Comments on: Streetfoolish

By: Transportation smackdown… | Transit Miami

Transportation smackdown… | Transit Miami — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:05:42 +0000

[...] ideas were thrown around, most of which we have been championing for a while. (See Streetfoolish or The Week in Transit) Depressing though our situation may be, we have reason to hope that the [...]

By: Tony Garcia

Tony Garcia — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:03:16 +0000

Actually, our big problem is that we don’t have enough money to expand and operate our existing system. Mismanagement is a big factor in this, as is the inefficiency of the system, but without adequate amounts of money the system will never get built. Not to mention that to get quickstart funding from the FDOT for future lines you need to show that the system is solvent.
PS. Increasing fares and fees at parking lots doesn’t compare with filling up $300 a month in gas (plus insurance, plus maintenance..etc) Unless we raise fares and fees to some ridiculous amount, this argument will not be very relevant. Sure there will be some people who try to justify using their cars by using this faulty math. Let them drive. Those people are less likely to take transit anyway.

By: Semi

Semi — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:59:31 +0000

Useless. Increasing the price of parking at stations will keep those in places where fewer people using transit from making Metrorail an option - “If it costs to much to park I’ll just drive to work.”

Peak, non-peak, transit fare? Sure. Nothing slows down fare collection and frustrates people like making them memorize or guess what the price is.

More taxes? Higher fares? All this distracts from the real problem which is spending the money properly and making the system more efficient. Planning it logically instead of “who” deserves it more would also help. HELP!

By: Tony Garcia

Tony Garcia — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 16:57:20 +0000

Yeah, I don’t think drilling is a solution. That’s just more of the same car-centric planning that has gone on in this country for the last half century. I can’t wait for the election to be over so that people forget about drilling.

In other news, I have been keeping an eye on MDX and they work fast, I can’t deny that. I think the organization and structure of MDT needs to be rethought. Sounds like when we talk about the CITT/MDX/MDT idea we are really clamoring for an entity that is responsive, accountable, and effective.

By: TransitDave

TransitDave — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:06:52 +0000

How “bout drilling for oil off the coastline, and making sure that
a percentage comes back to Florida for infrastructure projects, specifically transit projects? many billions of dollars there potentially, and the Chinese will be drilling if we don’t……

By: Steven

Steven — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:07:41 +0000

The problem I see is that the CITT is not designed to be an independant authority as MDX is. Instead, it is designed as an oversight organization who has had its wings clipped before it even left the nest. I think that this county really should create a more independant transit authority like MDX that is geared towards transit only. As the organization is currently, there are too many hands in the pot (mainly commissioners) and it is just turning any prospect of transit projects actually getting done right out the window.

By: TransitDave

TransitDave — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:55:30 +0000

Tony, my thought is that the MDX has the structure, power, ability to issue bonds, legal council, etc and most of all, the true independance that the CITT aspires to, so why re-invent the wheel?
If by narrowing the focus of the PTP by eliminating the Municipal subsidies and road projects, the only remaining oversight of the funds will be for Building our metrorail system, then again, why reinvent the wheel? The MDX is equipped to do right of way acquisition, planning and construction management for expressways, much the same has to be done for metrorail construction. The MPO determines which transit and road projects have priority, so MDX’s role would be more in the execution phase, rather than planning, so I don’t see the potential conflict. I don’t profess to have all of the answers, but adding a “T” to the MDX seems an obvious and faster alternative to what would be a huge duplication of effort to reinvent the CITT in order to make it truly effective and independant.

By: Tony Garcia

Tony Garcia — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:32:53 +0000

TransitDave, You’ve commented previously that MDX would be better suited than the CITT to distribute funds. Elaborate a little more on why you think that is a good idea. I am unconvinced only because their primary mission has always been road/expressway building. I find that transit’s biggest enemy at times can be transportation engineers who just don’t ‘buy into’ transit. I’m sure a transit minded transportation engineer like Gabe can attest to that! I know that certain members of the MDX Board have made public comments about transit being secondary to roads/expressways.

Eliminating the 20% municipal contribution is a no-brainer. The problem is, as some commissioners have pointed out, that contribution was how the County mustered municipal support for the 1/2 penny tax.

By: Alejandro Gonzalez

Alejandro Gonzalez — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:08:52 +0000

I agree with TransitDave above me that the city cuts of the PTP funds need to be eliminated. The hefty 20% that they are given is being wasted on road projects, and the 20% of their share they are required to invest in transit (with some exceptions) is being reinvested in County bonds! So in the end the County pays the Cities twice!
A major problem, I feel, with the CITT is that it is the Citizens TRANSPORTAION Trust instead of Transit Trust. The people of the County were fooled by pretty ads saying that they were going to expand busses, help old people, and build the Metrorail extremely fast; and the independednt CITT would help them do it. But Transportation (which means it includes roads, sidewalks, “neighborhood improvements” AND Transit) should not be the priority of the Trust it should be only
Transit.
Between 2008-2009 an estimated $58.4 million dollars will be given to the cities in Miami-Dade. If since 2003 with the creation of the Trust, only four years, we would have saved that 20% and put it into a Metrorail funding account of some kind, over $125 million would be in it; thats over 1/6th of the estimated cost of the North Corridor $600 Million dollar price tag.

I think the solution to our problem is reorganization, and the ordinances passed earlier this month by the commission is one step closer to that ultimate goal.

By: TransitDave

TransitDave — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:11:43 +0000

Good start, except for the bond issues. As for the PTP half penny, put a measure on the ballot to modify it and allocate it only to Transit Projects by eliminating the municipal transit share, as well as any road projects. Finally, Eliminate the Citizen’s independant transit trust and task the Miami Dade expressway authority with overseeing the planning and construction of Metrorail projects, and let MDT answer to the MDX to make sure that PTP money only goes for productive bus routes.

After all, the MDX has the structure, the power and already employs much of the same talent that would be needed to get the job done.