Light Rail Myth #1

Light Rail will reduce congestion

Now that a commercial developer-led light rail advocate community organization is dawning on the horizon, a series of public relations myths will befall the unsuspecting public. In a weekly series, I will attempt to anticipate these fantasies and dispel them with a reality statement and supporting data.

The Myth: Light Rail will decongest roads by converting automobile users into users of mass transit.

Follow up:

The Reality: Light rail transit does not significantly reduce congestion. Drivers’ support for rail transit is based on a hope that other drivers will use light rail transit and open up the road; in fact, the majority of rail riders are taken out of buses, not cars. More importantly, during peak hours, light rail increases local arterial congestion.

When asked, drivers are enthusiastic about a light rail line along their route, but only because they think others will ride the transit and leave the road clear. An endorsement of transit construction is a vote for an open road, free of all those pesky other drivers.

This misinterpretation for public support produces serious overestimates of likely ridership. Hence, disastrous economic forecasts result. In Portland, Oregon, transportation planners said that a light-rail line would be built in three years for $135 million and would carry nearly 60,000 people per day after 10 years; in fact, the line took four years and $210 million to build, and it carried only 27,000 people per day after 10 years.

These shortfalls in ridership are not well known to the public. When a project is first under consideration, optimistic ridership forecasts are used. After funding is obtained and the construction is under way, the forecasts are revised downward drastically. Finally, when operation begins, the transit authority happily announces that ridership has “exceeded forecasts” referring to the second, revised forecast, not to the original prediction used to “sell” the project.

Traffic congestion is greatest at the beginning and end of normal working hours. A misconception is all the cars on the road during peak hours are going to or from work. The belief that a light rail transit systems along the main commuting corridors will relieve the congestion.

In the D.C. area, 75 percent of all automobile trips involve errands—taking the kids to school, going to the doctor, or performing the other multiple errands of every family. Nationwide, 39 percent of morning rush-hour trips and 60 percent of afternoon rush-hour trips are not work-relate. These errand trips will be taken by car by everyone except people who cannot afford to buy one.

The assumption that rail transit can decongest roads rests on another erroneous assumption. Commuters must get in their cars, drive to a station, park, walk, wait, and board the train. Many of them, once in their cars, will find it more convenient to keep going.

If light rail transit does not draw passengers from automobiles, where do they come from? The answer is clear: from buses. A 1996 Los Angeles study found that 63 percent of rail passengers had switched from the bus. Another 6 percent used to be driven by others, 6 percent had walked, and 4 percent were taking trips they would not have taken but for the rail line. Only 21 percent were riding instead of driving alone.