Thanx. And I'll hope you'll consider my positions/perspectives fairly.
Here follows some notes on your wording below. I'll disagree with your $20 subsidized 'actual' cost figure because 1, the capital could be paid off sooner (there are ways to do that), 2, it will be paid off eventually, and 3, there are measurable explicit cost savings with functioning transit. If it weren't for capitalist chums who arrive in town aboard a Big Boat, Seattle could have a model trolleybus transit system. Their money is in and on the automobile market and have friends in high DOT offices to make sure transit doesn't live up to even the most reserved predictions and expectations.
"You're too funny Wells. PowerGangers? I like yours better than mine.
I did some number crunching on the FHSC, applied FTA 'Annualization Factors' to convert capital costs to annual costs. These I add to operating cost, which allows project considerations of cost effectiveness. Facilities are figured at 30 year life and rail vehicles at 25 yr. FHSC costs were given in 2007 dollars, then converted to 2012 dollars, giving a project cost to ST of $172M. Annual operating cost $5.2M to $6M.(SDOT Ordinance 117387).
Applying the annualization FTA factors gives an annual capital cost of $13.6M plus $6M to operate 20 hours a day, about $20M/yr. ST estimates ridership between 3000-3500 in year 2030, and 1 million rides per year using Link formula to convert daily and yearly ridership.
In short, for the year 2030, FHSC will cost the taxpayers $20 for every boarding. Compared to the #12 trolleybus route with 1.1 million annual riders, a cost of $3.1M/yr or about 1/6 the cost. That's why I can make the challenge and rest easily at night. Don't ask me what the numbers were on the WizKids idea they never studied it, but it's a trolley in a transit-rich environment just like the #12 trolley.
**Late edit to sum up FHSC advantages: Pedestrian infrastructure for improved safety, increased transit use from overall system redesign, more potential to revitalize storefront businesses, within a district which serves everyone, not mostly well-dressed snootypants whose personal health care expenditures come from an 'actual' slush fund. Thanx again for the civility. The dbt is deadly wrong, criminally deadly wrong.
↧