Georgia Senate panel recommends 'path forward' for regional transit (Atlanta: buy, tax)

[bu2]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

I'm not sure where you're getting the 10% to 20% figure from, but MARTA's total 2016 ridership was actually at 117% of its 2002 ridership. Furthermore, the general trend has been up, though we are in a period of decline currently:


Source: National Transit Database Monthly Raw Data

You're right to point out that there was a drip in ridership from the pre (or just entering into) recession peak, but that can easily be attributed to the massive service reductions that occurred at the time:


Source: National Transit Database Monthly Raw Data

Further credit to a loss of ridership can be given to a fall in gas prices around the same time. If you'll notice, those prices returned to their preresession prices through the same period of time as MARTA's ridership began to grow again:


Source: Department of Energy

The more recent fall of prices are a major player in the more recent downturn. It's unclear if this price point is sustainable, and depends on any number of factors like Iran's continued participation in the market, Saudi Arabia's internal stability / ability to maintain low prices, Russian exports, and Domestic Production. My personal suspicion is that it is not, and prices will move back up to prerecession (and pre-Iran) highs within a decade.

Further contributing is the availability of rideshare over taxis, though even that industry's sustainability is questionable.

As to your question about whether or not it makes sense to expand to reach ridership, the answer is a simple yes. As has been explained many times before, by extending the reach of a system into a new area, you not only gain riders from that new area, but also from existing areas as you add both new sources and destinations for riders.

Whether or not it is worth it, well, the reality of the situation is this:

1. The metro will grow 2.5 Million people by 2040
2. The City of Atlanta will grow to 1.5 Million on its own by 2050
3. That's 3.2 times the 2015 estimated population
4. That puts us (1,500,000 people; 134.00 square miles; 11,194.0 people per square mile) on the same level of modern-day Philidelphia (1,517,550 people; 135.09 square miles; 11,233.6 people per square mile)
5. Our roads in the city are mostly built out, and many are already over capacity.

If we are to maintain mobility, it is imperative that we build our transit system to handle the population growth, while simultaneously setting our build environment to prioritize non-car transportation, if we are to be able to handle the growth in any kind of sustainable way.

Look at the graph that starts CQ's linked article. It shows rail at 89% of 2002 and bus at around 81% of 2002. That despite a growth in population.

Its a similar situation in LA despite a massive expansion of their rail system. Big growth with a decline in ridership. They have raised prices on transit, which has been a factor. Lots of other cities are having the same situation with growth in population but decline in ridership.

[tikigod311]

Does the decline correlate with the rise of ride share services? I have to imagine it has made a significant impact to off peak ridership numbers. I frequently have a hard time justifying using MARTA with the convenience and price of Uber

[Sualpine]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

And this is the point of the study: to figure out what is appropriate for moving forward. They're likely purposefully avoiding anything explicit about who and how consolidation happens, if it happens.

Your obvious solution is not obvious to everyone. Afterall, many of us have conflicting views here, like how I disagree about combining GRTA and MARTA and your assumptions regarding political potentials. The study is to try and sift out what exactly is the best option. It's quite possible it comes out with a very different, for better or worse, suggestion on how to handle the state.

Transportation studies are a waste of time and money that should otherwise be going into MARTA.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by bu2

Look at the graph that starts CQ's linked article. It shows rail at 89% of 2002 and bus at around 81% of 2002. That despite a growth in population.

Its a similar situation in LA despite a massive expansion of their rail system. Big growth with a decline in ridership. They have raised prices on transit, which has been a factor. Lots of other cities are having the same situation with growth in population but decline in ridership.

Ah, I found my mistake. I was looking at national ridership (because I'm great at reading what cells are being summed up in excel like that). Here are the corrected versions of graphs for MARTA:





Alright, so ridership is, indeed, lower than it was in 2002, at this point in time. Ridership is also lower than in 2009. If you look at the vehicle miles chart, though, you'll see that 2009 was also the start of a set of large service cuts (to make up for the loss of funds during the recession). And, of course, gas prices still play a massive role in things, as I explained, with drops in prices corresponding to decreased ridership.

Though our revenue miles for both buses and rail are going up, neither are at the point where they were in 2008. Correspondingly, our ridership is on an upswing, though it's not at the 2008 height. There's a strong correlation between just how much service there is in an area, and how high ridership is. After all Transit Ridership is Falling Everywhere — But Not in Cities With Redesigned Bus Networks:

Driving mileage increased for the fifth straight year, the Federal Highway Administration reports in a statement that celebrates record traffic levels as a boon for the nation. Americans logged 3.2 trillion miles last year. Traffic in December 2016 increased 0.5 percent compared to the previous December.

Meanwhile, transit ridership decreased in almost every major city. But there were two cities that bucked the trend — Seattle and Houston, which posted 4.1 and 2.3 percent increases, respectively.

Those two outliers share one thing in common: In addition to expanding light rail, they’re both redesigning their bus networks.

MARTA has kicked off its bus overhaul plan, and we will likely see ridership grow.

There's also the note that ridership hasn't declined equally between modes, despite overall declines:

In other cities, rail numbers grow while bus numbers fall. That’s true in Los Angeles, where thickening traffic and construction hold-ups are slowing buses and perhaps discouraging passengers. In Chicago, CTA bus ridership dropped by nearly 20 percent between 2008 and 2016, “even as rail ridership has increased by roughly the same amount,” writes the urban policy analyst Daniel Kay Hertz; service cuts likely bear a good deal of blame.

In New York, bus ridership has waned for years; chalk it up there to too-slow and too-unreliable service. And yes, subway usage also fell 0.3 percent last year, as the New York Times reported this week—but weekday ridership is at an all-time high, while weekend ridership has dropped about 3 percent.

So, there you have it. Cities that have expanded their bus systems have seen growth in those systems, while cities who have strong rail systems are seeing growth in those systems as well.


To answer your original question, yes, expanding rail (as well as bus) service will bring more riders to the system, despite overall trends on decreasing ridership (though the causes of that trend are wide and varied between systems).

Originally Posted by Sualpine

Transportation studies are a waste of time and money that should otherwise be going into MARTA.

Without studies, MARTA can't do anything either. The data and information gathered is important to properly planning out an approach. Are some of them redundant? Sure. Is the inaction after them frustrating? Yes. Would the complete diversion of money established for studies to MARTA actually solve anything? Not really.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by tikigod311

Does the decline correlate with the rise of ride share services? I have to imagine it has made a significant impact to off peak ridership numbers. I frequently have a hard time justifying using MARTA with the convenience and price of Uber

https://www.citylab.com/commute/2017...k-city/517932/

[bu2]

Houston ridership is growing now after the bus revamp, but it is still well below peak ridership.

[cqholt]

Ralston had already made news in January when he proposed setting up a House Commission to study transit. He also made a point that the Commission was not being put together to “take over” any existing transit agency (a point that was welcomed by MARTA officials at the time).

Speaker David Ralston talks transit, religious liberty and a possible run for governor - SaportaReport

[tikigod311]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Speaker David Ralston talks transit, religious liberty and a possible run for governor - SaportaReport

Great article, lots of good insight into the future of the state's transit effort. He sounds like Deal 2.0, against the religious liberty bill, bidness focused. He really seems to highlight rural transit. Rural bus network coming? He also seems to avoid committing to rail transit.

Ralston was asked specifically about a Georgia Senate resolution that passed on Friday about would allow the state to enter into a lease with CSX. According to an article in the Marietta Daily Journal, CSX would have exclusive use of the railroad, “ending any possibility for those tracks to be shared with a passenger rail line.”


Ralston did not respond specifically to that resolution, but he said: “I think it’s important that we have as many options as possible as we go forward.”

I hope he's serious about that.

[cqholt]

Georgia House Speaker David Ralston appointed 14 members to the panel to study potential collaborations between systems in the region. Among the members are leaders from three counties in the metro—Fulton, Cobb, and Gwinnett—representatives from three transit agencies in the state—Chatham Area Transit, Athens Transit System, and the Georgia Transit Association—and six members of the state House of Representatives.

Anyone notice something missing?

Notably missing from the list are representatives from the City of Atlanta and the state’s largest transportation system, MARTA.

https://atlanta.curbed.com/2017/5/26...gional-transit

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Anyone notice something missing?

https://atlanta.curbed.com/2017/5/26...gional-transit

So does this mean they are planning something that doesn't involve MARTA?

Maybe MARTA could become involved at a later date.