U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-15-2014, 08:28 AM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,080 posts, read 16,109,257 times
Reputation: 12652

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zelpha View Post
Buses only carry an average of 9 passengers though, and I see a lot more than 6 six cars (average car has 1.55 passengers). Given, that's partly because transit is overly subsidized and places have to spend money on it even if there's no demand to justify it. But even a busy route is never going to average the hypothetical maximum capacity as that's impossible.


https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/...iod_RT_38L.pdf

Geary lines run very full during peak hours, but as you can see the average load is no where near capacity for route as a whole.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-15-2014, 08:31 AM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,080 posts, read 16,109,257 times
Reputation: 12652
Quote:
Originally Posted by grilba View Post
Busses hold more than one one person so even a bus that drives on dirty fuel is cleaner than the 5-6 taxis driving around people seperately, or the run down cars the poor often are forced to ride around in, and yeah, I don't mind welfare for the rich either so subsidizing electric cars seems like a good deal to me.
Fair point with taxis. They have to make runs empty to pick up fares and I doubt enough people are sharing a cab to offset that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 08:37 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,992 posts, read 42,037,172 times
Reputation: 14811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
Buses only carry an average of 9 passengers though, and I see a lot more than 6 six cars (average car has 1.55 passengers). Given, that's partly because transit is overly subsidized and places have to spend money on it even if there's no demand to justify it. But even a busy route is never going to average the hypothetical maximum capacity as that's impossible.


https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/...iod_RT_38L.pdf
True, though a bus can hold 30-40 seated. The busiest routes will have some standing passengers, so it shouldn't that hard to average well over 9 passengers. One local bus I take was crowded enough that they switched to double length buses. Unfortunately, the busy times are only in certain directions and times, so they sometimes run rather empty. People complain more about packed buses than fuel inefficient buses.

Also, while the average car has 1.55 passengers, transit trips are more likely to taken by people traveling alone, if they were driving their cars wouldn't average 1.55 passengers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 08:46 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 27 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,027 posts, read 102,689,903 times
Reputation: 33083
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
But it is also a fair assumption that most car trips are alone. 2/3 (give or take) households do not have kids. And single (not coupled) households are on the rise. And adults travel separately pretty often. Trips with kids aren't leading to a decline of single occupancy vehicle trips, as households with kids are declining. As are household sizes.
No, it's not a fair assumption. I don't know where Malloric got his 1.55 number, but it seems to be accepted on this board, so family size, whatever, isn't really important to this conversation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,080 posts, read 16,109,257 times
Reputation: 12652
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
True, though a bus can hold 30-40 seated. The busiest routes will have some standing passengers, so it shouldn't that hard to average well over 9 passengers. One local bus I take was crowded enough that they switched to double length buses. Unfortunately, the busy times are only in certain directions and times, so they sometimes run rather empty. People complain more about packed buses than fuel inefficient buses.

Also, while the average car has 1.55 passengers, transit trips are more likely to taken by people traveling alone, if they were driving their cars wouldn't average 1.55 passengers.
Most car trips are also taken by people traveling alone. I frequently see people who know each other on transit and who get on/get off together. Maybe they just meet at the same stop every morning and got to know one another or maybe they're traveling together.

And I completely agree with you. It shouldn't be that hard to average over 9 passengers. But that is the average. Gearly line is running articulated buses and if you looked at that, 9 seems absurdly low. Basically it is for any bus in San Francisco except perhaps at the last few stops assuming out and back rather than loop. It's a big country, though, and not everywhere looks like San Francisco.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 09:37 AM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,080 posts, read 16,109,257 times
Reputation: 12652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
No, it's not a fair assumption. I don't know where Malloric got his 1.55 number, but it seems to be accepted on this board, so family size, whatever, isn't really important to this conversation.

http://cta.ornl.gov/data/tedb33/Edition33_Chapter02.pdf
Table 2.12.

I wouldn't say it's accepted. I've just posted it about 8,000 times is all. It's about two-thirds of the way through a rather lengthy document.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 04:34 PM
 
10,604 posts, read 14,223,064 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerriMAC View Post
No. The original post is a legitimate question I am wondering. I wanted to know more about city planners' and public administrators' view/philosophy of public transit.
No it's not - come on now.

Like you ACTUALLY believe a city with 8 million people can thrive with cabs.

Besides, are you remembering that the CITIZENS VOTE for funding initiatives?

It's not being "provided" it's being BOUGHT by taxpayers.

The Bronx grew into a NYC railroad suburb in the late 19th century. Major population growth changed it from agricultural farms, creating a major construction boom and and even allowed the World's Fair to be held there. That's how all the immigrants were able to get out of the tenements.

The taxis at the time were four legged. Do you think there was enough room on the roads then to commute 1.3 million people back and forth?

Last edited by runswithscissors; 09-15-2014 at 04:59 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 04:42 PM
 
3,269 posts, read 3,010,456 times
Reputation: 1894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
And I completely agree with you. It shouldn't be that hard to average over 9 passengers. But that is the average. Gearly line is running articulated buses and if you looked at that, 9 seems absurdly low. Basically it is for any bus in San Francisco except perhaps at the last few stops assuming out and back rather than loop. It's a big country, though, and not everywhere looks like San Francisco.
I'm pretty sure the NYC and NJ average - at least for the lines between the two - is dramatically higher. Granted, maybe I only see the crowded buses because like most people I am statistically and personally only likely to be seeing those. 50 people on a super-crowded bus versus 5 on a near empty one and 90% of people will perceive the system to be bursting at the seams so this could very well be that effect on perception working on yours truly.

Bus space utilization rate is a political problem, not a planning problem, for the most part. People want lines convenient to them and their communities, and want them often, even if utilization is low. Cut a low use line and the savings from that and efficiency gains are spread across the system whereas the relatively small group of users get upset enough to badger politicians.

It's a large part of why the public sector does a much better job in general managing train lines than bus lines.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 05:20 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,080 posts, read 16,109,257 times
Reputation: 12652
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALackOfCreativity View Post
I'm pretty sure the NYC and NJ average - at least for the lines between the two - is dramatically higher. Granted, maybe I only see the crowded buses because like most people I am statistically and personally only likely to be seeing those. 50 people on a super-crowded bus versus 5 on a near empty one and 90% of people will perceive the system to be bursting at the seams so this could very well be that effect on perception working on yours truly.

Bus space utilization rate is a political problem, not a planning problem, for the most part. People want lines convenient to them and their communities, and want them often, even if utilization is low. Cut a low use line and the savings from that and efficiency gains are spread across the system whereas the relatively small group of users get upset enough to badger politicians.

It's a large part of why the public sector does a much better job in general managing train lines than bus lines.
Yes, most likely. There's places like where I live where most of the buses are generally running around with 0-4 people that drag down the average. That's what I mean by the average doesn't really say much. While there may not be a lot of buses here, there's a lot of "here" to drag the averages down. That's not to say there aren't a handful of routes that are heavily used here, it's just not most of them. But the transit agency here gets the over abundance of money it gets so it runs a lot of more or less useless bus lines that have little to no demand.

Since peak funding/service levels (2008), the transit agency has cut 20% of funding and ridership is down by less than 10%. It's hard to separate that from the economy, of course. Economy has improved significantly so more people are going to work. Transit is also very bad here so the improving economy usually means lower ridership. Coming out of the dot com bust, transit usage fell as the economy improved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2014, 07:24 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,992 posts, read 42,037,172 times
Reputation: 14811
Btw, even the NYC subway has 58% of seats filled on average.

http://www.railvolution.com/rv2008_pdfs/rv2008_230e.pdf [page 12]

that's not the experience of the average rider, of course. But ridership is strongly peaked, and the trains can run relatively empty at the ends. Though even off hours the NYC subway has nearly full in my experience, but there are probably emptier segment I'm taking. Other subways off hours tend to be much emptier. Hard to compare for how empty bus seating is, since subway are a bit different (multiple cars, can be shortened but often the agency doesn't). But hints that an average seating of near 100% is impossible for transit. Checking an MTA document on crowding on the L subway train, it says the trains get near max capacity even on parts of Saturdays. But that's not averaging over the entire line but the most crowded point on the line (the two stops on either side of the East River). And it's one of the more crowded lines.

From the link, by emissions per passenger, rail is better than cars, sometimes much better. Only Cleveland comes close to cars, due to very low ridership and dirty coal power sources. Buses do come out more efficient than average driving to work trip, though the difference isn't enormous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top