Couple points - though Rochester, NY is a small city, there was still much going on here at the time the Subway was proposed and built. When the subway was active, there was more than just Gannett Newspapers. Remember, Kodak's headquarters was (and still is) in Rochester, as well as major manufacturing by Bausch & Lomb, and Xerox. So there was definitely reason for optimism at the time. As for other works, the city recently "filled in" part of the belt highway system (the "Inner Loop") to become local residences. So major infrastructure changes still do occur in the city.
They failed to mention that the subway was important to Gannett because they used it for rail delivery of newsprint. Infact the main purpose of the subway was to facilitate local freight deliveries. Trolley car passenger service was almost a secondary use. Freight use contunued decades after passenger service ended.
The last remaining Rochester Subway Car, no 60, is at the Rochester & Genesee Valley Railroad Museum. There is a picture of it under restoration on their website.
One of the unique aspects of the Erie Canel is that its original path took it OVER the Genesee River on a bridge that was filled with water. The traffic never touched the Genesee River as it passed through Rochester.
I filmed a documentary on these tunnels a couple years ago, has a really creepy experience with someone else down there. It was around 2 in the morning when we were there and somebody was prowling about, and I think they ran away into the sewers. It was a cool place to visit
Is that available on your channel? I’ve been deep into the lines down there. Places that nobody has seen in decades. A couple buddy’s and I along with a fourth new person we hired who had a certain necessary skill to get us through some barriers, went in a few years ago. We left it closed up again when we were done so nobody would get hurt down there. I would like to see where you went and what you found.
We also had electric train running from Rochester to Canandaigua in the early 1903. Rochester and Eastern Rapid Railway. I wish it were still around as I would rather take that to school and work than drive all the time
Been watching you for a while now super cool to see you cover my local area let alone it being something that’s fascinated me for awhile and a place I’ve spent plenty of time exploring. Keep up the great work
As a kid, I used to visit my cousins in Rochester and well I used to remember seeing these weird looking spots all over the city. Didn't know until You made this video when answered my question after all these years
Same for me…when I was young I would stay summers with my cousins in Irondequoit and I remember seeing this too around Rochester. Glad this video cleared that up for me and you!
Having spent a chunk of my life in Rochester, thank you for this video. By the time I was around, the subway tunnels were an urbex attraction. I would love to see them be put to use as a gallery.
Excellent discussion about the Rochester subway tunnels! As someone who was born, and has lived most of my life, in the area I grew up on stories of the subway and the abandoned tunnels. I wholly support refurbishment, as I definitely feel it is not only part of Rochester history, but New York and US history.
General Motors gets some credit for killing the Roc subway. GM pressured local leaders to use GM busses and construction of "the suburbs" pretty much guaranteed car culture. If only Rochester had continued, improved and expanded the subway system, Rochester could have a great, state of the art public transportation system. A subway made and makes so much sense in Rochester because of our winter weather with lots of snow.
Not sure why the Rochester subway operating at a loss keeps getting mentioned, New York City's subway and bus system has always operated at a loss. That's usually how public transportation works-it's subsidized by taxpayers.
I used this line as a boy in the early 1950s from Brighton into central Rochester an easy walk from our house across a railroad track and through bushes.
Thanks, Ryan. I agree in principle: with effective oversight, public transportation should not be seen as a for profit business. The greater good and ultimately reduced infrastructure costs (compared to endless road construction and maintenance) should be funded by indirect beneficiaries.
@@heatshield absolutely, I used to use some of them but I was aware that the portions that I used were a small fragment of the full system that was thought of.
No they do not and they will not actually be able to efficiently carry out their emergency purposes WITHOUT public transit either: In an emergency situation where people have to evacuate an area **fast**, if there is only one way to evacuate then that mode of transport gets overburdened. This has been seen with hurricane evacuations where they have to turn the opposing highway/freeway lanes in the opposite direction for more capacity and it still gets busy in a lot of cases even with several days of notice. Freeways/highways being used in conjunction with rail systems get more people around and far faster. Even in an every day situation, if there is an alternative that isn't driving, people will take it which is less cars on the road for police, firefighters, and ambulance drivers to deal with. We can more effectively respond to emergencies.
It's not that they don't make a profit, it's that they always operate at a loss which is inevitably placed on the backs of the taxpayers. Rochester was still paying for the cost of the subway long after operations ceased.
@@StLouis-yu9iz They are. Gas taxes are used to offset those costs. Everyone who uses the roadways contributes to their maintenance, unlike light rail maintenance. Lmao.
Now that you've ventured into upstate NY history, you should look into the Buffalo Central Terminal, the Pan-American exposition (where McKinley was shot and killed, and the Olmstead Park Conservancy(Which was created after Olmstead realized how badly he messed up building central park in NYC), and i'm sure you can find interesting stories about Syracuse as well.
Ryan, you asked if public transportation should be subsidized; my answer is a resounding yes, if the plans for it can be determined to be beneficial to the community as a whole. Not everyone can afford to drive; senior citizens like myself may have needs to get around but don't necessarily want to drive (or perhaps shouldn't be driving). Public transit also has environmental benefits too.
Public transport was always supposed to be just that - inexpensive transportation for the masses. It's supposed to be more environmentally friendly and used in combination with other forms of travel. In European countries, public transport is so good that in some cites, no one drives cars because it's faster to use public transport.
Yes exactly this. But before even going that far there are also non-direct financial benefits, for example by bringing in customers and workers to businesses, who then earn money or more money, which is then later taxed. It is not just about fare receipts.
In my area seniors and the disabled already have subsidized public transit mind you this is in a Red State. It is a Paratransit bus system. And from what I heard this is available in many cities it's just not reported as much on because it's far less visible. The people don't know that we subsidize major freight railroads and mass transit in the U.S. quite a bit. They also don't know or in the case of many "enlightened" urbanists refuse to acknowledge that the economic benefits of highway systems.
@@joeblow5214 in economics, there is the concept known as an externality, which is a cost not counted in a price tag. The difference between transit and cars is that cars produce negative externalities, and transit produces positive externalities. Due to the nature of the externalities, cars are a demerit good, much like cigarettes, gasoline, fast food, and firearms, whereas transit is a merit good, like single payer healthcare, welfare programs, or education. Additionally, blue states pay more to red states in terms of tax revenue at the federal level, thereby supporting the red state welfare queens who refuse to raise revenues whilst suckling on the federal teat, so perhaps it's time red states to become fiscally literate and vote dem? GDP is an equation that is helped to be raised by government spending (C+I+G+(X-M)), so why argue for the reduction of GDP? People other than seniors or the disabled should be served by public transit.
It's crazy that we ask if public transportation should be subsidized, yet we subsidize private transportation with no questions asked. When a new highway gets built, who pays for it? The taxpayers, no questions asked. Does the road have to be profitable? Of course not. Yet somehow that's a problem when we want to pay for public transit?
Great job! Most of us never heard of the system. Have you done the Cincinnati system? Other guys have, I think. I grew up back east with some familiarity with NYC subways. I'm 80. It's Thu. Sep. 19, 2024. St. Joseph, MO.
Please do a video on the Cincinnati inclines! There is a historical marker for one beside a restaurant (the incline house) good food and definitely worth the stop and view
This is awesome! I’ve been following for years and this is finally a place I’ve explored! I have pictures of some of the graffiti in the beginning! I’m really hoping they don’t re flood it though
An open-air section( though, 15- 20ft. below street level, branch-line To Kodak Park) ran alongside my Grandmother's house. It wasn't filled in until the 70's.
A real shame as not only did Rochester have the subway, as some commented, we started to have trolley's all around the suburbs which are now amazing bike and foot paths, but I for one would love to be able to hop on a trolley to go from the east to west side or up to the lake. A shame....
I think they were referring to Hemlock and Candace lakes - owned by the City of Rochester. Neither quite local, but the gravity fed water system from those lakes to the City was also an engineering feat at the time.
Transit doesn't have to be profitable, it just needs to break even. Subsidies should almost always be avoided as they rarely bring about the public good that would justify the cost.
Rebuild, reuse, reopen... Rochester should reuse as much as it possibly can with high-floor LRT cars like Cleveland, Edmonton, Calgary, Frankfurt... Combine that with land-use intensification and affordable housing and you've just made your city great again...
For me, public transportation should never be a business that needs to be profitable. Of course it shouldn't waste money either but its a service that is for the good of the people, like the fire department or the police.
I think that public transit should be run on an at cost basis, however as part of that it shouldnt just be the income from the line but also the financial gain that is brought to an area
I have photos of when I went down there when was younger. Nothing really down there worth looking at, just scaffolding and tagging. History around it just neat
I’d love to see some content covering subject matter in Canada. Toronto specifically has a rich history of urban development and innovation. To name a few projects and current buildings, The RC Harris Water Treatment Plant or the Prince Edward Viaduct.
In many parts of the world, especially Europe, public transport is seen as a public good, and not necessarily expected to make a profit. Yes, the bottom line may look like a cost, but in the round, there are other benefits that don't appear on the balance sheet. People can take jobs they would otherwise not be able to, because they can reach the workplace easily; motor traffic is kept off the streets, easing pollution, and the knock-on effects on health. On a broader, national scale, effective public transit can reinvigorate towns and cities away from the capital, increasing tourism and allowing people to live in less costly areas, while commuting. With proper planning and facilities, mobility for the disabled can be vastly increased. In London, for example, the new Elizabeth line makes it much easier for people in some parts of the city to access Heathrow airport, or the comercial centre at Canary Wharf, opening up more jobs, or making it a little simpler to take a cheaper flight. In France, some towns actively campaign for a new high speed line to have a station near them, because of the benefits to commuters, or tourism. Improving local transit lines, like my nearest one, where we now have a reliable service every 15 minutes, means way more people use it - up from 408,000 in 1997 to 1.69 million entries and exits in 2022-23. That's a fourfold increase - and each one of those journeys means fewer people using cars. That means fewer people needing to have a car in London, which means savings for individuals in insurance, maintenance, etc, and more money to spend on other things in the local economy. So, yes, just looking at whether or not a specific transit project makes a profit in terms of ticket sales vs cost of construction and operation is one way of considering things. But it seems to me that it's very simplistic. The knock-on effects of regular, reliable public transport mostly don't appear on the balance sheet, but they certainly make a big difference to people's lives.
"On a broader, national scale, effective public transit can reinvigorate towns and cities away from the capital, increasing tourism and allowing people to live in less costly areas, while commuting." This is also a often ignored benefit of highway building. Just a FYI. Heavy rail investment can in certain corridors work very well but in many cases if it isn't also carrying freight it does little to encourage a reduction in overall commuting which would be the ideal plan for any major project with a focus on reinvigorating small towns as companies pay more in local taxes then individual residents.
Maybe Rochester, New York, could take a look at Rochester Minnesota Subway system. They provide a different kind of system instead of with subway cars they underground pathways because of the cold and hot temperatures in Minnesota. This allows small businesses and markets to establish connections to the underground system. It covers some of the costs of this system. Also, being connected to the Mayo medical facility was a big boost with the Subway system. And rise to another system called the skyway system that connects from building to building.
Sad to say but the lack of public transport in Rochester and surrounding areas is pretty sad. It is especially hard for those with no car and for the elderly who do not have the capacity or desire to drive anymore. A subway system servicing all of Rochester and surrounding suburbs would be such a boost to this City. I for one live in Greece, and if I did not have a car I would be completely dependent on Uber or rides from other people. Growing up as I did in the UK, very few people had cars then (in fifties until I left in 69) however we never needed a car as there was all kinds of public transport such as buses, trains and of course our subway. I don't know if Rochester is the only city that is so lacking in public transportation in the US but it is definitely time we had much more access to it than we have at the moment. By all means bring back the subway (And the ferry to Toronto)
Yeah that is due to more land than people so as people move from one place to another some areas lose population and buildings become abandoned or lose their value. This is why there are very few abandoned places in large cities in Texas because they have exploded in new population but why there are so many in North-East US as people have been leaving for better weather and higher income.
the only way i could ever see the subway making a comeback would be if they 1. could make it more efficient than the current bus system and 2. branch it out to surrounding towns like greece, irondiquoit and penfield.
It's funny you did this video. Free4All did a video about exploring the exact tunnels! Thanks for the history lesson. It's their latest video if you wanna watch it.
There’s a lot that’s still accessible if you know where to go. Of course you’re probably right that “most” is demolished or filled but there’s still miles and miles that nobody knows about besides local explorers and we’re not giving it to the world just yet.
Oh I remember going down here when back in like 2013 nothing really special just a quick 20 min walk down the dark tunnel I've since moved out of rochester but I've heard they closed it off or some construction development in downtown?
The public subsidizes highways and roads through taxation. It's sad that those who are against public transportation frequently point to the need for subsidation but ignore the public's subsidizing cars and trucks. Thanks for posting.
Amtrak and US Mail are forced to be profitable per charter despite technically being government entities. If its a public service, it shouldn't be forced to profit. Sure a more expansive service like Amtrak can use money generated from "profitable" routes (Regional, Acela, Borealis) to fund the high margin/"Unprofitable" long distance routes, especially if it means they can get the Cardinal and Sunset Limited to daily operation (although it will mostly like go to getting a second Borealis run and the new "Superliner III's")
Public transport should be seen as a public benefit. Do we expect other infrastructure projects such as roads, bridges and flood walls to make a profit? No, because it benefits everyone in the city in some small way. Almost every great public transport system around the world would never have been built if we expected them to make a profit.
@@jamesstetz9884 That’s why public transit should be public and not private. Private transit companies focus on collecting money rather than providing a service for people. That’s why modern passenger lines are run by the state. Without state funding, it’s very hard to make a profit in the passenger business.
and to an extent, with Philadelphia's SEPTA subway system, for which this channel had done a video on previously!!! I say this, is because when I saw that particular video, I was shocked that the original plans for Philadelphia's subway system would've come very close to being just as large as New York City's subway system, had they not been plagued with financial problems and whatnot.
I liked the idea of converting sections into underground stores and kiosks. Other sections could be converted into a museum showcasing life back in the day, with history of subways and other historical education. In terms of public infrastructure making a profit off of taxpayer money - No. Not in the context of profit that would allow politicians to use the money as their personal piggybank - (Does social security ring a bell!?). But profit enough to maintain the structure, and operating costs - a "break even" where the money earned remains with the public where the funds came from.
Hell yeah, It's supposed to be somewhat profitable. That way he business can take care of itself and the people that work for it, instead of asking for a government handout or a bailout.
public transportation is absolutely worth taxpayer support. It saves from construction of other particularly highway infrastructure. Here in NJ, agencies such as the Turnpike Authority and the Port authority contribute a portion of toll revenues to improve mass transit. They also build within their toll facilities park and ride lots and encourage usage of bus or trains. It is a lot cheaper than adding more highway infrastructure. Please note that I love highways so am not against them, but they do have limitations and cannot be forever widened.
Currently in the whole state of Queensland, Australia (which is larger than Texas with 1/6th the population) we are going through a 12 month trial (was initially 6 months but the government extended it) of 50 cent fares on all public transport, no matter the distance. People can travel from the capital Brisbane to the 2nd largest city in the state the Gold Coast, which is approx 100 km away, for 50 cents. It will cost the state government $150 million AUD in annual revenue but its been touted as a cost of living measure and a congestion buster. Public transport was already subsidised and this further subsidisation has already seen benefits with traffic, increase in patronage and accessibility. This is also while there is ongoing large investment in improving public transport infrastructure with a number of major projects under construction and planned. PT should not be for profit, it is for the people and the benefits far out way the costs.
I don't think of public transport as every being profitable, but more of a community quality of life matter. Nevertheless, it does need to make sense in any given application, and in this case a subway apparently didn't.
No, public transit should not be built with the goal of turning a profit. Especially in the US, where it's seen as a form of social assistance (being managed under social services/ welfare departments in some jurisdictions, rather than public works or transportation). If public transit is supposed to turn a profit, so should roads. And not just highways/ interstates... all of them. How much are you willing to pay to drive down your residential street? Roads, as a publicly funded enabler of movement, technically could be argued as a form of "public" transportation. Though more like a public-private partnership, where the private sector (i.e., drivers) pays for the vehicles, but not the cost to build or maintain infrastructure (because gas taxes and registration fees are nowhere near what they would need to be at to fully fund the US road system).
I hate to be the one to say this..... but EVERY subway operates at a loss... so does every single transit system.... so does every single ROAD/STREET, ETC.... operating at a profit has never or will never be the point of municiple infrastructure...
Yes, public transport makes sense, even when it operates at a loss. I don't know of any public transport system that directly operates profitably. But thy connect businesses and customers, workers and jobs, all of whom pay taxes at the end of the day and generate indirect revenue.
A relic from a better vanished time. Dickens could have seen Rochester from Coburg on his tour in 1800's. Niagara falls had the hydro to harness, Hoover dam built a city in the desert. And private entities were building generational wealth from owning international bridge between Windsor and Detroit for over a century. Politicans had ideas visions and dreams which lasted longer than their election cycles. Embraced idea of moving people underground , saving people from elements and vehicular traffic. Vancouver had Rockies for backdrop, built communities around lives, rather than the automobile. Had someone bombed the east coast before Hawaii.......
Anything the government does, even the best things, fails eventually bc there is zero accountability and incentive for profit or reinvestment. The US highway system had a trust fund to maintain it yet politicians constantly steal from that trust only to tax us to maintain the roads. Stop all new taxes and spending for a year and we will see what is necessary for life and what isn’t
If it can't pay for itself, then the burden falls on those that may not be able to pay it. No, it should at least break even, including limiting executive salaries.
Does any public transportation run a profit? I thought they all were subsidized by taxpayer monies be it local, state or federal. It's too late now but they probably should have just kept it going, not that I am a fan of public transportation, but with so much invested it should have been run like all other money losing public transports and gotten federal funds like Amatrak. Maybe it would have help Rochesters economy revitalize had it been kept going. Too late now.
While subsidies for Transit for the Poor and Working Class and to reduce congestion can make sense, it needs to be reasonable and proportional for the demand and the finances of the community itself. Does a 7 mile subway really make sense for a community of 120,000 people when you could provide a dedicated surface busway with greater frequency for much less? It is the same issue when people push for High Speed Rail through extremely low population areas to serve a distant community with a population of less than 100,000 people. Often when looking at their proposal, within minutes you realize their proposal assumes insane things like everyone in the community needing to take a 150 mile trip on the HSR 3 times a week! Transit needs to be based on everyday Needs, not political wants.
As a Rochester local, thank you so much for bringing attention to this!
Chili here, saying hello
One of the old subway cars are now preserved at our local railroad museum, and it happens to be the last one
Couple points - though Rochester, NY is a small city, there was still much going on here at the time the Subway was proposed and built. When the subway was active, there was more than just Gannett Newspapers. Remember, Kodak's headquarters was (and still is) in Rochester, as well as major manufacturing by Bausch & Lomb, and Xerox. So there was definitely reason for optimism at the time.
As for other works, the city recently "filled in" part of the belt highway system (the "Inner Loop") to become local residences. So major infrastructure changes still do occur in the city.
They failed to mention that the subway was important to Gannett because they used it for rail delivery of newsprint. Infact the main purpose of the subway was to facilitate local freight deliveries. Trolley car passenger service was almost a secondary use. Freight use contunued decades after passenger service ended.
The last remaining Rochester Subway Car, no 60, is at the Rochester & Genesee Valley Railroad Museum. There is a picture of it under restoration on their website.
One of the unique aspects of the Erie Canel is that its original path took it OVER the Genesee River on a bridge that was filled with water. The traffic never touched the Genesee River as it passed through Rochester.
I filmed a documentary on these tunnels a couple years ago, has a really creepy experience with someone else down there. It was around 2 in the morning when we were there and somebody was prowling about, and I think they ran away into the sewers. It was a cool place to visit
Is that available on your channel? I’ve been deep into the lines down there. Places that nobody has seen in decades. A couple buddy’s and I along with a fourth new person we hired who had a certain necessary skill to get us through some barriers, went in a few years ago.
We left it closed up again when we were done so nobody would get hurt down there.
I would like to see where you went and what you found.
We also had electric train running from Rochester to Canandaigua in the early 1903. Rochester and Eastern Rapid Railway. I wish it were still around as I would rather take that to school and work than drive all the time
Lived in Canandaigua and worked in Rochester for awhile. Can confirm, not a great drive 😂
I thought the electric trolley went from geneva to midtown plaza specifically
Been watching you for a while now super cool to see you cover my local area let alone it being something that’s fascinated me for awhile and a place I’ve spent plenty of time exploring. Keep up the great work
As a kid, I used to visit my cousins in Rochester and well I used to remember seeing these weird looking spots all over the city. Didn't know until You made this video when answered my question after all these years
Same for me…when I was young I would stay summers with my cousins in Irondequoit and I remember seeing this too around Rochester. Glad this video cleared that up for me and you!
Having spent a chunk of my life in Rochester, thank you for this video. By the time I was around, the subway tunnels were an urbex attraction. I would love to see them be put to use as a gallery.
Excellent discussion about the Rochester subway tunnels! As someone who was born, and has lived most of my life, in the area I grew up on stories of the subway and the abandoned tunnels. I wholly support refurbishment, as I definitely feel it is not only part of Rochester history, but New York and US history.
Outside of Rochester, no one cares
@@jamesstetz9884 👎👎👎👎👎
Well I'm Rochester born and bred, so I care
@SuV33358 Same here which is why I gave that guy thumbs down
Ah yes, another great high quality video to entertain me and learn a little something in the process.
General Motors gets some credit for killing the Roc subway. GM pressured local leaders to use GM busses and construction of "the suburbs" pretty much guaranteed car culture. If only Rochester had continued, improved and expanded the subway system, Rochester could have a great, state of the art public transportation system. A subway made and makes so much sense in Rochester because of our winter weather with lots of snow.
The most important detail here was that the subway route was dictated by the repurposed Erie Canal bed. That dictated the subway route and its fate.
Thank you Ryan for your optimism & yes the sky can be the limit❣️ The themes you choose to document are always interesting‼️👍🏻❤️
As a local I still learned a few things from this, nice video!
Not sure why the Rochester subway operating at a loss keeps getting mentioned, New York City's subway and bus system has always operated at a loss. That's usually how public transportation works-it's subsidized by taxpayers.
I used this line as a boy in the early 1950s from Brighton into central Rochester an easy walk from our house across a railroad track and through bushes.
It was our hangout when skipping school in the 70's. It was creepy!
It reminds me of the Abandoned Trolley Car Bridge in Herkimer, New York.
Thanks, Ryan. I agree in principle: with effective oversight, public transportation should not be seen as a for profit business. The greater good and ultimately reduced infrastructure costs (compared to endless road construction and maintenance) should be funded by indirect beneficiaries.
I used to go to school at RIT and was fascinated by the remaining Tunnel! Might have moved there permanently if they were able to keep this.
You probably know about the tunnels under RIT as well then.
@@heatshield absolutely, I used to use some of them but I was aware that the portions that I used were a small fragment of the full system that was thought of.
Public transit absolutely should not have to make a profit. Do highways generate direct profits?!
No they do not and they will not actually be able to efficiently carry out their emergency purposes WITHOUT public transit either: In an emergency situation where people have to evacuate an area **fast**, if there is only one way to evacuate then that mode of transport gets overburdened. This has been seen with hurricane evacuations where they have to turn the opposing highway/freeway lanes in the opposite direction for more capacity and it still gets busy in a lot of cases even with several days of notice. Freeways/highways being used in conjunction with rail systems get more people around and far faster.
Even in an every day situation, if there is an alternative that isn't driving, people will take it which is less cars on the road for police, firefighters, and ambulance drivers to deal with. We can more effectively respond to emergencies.
It's not that they don't make a profit, it's that they always operate at a loss which is inevitably placed on the backs of the taxpayers. Rochester was still paying for the cost of the subway long after operations ceased.
@@stevezilla68 and taxpayers aren’t burdened with maintaining roadways?! lmao 🤦♂️
@@StLouis-yu9iz They are. Gas taxes are used to offset those costs. Everyone who uses the roadways contributes to their maintenance, unlike light rail maintenance. Lmao.
Now that you've ventured into upstate NY history, you should look into the Buffalo Central Terminal, the Pan-American exposition (where McKinley was shot and killed, and the Olmstead Park Conservancy(Which was created after Olmstead realized how badly he messed up building central park in NYC), and i'm sure you can find interesting stories about Syracuse as well.
It's OK for these things to operate at a loss though... They're a public service, just like the roads (which also operate at a loss).
Ryan, you asked if public transportation should be subsidized; my answer is a resounding yes, if the plans for it can be determined to be beneficial to the community as a whole. Not everyone can afford to drive; senior citizens like myself may have needs to get around but don't necessarily want to drive (or perhaps shouldn't be driving). Public transit also has environmental benefits too.
Public transport was always supposed to be just that - inexpensive transportation for the masses. It's supposed to be more environmentally friendly and used in combination with other forms of travel. In European countries, public transport is so good that in some cites, no one drives cars because it's faster to use public transport.
Yes exactly this. But before even going that far there are also non-direct financial benefits, for example by bringing in customers and workers to businesses, who then earn money or more money, which is then later taxed. It is not just about fare receipts.
In my area seniors and the disabled already have subsidized public transit mind you this is in a Red State. It is a Paratransit bus system. And from what I heard this is available in many cities it's just not reported as much on because it's far less visible. The people don't know that we subsidize major freight railroads and mass transit in the U.S. quite a bit. They also don't know or in the case of many "enlightened" urbanists refuse to acknowledge that the economic benefits of highway systems.
@@joeblow5214 in economics, there is the concept known as an externality, which is a cost not counted in a price tag. The difference between transit and cars is that cars produce negative externalities, and transit produces positive externalities. Due to the nature of the externalities, cars are a demerit good, much like cigarettes, gasoline, fast food, and firearms, whereas transit is a merit good, like single payer healthcare, welfare programs, or education. Additionally, blue states pay more to red states in terms of tax revenue at the federal level, thereby supporting the red state welfare queens who refuse to raise revenues whilst suckling on the federal teat, so perhaps it's time red states to become fiscally literate and vote dem? GDP is an equation that is helped to be raised by government spending (C+I+G+(X-M)), so why argue for the reduction of GDP? People other than seniors or the disabled should be served by public transit.
It's crazy that we ask if public transportation should be subsidized, yet we subsidize private transportation with no questions asked. When a new highway gets built, who pays for it? The taxpayers, no questions asked. Does the road have to be profitable? Of course not. Yet somehow that's a problem when we want to pay for public transit?
Great job! Most of us never heard of the system. Have you done the Cincinnati system? Other guys have, I think. I grew up back east with some familiarity with NYC subways. I'm 80. It's Thu. Sep. 19, 2024. St. Joseph, MO.
Please do a video on the Cincinnati inclines! There is a historical marker for one beside a restaurant (the incline house) good food and definitely worth the stop and view
This is awesome! I’ve been following for years and this is finally a place I’ve explored! I have pictures of some of the graffiti in the beginning! I’m really hoping they don’t re flood it though
I used to live on St. Paul. Love these tunnels.
An open-air section( though, 15- 20ft. below street level, branch-line To Kodak Park) ran alongside my Grandmother's house. It wasn't filled in until the 70's.
They opened the tunnel up today for touring, there is apparently a group working to preserve the tunnel area underneath that bridge.
The only reason it failed was that cars received dozens of times more funding than rail
What a small city to,try this! Smaller than the failed one in Cincinnati
Around the same size as many cities with large rail transit systems in Europe
I live in Rochester Ny and I only went in there a few times but not fully gone walking in there and plus some tracks are still in there
A real shame as not only did Rochester have the subway, as some commented, we started to have trolley's all around the suburbs which are now amazing bike and foot paths, but I for one would love to be able to hop on a trolley to go from the east to west side or up to the lake. A shame....
at 2:12 "local lake"? - Lake Ontario, maybe?! - great content as always, Ryan
Hemlock Lake a small finger lake.
I think they were referring to Hemlock and Candace lakes - owned by the City of Rochester. Neither quite local, but the gravity fed water system from those lakes to the City was also an engineering feat at the time.
Transit doesn't have to be profitable, it just needs to break even. Subsidies should almost always be avoided as they rarely bring about the public good that would justify the cost.
Rebuild, reuse, reopen... Rochester should reuse as much as it possibly can with high-floor LRT cars like Cleveland, Edmonton, Calgary, Frankfurt... Combine that with land-use intensification and affordable housing and you've just made your city great again...
@stickynorth Rochester will never be great again. It would take politicians who actually care about this area to do anything unfortunately.
Sounds like a socialist utopia…and they always work out so well, don’t they?
Abandoned Can u do the buffalo train station I use to explore it when I was younger
I was near The Central Terminal over the weekend for some festival that my friends and I were checking out. it's the closest that I've been to it
I would very much like him to do a video on Buffalo Central Terminal
Good work.
For me, public transportation should never be a business that needs to be profitable. Of course it shouldn't waste money either but its a service that is for the good of the people, like the fire department or the police.
I think that public transit should be run on an at cost basis, however as part of that it shouldnt just be the income from the line but also the financial gain that is brought to an area
Most transit projects already do this.
Public transport should have the same earning expectations as road traffic !
Another issue for the subway was competition from the automobile. The Inner Loop was being constructed about then if I recall correctly.
I have photos of when I went down there when was younger. Nothing really down there worth looking at, just scaffolding and tagging. History around it just neat
8:57: This whole area shown here is now gone, replaced by new apartments.
Been there a few time's , Theres certain places where if you peer through the wall you can see basements occupied with lights on , wild stuff
I’d love to see some content covering subject matter in Canada. Toronto specifically has a rich history of urban development and innovation.
To name a few projects and current buildings, The RC Harris Water Treatment Plant or the Prince Edward Viaduct.
I think that looks like a Underground tramwasy rather than a Subway
There were removed when the trams were replaced by buses
According to the image you posted, peak ridership occurred in 1947, 2 years after the end of WWII
In many parts of the world, especially Europe, public transport is seen as a public good, and not necessarily expected to make a profit. Yes, the bottom line may look like a cost, but in the round, there are other benefits that don't appear on the balance sheet. People can take jobs they would otherwise not be able to, because they can reach the workplace easily; motor traffic is kept off the streets, easing pollution, and the knock-on effects on health. On a broader, national scale, effective public transit can reinvigorate towns and cities away from the capital, increasing tourism and allowing people to live in less costly areas, while commuting. With proper planning and facilities, mobility for the disabled can be vastly increased.
In London, for example, the new Elizabeth line makes it much easier for people in some parts of the city to access Heathrow airport, or the comercial centre at Canary Wharf, opening up more jobs, or making it a little simpler to take a cheaper flight. In France, some towns actively campaign for a new high speed line to have a station near them, because of the benefits to commuters, or tourism.
Improving local transit lines, like my nearest one, where we now have a reliable service every 15 minutes, means way more people use it - up from 408,000 in 1997 to 1.69 million entries and exits in 2022-23. That's a fourfold increase - and each one of those journeys means fewer people using cars. That means fewer people needing to have a car in London, which means savings for individuals in insurance, maintenance, etc, and more money to spend on other things in the local economy.
So, yes, just looking at whether or not a specific transit project makes a profit in terms of ticket sales vs cost of construction and operation is one way of considering things. But it seems to me that it's very simplistic. The knock-on effects of regular, reliable public transport mostly don't appear on the balance sheet, but they certainly make a big difference to people's lives.
"On a broader, national scale, effective public transit can reinvigorate towns and cities away from the capital, increasing tourism and allowing people to live in less costly areas, while commuting." This is also a often ignored benefit of highway building. Just a FYI. Heavy rail investment can in certain corridors work very well but in many cases if it isn't also carrying freight it does little to encourage a reduction in overall commuting which would be the ideal plan for any major project with a focus on reinvigorating small towns as companies pay more in local taxes then individual residents.
Went there for a photography class field trip 💖 very cool place
Maybe Rochester, New York, could take a look at Rochester Minnesota Subway system. They provide a different kind of system instead of with subway cars they underground pathways because of the cold and hot temperatures in Minnesota. This allows small businesses and markets to establish connections to the underground system. It covers some of the costs of this system. Also, being connected to the Mayo medical facility was a big boost with the Subway system. And rise to another system called the skyway system that connects from building to building.
To my knowledge there's an library in the city that utilizes a section of the subway to connect to another library across the street.
Sad to say but the lack of public transport in Rochester and surrounding areas is pretty sad. It is especially hard for those with no car and for the elderly who do not have the capacity or desire to drive anymore. A subway system servicing all of Rochester and surrounding suburbs would be such a boost to this City. I for one live in Greece, and if I did not have a car I would be completely dependent on Uber or rides from other people. Growing up as I did in the UK, very few people had cars then (in fifties until I left in 69) however we never needed a car as there was all kinds of public transport such as buses, trains and of course our subway. I don't know if Rochester is the only city that is so lacking in public transportation in the US but it is definitely time we had much more access to it than we have at the moment. By all means bring back the subway (And the ferry to Toronto)
omg i requested this one!!!
What impresses is in 2024, the number of RUclips channels that show abandoned malls, resorts, theme parks and entire cities in the United States.
Yeah that is due to more land than people so as people move from one place to another some areas lose population and buildings become abandoned or lose their value. This is why there are very few abandoned places in large cities in Texas because they have exploded in new population but why there are so many in North-East US as people have been leaving for better weather and higher income.
the only way i could ever see the subway making a comeback would be if they 1. could make it more efficient than the current bus system and 2. branch it out to surrounding towns like greece, irondiquoit and penfield.
Subway surfers Rochester edition
It's funny you did this video. Free4All did a video about exploring the exact tunnels! Thanks for the history lesson. It's their latest video if you wanna watch it.
300k.. small town? I thought my town was pretty average sized at 50k.
@@TryxyPixy 50k is just one small suburb. Like gates. Lol Rochester metropolitan area has over a million people.
@@Thesauce585 Yes, but thats a CITY. They said town.
It is the Kodak headquarter also. I worked for Kodak at one time.
Sounds like every Rochester revitalization project.
most of it was destroyed minus the small part under the bridge and library and they say avoid it because you can get mugged down there lol
There’s a lot that’s still accessible if you know where to go. Of course you’re probably right that “most” is demolished or filled but there’s still miles and miles that nobody knows about besides local explorers and we’re not giving it to the world just yet.
Convert it to mixed use - art, music, restaurants, retail, housing - and call it "The Underground"
Yeah we need more pronoun places. Fill them with gravel and forget them
@tomsmith2013 best idea I've heard .
genuinely curious what you mean by that..?
Like Atlanta did
Albert -LOL
Oh I remember going down here when back in like 2013 nothing really special just a quick 20 min walk down the dark tunnel I've since moved out of rochester but I've heard they closed it off or some construction development in downtown?
The public subsidizes highways and roads through taxation. It's sad that those who are against public transportation frequently point to the need for subsidation but ignore the public's subsidizing cars and trucks. Thanks for posting.
Amtrak and US Mail are forced to be profitable per charter despite technically being government entities. If its a public service, it shouldn't be forced to profit. Sure a more expansive service like Amtrak can use money generated from "profitable" routes (Regional, Acela, Borealis) to fund the high margin/"Unprofitable" long distance routes, especially if it means they can get the Cardinal and Sunset Limited to daily operation (although it will mostly like go to getting a second Borealis run and the new "Superliner III's")
Public transport should be seen as a public benefit. Do we expect other infrastructure projects such as roads, bridges and flood walls to make a profit? No, because it benefits everyone in the city in some small way. Almost every great public transport system around the world would never have been built if we expected them to make a profit.
So many small and mid size rust belt cities have stories of failed public transit just like this.
Rochester would be twice the size it is now if this was built to last
Huh? It lost money until it went out of business.
@@jamesstetz9884 That’s why public transit should be public and not private. Private transit companies focus on collecting money rather than providing a service for people. That’s why modern passenger lines are run by the state. Without state funding, it’s very hard to make a profit in the passenger business.
@@jamesstetz9884it was never a business…
@@theexcaliburone5933 right it’s literally public transportation owned by the city usually
Sounds like what happened with Cincinnati and it's subway
and to an extent, with Philadelphia's SEPTA subway system, for which this channel had done a video on previously!!!
I say this, is because when I saw that particular video, I was shocked that the original plans for Philadelphia's subway system would've come very close to being just as large as New York City's subway system, had they not been plagued with financial problems and whatnot.
Really like to see this subway come back and be reworked or added to with branch lines. It’s such a cool city that deserves this investment
I liked the idea of converting sections into underground stores and kiosks. Other sections could be converted into a museum showcasing life back in the day, with history of subways and other historical education. In terms of public infrastructure making a profit off of taxpayer money - No. Not in the context of profit that would allow politicians to use the money as their personal piggybank - (Does social security ring a bell!?). But profit enough to maintain the structure, and operating costs - a "break even" where the money earned remains with the public where the funds came from.
I've been down there!
My home city.....west side suburb
Show suggestion: Port Chicago disaster
Hell yeah, It's supposed to be somewhat profitable. That way he business can take care of itself and the people that work for it, instead of asking for a government handout or a bailout.
I490 is subsized massively. All the land it takes up isn't taxed or developed, resulting in a significant cost to taxpayers.
I think they should repurpose it
public transportation is absolutely worth taxpayer support. It saves from construction of other particularly highway infrastructure. Here in NJ, agencies such as the Turnpike Authority and the Port authority contribute a portion of toll revenues to improve mass transit. They also build within their toll facilities park and ride lots and encourage usage of bus or trains. It is a lot cheaper than adding more highway infrastructure. Please note that I love highways so am not against them, but they do have limitations and cannot be forever widened.
Now The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles living in an abandoned sewer/subway makes sense.
Currently in the whole state of Queensland, Australia (which is larger than Texas with 1/6th the population) we are going through a 12 month trial (was initially 6 months but the government extended it) of 50 cent fares on all public transport, no matter the distance. People can travel from the capital Brisbane to the 2nd largest city in the state the Gold Coast, which is approx 100 km away, for 50 cents. It will cost the state government $150 million AUD in annual revenue but its been touted as a cost of living measure and a congestion buster. Public transport was already subsidised and this further subsidisation has already seen benefits with traffic, increase in patronage and accessibility. This is also while there is ongoing large investment in improving public transport infrastructure with a number of major projects under construction and planned. PT should not be for profit, it is for the people and the benefits far out way the costs.
Цікаве та пізнавальне відео. Дякую ❤️
Reopen the subway as a subway or light rail!
I don't think of public transport as every being profitable, but more of a community quality of life matter. Nevertheless, it does need to make sense in any given application, and in this case a subway apparently didn't.
Sounds a lot like the High Speed Railway in the San Joaquin Valley of California. It has cost a fortune and still is not finished.
They should refurbish it and use it as a subway system. Profit he damned.
No, public transit should not be built with the goal of turning a profit. Especially in the US, where it's seen as a form of social assistance (being managed under social services/ welfare departments in some jurisdictions, rather than public works or transportation).
If public transit is supposed to turn a profit, so should roads. And not just highways/ interstates... all of them. How much are you willing to pay to drive down your residential street?
Roads, as a publicly funded enabler of movement, technically could be argued as a form of "public" transportation. Though more like a public-private partnership, where the private sector (i.e., drivers) pays for the vehicles, but not the cost to build or maintain infrastructure (because gas taxes and registration fees are nowhere near what they would need to be at to fully fund the US road system).
I hate to be the one to say this..... but EVERY subway operates at a loss... so does every single transit system.... so does every single ROAD/STREET, ETC.... operating at a profit has never or will never be the point of municiple infrastructure...
Yes, public transport makes sense, even when it operates at a loss. I don't know of any public transport system that directly operates profitably. But thy connect businesses and customers, workers and jobs, all of whom pay taxes at the end of the day and generate indirect revenue.
If anyone wants a free boat or jetski, there's one of each down there
All the stolen Kias get hidden down there
A relic from a better vanished time. Dickens could have seen Rochester from Coburg on his tour in 1800's. Niagara falls had the hydro to harness, Hoover dam built a city in the desert. And private entities were building generational wealth from owning international bridge between Windsor and Detroit for over a century. Politicans had ideas visions and dreams which lasted longer than their election cycles. Embraced idea of moving people underground , saving people from elements and vehicular traffic. Vancouver had Rockies for backdrop, built communities around lives, rather than the automobile. Had someone bombed the east coast before Hawaii.......
Anything the government does, even the best things, fails eventually bc there is zero accountability and incentive for profit or reinvestment. The US highway system had a trust fund to maintain it yet politicians constantly steal from that trust only to tax us to maintain the roads. Stop all new taxes and spending for a year and we will see what is necessary for life and what isn’t
If it can't pay for itself, then the burden falls on those that may not be able to pay it. No, it should at least break even, including limiting executive salaries.
Yet highway and bridge infrastructure are paid for out of tax revenue. I've yet to hear of any interstate highway system that makes a profit.
Does any public transportation run a profit? I thought they all were subsidized by taxpayer monies be it local, state or federal. It's too late now but they probably should have just kept it going, not that I am a fan of public transportation, but with so much invested it should have been run like all other money losing public transports and gotten federal funds like Amatrak. Maybe it would have help Rochesters economy revitalize had it been kept going. Too late now.
While subsidies for Transit for the Poor and Working Class and to reduce congestion can make sense, it needs to be reasonable and proportional for the demand and the finances of the community itself. Does a 7 mile subway really make sense for a community of 120,000 people when you could provide a dedicated surface busway with greater frequency for much less? It is the same issue when people push for High Speed Rail through extremely low population areas to serve a distant community with a population of less than 100,000 people. Often when looking at their proposal, within minutes you realize their proposal assumes insane things like everyone in the community needing to take a 150 mile trip on the HSR 3 times a week! Transit needs to be based on everyday Needs, not political wants.
A subway in a city no one wants to live in anymore…