|
jmecklenborg
|
BART was formed and started construction with no federal funding whatsoever. The system did receive federal funding after the Washington Metro fired up, however. There was at least one instance in the late 70's where Metro was nearly killed, even after the red line and part of the orange/blue line had begun operation. Obviously very difficult geography dictated the need for big-time rail in San Francisco but it didn't appear at the same time as the early east coast systems because the city was physically small and well-served by its streetcar system (which included a few tunnels) and the technology and need didn't quite exist for the transbay tunnel. San Francisco is still served by its streetcar/light rail system (Muni) and then BART is like the Washington Metro in that it functions somewhat like commuter rail.
MARTA suffers from similar funding problems and the downtown subway is looking shabby. The suburban counties keep playing games and nobody wants to get serious. If it costs money, people make excuses. But if it's "free", politicians jump all over it. The interestates were "free", esp in Cincinnati where the subway and canal ROW's served as so much of the 10% local match. Meanwhile even LA subway, with the benefit of being entirely within LA county, has been stymied by the outrageous tunneling ban spurred by methane fears. It might have been lifted recently, I don't keep up on it too closely.
|
|
|
|
