Falling Transit Ridership

[Hermod]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.6eddebf30ff2

31 or 35 major metropolitan areas show declines in public transit ridership.

[Bham1982]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.6eddebf30ff2

31 or 35 major metropolitan areas show declines in public transit ridership.

Uber and ride-sharing, in general, have wrecked havoc on transit numbers the last few years.

In the long run, transit numbers will stabilize, but transit doesn't make much sense in the U.S. outside of NYC and, to a much lesser extent, about a half-dozen other cities [[DC, Bos, Philly, Chi, SF).

In most of the U.S. transit seems to be run as a tourist toy [[see trolleys in Detroit, Cincy, KC, OKC, etc.) or as a last-ditch option for the poorest of the poor.

[Scottathew]

People should re-think transit. I have the means to drive from Rochester Hills to Detroit, but I choose to transfer to a SMART bus in Troy. I save money and more importantly I reclaim time.

Uber and Lyft are too expensive for me. I don't drink, so a major use-case for those services doesn't appeal to me.

[Bham1982]

I save money and more importantly I reclaim time.

Money, yeah, but how do you "save time" taking a bus from Rochester to Detroit?

[MicrosoftFan]

I think I saw a report one time that Detroit’s ridership went up a miniscule amount- 0.3% or something. Houston was the most up, still just at 3%.
Likely because they redesigned their bus network.

[Bham1982]

DDOT had a 10.32% decline in bus ridership in calendar year 2017, which appears pretty awful. Among major cities, only Miami fared [[slightly) worse.

Source:
http://www.apta.com/resources/statis...rship-APTA.pdf

[ABetterDetroit]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.6eddebf30ff2

31 or 35 major metropolitan areas show declines in public transit ridership.

Interesting article.

One can’t ignore the parallels to the Military Industrial Complex with its unwillingness to embrace new ideas and thinking to protect the revenue stream and the careers based on the old ways of doing the job even when facing cost effective obsolescence.

[Honky Tonk]

Money, yeah, but how do you "save time" taking a bus from Rochester to Detroit?

Instead of wasting time watching for pedestrians, the road, traffic, "the other guy", and driving, you could have your nose stuck in your cell phone posting brilliant tid-bits on DetroitYES!

[Johnnny5]

Uber and the other car services are undoubtedly cutting into mass transit use, but I would guess the improved economy is just as responsible for the decline. With the exception of a few places [[like NYC) those using mass transit are typically doing so for purely economic reasons.

[emu steve]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.6eddebf30ff2

31 or 35 major metropolitan areas show declines in public transit ridership.

I will speak of D.C. transit ridership, one of the highlights of that article.

The subway system was getting older [[first segment completed in 1976) and badly in need of repairs [["deferred maintenance"). Metro started a project which lasted I think almost two years and involved just terrible interruptions to service for weeks or months.

Sometimes a whole segment of a line was shut down FOR WEEKS and folks had to take shuttle buses 'across the divide' between two segments of the line. It was a rotating mess. One line messed up for weeks and then another line. Then that first line got another series of work and it was messed up again. Certain lines were taken out of service on weekends. Lines closed down early so crews could work during the week.

That is why the 2016 statistics were so bad. Metro stabilized in 2017.

That was a ONE TIME event which caused havoc with service. NO one was happy. It was like purgatory for D.C. area subway riders.

Our system is now very close to having an agreement on DEDICATED funding of 500M per year paid from D.C., Md, and Va.

Since Detroit doesn't have a subway system, what is the relevance to Detroit?

The real enduring problem in the D.C. area system is the BUS system. Ditto Detroit.

I might take Uber a few miles but I doubt I'd take it 13 miles to work. It would be either bus/subway or drive.

There might be other reasons for some MARGINAL decline like telework, maybe reductions in transit subsidies by employers, etc.

BUT, in D.C. telework is what a decade old. It doesn't explain something which hit hard in 2016.

My guess is that the D.C. subway hit rock bottom in 2016 and is bouncing back. They now have on time guarantees.

I went to the March For Our Lives Saturday afternoon and the subway system was flawless.

[dtowncitylover]

Well I guess this means we should widen all the freeways to 8 lanes in each direction.

[Atticus]

I hear it all the time, from Amazon, from politicians, and from arm/chair city planners. I hear the same basic statement: “Sucessful cities have transit”.

They are correct. Successful cities do have transit. Here is what they often miss: Successful cities need transit to solve their transportation problems. The point is, transit is there to solve a problem... not just there to exist for aesthetics and to say “we have transit.” Identity the problems first, then find solutions to match.

Otherwise transit is just being built for optics, and not for a purpose.

[Bham1982]

I hear it all the time, from Amazon, from politicians, and from arm/chair city planners. I hear the same basic statement: “Sucessful cities have transit”.

They are correct. Successful cities do have transit. Here is what they often miss: Successful cities need transit to solve their transportation problems. The point is, transit is there to solve a problem... not just there to exist for aesthetics and to say “we have transit.” Identity the problems first, then find solutions to match.

Otherwise transit is just being built for optics, and not for a purpose.

Yes. All this x1000.

Transit in the U.S., in 2018, is MeTooism. Detroit needs a trolley 'cause Cincy got a trolley, etc. etc.

And, yes, [[most) successful cities have transit, but transit isn't a cause of their success; it's a result stemming from success.

[Scottathew]

Money, yeah, but how do you "save time" taking a bus from Rochester to Detroit?

Time spent driving is very low quality. The most I can do is listen to a podcast or music while not hitting things with my car.

Time on the bus on the other hand is of a much higher quality. While on the bus I do homework for my masters degree, watch Netflix, respond to emails, sleep, etc...

Driving downtown:
120 minutes of low-quality time per day.

Busing downtown:
30 minutes of low quality time per day

[dtowncitylover]

I hear it all the time, from Amazon, from politicians, and from arm/chair city planners. I hear the same basic statement: “Sucessful cities have transit”.

They are correct. Successful cities do have transit. Here is what they often miss: Successful cities need transit to solve their transportation problems. The point is, transit is there to solve a problem... not just there to exist for aesthetics and to say “we have transit.” Identity the problems first, then find solutions to match.

Otherwise transit is just being built for optics, and not for a purpose.

...but we do have a problem. Whatever Bham's belief that we're not NYC, as if we're somehow not aware we're not, that doesn't mean we don't have a problem. [[Literally no one is saying we need to have two dozen subway routes, another dozen commuter routes, and 300 bus routes)

Our problem is that Detroit is hyper-dependent, like no other metro in the USA, on the car. LA, Dallas/FW, Phoenix, Houston, Miami, DC/Baltimore, Atlanta; these sprawling metroplexes still have regional transit and are still investing in transit. And none, as far as I'm aware, are looking to dismantle their systems simply because Uber/Lyft is a thing [[for now). DDOT and SMART are the butt of jokes, when we need to take seriously our failure in support good regional, mass transit. We do not invest in transit like other cities and region. We do not take it seriously like most other cities and regions. It's amazing how ignorant we are about how successful transit is needed for successful cities.

The point of the RTA isn't to spend billions of dollars. The point is to bring together our transit agencies under one roof for efficiency in running regional transit and to have one voice when we ask for money in DC. [[And I really don't care to hear about the current climate of DC; "this too shall pass" is my motto and we better be ready when it does)

Our transportation problem is the lack of credible choice in moving from one end to the metro from the other without a car.

There is no law that says the Motor City and its environs must drive cars. We do not have to be this way. We are only this way because our populace is provincial and used to living cheap lives getting cheap public services in return and our leaders are weak.

But sure let's use the QLine and Hermod's known bias against public transit to just wallow and do nothing about our lack of effective public transit in Detroit.

[Bham1982]

Time spent driving is very low quality. The most I can do is listen to a podcast or music while not hitting things with my car.

Time on the bus on the other hand is of a much higher quality. While on the bus I do homework for my masters degree, watch Netflix, respond to emails, sleep, etc...

Driving downtown:
120 minutes of low-quality time per day.

Busing downtown:
30 minutes of low quality time per day

Driving is objectively much faster than taking the bus. I have no idea how a bus gets from Rochester to Downtown in 15 minutes.

Yes, someone could subjectively prefer sitting on a bus than riding in a car. I would say it's a rare person, but I'm sure they exist.

As someone who spent years commuting to work by bus, I cannot imagine someone would willingly prefer bouncing around on a noisy, dirty, sometimes smelly bus, as opposed to sitting in a a leather seat with climate control and the like, but to each his own.

For all my hours on the bus, I could never imagine sleeping or studying. How can someone do that while lurching about?

[emu steve]

Driving is objectively much faster than taking the bus. I have no idea how a bus gets from Rochester to Downtown in 15 minutes.

Yes, someone could subjectively prefer sitting on a bus than riding in a car. I would say it's a rare person, but I'm sure they exist.

As someone who spent years commuting to work by bus, I cannot imagine someone would willingly prefer bouncing around on a noisy, dirty, sometimes smelly bus, as opposed to sitting in a a leather seat with climate control and the like, but to each his own.

For all my hours on the bus, I could never imagine sleeping or studying. How can someone do that while lurching about?

Sadly for Detroit, the best option is a subway car but none are to be found.

IF the options are a). Bus b). Car Most who have a realistic choice will choose B).

As another poster above indicated, many cities have subways, so they have choices a) Bus, b). Car c). Subway.

That is the truest test of mass transit in urban areas in which employment, entertainment, etc. are highly centralized in cities like NYC, D.C., etc.

Also, sadly, for Detroit the lack of a subway system did not lead to smart growth.

IF there were a subway line along Woodward from say 8 mile to the river than businesses and residences would line Woodward. Housing, retails, etc. would locate around the subway stops. People could take the subway to and from work. Then walk to the cleaners, Starbucks, etc. after work during the week. Many days this hypothetical person wouldn't need to drive his car. If the station stop was Woodward/8 Mile [[Fairgrounds), a whole mini-city could be built there with Starbucks, grocery, cleaners, urgent care, dentist, CVS, half dozen fast foods, etc.

The idea is to build high density housing, say maybe 500 - 1K housing units, multi-family buildings, and build this 'mini-city' to serve those residents and those within say a 5 - 10 minute car drive.

[EGrant]

I just don't see mass transit really catching on here at this rate. Our attachment to cars [[despite potholes, insurance costs, weather and other inhibiting factors) has stunted what might be the natural growth of mass transit over time. So instead, we have piecemeal options like SMART, QLine, DDot, etc. that don't provide enough of a network for the average person to give up their cars. Even if the QLine was extended to Pontiac for example, most people in Oakland County are still miles away from Woodward, or even a bus stop that would take them to Woodward.

Unless we undertake some absurd infrastructure project that makes abandoning a car a reasonable and feasible option for the average person, we're never going to truly achieve the results most people on this forum want. Basic improvements will make life easier for those without a car and get people with cars to drive less, but this will always be the Motor City.

[dtowncitylover]

...but this will always be the Motor City.

And because of that we will fail as a region and become more irrelevant in the global network than Cleveland, Indy, or St. Louis. But glad to know we were once something even though I never saw it.

[dtowncitylover]

So instead, we have piecemeal options like SMART, QLine, DDot, etc. that don't provide enough of a network for the average person to give up their cars.

That's literally the effing point of the need for the RTA. Make a piecemeal situation into a whole one with connections and the ability for us car-loving Detroiters to at least sometimes put away the car.

New Yorkers still drive. There are still taxis in London. The cars aren't going away. But holy hell, we are dense people if we can't understand why transit is extremely important to have for any city/region.

[Jason]

My understanding is that the decline in ridership is from lower gas prices and a better economy.

Transit ridership is driven by commuting to work and other regular trips, not by occasional uber trips while bar hopping or going to sports events. People don't take uber to work every day. Uber is replacing traditional taxis, not meat and potatoes public transit. And typical transit riders don't have the types of jobs that allow you to telecommute [[and the ones that do purposefully live in urban areas for the lifestyle).

Regardless, public transit is cheaper to build and operate than privately owned parking lots, parking garages, cars, gas, and insurance.

It's like we're having a pizza party and everyone is individually buying their own slices of pizza at $3 each, instead of buying whole pizzas for the group for a fraction of the cost, because we think the other people are going to "steal my pizza".

[stasu1213]

Jason, those entities that you had mentioned are probably responsible for Detroit not having adequate public transportation. The owner of those entities might have their hands in the elected officials back pockets or purses to keep reliable mass transit from happening. Then they would post something saying that the use of transportation is on the way down which is opposite of how it is in Detroit. SMART's services had became more and more inefficient since Dan Dirk had left for DDOT. The FAST busses are reliable and much needed but the local SMART services are wanning. It's cheaper to build more busses than it is to repair time after time these roads and freeways for the automobile. Mass Transit doesn't have strong lobbyist in the State House. One thing that I give Duggan is that he had given DDOT a shot in the arm by having services wait time decreased and adding more lines including keeping it's Reflex Woodward bus until the contract run out. DDOT also have rights to run it's bus services a few miles into the suburbs which they probably want to do but the municipalities out there and the bus drivers union had probably fought against it. Let's keep the crazy behaviors minimized on DDOT then the total ride would be pleasant enough where one would feel comfortable to work on their laptops or possibly take a nap

[Atticus]

Here is the thing, when people say the region needs transit... deep down they mean trains. Very few people will ever choose a bus over a car, if they can afford the choice. Especially if the bus travels the same roads as the car and encounters the same traffic jams. Obviously improved bus service helps the low income folks, which is great, but it is not going to make your region appear any better when getting graded on having transit.

And lets be honest, if you polled posters on DYES [[who are mostly going to be biased in favor of transit), how many people on this board could actually name the major American cities that have a good BUS system, and a bad BUS system? Not very many. Now, I am sure most of us could identity regions with good train transit, but very few would actually know where the good bus service is... and that is because if you are talking about the region needing transit, you are talking about trains [[light rail, commuter rail, subway, etc).

The current proposal by Evans is basically 1) more and better bus transit, and 2) a commuter rail between AA and New Center. Thus if we are using this addition to market the region as getting better transit, we are essentially putting all the eggs into the AA commuter rail basket... because again, bad as it sounds, bus service doesn't really count.

[emu steve]

Here is the thing, when people say the region needs transit... deep down they mean trains. Very few people will ever choose a bus over a car, if they can afford the choice. Especially if the bus travels the same roads as the car and encounters the same traffic jams. Obviously improved bus service helps the low income folks, which is great, but it is not going to make your region appear any better when getting graded on having transit.

And lets be honest, if you polled posters on DYES [[who are mostly going to be biased in favor of transit), how many people on this board could actually name the major American cities that have a good BUS system, and a bad BUS system? Not very many. Now, I am sure most of us could identity regions with good train transit, but very few would actually know where the good bus service is... and that is because if you are talking about the region needing transit, you are talking about trains [[light rail, commuter rail, subway, etc).

The current proposal by Evans is basically 1) more and better bus transit, and 2) a commuter rail between AA and New Center. Thus if we are using this addition to market the region as getting better transit, we are essentially putting all the eggs into the AA commuter rail basket... because again, bad as it sounds, bus service doesn't really count.

Agree with all of your points.

[Hermod]

But sure let's use the QLine and Hermod's known bias against public transit to just wallow and do nothing about our lack of effective public transit in Detroit.

Given that I am a railroad, interurban, and trolley nut, I am certainly not opposed to rapid and efficient public transit.

What I am opposed to is boondoggles like the Detroit parking shuttle [[aka Q-line) or the abortion called the Wave they are trying to build here in Ft Lauderdale. They do not "move" significant numbers of people and just make the traffic more congested.

What would really be ideal would be if 48307 could just hop in his car and drives over to, say, 24 Mile and Van Dyke where he would board a rapid rail car moving as either a subway or an elevated railroad which would whisk him downtown while he lounges in a reclining seat using the on-board Wi-Fi to surf the internet or do wok on his laptop which is held by the convenient tray table folding down on the back of the seat in front of him.

The operator has at his controls a red button and if an objectionable passenger makes troubles for the operator or for the other passengers, he pushes the button and the train is met at the next station stop by four jack-booted thugs who pull the offender off the train and give hoim a well-deserved "wood shampoo" with their nightsticks.

Trains would run on ten minute headway during morning and evening rush hours and twenty minute headway the remainder of the 24 hours. If 48307 chose to go to the airport, he could quickly transfer downtown from the Van Dyke line to the Michigan line which would drop him off at the front of the airport.

The Jefferson line would go to Mount Clemens. The Gratiot line would go to Port Huron. The Van Dyke line would go to Imlay City. The Woodward line would go to Flint. The Southfield line would go from Melvindale to Birmingham. The Grand River line would go to Brighton. The Schoolcraft line would go to Ann Arbor as would the Michigan line. The Fort Street line would go to Monroe.

The next thing we would do is build lateral lines along 8-Mile, I-696, and M-59. Standard fare would be a buck a ride.

While not exactly in line with my vision, this is what we once had: