Interstate High Speed Rail and Rapid Transit

To reduce Highway & Hub Airport congestion, air pollution and help slow Global Warming, America needs better Metro Heavy Rail, Metro Automated Rail, Metro Light Rail & Bus Rapid Transit lines complementing growth in High-Speed Rail, Modernized Regional Rail & Modernized Commuter Rail. Rapid Transit Culture must spread across America like it has in Europe and Asia — Thomas Dorsey, Soul Of America

Rapid Transit Naming Conventions

Before a mild dive into America’s Rapid Transit needs, some naming conventions and a nod to Europe’s Rapid Transit infrastructure are in order.

Depending on the naming convention of each American transit agency, “Metro Rail” means Metro Heavy Rail, Metro Light Rail or both. Metro Light Rail having often called “Light Rail” in America, is called “Tram” in Europe. Since commuters use all forms of transit, Commuter Rail is more accurately called “Suburban Rail” in Europe.

Recently, a number of transit agencies started calling modernized Commuter Rail, “Regional Rail.” I disagree though Regional Rail is related to Suburban Rail because they share track and station infrastructure. In Europe, Regional Rail has much longer distance between stops, includes luggage space, and often runs up to 186 miles (300 kilometers).

Modernized Regional Rail is the status most Amtrak lines need to become. Amtrak Regional lines are more accurately categorized as a mode of Intercity Passenger Rail.

Since the 1974 Oil Embargo, Europe has accelerated Suburban Rail & Regional Rail modernization by replacing diesel-powered locomotives with electric trains that do not emit air pollution, thereby allowing stations to be more attractive for eateries, coffeehouses and shops.

Since the 1990s, they’ve been adding railroad over/underpasses, closing small streets, and raising station platforms level with train floors for faster passenger entry & exit. As a result, their trains run at higher speeds, frequencies, schedule reliability, and safety.

Western Europe is on pace, by 2045, to have all Suburban Rail modernized to support 81-93 mph (130-150 kph) and Regional Rail modernized to support 99-137 mph (160-220 kph) Top Speeds.

In North America, Toronto, Montreal, San Francisco Bay Area, Philadelphia, Chicago, Boston, and Baltimore-Washington Commuter Rail upgrade projects are conflating Europe’s Modernized Suburban Rail naming convention by calling them “Regional Rail” upgrades. I prefer to call them “Modernized Commuter Rail” to differentiate from Amtrak Regional upgrading to “Modernized Regional Rail.”

Mexico City bucks that trend by calling its electric trains serving suburban commuters, “Tren Suburbano”, which is most like “Modernized Suburban Rail.”

Rapid Transit Modes in North America

Commuter Rail

In America, most commuter trains run on railway shared with freight trains or Amtrak trains. Much of that railway has 1-track segments limiting the speed and the frequency of trains traveling in opposite directions.

Commuter Rail supports 25-40 mph Average Speeds but has lower schedule reliability, because autos & people cross tracks at too many places and often lacks automated train control. They typically run 1 per hour Peak and every 2 hours Off-Peak.

By 2030, most U.S. commuter trains will use diesel-electric locomotives for lower smog & greenhouse gas emissions, but that falls well short of our need.

Construction Cost Per Mile is very low and Operational Cost Per Mile is low, matching its “Bargain Basement” service level.

Modernized Commuter Rail

Modernized Commuter Rail requires electric trains that accelerate & brake faster and automated train control for safety. It has 2 Main Tracks plus intermittent Siding Track for skip-stop passenger trains to pass by or freight trains to pull aside.

In North America, most electric commuter trains draw current by extending pantographs to overhead electric wire. In NYC metro area, some electric commuter trains draw current from a 3rd rail. Electric commuter trains run at 35-55 mph Average Speeds depending on number of stops per mile.

Modernized Commuter Rail has more railroad over/underpasses and street closures for higher safety & schedule reliability, along with 8-30 minute train frequency. Station platforms support 6-12 cabin trains for 600-1800 rider capacity per train.

Since station platforms level with train floors enable faster entry & exit to save 1-2 minutes per stop, Montreal, Toronto, Chicago, NYC, Newark, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore-Washington, San Francisco-San Jose, and Los Angeles already have or plan to add them in Commuter Rail modernization programs.

Construction Cost Per Mile is Medium because they are already have rail Rights-Of-Way; Operational Cost Per Mile is Low-to-Medium, depending on train frequency.

Metro Heavy Rail

Metro Heavy Rail Trains draw current from a 3rd rail and station platforms are level with train floors. Most systems have Automated Train Control, but still utilize drivers. Viaducts, tunnels and fencing completely separate trains from automobiles & pedestrians for 25-40 mph Average Speeds and high schedule dependability.

Stations are large to support 5-11 cabin trains having 900-2400 rider capacity. Commuters like their 4-8 minute Peak frequency and 8-15 minute Off-Peak frequency. A single Metro Heavy Rail line can transport 4-5 times more commuters per hour than a 6-lane freeway.

New York City and Mexico City have, by far, the two highest ridership Metro Heavy Rail systems in North America. Toronto and Montreal Metro Heavy Rail systems are next. When Washington, Chicago and Boston Metro Heavy Rail increase train frequencies again, anticipate their ridership approaching Toronto and Montreal systems. Los Angeles Metro Heavy Rail lines will get a ridership boost as it expands and increases frequency over 2026-28.

Construction Cost Per Mile is high and Operational Cost Per Mile is high. But when ridership is high, Benefits over Costs are high.

Metro Light Rail

Metro Light Rail Trains draw current by extending pantographs to overhead electric wire. Boston, Seattle, Houston, Portland, Sacramento, St. Louis, Charlotte & Phoenix have low station platforms level with train floors, while other Metro Light Rail systems have high station platforms level with train floors.

They have dedicated lanes and portions of lines have over/underpasses and street closures to reduce roadway crossings for 18-35 mph Average Speeds. Traffic Signal Priority can reduce travel times on surface-running Metro Light Rail/Trams by 10-15%. Recently, some Metro Light Rail systems in America have begun employing Traffic Signal Priority at some roadway crossings.

To support 2-4 cabin trains, Stations are small-to-medium size (200-400 feet). A cabin can hold 175 riders for 350-525 rider capacity/train. In 2026, most Metro Light Rail trains in America have improved to 4-10 minutes Peak frequency, 8-20 minutes Off-Peak frequency.

Construction Cost Per Mile is medium; Operational Cost Per Mile is medium.

Metro Automated Rail

Transit industry has not settled on one name for this technology. Though I call it “Metro Automated Rail”, others call it “Automated Light Metro“, “Driverless Trains” or “Automated Transit Operation.”

Metro Automated Rail trains combine Metro Heavy Rail and Metro Light Rail features, but are driverless. Technicians at transit operation centers remotely monitor their trains.

Station platforms are not only level with train floors, they feature Platform Screen Doors synchronized with train door openings & closings for safety.

Like Metro Heavy Rail, most Metro Automated Rail draws electricity from a 3rd rail. They have viaducts, tunnels and fencing to completely separate from automobiles & pedestrians. They produce 25-40 mph Average Speeds, depending on number of stops per mile.

Like better Metro Light Rail systems, stations are large enough for 3-4 cabin trains for lower station construction cost than Metro Heavy Rail stations. Each 175-rider-cabin has an open-gangway to other cabins for 525-700 rider capacity/train. The automated Paris Metro Line 14 is an exception with much longer trains and stations.

Commuters love their 2-3 minute Peak frequency, 4-6 minute Off-Peak frequency and very high schedule dependability.

Metro Automated Rail’s Construction Cost Per Mile is less than Metro Heavy Rail, but higher than Metro Light Rail; Driver cost is zero for Metro Automated Rail, but Technical cost is higher, but yielding a Low Operational Cost per Rider.

Due to so many features that attract ridership, many Rapid Transit advocates now lobby for Metro Automated Rail, rather than new Metro Heavy Rail or Metro Light Rail projects.

In North America and Hawaii, Vancouver, Montreal, Queens-JFK Airport, and Honolulu have Metro Automated Rail systems. In 2026, Toronto and Ottawa are converting Commuter Rail lines to Metro Automated Rail and Monterrey (Mexico) is constructing a new one. Los Angeles and NYC recently committed to build Metro Automated Rail lines.

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

BRT requires Dedicated Busway and has fewer over/underpasses and street closures than Metro Light Rail. Many have colored lanes to distinguish from other roadway lanes, pedestrian bulbs for safety, and covered stations for commuters.

In North America, many BRT systems have a percentage of traffic lanes shared with automobiles and few have Traffic Signal Priority for 12-20 mph Average Speeds.

BRT has 60-80 rider capacity. Station platforms may or may not be level with bus floors and cyclists loading bikes increase entry & exit times.

BRT systems typically run at 6-10 minutes Peak frequency, 12-20 minutes Off-Peak frequency.

Construction Cost Per Mile is low. Due to fewer  passengers per driver than Metro Light Rail and high maintenance costs for buses, Operational Cost Per Mile is high.

By 2040, a large percentage American BRT systems will transition to electric power, increasing their Actual Construction Costs Per Mile much closer to Metro Light Rail. Inflation makes electric conversions more expensive than building Metro Light Rail at the outset. A prime example is the Los Angeles Metro BRT Orange Line in San Fernando Valley.

Though BRT with 100% Dedicated Busway and Traffic Signal Priority for 18-20 mph Average Speed is cost-effective for many 2-5 mile corridors, some transit agencies are unwisely seduced into building BRT in longer corridors with planned conversion to Metro Light Rail later.

Streetcars

Streetcars are not Rapid Transit. Vintage Streetcars in New Orleans, San Francisco, Dallas, Savannah, Tampa and Memphis have been good for tourism but transport less than 60 riders per car and run at low frequencies. Excluding Toronto, San Francisco and New Orleans, no Streetcars in North America run better than 15 minute frequencies, nor have multiple lines for significant urban coverage.

Modern Streetcars in America have longer distances between stops like Trams in Europe, but typically run in mixed traffic like local buses and do NOT have signal priority at roadway crossings. Average Speed is 8-11 mph. In 1-2 car configuration, Modern Streetcars have 60-120 rider capacity.

Over 2027-30, Philadelphia is converting its Vintage Streetcars to low-platform Metro Light Rail with higher capacities and frequencies.

Toronto has a large Multi-Streetcar system that attracts 224,000 daily ridership. San Francisco Streetcar & Cable Car system attracts 15,000 daily ridership. Other Streetcar systems in North America attract only 600 to 9,000 daily ridership.

Highways Wrecked Many Black, Brown & Poor White Communities

American Auto Culture came into dominance just after World War II, when more national and state highways sprouted around America. Buses began their swift replacement of streetcars. The Highway Lobby and sympathetic politicians abused Auto Culture to convince most American voters that we only needed new highways and boulevards.

In the late 1940s, many states began highway projects. Many cities and counties accelerated boulevard projects.

In 1956, federal funding of the Interstate Highway System supercharged middle-class White Flight, Suburban Sprawl, and the death of Streetcars. That federal policy promoted matching funds and property Rights-of-Way from states & counties,

The primary beneficiaries were white veterans using the GI Bill to purchase new homes in the suburbs. The direct results were middle-class White Flight and suburban sprawl.

By constructing the nation’s largest freeway network and promoting it in movies and on television, LA became the poster child for Highway Expansion and Suburban Sprawl that spread Americans further from downtown offices, retail, colleges, and medical centers. Other metro areas embraced LA’s approach, which  increased Vehicle Miles Traveled from suburbs.

A side effect was destruction of stable Black & Brown communities plus some poor White communities by plowing new highways through them. But unlike white communities, over a million Black & Brown veterans from World War II were denied full benefits from the GI Bill to gain a measure of benefit from suburban homes.

By 1962, the Kennedy Administration noticed that “Highway Expansion-Suburban Sprawl-Middle-Income White Flight” was draining tax revenue and retail jobs from the nation’s big cities. Unfortunately, JFK did not have sufficient influence to convince Congress to fund Urban Mass Transit projects before his tragic November 1963 assassination.

In summer 1964, the Johnson Administration convinced Congress to honor one of JFK’s policies by introducing the Urban Mass Transit Administration and commit to future funding for a dozen Metro Heavy Rail projects in big cities.

When the Vietnam War ramped up in 1965, however, Rapid Transit funding was cut. Only NYC, Boston, Chicago, Washington, Baltimore, San Francisco-Oakland, and Miami proceeded with new Metro Heavy Rail projects or system upgrades. Los Angeles, Seattle, Houston and Cleveland canceled new Metro Heavy Rail  projects. Atlanta received Seattle’s project funding.

In contrast, Interstate Highway funding continued without slowdown. As more stable low-to-middle-income urban communities were mutilated by freeways in the 1960s-70s, higher smog and lower home values chased away middle income residents in the 1970s-80s. Was it worth it?

Since our federal, state & county politicians never fund Rapid Transit projects on par with Highway projects, even NYC falls short of a “Rapid Transit Mesh Network” that per square mile coverage on par with Paris or Tokyo. A prime example is the recently approved Brooklyn-Queens Interborough Express should have been completed by 2000.

Today, commuters ride wider congested freeways for lower Peak Hour speeds that sap our economic productivity. We need more cars per household to commute to work, hospitals, colleges and shopping areas. Highway and boulevard congestion keep smog & greenhouse gas emissions high despite more Remote Work, Electric & Hybrid Vehicles.

Population growth, More Cars Per Household, Excessive Highway Widening, and Suburban Sprawl are increasing Vehicle Miles Traveled. Metro area highways that used to average 25-30 mph at Peak Hour have dipped to 18-21 mph at Peak Hour.

San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, Washington, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Phoenix, Miami, San Diego, Seattle, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Denver, and Minneapolis metro areas have proven that highway widening beyond 8 lanes induces more suburban sprawl and Vehicle Miles Traveled only 2-3 years later. Hence, building 20-26 lane freeways like Houston and Dallas is insane on the membrane.

Nor will Autonomous Vehicles solve highway congestion in the next 50 years as this article by The Conversation explains.

Excessive Highway Widening, Anathema to Rapid Transit

From 1964 to 1974 during the Vietnam War, our federal, state & county politicians maintained a high percentage of funding for Highway (and Hub Airport) expansion, but cut Rapid Transit project funding. After the Vietnam War, Rapid Transit project funding never reached the inflation-adjusted levels promised in 1964.

This chart by TheTransportPolitic.com only covers 2010-19, but accurately characterizes America’s 1964-2025 Highway over-investment compared to Rapid Transit under-investment.

Highway Expansion has interconnected America’s metro areas and formed “Highway Mesh Networks” within metro areas having 2M+ population. Arguably, that expansion has been good for our macro-economy despite destruction of many urban communities..

The Fools Gold of Excessive Highway Widening, however, increases traffic congestion, smog & greenhouse gas emissions by inducing more Vehicle Miles Traveled and suburban sprawl further distant from city centers. Excessive Highway Widening also undermined Rapid Transit project funding and ridership in high activity corridors.

America’s Lack of Rapid Transit Mesh Networks

When one examines the high-ridership Rapid Transit systems of Europe and Asia, we can deduce that 2 million population metro area needs at least 8 Rapid Transit lines radiating & criss-crossing the city center to major activity centers. Call it a “Rapid Transit Mesh Network.” Excluding 21-million pop. NYC Metro Area, only 6 American metro areas have 8+ Rapid Transit lines of any type forming a Mesh Network:

10M pop. Chicago Metro Area – 8 Heavy Rail, 12 Commuter Rail lines
4.9M pop. Boston Metro Area – 3 Heavy Rail, 11 Commuter Rail, 5 Light Rail lines
6.1M pop. Philadelphia Metro Area – 3 Heavy Rail, 12 Commuter Rail, 4 Light Rail lines
6.3M pop. Washington Metro Area – 6 Metro Heavy Rail, 5 Commuter Rail, 1 Light Rail (u/c) lines
7.5M pop. San Francisco Bay Area 5 Metro Heavy Rail, 3 Commuter Rail, 8 Metro Light Rail lines
19.0M pop. Los Angeles Metro Area – 2 Metro Heavy Rail, 7 Commuter Rail, 4 Metro Light Rail lines

Like robust Highway (freeway & tollway) Mesh Networks, it takes decades to build robust Rapid Transit Mesh Networks. Chicago, Boston, and Philadelphia have partial Rapid Transit Mesh Networks because most of their infrastructure completed before 1946. Washington and San Francisco Bay Area have continuously attracted federal and state funding since 1964 to form partial Rapid Transit Mesh Networks.

Cleveland opened its first Metro Heavy Rail line in 1955. Atlanta, Baltimore, and Miami opened their first Metro Heavy Rail lines in the 1970s-80s. In 1981, San Diego opened America’s first Metro Light Rail line.

President Reagan’s Transportation policy easily ignored most Metro Heavy Rail projects because racist attitudes at state & county levels would not approve 40-45% state & county matching funds attract 55-60% federal funds over 1981-92. A handful of metro areas downscaled projects to less expensive Metro Light Rail lines instead of Metro Heavy Rail. U.S. Metro Light Rail systems expanded at a snail’s pace.

Recently, many counties have voted for sale tax-funded Rapid Transit projects. Even with Metro Light Rail lines under construction/operating in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Dallas, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Houston, Phoenix, Denver, Seattle, San Diego, Portland, Cleveland, St. Louis, Sacramento, Pittsburgh, Salt Lake City, Charlotte, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Newark, Buffalo, and Norfolk, they aren’t expanding to form Rapid Transit Mesh Networks fast enough.

The culprits are mainly severe federal under-funding that does not trigger more state & county funds and nuisance lawsuit delays by NIMBYs.

Most cities are building Metro Light Rail as a lower Construction Cost substitute for Metro Heavy Rail. They should consider Metro Automated Rail in high activity corridors and Metro Light Rail in medium activity corridors.

Though many politicians appreciate Streetcar’s ability to attract nearby Transit-Oriented Development, that mode shares traffic lanes with automobiles and is too slow, low capacity, low frequency to attract high ridership.

That is why it’s disappointing to see Washington, Atlanta, Salt Lake City, and Charlotte add Modern Streetcars, rather than expand existing Metro Heavy Rail or Metro Light Rail systems. Nor should Detroit, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Kansas City, Tempe, Tucson, and Oklahoma City promote Modern Streetcar lines as substitutes for Metro Light Rail.

High Frequency & Vibrant Station Areas, Critical for Ridership

After Rapid Transit Mesh Networks cover most activity centers in a metro area, high frequency train schedules are the next most important factor to attract ridership.

In France, I like the examples in Paris, Lyon, Marseille, and Toulouse where Metro Rail and Trams run at 3-4 minute Peak frequencies and 6-8 minute Off-peak frequencies. They assure riders who miss a train, that the next one is coming shortly. Suburban Rail at 12-15 minute frequencies also reassures commuters to switch from driving.

Excluding NYC, Los Angeles, San Francisco Bay Area and Chicago metro areas, America’s Metro Heavy Rail/Metro Automated Rail projects have halted for now.

Metro and Tram lines in Europe go to business centers, dense residential districts, medical centers, colleges, and sports venues. Typically, their Metro and Tram stations have surrounding cafes & shops. Commuters often enjoy going to “places”, not just Point A to Point B.

Most European children have been conditioned to commute on Rapid Transit. As adults, driving is feels optional to them, so most highways remain 4-6 lanes which are less costly to maintain than wider highways in America and Canada. Their cities need fewer soul-sucking parking lots.

Vibrant Rapid Transit Mesh Networks in Europe

How many rapid transit lines are appropriate for our large & medium metro areas? American metro areas should follow the best practices of European metro areas.

After the 1973 OPEC Oil Embargo, European metro areas have been upgrading their Suburban Rail, expanding Metro Heavy Rail, and Trams to form mesh networks that attract over 60% of commuters. Aside from Paris, several rail maps linked below demonstrate successful Rapid Transit Mesh Networks by population size in Europe:

1.1M Nice metro area – 3 Trams, 3 Suburban Rail lines
2.3M Lyon metro area – 4 Heavy Rail, 7 Trams, 5 Suburban Rail lines
3.2M Rome metro area – 3 Heavy Rail, 3 Trams, 7 Suburban Rail lines
4.7M Berlin metro area – 9 Heavy Rail, 24 Suburban Rail lines
4.9M Milan metro area – 7 Heavy Rail, 9 Suburban Rail lines
6.0M Madrid metro area – 12 Heavy Rail, 3 Trams, 9 Suburban Rail lines
14.7M London metro area – 11 Heavy Rail, 3 Tram, 15+ Suburban Rail  lines

Vibrant Rapid Transit Mesh Network Still Possible in America

Rapid Transit Mesh Networks in the medium & large metro areas of France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK enable people to average significantly fewer Vehicle Miles Traveled by car because they have high-frequency, comprehensive of coverage. Their Rapid Transit Mesh Networks have formed a Transit Culture that rivals Automotive Culture in metro areas.

One example of Rapid Transit benefits in Europe’s largest metro areas is they place residents within 1/4 to 1/3 mile of a Metro Rail or Tram Station and 1/4 to 3 miles from Suburban Rail, Regional Rail and sometimes, High-Speed Rail stations. They enhance large stations to form vibrant Intermodal Transit Centers with more retail, dining and passenger amenities.

America lacks commitment to build Rapid Transit in metro areas. As of 2025, America’s Top 53 Metro Areas have 1+ million population. Our Top 36 Metro Areas have 2+ million population. Yet most have no Metro Heavy Rail or few more than 1-2 Metro Light Rail lines.

Our 1.0-1.9 million population metro areas should have 2 to 3 Metro Light rail lines. Those at 2-2.9 million population should have 3-4 Metro Heavy Rail/Metro Automated Rail lines, 2-3 Metro Light Rail lines and 1-2 Modernized Commuter Rail lines. Our 3-5 million population metro areas should have 4-6 Metro Heavy Rail/Metro Automated Rail lines, 3-4 Metro Light Rail lines and 1-2 Modernized Commuter Rail lines. We should have robust Rapid Transit Mesh Networks in 5+ million population metro areas.

NYC anchors America’s only metro area with a Transit Culture that attracts 55% of daily commuters. It has a hyper-dense population that supports 24 Metro Heavy Rail lines, 12+ Commuter Rail lines, and 2 Light Rail lines that attract very high ridership per mile. NYC Rapid Transit saved taxpayer money by avoiding 3-to-4 times more land-taking for highway lanes and avoiding more highway tunnels & bridges.

Making Rapid Transit a Funding Priority

In 1998, NYC Grand Central Terminal transformed into an Intermodal Transportation Center bustling with retail & hotel activity. Opened in 2003, AirTrain between Queens and JFK Airport in NYC became America’s first Automated Heavy Rail line. phase 1 of Second Avenue Subway (Metro) opened in 2017 and Phase 2 expands to Harlem in 2032.

In 2021, Moynihan Hall expanded New York Penn Station capacity and features HSR, Regional Rail, Commuter Rail, and Metro Heavy Rail that attract very high ridership. It joins the awe-inspiring Grand Central Terminal and World Trade Center Transportation Hub. NYC Metro Heavy Rail is advancing towards 3-6 minute frequencies and modernizing Commuter Rail towards 10-15-minute frequencies, helping NYC be America’s most visited international destination.

Chicago has been modernizing Metro Heavy Rail for over a decade. Now it’s expanding a long-delayed Metro Heavy Rail line, modernizing Commuter Rail, and building a BRT circulator connecting Amtrak, Metro Heavy Rail & Commuter Rail lines. More recently, it plans to upgrade Chicago Union Station and connect underground with Oglivie Transit Center for convenient transfers between those transportation modes.

Boston South Station, an Intermodal Transportation Center, is upgrading  with more office & retail space to better host more Amtrak HSR & Regional Rail, Modernized Commuter Rail, Metro Heavy Rail, Metro Light Rail, Intercity Bus passengers. Boston recently extended 2 Metro Light Rail lines, and is modernizing Metro Heavy Rail and Commuter Rail stations.

Philadelphia 30th Street Station, an Intermodal Transportation Center, is upgrading with more office & retail space to better host more Amtrak HSR & Regional Rail, Metro Heavy Rail, Metro Light Rail, and Intercity Bus passengers. Philadelphia is also modernizing Metro Heavy Rail and Commuter Rail infrastructure to provide better service.

Washington Union Station is upgrading its intermodal transportation center with residential, office & retail space over its tracks to better host Amtrak HSR & Regional Rail, Commuter Rail, Metro Heavy Rail, and Intercity Buses. Maryland and Virginia Commuter Rail modernization and a Metro Light Rail line in the northern suburbs should complete in the early 2030s.

Urban & transportation planners educated citizens to make San Francisco one of the earliest cities to halt destruction from excessive freeways, repair urban communities and accelerate Rapid Transit projects. Though the pandemic accelerated Remote Work that decimated Transit ridership, in 2026, San Francisco transit ridership is steadily recovering.

San Francisco’s Salesforce Transit Center is situated only 1.5 blocks from Metro Heavy Rail (BART), Metro Light Rail, Vintage Streetcars & Cable Cars, and 3 blocks from trans-bay Ferries. By 2032-33, a short rail tunnel will enter Salesforce Transit Center for electric commuter trains and later, high-speed trains, while BART extends to downtown San Jose’s Intermodal Transportation Center. Transit ridership will likely return to pre-COVID levels by 2032-33.

In 2025, LAX Metro Transit Center opened for Metro Light Rail connections to Inglewood, Leimert Park Village, Santa Monica, Culver City, USC, and downtown LA. In 2026, a Metro Light Rail line expanded and the LAX Airport People Mover opens to LAX Metro Transit Center. One Metro Heavy Rail line extends to Los Angles Museum District, Beverly Hills & Century City. By 2028, a Metro Heavy Rail extends to Westwood near UCLA to support the 2028 Los Angeles Summer Olympic Village.

Over 2029-50, more Metro Light Rail lines open. More electrification and railroad over/underpasses will modernize Commuter Rail and Amtrak Regional Rail heading to upgraded Los Angeles Union Station. In fact, Los Angeles is building & upgrading more Rapid Transit mileage than any other North American metro area as it heads towards a Rapid Transit Mesh Network similar to this vision map.

Must Prioritize Rapid Transit in Metro Areas Across America

America should not have false pride based on limited Rapid Transit construction in 7 of our largest metro areas. Despite being the world’s richest and only superpower after World War II, America is woefully behind.

Japan, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, and UK already have dozens of Rapid Transit Mesh Networks. Nor does our Rapid Transit progress compare to hundreds of miles opening in China, India, Egypt and Turkey. On the chart below, 200 kilometers equates to 124 miles and America is building less than 50 combined miles of Metro Heavy Rail & Metro Light Rail in 2026.

Only Los Angeles will expand a Metro Heavy Rail line a few miles. Only Los Angeles, Seattle & St. Louis will expand Metro Light Rail lines. America’s 2024-25 expansions/openings were essentially the same. In 2026, no Modernized Commuter Rail completions are slated in America.

In total, that’s shamefully low Rapid Transit progress in the world’s richest nation.

Yonah Freemark of The Transport Politic and Urban Institute studied the importance of Rapid Transit and increasing local bus frequency in 100,000+ population urban areas. His study reveals a strong correlation between people with no Rapid Transit access and low-frequency local bus service to higher unemployment levels. Consider that correlation as America’s Top 70 Metro Areas sprint to 2+ million by 2050.

To avoid cutting local bus service while expanding Modernized Commuter Rail, Metro Heavy Rail, Metro Automated Rail, and Metro Light Rail projects, America needs at least $110 billion of annual combined federal, state & county Transit funding. If we invest wisely, Rapid Transit and local buses can attract 25-40% of daily commutes in our Top 70 Metro Areas by 2050, with NYC growing to 60-65%.

Like the billions spent each year on Highway safety & trash removal, we need larger funds spent on Rapid Transit safety & cleanliness. For example, ride the Paris Metro to be impressed at station cleanliness. Highly visible transit police and many station cameras allow women and the elderly to feel safe riding it, at least up to 11pm. Your only major concern is pickpockets on crowded Paris Metro trains.

In summary, America must accelerate Rapid Transit infrastructure progress and be complementary partners to High-Speed Rail and Regional Rail projects described in Part 6.

Part 6: Interstate High Speed Rail Progress