PAT should really have a "rush hour" rate? (Pittsburgh: quality of life, living)

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by pman

no one was riding them.

Bull crap! Those busses were packed at rush hour. I know. It was my bus. Standing room only.

The midday runs should have been eliminated, not the rush hour runs.

Originally Posted by pman

how is charging market rate for parking anti-car?

The current rates are market rates for Pittsburgh's economy.

Originally Posted by pman

...and even if there is a little anti-car, a little is necessary to offset the decades of procar at any cost extremism.

We have no choice in the suburbs because the public transportation system sucks. People need to go more places than downtown. Since the route cuts, we have zero public transportation where I live, and you want to raise parking rates.

[sealie]

I sometimes think Pittsburgh's problem is that they want to let things go until they can't put them off any more. It was the first time parking rates had gone up in a decade. Same with the property assessments. Naturally the amount spikes, everybody gets upset, the city is terrified to do this again for the next ten years until they absolutely can't put it off any more, rather than just a gradual change to keep up with inflation every two years. This seems to be a running theme. See also road maintenance. See also underattended but not yet consolidated schools. So one thing I agree with Barq on here is that city government is not very open to change. I just don't agree with his proposed change.

[pman]

Originally Posted by Hopes

Bull crap! Those busses were packed at rush hour. I know. It was my bus. Standing room only.

if that were the case across the board then ridership would have dropped at a faster rate.
what actually happened was two fold. ridership drops on the whole, ridership shifts towards dedicated right of way routes. When this occurred, the agency acquired more articulated buses. PAT was one of the worst run transit agencies in the country prior to the cuts, now it's a reasonably productive agency (riders per labor hour). that said, financial troubles mean that while they were becoming more efficient, there were still cuts they probably didn't want to make. off peak service took a beating as well. ideas have consequences, for the price of the north shore connector "you" could have built regional rail.

Originally Posted by Hopes

The midday runs should have been eliminated, not the rush hour runs.

midday runs are labor and fuel, rush hour runs are equipment. in other words at rush hour there is generally no way to add runs without cutting them somewhere else.

Originally Posted by Hopes

The current rates are market rates for Pittsburgh's economy.

currently there are waiting lists for garages which indicates your assertion is wrong.

Originally Posted by Hopes

We have no choice in the suburbs because the public transportation system sucks. People need to go more places than downtown. Since the route cuts, we have zero public transportation where I live, and you want to raise parking rates.

higher rates should make it easier to park while at the same time it should discourage people for whom transit IS an option. there is no reason why the city should charge below market parking rates.
I think regional transportation is a big hole and would love to see the reintroduction of limited commuter rail service.

[BarqCider]

I would like to clarify in that I simply meant to use "fund the other less ued lines with the increased fees" as an example and not a reason why they should. they could use it anyway they wanted to, but I just used that as a quick example.

[pman]

Originally Posted by BarqCider

I would like to clarify in that I simply meant to use "fund the other less ued lines with the increased fees" as an example and not a reason why they should. they could use it anyway they wanted to, but I just used that as a quick example.

use it to bring hopes route back

[BarqCider]

Originally Posted by pman

use it to bring hopes route back

lets hope for hopes route to return?

[captainmidnight]

I think a lot of rush hour commuter riders would leave if PAT did some sort of rush hour pricing. I don't think many would justify it. The T has it because it costs more to operate the T than a bus, but I would imagine lots more people are using tickets/passes on the rush hour T's than cash.

I remember reading the TDP route-by-route analysis from four years ago (I wish I backed those files up) and most of the suburban flyers routes cost $5-8 a rider to operate. Obviously higher than the $3.75 fare charges so that, plus extra operator and equipment costs and you can see those flyers were not breaking even or making money. Now, if PAT did charge $7 per trip or whatever for the P12, P10, etc than ridership would really drop. Some people would still ride it but someone from Murrysville who gets on the P12 in Holiday Park would think, "For $14 in bus fare a day, I can just drive and park Downtown." and they would be right, but a lot of those people overlook maintenance and fuel costs that go along with that thinking.

After the service cuts, Lenzner Coach Lines came to the rescue for some of the north suburbs. and offered commuter trips to Downtown from Cranberry and Warrendale. The Cranberry route is $5.25 one way and Warrendale route is $5 one way. Lenzner Coach Lines | Commuter Fares

That gives you an idea for the fares needed for a route like that for a private company that doesn't get funding. Plus you have to reserve seating on those and I don't believe they don't stop on their way to Downtown.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by BarqCider

I would like to clarify in that I simply meant to use "fund the other less ued lines with the increased fees" as an example and not a reason why they should. they could use it anyway they wanted to, but I just used that as a quick example.

I still don't understand why you would jump to a fare hike to make the buses less crowded by discouraging people from riding, rather than simply having more buses on those lines, which would encourage people to ride.

[pman]

Originally Posted by ferraris

I still don't understand why you would jump to a fare hike to make the buses less crowded by discouraging people from riding, rather than simply having more buses on those lines, which would encourage people to ride.

what if you needed to charge more to operate more buses? (ftr, I think peduto is starting in the right place by trying to bring parking costs in line with the market. PAT has stated they will be adding capacity on busy routes already. still, I think it costs too much off peak as it is. )

[BarqCider]

correct me if im not mistaken, but the buses are running in the red, not black. Why should they continue to operate in the negative instead of being able to operate without bailout money? it almost sounds like a lot of you feel like you're forking over your first born if they dare raise the prices. The apocalypse will come to the suburban folks, the next great depression will hit America if PAT raises prices on fares.

I understand that many don't want the way of life to change, but the problem is.. many want the lifestyle of eating shrimp daily at a dollar menu price.

heck, many of you want your houses to value 600k+ but pay taxes on a 60k house.