Ridership on masstransit breaks records Nationwide

[Kenosha]

And why are we not investing in Mass Transit?

quote: Ridership on mass transit breaks records    

Enlarge By Mary Altaffer, AP


More people are riding the nation's buses and trains, breaking records for the first quarter of the year. Transit operators expect the increase to be greater in the second quarter as gasoline prices soar.
A report set for release today by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) shows trips on public transit January-March rose 3% over the same period last year to 2.6 billion rides. Light rails saw the biggest jump: 10% to 110 million trips.

Early figures for April show ridership going even higher as gas hovers near $4 a gallon, says APTA president William Millar.

In 2007, he says, "we had higher numbers than we've seen in 50 years, and the trend is continuing in 2008."

Still, only 5% of workers commute by public transit, according to a U.S. Census survey in 2006. Millar says no more than 20% of households have easy access to buses or trains.

Rising gas prices present an opportunity for the transit industry to beef up service, says Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, chairwoman of the Urban Planning Department at UCLA. She says cities have not provided an alternative for people to leave their cars at home: safe, reliable, convenient service.

"In many places, they are not reaching capacity," she says. "But if gas prices keep rising, we'll see it more and more."

Transit managers say systems are underfunded.

The South Florida rail system, which runs from Miami to Fort Lauderdale and Palm Beach, had a 13% increase in riders during the first quarter. In April, travel jumped 28%, says Joe Giulietti of the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority.

Yet his agency faces an $18 million budget hole that may mean cutting train service by more than half, he says. The system is funded mainly through grants from the state and the three counties it serves, and he says Palm Beach County is considering reducing its funding.

"So at a time that ridership is at an all-time high and people are desperate to use mass transit," he says, "we are in a terrible spot."

The APTA ridership report covers 262 transit systems. It shows the biggest increase in rail travel in Oceanside, Calif., Seattle and Harrisburg, Pa. Gainesville, Ga., and Pompano Beach, Fla., saw some of the biggest gains in bus ridership.

"There are a number of factors. ... An obvious one is high gas prices," says Linda Robson of Seattle's Sound Transit. She says the system has added trains

"We're hearing from riders that gas prices got them to consider riding the system," she says. "But what keeps them coming back is service and convenience."

[dioscorides]

this was in yesterday's tulsa world:
Click Here

Gas, road costs put rail plans on track

By SUSAN HYLTON World Staff Writer
6/1/2008
Last Modified: 6/1/2008  3:25 AM

Tulsa's carbon footprint also fuels the vision of rail transit.


The idea of commuter rail seems to be gaining steam in an atmosphere of skyrocketing gasoline and road-widening costs and a worrisome report on the size of Tulsa's carbon footprint.

One of the biggest reasons cited last week by the Brookings Institution for Tulsa's ranking of 11th for its output of greenhouse gases was its lack of rail transit made worse by urban sprawl and near-total dependence on personal vehicles.

The good news is that Tulsa already has numerous rail lines in place that are still active, connecting downtown to all the suburbs.

"I think it's something we have to begin to look at," Mayor Kathy Taylor said. "We know the environment is something we can either spoil or take care of. Knowing what we can do to reduce (emissions) is not just smart, but it saves money."

Tulsa City Councilor Rick Westcott said it is discouraging to realize the size of Tulsa's problem.

"But I think it could prove as an impetus toward people realizing the need for a good commuter rail system or connecting to the Amtrak system," he said.

Traveling by rail is a romantic notion for many, but there also are
practical benefits such as infill development that experts say tends to spring up near rail stations.

An alternate means of transportation also would help many people avoid unaffordable gas prices. It also gives the aging population a way to continue being mobile.

"There's going to come a time when people are not going to be able to afford to drive every day," Westcott said.

Westcott said he thinks it is possible to take the position that greenhouse gases should be reduced without believing that climate change is solely the result of mankind's emissions.

"I don't believe (global warming) is caused by mankind's carbon emissions, but there's no doubt that operating an automobile does release a certain amount of carbon in the air. Is it better not to do that? Of course it is," Westcott said.

Leaders believe there could be some federal money to make commuter rail possible, but most of the funding will have to be local or state.

Taylor's urban planning adviser, Jack Crowley, is working on a light rail concept that would connect the west bank of the Arkansas River to downtown destinations such as the BOK Center and Convention Center, the Blue Dome District, and the campuses of Oklahoma State University-Tulsa and Tulsa Community College.

There comes a point where widening Tulsa's streets and highways to ease gridlock is not the best solution, Westcott said.

And it may not be the cheapest solution either.

Transportation planning manager Tim Armer of the Indian Nations Council of Governments said a Tulsa Transit feasibility study shows that not only would there be enough people — 2,000 — to support passenger rail between Broken Arrow and Tulsa, but implementing a rail system would be much cheaper than building more highway lanes.

At the current $100 million per highway lane it is costing to widen Interstate 44 between Yale Avenue and Riverside Drive, it would cost about $1.4 billion to widen the 14-mile path of the Broken Arrow Expressway, Armer said.

The capital cost to implement the rail system from Tulsa to Broken Arrow is estimated at $100 million, and $3 million a year to operate it.

Also significant is that rail service would pull about 20 percent of the vehicles off the Broken Arrow Expressway, Armer said.

Cities like Denver and Austin have reacted to ozone alert days and gridlock traffic with initiatives to support a commuter rail system.

"We didn't do the best job in planning for growth, and we're in a reactive state," Sonya Lopez, senior planner for the city of Austin, said recently at a rail seminar in Tulsa.

Tulsa planners are reacting as well.

Armer said they no longer support widening the Broken Arrow Expressway to eight lanes in the 2030 long-range plan.

"We kept it at six lanes and added an element to study passenger rail," Armer said.

Further study needs to be done to look at what stops the train would make as it goes through east Tulsa and midtown on its way to downtown.

"We are hoping that our leaders and the residents would take the approach of being proactive instead of reactionary," Armer said. "We don't want to wait until we're like Dallas or Atlanta and be forced to look at other options."

More bike trails, renewable energies, carbon-absorbing trees and other efforts also are part of the equation to reduce greenhouse gases.

Taylor said she wants the city of Tulsa to be a leading source to help inspire behavior patterns that promote a greener city.

The city will instantly be more efficient when it moves into One Technology Center this year, Taylor said, noting that employees who carpool or drive hybrid cars will be rewarded with preferential parking, and showers will be available for those who bike to work.

"We're really making progress, but it is really about changing habits," Taylor said.

[we vs us]

Wow, hedge much?

quote:
Westcott said he thinks it is possible to take the position that greenhouse gases should be reduced without believing that climate change is solely the result of mankind's emissions.

"I don't believe (global warming) is caused by mankind's carbon emissions, but there's no doubt that operating an automobile does release a certain amount of carbon in the air. Is it better not to do that? Of course it is," Westcott said.

[dioscorides]

yeah, i thought that was a funny quote.

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

Wow, hedge much?

quote:
Westcott said he thinks it is possible to take the position that greenhouse gases should be reduced without believing that climate change is solely the result of mankind's emissions.

"I don't believe (global warming) is caused by mankind's carbon emissions, but there's no doubt that operating an automobile does release a certain amount of carbon in the air. Is it better not to do that? Of course it is," Westcott said.

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by dioscorides

this was in yesterday's tulsa world:
Click Here

Transportation planning manager Tim Armer of the Indian Nations Council of Governments said a Tulsa Transit feasibility study shows that not only would there be enough people — 2,000 — to support passenger rail between Broken Arrow and Tulsa, but implementing a rail system would be much cheaper than building more highway lanes.

[snip]

Also significant is that rail service would pull about 20 percent of the vehicles off the Broken Arrow Expressway, Armer said.

Cities like Denver and Austin have reacted to ozone alert days and gridlock traffic with initiatives to support a commuter rail system.

How does 2,000 passengers equate to 20% of the rush hour traffic on the BA? Even if every one of those passengers is in his or her own car, that means only 10,000 cars on the BA.

Austin has a dense bus network that runs frequently and late into the night. Providing that in Tulsa would do far more, far sooner to enable car-free living for more Tulsans than one or two infrequently serviced rail lines.

But since people don't like buses, if it makes people happier, we can paint choo-choo wheels on the sides of the buses and change the horns to give off a cheery "peep-peep!" -- maybe even paint them up like Thomas the Tank Engine and friends.

[1099paralegal]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates
But since people don't like buses, if it makes people happier, we can paint choo-choo wheels on the sides of the buses and change the horns to give off a cheery "peep-peep!" -- maybe even paint them up like Thomas the Tank Engine and friends.

BEEN THERE.  DUN DAT.

[PonderInc]

Actually, painting a few trains like Thomas and friends (aside from the copyright issues) is not such a bad idea.  It's so weird, it might just be brilliant!  

It would get a crapload of little kids and their families on board (it would also acclimate them to transit at an early age).  They would WANT to ride the train and would demand it (incessantly) from their folks.  Riding the train would become the parental ploy of choice for local folks ("If you stop biting your sister, we'll go ride Thomas...")  Then, of course, the family would need a destination.  So perhaps they would jump off for a meal in the Blue Dome district.  A beer to soothe frayed adult nerves and a burger for the kiddos...

Think about how many billions of dollars are spent marketing to very small children.  The reason it works is that little kids will drive their folks crazy until the adults capitulate and purchase the advertised item.  It's a much more powerful strategy than you might imagine.

I'm game for Thomas the Train!  Whatever it takes to get folks on board!

(The official Thomas the Train that travels around the country charges about $20 for each ticket.  A lot of people actually drive in from out of town to see it and take their kids for a ride.)

[joiei]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

quote:Originally posted by dioscorides

this was in yesterday's tulsa world:
Click Here

Transportation planning manager Tim Armer of the Indian Nations Council of Governments said a Tulsa Transit feasibility study shows that not only would there be enough people — 2,000 — to support passenger rail between Broken Arrow and Tulsa, but implementing a rail system would be much cheaper than building more highway lanes.

[snip]

Also significant is that rail service would pull about 20 percent of the vehicles off the Broken Arrow Expressway, Armer said.

Cities like Denver and Austin have reacted to ozone alert days and gridlock traffic with initiatives to support a commuter rail system.

How does 2,000 passengers equate to 20% of the rush hour traffic on the BA? Even if every one of those passengers is in his or her own car, that means only 10,000 cars on the BA.

Austin has a dense bus network that runs frequently and late into the night. Providing that in Tulsa would do far more, far sooner to enable car-free living for more Tulsans than one or two infrequently serviced rail lines.

But since people don't like buses, if it makes people happier, we can paint choo-choo wheels on the sides of the buses and change the horns to give off a cheery "peep-peep!" -- maybe even paint them up like Thomas the Tank Engine and friends.

I agree with Mr. Bates about needing to have the increased frequency, running where the people who would ride the busses live and work, better connections for people going across town, and extend the times.

I have lived in cities with better mass transit and used that transit system to get around.  San Francisco, Portland, OR., and New Orleans.  They all had their deficiencies but they had busses that ran on frequent schedules, especially during the morning and the evening rush hours.  And they had busses that ran until late for the second and third shift workers to get to work or home late at night and first thing in the morning.  

Before jumping on the rail trail, lets first improve what we already have, busses.  They work, I know, I have commuted on them, just not here.  

One of the first things I would recommend looking at is where does the transit system need to be.  Where are the people who would use transit coming from and where do they need to get to and during rush hour beef up the number of busses running.  I don't know if there is a pass system, but frequent riders can be encouraged by offering monthly bus passes at a discount as a reward.

I think we need to work with Mr Bates on this idea, and get something happening quickly.

[TheArtist]

There is the long range plan for 2030,,, but I say the mid range plan should be to do at least 2 things when it comes to the BA and commuting. We also should to more to increase bus ridership in general but I want to mention these at the moment.

1. Do the downtown starter line. You will need to do that section before you do any line, to any other part of the city or any suburb, first anyway. It will be an expense all its own and by doing that cost now, will take a chunk out of the eventual cost of doing a BA to Tulsa line or Jenks to Tulsa line, etc.  

2. Park-n-rides and dedicated "BRT or nice commuting" busses running up and down the BA where the future rail line would be.  The park-n-ride parking lots would be in areas where you would eventually want rail stations to be and you can start encouraging higher density developments around them. Its a way for suburban commuters to get used to the idea of mass transit. Having a Park-n-ride station in BA can save someone who lives further out a bit on gas. The person drives from their neighborhood to the station, parks, then hops on the bus for the rest of the way into the city for work, for a show, a night out, a baseball game...It will be far more flexible time wise than a rail could be at first.  And your taking an incremental step towards paying for future rail infrastructure by purchasing the park-n-ride stations early. The park-n-ride stations along the BA can also start acting as feeder stations for the arterial busses. Or vice versa, someone living near downtown can hop on the commuter bus, get off at the "Sheridan Station" then take the arterial bus to work at the mall area,,, or go on into downtown BA. You use the commuter line hauling suburban commuters to help you have enough ridership to make the park-n-ride stations within the city more practical. This way in 20 or 25 years time when your ready for a rail line to go in, your already a good part of the way there.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

quote:Originally posted by dioscorides

this was in yesterday's tulsa world:
Click Here

Transportation planning manager Tim Armer of the Indian Nations Council of Governments said a Tulsa Transit feasibility study shows that not only would there be enough people — 2,000 — to support passenger rail between Broken Arrow and Tulsa, but implementing a rail system would be much cheaper than building more highway lanes.

[snip]

Also significant is that rail service would pull about 20 percent of the vehicles off the Broken Arrow Expressway, Armer said.

Cities like Denver and Austin have reacted to ozone alert days and gridlock traffic with initiatives to support a commuter rail system.

How does 2,000 passengers equate to 20% of the rush hour traffic on the BA? Even if every one of those passengers is in his or her own car, that means only 10,000 cars on the BA.

Austin has a dense bus network that runs frequently and late into the night. Providing that in Tulsa would do far more, far sooner to enable car-free living for more Tulsans than one or two infrequently serviced rail lines.

But since people don't like buses, if it makes people happier, we can paint choo-choo wheels on the sides of the buses and change the horns to give off a cheery "peep-peep!" -- maybe even paint them up like Thomas the Tank Engine and friends.

And we can paint rails in the streets and hang ropes to simulate the overhead electric lines. At least no one would steal them for the copper.  A bus is a bus is a bus. You cannot fool anyone who has ridden a real trolley.

A bus is my least favorite mode of public transit.  I remember them as a child as loud and smelly at the 69th Street terminal at Upper Darby / Philadelphia, PA. The real trolleys running to Suburbia (Media in my case) were much more desirable.  I would ride a bus if I were desperate enough, or as a short link to light rail. The public preferance for rail was demonstrated when the Ardmore route from 69th Steet was bustituted from trolley to bus on the same exclusive right of way decades ago.

Light Rail cannot be justified everywhere. Where it can, it will be less expensive over the life of the transit system.  See www.lightrailnow.org
Look at the myths vs. facts section first.

In any case, I do not foresee effective public transportation any time soon in the S.E. Tulsa north Bixby area.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

There is the long range plan for 2030,,, but I say the mid range plan should be to do at least 2 things when it comes to the BA and commuting. We also should to more to increase bus ridership in general but I want to mention these at the moment.

1. Do the downtown starter line. You will need to do that section before you do any line, to any other part of the city or any suburb, first anyway. It will be an expense all its own and by doing that cost now, will take a chunk out of the eventual cost of doing a BA to Tulsa line or Jenks to Tulsa line, etc.  

2. Park-n-rides and dedicated "BRT or nice commuting" busses running up and down the BA where the future rail line would be.  The park-n-ride parking lots would be in areas where you would eventually want rail stations to be and you can start encouraging higher density developments around them. Its a way for suburban commuters to get used to the idea of mass transit. Having a Park-n-ride station in BA can save someone who lives further out a bit on gas. The person drives from their neighborhood to the station, parks, then hops on the bus for the rest of the way into the city for work, for a show, a night out, a baseball game...It will be far more flexible time wise than a rail could be at first.  And your taking an incremental step towards paying for future rail infrastructure by purchasing the park-n-ride stations early. The park-n-ride stations along the BA can also start acting as feeder stations for the arterial busses. Or vice versa, someone living near downtown can hop on the commuter bus, get off at the "Sheridan Station" then take the arterial bus to work at the mall area,,, or go on into downtown BA. You use the commuter line hauling suburban commuters to help you have enough ridership to make the park-n-ride stations within the city more practical. This way in 20 or 25 years time when your ready for a rail line to go in, your already a good part of the way there.

I agree with but with the following qualifications:

For BRT to be effective it needs exclusive right of way. Otherwise it is just a fancy bus stuck in traffic along with personal vehicles. That will run up the cost of BRT up to near the cost of Light Rail. Consider the annualized cost, not just the initial cost.

BRT has not been shown to be a reliable forcast of rail ridership.  People still prefer rail whether that preference is justified or not.  My sister loves the Albuquerque Rail Runner, hates the bus ride from the rail station to her place of employment.  She hates the drive up I-25 even more.

[Kenosha]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

quote:Originally posted by dioscorides

this was in yesterday's tulsa world:
Click Here

Transportation planning manager Tim Armer of the Indian Nations Council of Governments said a Tulsa Transit feasibility study shows that not only would there be enough people — 2,000 — to support passenger rail between Broken Arrow and Tulsa, but implementing a rail system would be much cheaper than building more highway lanes.

[snip]

Also significant is that rail service would pull about 20 percent of the vehicles off the Broken Arrow Expressway, Armer said.

Cities like Denver and Austin have reacted to ozone alert days and gridlock traffic with initiatives to support a commuter rail system.

How does 2,000 passengers equate to 20% of the rush hour traffic on the BA? Even if every one of those passengers is in his or her own car, that means only 10,000 cars on the BA.

Austin has a dense bus network that runs frequently and late into the night. Providing that in Tulsa would do far more, far sooner to enable car-free living for more Tulsans than one or two infrequently serviced rail lines.

But since people don't like buses, if it makes people happier, we can paint choo-choo wheels on the sides of the buses and change the horns to give off a cheery "peep-peep!" -- maybe even paint them up like Thomas the Tank Engine and friends.

Snarky, but brings up a good point.  Clearly, in order to have a comprehensive transit system, bus, shuttle, and rapid bus service would need to be funded and fully implemented.  I believe there is a plan for full implementation, but it isn't funded.  I don't recall any discussion about rail based transit, that didn't include expanding rubber tire service as well.  It's just common sense, Michael. So, call your councilor, the mayor, and demand that if they are going to ask the public invest 2 billion dollars in stuff for cars, to at least provide dedicated funding for transit (we can start with the bus system) so that we can get some of these cars of the road, and so we don't run into this same problem in 15 years...more cars, more wear and tear.  

2 billion dollars in only in asphalt. It's just does't seem like the smart long term thing to do...does it?

[Hometown]

Long range the smart way to go is to plan for the smart cars of the future.  

Tulsa's love of parking lots might put her in the right spot at the right time. Of course we could always ask developers to improve their parking lots.

Beefing up bus service in the meantime might be a better investment.