Stats that show the Atlanta Streetcar was a complete and utter failure of epic proportion (apartments, yard)

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by MikeHonchoATL

LOLOLOLOLOL!

It is averaging well under 1,000 rides given a day. Their initial ridership projections, which were already incredibly low, were for 2,500 per day. It is underperforming so badly.

How can anyone defend this failure?

I've heard people say it was more for business development than transportation.

[MikeHonchoATL]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I've heard people say it was more for business development than transportation.

I'd change my story and try to find something else to brag about if I was in charge of a project that threw away $100 million.

[MikeHonchoATL]

Originally Posted by tikigod311

The strategy was to get a portion of the SYSTEM built. To keep ignoring that and the defining the streetcar as is requires willfully ignoring facts. It's quite easy to defend when you actually plan for the future.

It was projected to get a meager 2,500 rides a day. It isn't even cracking 1,000 a day. How can you defend that? What makes you believe future projections will be more accurate?

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by MikeHonchoATL

I'd change my story and try to find something else to brag about if I was in charge of a project that threw away $100 million.

Part of that price tag was ADA upgrades to sidewalk, new utilities, etc.

[red92s]

It'd sure be nice if I could deliver prototypes that failed to meet promised expectations, were behind schedule, were over budget, and were riddled with operational and organizational deficiencies . . . and then just say "no no no it'll be better once you give me more money to expand the project, I promise". Has the streetcar ever met a single metric for ridership, cost, schedule, fare collection, etc? Things that are poorly designed, implemented, and managed tend not to improve when you expand the scope and budget.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by MikeHonchoATL

It was projected to get a meager 2,500 rides a day. It isn't even cracking 1,000 a day. How can you defend that? What makes you believe future projections will be more accurate?

In our case, the current loop wasn't even Phase 1 of the build out. It was Phase 0. It was the establishment of the technology, a test bed for operating, and a launch pad for build out of Phase 1, or some equivalent route-mileage.

To compare, we have a 2.7 track-mile loop (more like 1.1 route-miles linear reach) right now. The full Phase 1 (which greatly mimics the environmental studies in review right now) build out would have been 12.3 - 14 route-miles, depending on how you measured.

That's literally a 1270% increase in the number or route-miles, accessing a much larger rider and destination base in comparison to only our downtown loop.

To compare the ridership of that, Technical Memorandum 3: Ridership Modeling Analysis and Results shows projected year 2040 ridership of various configurations of buildout.

The streetcar as is, is projected to have 900 daily boardings. Notice that this was released back at the beginning of 2014. This IS NOT new knowledge. This IS NOT out of the model. Exactly what was predicted is coming to happen. The numbers you quote, were start of the system ridership projections, without a fare, and with the 'new factor' still in play.

The full build out of Phase 1 is projected to have 14,320 daily boardings. That means that you go from 818 boardings / route-mile to 1172 boardings / route mile. To put that into relative terms, for an 11x increase in route-miles, you get a 16x increase in ridership. So not only have you increased your daily ridership, but your per-mile ridership as well.

That's the entire point behind the expansion argument. As you increase reach, you not only access new riders who weren't in the capture area of the system before, but you also add new destinations that people living in the existing capture area can now reach.


When you expand the system, you add new potential riders, and give existing ones more reason to ride.


Furthermore, as far a I can tell, the ridership models were done in relative vacuum, or at least with existing MARTA conditions. That means that it's not taking into account the further network affects from BRT, ART, frequent local buses, circulators, heavy rail extensions, or further light rail. It is very likely that we will see that rider per mile increase dramatically as other network improvements come into play.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by red92s

It'd sure be nice if I could deliver prototypes that failed to meet promised expectations, were behind schedule, were over budget, and were riddled with operational and organizational deficiencies . . . and then just say "no no no it'll be better once you give me more money to expand the project, I promise".

This happens all the time in nearly any industry. I know it happened in the engineering firm I worked in. There was absolutely room to make mistakes, design adjustments, and go over budget, because there space where it is still worth less effort and money to allow for that, rather than restart the entire process.

One company WORKS WITH the other company to try and minimize the mistakes and budget overruns, but they still happen, no matter who you're working for or with.

To think otherwise to to be ignoring reality.

Has the streetcar ever met a single metric for ridership, cost, schedule, fare collection, etc? Things that are poorly designed, implemented, and managed tend not to improve when you expand the scope and budget.

Yes, we met ridership goals through the first year.

When you actually fix the problems though, that come with experience of operation, you absolutely DO get better at it. Do you think master machinists never ruined a turning? Do you think master painters never had an errant brush-stroke? Do you think we know all there is to know about road and transit design, and have no possibility of learning from our mistakes?

This is expecting perfection from day one. It's a nice idea, but it simply does not reflect the complexity of reality.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

This happens all the time in nearly any industry. I know it happened in the engineering firm I worked in. There was absolutely room to make mistakes, design adjustments, and go over budget, because there space where it is still worth less effort and money to allow for that, rather than restart the entire process.

One company WORKS WITH the other company to try and minimize the mistakes and budget overruns, but they still happen, no matter who you're working for or with.

To think otherwise to to be ignoring reality.



Yes, we met ridership goals through the first year.

When you actually fix the problems though, that come with experience of operation, you absolutely DO get better at it. Do you think master machinists never ruined a turning? Do you think master painters never had an errant brush-stroke? Do you think we know all there is to know about road and transit design, and have no possibility of learning from our mistakes?

This is expecting perfection from day one. It's a nice idea, but it simply does not reflect the complexity of reality.

Of course not, everyone on CD is a Transportation Engineer and Professional Planner.

[Ant131531]

It's not too often that I agree with MikeHoncho/GtCorndog, but in this case I have to agree with him. Total waste of money and it's boondoggles like this that makes people skeptical of the government in the first place. We're lucky to have passed that MARTA tax, but I have a feeling it won't be the end of them...we'll probably see another in 5 years when they somehow mismanage this money too.

Let's just hope we can get light rail on the Beltline soon. Rail connectivity between the neighborhoods themselves would do wonders for this city.

[tikigod311]

Originally Posted by MikeHonchoATL

It was projected to get a meager 2,500 rides a day. It isn't even cracking 1,000 a day. How can you defend that? What makes you believe future projections will be more accurate?

Because I can see past today. Because I know the streetcar is quite useless in its current route! Everybody knows this! It is a little tourist train that barely offers an advantage over walking because it is so short. I would be totally against the streetcar if its current state was the totality of its purpose.

Now, if you go look at all the pretty lines this is going to connect to, this route's utility becomes GLARINGLY OBVIOUS. In its current state, it would be like building MARTA with only 4 stops, nobody is going to use that. But build an actual system, suddenly these 4 stops become useful.

What's up with the lack of foresight here Mike? Can you not see how this -




is completely transformed into usefulness when connected to this?



Do you really think the ridership numbers are going to stay the same when connected to a larger system?