is, we don't have heavy rail, so I didn't really think about it. Still, a streetcar down Westheimer would be great.

I think it could go pretty fast. Maybe have those rail guards come down when it is passing by. Just look at Portland's streetcar system:

Portland is suffering as a result of their rail.

Before building light rail, Portland transit was gaining market share from the auto. Since building it, Portland transit has steadily lost market share and now carries only about 2 percent of Portland-area trips.

Ten years after Portland's first light-rail line was built, the city was so disappointed about lack of development along the route that it offered ten years of property tax waivers to anyone building near rail stations. One major development along the light rail, Beaverton Round, received $9 million in infrastructure subsidies and tax waivers. But no one wanted to move in, so the developer faced foreclosure. The city recently put up another $3.4 million to keep the project alive.

Portland also restricted itself to increasing landwise. This resulted in forced zoning.

Planners required Portland and 23 suburbs to meet population targets through re-zoning. To meet those targets, cities are re-zoning neighborhoods of single-family homes for apartments. In these areas, if a house burns down, the owner must replace it with an apartment building. Cities are also re-zoning golf courses, 10,000 acres of prime farm land, and other open spaces to high-density development. Low densities are forbidden in these zones.

In 1990, 92 percent of Portland-area trips were by car. Planners calculate that density, rail, and transit-oriented development will reduce this only to 88 percent. When combined with predicted population increases, the end result is actually 67 percent more miles of auto driving.

Residents say they want less, not more, congestion, but planners claim that "congestion signals positive urban development" and predict their plan will triple congestion. With congestion comes pollution: Planners admit their plan will increase smog by 10 percent.

[Trae]

You really should go back and learn what a dedicated right of way is. a car driving along the track isn't a problem. The problems occur when cars cross the track.

Try saying that to a constituent. It wouldn't go over well.

Trae, an answer like this makes me think you don't pay your own bills. It is fine to have big dreams, but in the world of reality, you must be realistic.

putting a line down Westheimer would result in a situation where Westheimer would no longer be a road, (inner loop). the ROW required would take up the entire two lanes each way. So what would happen? home owners couldn't drive to their townhomes, people couldn't access businesses by car, etc. businesses that would remain would bombard the smaller side streets with additional traffic. the nearby neighborhoods would suffer as a result.

I sure don't pay my own bills.

Do you understand the difference between commuter rail and light rail?

No ____. Of course I do. That is why I said "No, but they are building 28 miles of commuter rail".

Portland is suffering as a result of their rail.

Before building light rail, Portland transit was gaining market share from the auto. Since building it, Portland transit has steadily lost market share and now carries only about 2 percent of Portland-area trips.

Ten years after Portland's first light-rail line was built, the city was so disappointed about lack of development along the route that it offered ten years of property tax waivers to anyone building near rail stations. One major development along the light rail, Beaverton Round, received $9 million in infrastructure subsidies and tax waivers. But no one wanted to move in, so the developer faced foreclosure. The city recently put up another $3.4 million to keep the project alive.

Portland also restricted itself to increasing landwise. This resulted in forced zoning.

Planners required Portland and 23 suburbs to meet population targets through re-zoning. To meet those targets, cities are re-zoning neighborhoods of single-family homes for apartments. In these areas, if a house burns down, the owner must replace it with an apartment building. Cities are also re-zoning golf courses, 10,000 acres of prime farm land, and other open spaces to high-density development. Low densities are forbidden in these zones.

In 1990, 92 percent of Portland-area trips were by car. Planners calculate that density, rail, and transit-oriented development will reduce this only to 88 percent. When combined with predicted population increases, the end result is actually 67 percent more miles of auto driving.

Residents say they want less, not more, congestion, but planners claim that "congestion signals positive urban development" and predict their plan will triple congestion. With congestion comes pollution: Planners admit their plan will increase smog by 10 percent.

Didn't know that about Portland. Doesn't sound so good for them, but their rail system is miles (literally) ahead of ours.

[musicman]

No ____. Of course I do. That is why I said "No, but they are building 28 miles of commuter rail".

Commuter rail uses existing tracks to minimize cost. i'm not sure they are building anything.

Didn't know that about Portland. Doesn't sound so good for them, but their rail system is miles (literally) ahead of ours.

From this statement, you seem to be ignoring reality again. so building a system that only a few use but takes up a relatively large amount of resources is a good thing?

[Trae]

Only a few use? They have ridership numbers of over 100,000. 104,000 to be exact.

[musicman]

Only a few use? They have ridership numbers of over 100,000. 104,000 to be exact.

The number means nothing unless some total commuter numbers are presented. You also have to account for total cost per rider taken off the road.

The Texas Transportation Institute publishes their mobility study annually. The Urban Mobility report provides data on the performance of the transportation system in over 80 urban areas through research performed in cooperation with state transportation departments to include Oregon.

Findings for Portland in 2005:

The average commuter in Portland spends 39 extra hours in traffic annually. Portland's rank was 26th in the nation (out of 85 metro areas) for the annual delay per traveler.

The travel time index for the Portland metro area was 1.37 with a ranking of 14. This means a 20-minute free-flow trip took over 30 minutes during peak travel times.

We consumed 21,857,000 extra gallons of fuel because we were stuck in traffic (ranking of 25) and the congestion cost was over $5 million.

Roughly 73 percent of Portland-area residents drove alone by car or motorcycle - the same as in Los Angeles.

[Trae]

Hold the hell up.

Trae you might as well forget it, the peole of Houston have spoken, they can't do stuff right. Even when Houston was #1 in the rap game they couldn't keep that because all they did was fight with each other instead of helping each other like Atlanta rappers. Thats why you don't see Houston rap on TV anymore and Atlanta music has taken over more than ever. Even rappers, singers, actors and other artist from other cities including Houston move there.

First of all, the Atlanta rap coming out is complete bullshit. I can't get that stuff out of my ears. I like rap with substance and meaning. More Houston rap has that than Atlanta rap.

Well what I am trying to get at is Houston will never be the type of city you and I want it to be. We are better off in cities like Dallas & Atlanta. Places that have the kind of Urban development and real rail systems. I love Houston, but its missing many of the qualities I like to see in a city. I like entertainment (themeparks movie/tv production,) I Like urban development, I like real train transit. And Houston will never have that, at least not in my life time. Houston works for all of you that are against what I say, but it doesn't work for me. I like progressive cities that don't settle for the minimum in anything. END OF STORY!

I hope Houston gets there. Hopefully the BRT routes are changed to LRT to make it all work. MARTA is great, but it isn't going to be expanded. The plus side is the Beltline and other transit agencies in Atlanta that are starting their own guided transit projects. DART is actually real good. Ridership is not the best (with the number of miles they have), but it reaches almost all points of Dallas. It isn't like Houston doesn't have urban development. There are plenty of urban settings close to the Red Line and University Line that you could choose to live in. To tell you the truth, Houston has a much better urban setting than Atlanta even. Atlanta's Downtown and Midtown are stretched out along Peachtree. Mostly tall condo projects are along it, so it may look cool, but it doens't have the urban feel you are probably looking for. Houston has that infill close to its Downtown and it stretches all the way down to the TMC. Dallas has some sort of infill north of its Downtown, but it doesn't go that far north (you reach University Park in an instant).

I would just like more rail in Houston. Why settle for BRT? If that dumbass Culberson wasn't in office, it would have been so much easier for Houston. I bet you, we would have the Uptown, North Line, Southeast Line, and East Line all in LRT instead of the now proposed BRT. Hopefully METRO can get it done.

[musicman]

I hope Houston gets there. Hopefully the BRT routes are changed to LRT to make it all work.

How would it work differently with LRT vs BRT? some specifics would be great.

DART is actually real good. Ridership is not the best (with the number of miles they have), but it reaches almost all points of Dallas.

So if it "reaches almost all points of Dallas" but ridership "is not the best" how is it "actually really good?" i'm missing your logic path.

I would just like more rail in Houston. Why settle for BRT? If that dumbass Culberson wasn't in office, it would have been so much easier for Houston. I bet you, we would have the Uptown, North Line, Southeast Line, and East Line all in LRT instead of the now proposed BRT. Hopefully METRO can get it done.

Again the BRT and LRT will provide the same service but BRT is millions less. When you start paying your own bills, I think you'll change your answer. BTW Culberson is still in office.

[KinkaidAlum]

Do you understand the difference between commuter rail and light rail?

Portland is suffering as a result of their rail.

Before building light rail, Portland transit was gaining market share from the auto. Since building it, Portland transit has steadily lost market share and now carries only about 2 percent of Portland-area trips.

Ten years after Portland's first light-rail line was built, the city was so disappointed about lack of development along the route that it offered ten years of property tax waivers to anyone building near rail stations. One major development along the light rail, Beaverton Round, received $9 million in infrastructure subsidies and tax waivers. But no one wanted to move in, so the developer faced foreclosure. The city recently put up another $3.4 million to keep the project alive.

Portland also restricted itself to increasing landwise. This resulted in forced zoning.

Planners required Portland and 23 suburbs to meet population targets through re-zoning. To meet those targets, cities are re-zoning neighborhoods of single-family homes for apartments. In these areas, if a house burns down, the owner must replace it with an apartment building. Cities are also re-zoning golf courses, 10,000 acres of prime farm land, and other open spaces to high-density development. Low densities are forbidden in these zones.

In 1990, 92 percent of Portland-area trips were by car. Planners calculate that density, rail, and transit-oriented development will reduce this only to 88 percent. When combined with predicted population increases, the end result is actually 67 percent more miles of auto driving.

Residents say they want less, not more, congestion, but planners claim that "congestion signals positive urban development" and predict their plan will triple congestion. With congestion comes pollution: Planners admit their plan will increase smog by 10 percent.

Please cite a source for this crap you just posted. I am almost 100% positive I know who it's from which would explain why you didn't give credit to the loon.

[musicman]

Please cite a source for this crap you just posted. I am almost 100% positive I know who it's from which would explain why you didn't give credit to the loon.

otoole i believe. while some may be unbelievable, articles in the Portland business journal such as this reveal growth problems.

another by staley reads "Metro, Portland's regional planning authority, has not increased the boundary sufficiently to meet new demand. Although 4,800 acres were added last fall, this represents an increase of just 2%. Meanwhile, the region's population is expected to grow by 80% to 2.7 million people by 2040. Metro is now mandating dramatically higher population densities in existing cities to accommodate projected population growth. If Metro's plan is fully implemented and boundary is not expanded, residents will be forced to live in more crowded cities, smaller houses, and more congested neighborhoods in order to conform to Metro's vision of what Portland "ought" to be. "

to be honest, i just did a search for some unbiased numbers regarding rail and can't find ANY neutral parties. if you can find some i'd sure be interested

I do find this recent US census press release the most eye opening regarding commuting. I guess i'm surprised that carpoolers more than double the number who use public transportation. About half of the nation

[Trae]

How would it work differently with LRT vs BRT? some specifics would be great.

Why settle for BRT in the long run? We might as well have a bus running down the middle of the street. LRT is much better. The LRT is on tracks and doesn't need much from the driver.

So if it "reaches almost all points of Dallas" but ridership "is not the best" how is it "actually really good?" i'm missing your logic path.

It reaches almost all points of Dallas. Ridership is growing so that should tell you something. They are also building new LRT lines. The line up to Carrolton went under construction so quick. Another one being considered for DFW Airport. They get it so fast up there. Down here, we are getting BRT for all our lines except one. In Dallas, they have LRT, and even a trolly. Why not for Houston?

Again the BRT and LRT will provide the same service but BRT is millions less. When you start paying your own bills, I think you'll change your answer. BTW Culberson is still in office.

I know he is in office. That is why I said "if he wasn't in office". I am sure that if he wasn't in office, Houston would be getting more LRT. What are METRO's fund like? Other cities sure don't have problems with getting fundings for their streetcar, LRT, and commuter rail projects, but it seems like Houston gets shafted all the time. What's the deal here?

[Houston19514]

you should read METRO's website several times.

most will be at ground level except where they are forced to elevate like over buffalo bayou

its numbers are skewd due to forced ridership. it will be harder to accomplish this on the other lines. so we'll find out then.

Silly me, I'm always forgetting about those Metro Police out there rounding up people and forcing them to ride on Metro Rail. Give it a rest already with this "forced ridership" nonsense. Show me a rail system any where that does not feed bus passengers into the rail system, and I'll show you an inefficient, duplicative system.

[musicman]

Why settle for BRT in the long run? We might as well have a bus running down the middle of the street. LRT is much better. The LRT is on tracks and doesn't need much from the driver.

Your rationale "The LRT is on tracks and doesn't need much from the driver," is weak. "doesn't need much from the driver" means what specifically?

It reaches almost all points of Dallas. Ridership is growing so that should tell you something. They are also building new LRT lines. The line up to Carrolton went under construction so quick. Another one being considered for DFW Airport. They get it so fast up there. Down here, we are getting BRT for all our lines except one. In Dallas, they have LRT, and even a trolly. Why not for Houston?

these anecdotal comments are interesting but i was just looking for clarificaiton for your earlier comments about ridership not being the best even though it reaches almost all points of Dallas.

I know he is in office. That is why I said "if he wasn't in office". I am sure that if he wasn't in office, Houston would be getting more LRT. What are METRO's fund like? Other cities sure don't have problems with getting fundings for their streetcar, LRT, and commuter rail projects, but it seems like Houston gets shafted all the time. What's the deal here?

i just did a quick good search and can't find any info that says other cities don't have problems getting funding. What are you referencing? Earlier you were mentioning MARTA and how they couldn't expand. i see several documents that show that they can't maintain their systems and need more money than they are taking in. Is this an optimal position to be in as a transit agency?

[Houston19514]

I'd beg to differ. Ridership is not the sole figure that determines the success of a public investment in transit infrastructure. Ridership by itself isn't even the sole determinant of the benefit side of the cost/benefit calculus.

ThePedant: Nobody said anything about ridership being the sole determinant of anything. But ridership is by far the dominant determinant of both success and benefit. That might be why they put so much emphasis on ridership studies. And I guess that might be why rankings of mass transit systems are routinely based on ridership. And I guess that might be why THE two fundamental items in considerations for federal funding are Cost and Projected Ridership (i.e. benefit).

[Trae]

Your rationale "The LRT is on tracks and doesn't need much from the driver," is weak. "doesn't need much from the driver" means what specifically?

The BRT is a bus.

these anecdotal comments are interesting but i was just looking for clarificaiton for your earlier comments about ridership not being the best even though it reaches almost all points of Dallas.

Well, DART rail ridership sure is rising every month, so people are taking notice. Since it reaches almost all points of Dallas, and still essentially new, ridership numbers will continue to grow. The TOD's will also help.

i just did a quick good search and can't find any info that says other cities don't have problems getting funding. What are you referencing? Earlier you were mentioning MARTA and how they couldn't expand. i see several documents that show that they can't maintain their systems and need more money than they are taking in. Is this an optimal position to be in as a transit agency?

Well, how are those cities getting funding for LRT then? They seem to not have problems getting funding if they don't have to settle for BRT.

[musicman]

Well, DART rail ridership sure is rising every month

What data are you referring to?

Well, how are those cities getting funding for LRT then? They seem to not have problems getting funding if they don't have to settle for BRT.

i'll stop after this one. you just said that Atlanta (MARTA) is having problems with respect to funding. so to me that statement contradicts your second statement that all those other cities aren't having trouble receiving funding.

[dbigtex56]

Please cite a source for this crap you just posted. I am almost 100% positive I know who it's from which would explain why you didn't give credit to the loon.

Yes, the loon is (the aptly named) O'Toole. Article can be read here, if you have time to waste.

[Trae]

What data are you referring to?

Do you believe METRORail ridership is rising each month?

i'll stop after this one. you just said that Atlanta (MARTA) is having problems with respect to funding. so to me that statement contradicts your second statement that all those other cities aren't having trouble receiving funding.

Yes, MARTA is one system (like Houston) that is having problem getting funding. I said it seems like other cities aren't having trouble recieving fundings because they are getting LRT's, streetcars, and have overpasses over heavily traveled streets. Go to mapquest or Google Earth and look at DART's system. Count how many times that thing goes over or under heavily traveled streets. I wish METRORail would go over and under heavily traveled streets like that.

And one thing I failed to mention about MARTA. MARTA is one of the only systems in the country that doesn't receive any state funding. It depends solely on fare revenue and penny sales tax from Fulton and DeKalb counties (the only counties it serves).

[musicman]

Do you believe METRORail ridership is rising each month?

no system has ridership that rises each month.

Yes, MARTA is one system (like Houston) that is having problem getting funding. I said it seems like other cities aren't having trouble recieving fundings because they are getting LRT's, streetcars, and have overpasses over heavily traveled streets. Go to mapquest or Google Earth and look at DART's system. Count how many times that thing goes over or under heavily traveled streets. I wish METRORail would go over and under heavily traveled streets like that.

ok oh now it "seems".

And one thing I failed to mention about MARTA. MARTA is one of the only systems in the country that doesn't receive any state funding. It depends solely on fare revenue and penny sales tax from Fulton and DeKalb counties (the only counties it serves).

does Houston's receive state funding? no. good luck in the future.

[TheNiche]

ThePedant: Nobody said anything about ridership being the sole determinant of anything. But ridership is by far the dominant determinant of both success and benefit. That might be why they put so much emphasis on ridership studies. And I guess that might be why rankings of mass transit systems are routinely based on ridership. And I guess that might be why THE two fundamental items in considerations for federal funding are Cost and Projected Ridership (i.e. benefit).

Your argument was that there was high ridership and therefore that the line was successful. You didn't mention other factors in your premise, so...

They put emphasis on ridership studies because that is how federal funding can be obtained and rankings are often shown on the basis of ridership because the issue is far too complicated for laymen to wrap their mind around, and ridership is an intuitive measurement. But the Feds don't make sense, and intuitive measures aren't by themselves indicative of an objective outcome.