U.S. Transit Ridership Is Plummeting: Can San Diego’s Proposal Buck The Trend?
Nationwide Transit Ridership Is Plummeting: Can San Diego’s High-Speed Rail Proposal Buck The Trend?
Oct. 21, 2019 By Joshua Emerson Smith Read More: https://www.latimes.com/california/s...ego-buck-trend Quote:
https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/d...t-plan2new.jpg https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/d...-ridership.jpg |
This sounds utterly idiotic. Why is the U.S. always spending scarce transit dollars in the most ass-backwards ways? Why would a BART-style system work in San Diego?
Why not, you know, invest in existing buses and trolleys, which have decent ridership (for pathetic U.S. standards)? |
Isn't the answer obvious?...........ribbon cutting ceremonies. Ditto for these useless downtown streetcar routes.
|
The reason why transit ridership declines?
We build vanity projects that don't get riders to their destination and then cut bus service that does. We have to save money to fund these vanity projects and truly viable transit suffers. We also allow big corporations to build major job centres in the middle of nowhere because the cost of land is cheap. We need to start to rationalize where jobs may be located so that transit service is viable. Transit planning and investment has to change so that it actually delivers better service and goes where people want to go. Often making bus service frequent will give the best bang for the buck. We also are afraid to put roads on a diet so that bus lanes can be inserted. |
Land use. Land use. Land use.
|
The issue is that outside of a handful of urban cores our cities are not built in a way that makes mass transit useful.
So you have a train that goes from suburban part of San Diego A to suburban part of San Diego B you still need a car once you get there. But besides that this is not surprising. in 2008 transit ridership was skyrocketing because oil prices were and people were struggling on top of that. Now we have (outside of California) cheap gas for the foreseeable future and a solid consumer confidence. This is to be expected really |
Uber and Lyft are responsible for a lot of the decline, even in places where transit is sometimes faster than cars during rush hour.
|
Quote:
So then what happens? Cities with robust transit and bike/scooter systems and high walkability will survive and thrive. Cities without those things...:runaway: |
San Diego, considering the massive decentralization, weak downtown, and difficulty of walking anywhere, has decent ridership. They could probably spend 5% of what it costs to build this asinine plan and get much higher ridership gains by simply investing in buses.
Also, San Diego has such pleasant year-round weather than it isn't unreasonable to ask people to wait at stops that are nothing more than a sign and maybe a bench. Can't do that year-round in blazing hot/sunny Phoenix, rainy Seattle, cold Chicago, humid Miami, etc. Any transit planner who believes an RER style system makes sense for San Diego should find another line of work. It's absurd. |
This is absurd. Given how employment is distributed in SD you'd need a lot of drugs to think this is a cost effective solution. How about a bus network with dedicated lanes and frequent service instead for a few million dollars.
If they really want to spend big money on a project then get to work improving the LOSSAN corridor. You could dump billions into that and actually get something for the effort. |
I would like to see the graph to display the total number of transit service hours for 2010 and 2018 for each of those cities. Then you have a more proper comparison.
|
I think that the real question is: What is the reason for the decline in transit in nearly every city nationwide?
I get that Uber / Lyft may be part of the issue, but 20+% declines? Do Uber / Lyft provide that many rides? |
This is an urban planning question, and all solutions will start from building sustainable communities where driving is not a viable option for residents. Higher density does not necessarily reduce quality of life.
|
Quote:
https://i.imgur.com/i935yK8.jpg https://i.imgur.com/z1Pp9vv.jpg https://i.imgur.com/RFNzXKR.jpg Now, anyone is going to look at these renderings and think this looks amazing. I mean look at that architecture, this is public transportation pornography. But then we get down down to the cost. The minimum estimate for this one station, serving one major destination (the airport) is $4.7 billion dollars. MTS has a plan to renovate the city's buses, increases frequency on the the major bus lines and the trolley, and build a whole new trolley line through one of the densest corridors in the city, and that only is going to cost ~$2 billion dollars. Just this one station is going to cost double the amount it takes to renovate and expand the entire city's current transit network, and that $4.7 billion dollar figure still doesn't take into account: -cost of moving the rail lines up and over the 5 freeway -need to strengthen the proposed tunnel to the airport because it runs right underneath the airport's runway and terminal -adding connections with downtown (which is over 2 miles away) -eminent domain issues with the surrounding neighborhoods due to blocked sunlight and need to expand roadways -need to redo the entire community plan of the surrounding region, which primarily an industrial area with a 30 foot height limit (changing the latter will require a countywide ballot) -legal costs of potential Brown Act violations because the landowner (the US Navy) is demanding planning move as such a rapid pace that there's hardly any time for community engagement Meanwhile, SANDAG director Ikhrata has been so obsessed with this one project (which he doesn't even have the funding for yet) that he failed to engage with the SANDAG board, giving road advocates there an opening to push their own agenda. Thus when earlier this month when he came to the board for approval of the next 5 year budget plan, they overruled his proposal and instead accelerated expansions of the 67 and 78 highways. So the only measurable impact of all this transit dreaming has been an increase in planning for auto infrastructure. :brickwall: |
San Diego should focus on serving its dense urban parts, of which it has plenty, not the boondocks.
|
I wonder how much remote working/working from home has contributed. If people can work remotely even 3 days a week that creates a lot less demand for transit services, if they were previously using them.
|
Quote:
Also Uber/Lyft are practically a nonfactor. Rideshare makes up 0.6% of communes and is in the low single digits of total trips. What's really happening is that the booming economy is making it more feasible for people to afford a car. Public transit, walking/biking, and even carpooling are all decreasing as more and more lower income folks get on the road. And it's hard to argue, even in NYC a person has potential access to more jobs if they commute via car than via public transit. Contributing are public transit agencies' increasing obsession with rail, LRT, subways, and other non-bus infrastructure. The issue being that these systems are typically routed through high income areas, where people are already rich enough to afford cars, while low income areas where the people actually need public transit are left behind. Rail based ridership is up at historic levels, but it's been more than washed out by the massive decreases in bus ridership. |
Quote:
Also, everyone I knew in NYC that commuted by car was broke. All the good paying jobs are accessible by subway. Uber/taxi is also a fraction of the cost of parking in lower Manhattan. I think working from home and telecommuting is an interesting theory which may explain part of the reason why transit ridership is down. If everyone did it one day a week, that would be a massive drop in ridership. |
Quote:
https://i.imgur.com/VqOLKxL.png Quote:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M12MTVUSM227NFWA |
Quote:
In any case, if you don't want to take my word for it you can read this UCLA study that ties SoCal's transit ridership declines explicitly to increased car ownership among low income minorities. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 8:37 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.