Report Card for America's Infrastructure














TRANSIT


Conditions

For transit there is both good news and bad news. The bad news is that while investments at both the federal and state/local levels are increasing, ridership demand is increasing at an even faster rate. The good news is that increased ridership means increased fare box revenues. However, it means additional public investment is needed. The question is, can investment keep pace with demand? Growth in transit ridership outpaces growth in other modes of transportation, including aviation and highways. Last year Americans took more than 9 billion trips on transit. For 2000, transit ridership increased by 4.5% over 1998. This continues a trend that marks the fourth straight year of ridership increases, and amounts to a 15% increase since 1995.

Transit funding is growing, but at a slower pace. Total spending for mass transit in 1997 was $25.1 billion. The federal share was $4.4 billion, state and local governments contributed $13.2 billion and operating revenue provided the rest. For FY 2000, the federal investment increased to $4.56 billion and to $6.2 billion for FY 2001. Total spending from all sources on transit capital projects for FY 1997 was $7.6 billion.

The federal government invests $7.66 billion annually in mass transit capital improvements. However, according to the Federal Transit Administration an additional $10.8 billion is needed to maintain current conditions and $16 billion to eliminate identified deficiencies. Capital spending on transit needs to increase 41% to reach the $10.8 billion.

Even with the increased investment, many people in the U.S. have little or no access to transit at all. The Federal Transit Administration reports that 25% of the nation's urban population does not have walkable access to transit. In addition, 30% of the nation's non-metropolitan counties have no transit service at all. This can prevent those without motor vehicles from participating in the economy, places the financial burden of automobile ownership on many low income families, and adds unnecessary automobile trips to our nation's congested streets and highways.

There are substantial benefits to the taxpayer in exchange for public investment in transit infrastructure. Transit provides basic mobility for those lacking a motor vehicle or unable to drive. It promotes location efficiency and reduces other infrastructure costs by encouraging dense, multi-purpose, pedestrian-oriented urban development. Transit is more energy efficient on a per-person basis than the automobile. Finally, and perhaps most important, it provides an environmental benefit. By reducing passenger car traffic transit reduces air, noise, and water pollution precisely where those reductions are needed most, in major urban areas.

The U.S. Department of Transportation reports that:

  • Investment in transit continues to increase, including increased federal funding through the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). Transit system route miles show a 10-year increase of 44.2% in rail service and 10.4% in non-rail service.
  • In 1997, there were 149,468 transit vehicles; 9,922 miles of track; 2,681 stations; and 1,179 transit maintenance facilities in the U.S.
  • There were 156,733 non-rail route miles of transit service in 1997.
  • Transit system capacity, measured in vehicle revenue miles, increased by 19.7% from 1987 to 1997, while non-rail increased 17.1%.
  • The average condition of urban bus vehicles was 3.1 on a scale of 5.0 or adequate, largely unchanged for the past 10 years. Sixty-three percent of urban bus vehicles are full-sized buses whose average condition has remained steady at 3.0 for the last decade.
  • The average condition of rail vehicles was 4.0 or good. This is down slightly and caused by heavy ridership in major urban areas.

The estimated average annual investment required to maintain the same physical conditions and operating performance of the nation's transit systems as in 1997, by replacing and rehabilitating deteriorated assets and expanding capacity to accommodate expected transit passenger growth, is $10.8 billion. The cost to improve conditions and performance is estimated to be $16 billion.

Policy Options

  • Fully support the intermodal (including transit) vision of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21).
  • Fully fund TEA-21 at the authorized level.
  • Realize the full intent of transportation trust funds by removing them from the unified federal budget.
  • Establish a federal, multi-year capital budget for public works infrastructure construction and rehabilitation, similar to those used by state and local governments.
  • Encourage the use of life-cycle cost analysis principles to evaluate the total costs of projects.
  • Continue research and development of new technologies to reduce construction and operating costs.

Sources

  • U.S. Department of Transportation, 1999 Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions and Performance, May 2000.
  • General Accounting Office (GAO), Mass Transit: Challenges in Evaluating, Overseeing and Funding Major Transit Projects, March 8, 2000.
  • GAO, Mass Transit: Implementation of FTA's New Starts Evaluation Process and FY 2001 Funding Proposals, April 2000.
  • GAO, Mass Transit: Project Management Oversight Benefits and Future Funding Requirements, September 2000.
  • American Public Transit Association, Public Transportation and the Nation's Economy: A Quantitative Analysis of Public Transportation's Economic Impact, October 1999.
  • ASCE Policy Statement 131 "Urban Growth," 2000.
  • ASCE Policy Statement 149 "Intermodal Transportation Systems," 2000.
  • ASCE Policy Statement 434 "Transportation Trust Funds," 2000.