HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2019, 6:08 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesinclair View Post
Id note that if gas prices were higher, than Lyft/Uber would be more expensive, so theyre certainly intertwined.

One aspect that keep getting ignored is pricing. Gas prices have fallen over the past decade, but most transit agencies hike their fares every 2 years. Some cities are charging $3 for a bus ride. That's insane to me.
All transit agencies operate at a loss, some of them substantial as fares don't even cover 20 percent of operating costs. That's by design of course. Transit isn't meant to be profitable, but sometimes the operating subsidy is so too large or lacks political support for the city to fill, so they rely on an increase in fares instead.

Gas prices aren't the main cost driver. Look at the breakdown of any budget and at least 70% of the operating costs will be attributable to salaries and fringe benefits. Basic cost of living raises every year, let alone any service expansions, will lead to higher operating costs and possibly hire fares if no other source of revenue. Fuel is probably only 5 to 10% of the operating costs, with the rest being maintenance.

Anyone have access to hard numbers of their transit agencies budget?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2019, 6:17 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,798
Here it is for MTA.

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/...bl3n9xlNWg.png

Fuel is literally just 1% of the operating cost. Add in electric power + fuel and it's 4.1%.


Bulk of the funds are for salaries and wages, retirement and other employee benefits, and post employment benefits other than pension. Maintenance and other operating contracts professional service contracts are all expenses to have the right personnel needed to operate and maintain the system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2019, 3:14 AM
CastleScott CastleScott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sacramento Ca/formerly CastleRock Co
Posts: 996
Just a reminder here's the APTA link: https://www.apta.com/resources/stati...rship-APTA.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2019, 7:05 AM
Doady's Avatar
Doady Doady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,375
Major transit ridership increase all across Canada. TTC +11%. GO Transit and STM +4%. Translink +6%. Brampton Transit +17%. Uber/Lyft must be to blame for that too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2019, 7:30 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,072
Uber/Lyft have at multiple possible effects, and it plays out differently by city -- in some cities it might encourage more people to use transit, and in others (at least so far) people use it less. Some of the factors that come to mind include:
1. Is the Uber/Lyft driver pay structure favorable for getting plenty of drivers, allowing faster pick-ups?
2. Do the roads make driving easy and quick? Are there HOV-2 lanes?
3. Is transit frequent, quick (can relate to dedicated lanes or rail), and reasonably pleasant (is behavior policed, and does the average worker ride it)?
4. On the flip side, are a lot of transit riders able to pay for Uber/Lyft, i.e. what's ridership by income or net worth?
5. Are Uber/Lyft/transit enough to get people to ditch car ownership?
6. How concentrated are jobs, i.e. near transit?
7. Is transit being added or subtracted?

I bet some of these factors will show themselves in cities that are rising/falling with transit use.

Mine, Seattle, was rising very slowly early in the year at least for a couple agencies. Let's see:
1. I don't know how their pay structure varies, but the city is expensive.
2. The roads are jammed, but HOV lanes are common.
3. Transit is rarely excellent but it's decent everywhere, including HOV lanes to make buses fast, and a lot of sub-10-minute frequencies at rush hours. The average rider income is pretty close to the regional average.
4. Uh oh.
5. Yes. Between cost and these options (along with walking), a lot of people don't have cars. A lot of people spend $2,500 for housing with no parking, take the bus or walk to work, and use Lyft on nights out.
6. Fairly concentrated on the white collar side. Same with most construction.
7. Added. Rail is slowly being added but we've upped bus service quite a bit lately.
__________________
"Alot" isn't a word.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2019, 4:41 AM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 1,532
My hierarchy of urban transport:

Walking
Biking
Train
Uber
Bus


In my city of Norfolk in a year I walk to a destination almost daily. I bike 2-3 times a week. I take the train about 4-7 times(I am downtown, so the destination for the train are limited). I Uber/Lyft 2-4 times a year. I take the bus 1-2 times(mainly when its at school and I don't feel like riding the bike home...because its now raining or something).

However, I think car-sharing could be a great thing in a city like Chicago. If I moved there I would like to know that my gf has her car, I can take the train/bus almost anywhere, bike, walk, or Uber if it makes more sense. Those options would have me, easily, to ditch my car. Heck, I almost ditched it here living in Norfolk because the gf walks to work(she uses about a tank of gas every 2 months) but I decided against it because I never know if I will end up in Dallas or some place like that.

As for the report, whats up with Bostons numbers?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2019, 8:51 AM
accord1999 accord1999 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by CastleScott View Post
Just a reminder here's the APTA link: https://www.apta.com/resources/stati...rship-APTA.pdf
Q3 data is now available:

https://www.apta.com/resources/stati...rship-APTA.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2019, 5:20 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
Many of the Canadian systems are up over double digits percentage from last year. For example, Toronto's heavy rail system is up 37 percent. That doesn't seem right. Looks like they may have reclassified a light rail to heavy rail?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2019, 5:32 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 17,258
I think APTA made some calculation errors in this release. I see some wacky things happening, like 80% year-over-year declines for huge agencies, but only in one quarter.

APTA is very sloppy with their releases. Couldn't they at least get an intern to eyeball the numbers?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2019, 6:03 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I think APTA made some calculation errors in this release. I see some wacky things happening, like 80% year-over-year declines for huge agencies, but only in one quarter.

APTA is very sloppy with their releases. Couldn't they at least get an intern to eyeball the numbers?
I was thinking that because several of the numbers don't align with the official release from the transit agencies. There are things that are higher too high or too low. I understand APTA counts "unliked trips" but that data isn't collected by transit agencies and would have to be calculated somehow.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2019, 8:55 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
As seen on SSC ;)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 5,584
For the Toronto figures, this was previously addressed on the Canada subforum. It seems there was an error when the previous lower figures the TTC reported to the APTA were linked trips when the APTA normally works with unlinked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nfitz View Post
Apparently TTC erroneously eported linked subway data to APTA for years, rather than unlinked. Hence the huge apparent ridership increase.

Now Toronto subway ridership (and bus and commuter train ridership) is listed by APTA as higher than Montreal.

I noted in another thread back in 2013 a couple of times that it made no sense that Montreal's subway ridership was higher, given Toronto trains were larger (10% shorter but 25% wider), with more trainsets and a higher peak and off-peak frequency than Montreal. I always figured Montreal's numbers were somehow escalated - I guess it was always more likely that TTC had messed up what they were reporting!
Quote:
Originally Posted by nfitz View Post
The APTA reports have had much higher Toronto numbers for months.

Stuart Green - the senior communications specialist in media relations at TTC is the source confirming the error according to Steve Munro - https://twitter.com/SwanBoatSteve/st...77779055247360

Though that there was an obvious error somewhere seemed pretty obvious to anyone who is very familiar with both systems!
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2019, 9:12 PM
Doady's Avatar
Doady Doady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,375
The numbers for Brampton Transit and York Region Transit are also linked trips. Brampton unlinked should be around 35 million, not 23 million, and York Region around 23 million unlinked rather than 18 million.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2019, 1:07 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
For the Toronto figures, this was previously addressed on the Canada subforum. It seems there was an error when the previous lower figures the TTC reported to the APTA were linked trips when the APTA normally works with unlinked.
That would explain it. Thanks!
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:43 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.