Transit ridership down in Atlanta and across USA (insurance, home)

[bu2]

Originally Posted by JMatl

You are quoting Randal O'Toole - who happens to be a paid, known enemy of Light Rail as well as all vestiges of Smart Growth.

I almost hate to say it, but I'm afraid this is more Houston-centric thinking on your part....

This shill has no credibility in practically any up-to-date actual Professional forum - or any setting, really. I realize his paid and connected constituency are big fans, though.

Well he is quoting APTA stats. It makes you look pretty silly to complain about the source of actual real numbers.

[LTCM]

Originally Posted by bu2

Transit Ridership Down 2.3% in 2016 - Center for Opportunity Urbanism

"With little fanfare, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) released its fourth quarter 2016 ridership report last week. When ridership goes up, the lobby group usually issues a big press release ballyhooing the importance of transit (and transit subsidies). But 2016 ridership fell, so there was no press release.
The report showed that light-rail ridership grew by 3.4 percent, probably because of the opening of new light-rail lines such as Seattle, where the opening of the University line increased ridership by 60 percent. In the past, light-rail ridership has grown with the addition of new lines, but the number of passengers per mile of light rail has fallen, indicating diminishing returns to new rail construction.
Commuter-rail ridership grew by 1.6 percent, mostly due to growth in New York City. Trolley bus ridership grew by 1.8 percent, almost all of which was in San Francisco. Demand-response (paratransit) grew by 0.7 percent.
The two most important modes, however, both declined: heavy rail fell by 1.6% and buses by 4.1 percent. Since these two modes together carry 86 percent of transit riders, their decline swamped the growth in other modes. “Other,” which includes ferries, monorails, and people movers, also fell by 0.2 percent.

Well, that utterly and convincingly destroys the "ridership grows faster as the system gets built out" lie which transit proponents throw out like candy. Maybe we can look back at the streetcar thread and call out the liars who pushed this falsehood. Can we get this thread as a sticky so no one forgets it?

Seriously, I cannot believe there are people who think building more of something which has poor ridership will improve loads.

What is the fastest way to waste $5 billion:

Bury the money in a pit?
Burn the money in a pit?
Join MARTA?

[JMatl]

Originally Posted by bu2

Well he is quoting APTA stats. It makes you look pretty silly to complain about the source of actual real numbers.

No, it makes you look silly to post anything authored by him. He has a well known agenda.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by JMatl

No, it makes you look silly to post anything authored by him. He has a well known agenda.

So do you. You get real numbers and stick your head in the sand and pretend they don't exist.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by LTCM

Well, that utterly and convincingly destroys the "ridership grows faster as the system gets built out" lie which transit proponents throw out like candy. Maybe we can look back at the streetcar thread and call out the liars who pushed this falsehood. Can we get this thread as a sticky so no one forgets it?

Seriously, I cannot believe there are people who think building more of something which has poor ridership will improve loads.

What is the fastest way to waste $5 billion:

Bury the money in a pit?
Burn the money in a pit?
Join MARTA?

Let's see, how long was the first section of interstate? How many people used it? How over budget was it? It should have never gotten extended, obviously.

The ridership models for the streetcar, which have been estimating bellow current ridership, indicate that we'll grow both overall and per mile ridership. That's because the idea that, as something grows it reaches more people, is in no way a faulty one. It's the core tenant of any network affect.

Of course there's a point where it shifts, where the expansions don't reach enough new people to grow the per mile number, but do you really think we're anywhere near that point? Do you really think our system, with as limited reach as it has, is any where near built out to the point where there isn't a reason to expand? Given the size of our metro, and the projected growth, I seriously question your logic if you actually think so.

On the other hand, we've reached the point where roads have diminishing returns. Why should we keep building them instead of investing in transit? Because someone used two whole years of data and you're taking it as a 'gotcha' to known and proven long-term trends? Please.

[AUGnative]

I think once we see self driving cars becoming the norm and ride pool apps using this technology.. traditional public transit will become virtually nonexistant.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by AUGnative

I think once we see self driving cars becoming the norm and ride pool apps using this technology.. traditional public transit will become virtually nonexistant.

Self driving cars will not solve the issue of large number of vehicles trying to use the same corridor at the same time, aka Rush Hour, as the existing lanes have a limit. Fixed guideway transit can add more railcars, buses, etc. to deal with crush loads.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by AUGnative

I think once we see self driving cars becoming the norm and ride pool apps using this technology.. traditional public transit will become virtually nonexistant.

I really doubt it. Cars, autonomous or not, are really bad at moving large numbers of people in limited spaces. You know, the general description of a city.

There will certainly be efficiency savings, but even Elon himself admits that autonomous cars will increase traffic. See, as you make driving easier, more people drive. It's the same concept of latent and induced demand that we see fill newly widened roads with cars until they're just as congested.

Its with that, and the continued growth of the cities, that will continue to keep mass-transit relevant.

As always, autonomous cars (and cars in general) are just a single part of what should be a collection of technologies being used to meet our transportation needs.

[J2rescue]

Originally Posted by AUGnative

I think once we see self driving cars becoming the norm and ride pool apps using this technology.. traditional public transit will become virtually nonexistant.

[tikigod311]

But, AVs will drive much better and current choke points on the interstate will actually run smoothly. I wouldn't expect to stop on the interstate hardly ever again. You would be slowed coming into congestion or entering the interstate. When all the vehicles are networked, the road throughput should increase significantly.

Even though AVs won't eliminate congestion, it will make things much better in regards to the overall commuting experience. For many people now, it takes up a significant portion of your life. Time where you really shouldn't be doing anything else. Free that up and congestion isn't nearly as bad of a thing as it used to. It's more free time

I do wonder what the role of transit will be in the future. If you have the money, you're going to opt for the AV experience. It's better in every aspect. But, who knows how long that will take. We have to increase commuter bandwidth in Atlanta. Money has to be spent. Better to provide alternatives to already massive roads than keep funding more of the same.