Skip to main content

Public transit CEOs highlight urgent need to invest in aging US public transportation systems

CEOs of large, mid-size and small public US transportation systems attending a press call as part of National Infrastructure Week have sounded the alarm for the urgent need to increase infrastructure investment in America's public transportation systems. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) cited a US$86 billion backlog in deferred maintenance and replacement needs with more than 40 per cent of buses and 25 per cent of rail transit assets in marginal or poor condition, according to the latest data
May 23, 2016 Read time: 2 mins
CEOs of large, mid-size and small public US transportation systems attending a press call as part of National Infrastructure Week have sounded the alarm for the urgent need to increase infrastructure investment in America's public transportation systems.
 
The 2023 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) cited a US$86 billion backlog in deferred maintenance and replacement needs with more than 40 per cent of buses and 25 per cent of rail transit assets in marginal or poor condition, according to the latest data from 2013.  At the same time, with ridership increasing by 37 per cent since 1995, public transit systems are challenged to increase service and capacity.   

"After decades of inadequate investment, the American public transportation infrastructure is crumbling," said American Public Transportation Association (APTA) chair Valarie J. McCall, who serves on the board of the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA).  "This neglect demands attention at all levels of government so that public transit can continue to help grow communities and businesses."

"As public transportation has experienced tremendous growth over the last two decades, public transit systems are struggling to maintain aging and outdated infrastructure while at the same time being challenged to expand capacity," said APTA acting president and CEO Richard White.  "While Congress's passage of the federal FAST Act was a step in the right direction, the job is still not done because we are woefully behind in investing in our infrastructure. Estimates to meet current national public transportation demand will require a capital investment of US$43 billion annually over six years by all levels of government.  Currently, the US invests US$17.7 billion annually."

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • US high-speed rail debate revisited
    August 18, 2014
    Two recent columns in the New York Times have revived the semi-dormant debate about the future of high-speed rail in America, according to an article by Innovation Briefs. The first column, by New York Times correspondent Ron Nixon, casts a sceptical eye on the Administration's high-speed rail program and concludes that "despite the administration spending nearly US$11 billion since 2009....the projects have gone mostly nowhere..." The second column, closely following the first, is an opinion piece by
  • Transition to Shared Mobility: How cities can deliver inclusive transport services
    June 2, 2017
    A new study released by the International Transport Forum (ITF) examines how cities can manage the challenges of geographical scale and transition to shared mobility services.
  • DG MOVE’s Christos Economou on the EU’s vision for road transport
    July 26, 2013
    Christos Economou, Deputy Head of Unit dealing with land transport within the European Commission’s DG MOVE, describes a new framework for road charging in Europe to Jason Barnes. Within the European Union (EU), two Directives shape the legislative framework on road charging. Directive 1999/62/EC sets up a number of rules to make sure that national road charging schemes do not distort competition on the internal market or discriminate between hauliers. It is misleadingly called ‘Eurovignette’ after the comm
  • A global standard for enforcement systems – is it necessary?
    May 30, 2013
    Jason Barnes speaks to leading figures from the automated enforcement sector about whether a truly international standard for automated enforcement systems is necessary or can ever be achieved. Recent reports of further press controversy in the US over automated enforcement (see ‘Focusing on accuracy?’, ITS International raise again the issue of standards and what constitutes ‘good enough’ in terms of system accuracy and overall solution effectiveness. Comparatively, automated enforcement has always expe