Ten myths about US urban rail systems
The proponents of rail transit have promulgated a set of stock arguments to help convince officials and the electorate that rail transit is a necessary component of a contemporary urban transportation system. These myths have gradually bored their way into conventional wisdom. We examine and dispel the following rail myths: (1) rail is cost-effective, (2) rail is the people's choice, (3) rail is fast transit, (4) rail is high capacity transit, (5) rail construction provides jobs, (6) rail promotes superior urban form, (7) rail will be paid for with non-local funds that cannot be used for other purposes, (8) rail will attract new riders to transit, (9) rail will decongest roads, and (10) there are no alternatives to rail.
Volume (Year): 6 (1999)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Boarnet, Marlon G. & Crane, Randall, 1995. "Public Finance and Transit-Oriented Planning: New Evidence from Southern California," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt4v95x0tm, University of California Transportation Center.
- P Gordon & H W Richardson & H L Wong, 1986. "The distribution of population and employment in a polycentric city: the case of Los Angeles," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 18(2), pages 161-173, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:6:y:1999:i:1:p:57-73. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.