LA is surely a worst case scenario but I think it's broadly true that American transit agencies are not politically, culturally, or institutionally ready for a fully YIMBY/Abundance world.

Do they keep slipping because of bad project management or because of NIMBYs? Because this sure isn't going to help the second problem, much as they think it might.

Metro doesn't really want to be in the land use business though and they are feeling pressure to deliver the voter mandated project list. If you put blinders on and are schedule driven all of your projects have slipped by years and keep slipping.

"Having enough density to actually drive ridership would make it harder to do new projects" is the sign of an agency that's excessively culturally driven by projects and not enough by baseline service to the region. bsky.app/profile/brad...

Look, even well-intended housing legislation can create unintended consequences for transit agencies. But literally nothing is more strategically important to us than land use adequate to support the very existence of the system. Nothing at all.

Right!

Slight correction: the line exists entirely for one customer, the giant paper mill in Toledo. It was built in the late 19th century and the infrastructure has seen, shall we say, very little in the way of updates since then.

Oh I need to pick up one of those. Been looking for one at a decent price.

3000 V DC (upped to 3300 through engineering ingenuity) was...not the world standard by the 1960s and placed fundamental limitations on what the Milwaukee could power. The boxcabs in particular were designed for slow-speed drags at a time when speed was becoming more important.

Key point in here: the entire electric loco fleet, and all the power infrastructure, needed replacement. The newest electric locos were the WW2-era Little Joes; the boxcabs were 20 years older. Diesels offered commodity pricing, while electrics were basically custom builds in the US market.