June 4, 2013 8:55 PM
R A Fontes Says:
Jimbobpdx -
I've been wondering the same thing about TriMet v. comps. The FTA's Transit Profile has a bunch of stuff and APTA's Fact Book - Appendix B does direct ranking. APTA also provides .xls files on things like farebox recovery and average vehicle age. The operators' web sites show current fares.
Anyway, the FTA profiles show service area populations as distinct from MSA's making it a little easier to compare systems. The following data show the 12 service areas with populations closest to TriMet (1.49 million) and is from 2011 except base fares which are current.
Abbreviations:
Pop = Service area populations in thousands
Veh = Buses/light rail vehicles operated in peak service
PT = Passenger Trips i.e. boarding rides in thousands
BF = Base Fare ($, Bus, adult, cash)
FRR = Fare Recovery Ratio (%)(Ops(& System?) - no capital)
City/Operator...............................................Pop.......Veh.............PT..........BF........FRR
Portland/TriMet............................................1,490....520/103.....104,644...2.50.......25
Garden City/MTA Long Island Bus(1)...............1,344....255/0..........30,660...2.25.......31
Oakland/AC Transit(2)...................................1,415....493/0..........58,086...2.10.......17
Pittsburgh/Port Authority of Allegheny County...1,415....607/48........63,837...2.50(3)...25
Hampton Roads/Hampton Roads Transit(4)......1,440.....221/0.........16,543...1.50........21
San Bernardino/Omnitrans.............................1,460.....139/0.........15,040...1.50(5)...19
Yaphank/Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works..1,493.....133(6)/0.......6,775...2.00.......13
West Covina/Foothill Transit...........................1,516.....266(7)/0......13,938...1.25.......29
St Louis/Metro..............................................1,540.....316/58........42,971...2.00(8)...20
San Antonio/VIA Metropolitan Transit...............1,556.....345/0.........45,494...1.20(9)...15
Atlanta/MARTA..............................................1,575.....490/0(10)..139,873...2.50.......22
Phoenix/Valley Metro......................................1,665....427(11)/0....37,127...2.00......19
Riverside/Riverside Transit Agency...................1,700....132(12)/0.......8,092...1.50......21
Notes:
(1) buses now owned by county,separated from MTA, renamed NICE (Naussau Inter County Express), doesn't include Long Island Railroad
(2) separate from BART heavy rail, transfer fees
(3) has free zone, transfer fee, light rail surcharge
(4) now has LRT
(5) full fare transfer
(6) contracted service, doesn't include Long Island Railroad, transfer fee
(7) contracted service, transfer fee
(8) light rail surcharge, transfer fee
(9) transfer fee
(10) 188 heavy rail vehicles, all passengers must have EFP card
(11) contracted service, new LRT not on 2011 report, full fare/day pass transfer
(12) 72 directly operated & 60 contracted buses
This post is not meant to be an authoritative end-all; just a starting point on a few criteria. I probably missed a transfer policy somewhere.
TriMet really does well in providing trips in proportion to population. MARTA does better, but that may be due to out of area riders using the heavy rail service.
TriMet's transfer policy is much more liberal than that of many operators. Some don't even say what their policy is which gives the impression that they probably don't offer them.
Our fares are at the high end, but not exorbitantly so, especially when transfer policies are considered. One concern with TriMet fares is that the base fare is not only one of the highest in the nation, but it is also higher in real terms than it has ever been (partially due to the elimination of zones) and is also higher in proportion to the average fare than it has ever been. IOW, full fare riders are carrying an ever more disproportionate share of the load. TriMet is supposed to address this issue in July.
The table doesn't show fleet average age, and TriMet is tied with Michael Moore's Flint for having the oldest buses at 12.9 years for all public operators with more than 30 buses. It's kind of interesting that TriMet is installing paper transfer dispensers on buses while it's still studying going to EFP. Meanwhile, Salem's Cherriots are field testing EFP cards.
All in all, TriMet may well be doing a better than average job in many respects, but that doesn't excuse the district for not doing anything about WES, dereliction of bus service, subsidizing permanent fire sale streetcar fares while raising our fares and reducing our service, spending so much money on MLR, etc, etc.
I've been wondering the same thing about TriMet v. comps. The FTA's Transit Profile has a bunch of stuff and APTA's Fact Book - Appendix B does direct ranking. APTA also provides .xls files on things like farebox recovery and average vehicle age. The operators' web sites show current fares.
Anyway, the FTA profiles show service area populations as distinct from MSA's making it a little easier to compare systems. The following data show the 12 service areas with populations closest to TriMet (1.49 million) and is from 2011 except base fares which are current.
Abbreviations:
Pop = Service area populations in thousands
Veh = Buses/light rail vehicles operated in peak service
PT = Passenger Trips i.e. boarding rides in thousands
BF = Base Fare ($, Bus, adult, cash)
FRR = Fare Recovery Ratio (%)(Ops(& System?) - no capital)
City/Operator...............................................Pop.......Veh.............PT..........BF........FRR
Portland/TriMet............................................1,490....520/103.....104,644...2.50.......25
Garden City/MTA Long Island Bus(1)...............1,344....255/0..........30,660...2.25.......31
Oakland/AC Transit(2)...................................1,415....493/0..........58,086...2.10.......17
Pittsburgh/Port Authority of Allegheny County...1,415....607/48........63,837...2.50(3)...25
Hampton Roads/Hampton Roads Transit(4)......1,440.....221/0.........16,543...1.50........21
San Bernardino/Omnitrans.............................1,460.....139/0.........15,040...1.50(5)...19
Yaphank/Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works..1,493.....133(6)/0.......6,775...2.00.......13
West Covina/Foothill Transit...........................1,516.....266(7)/0......13,938...1.25.......29
St Louis/Metro..............................................1,540.....316/58........42,971...2.00(8)...20
San Antonio/VIA Metropolitan Transit...............1,556.....345/0.........45,494...1.20(9)...15
Atlanta/MARTA..............................................1,575.....490/0(10)..139,873...2.50.......22
Phoenix/Valley Metro......................................1,665....427(11)/0....37,127...2.00......19
Riverside/Riverside Transit Agency...................1,700....132(12)/0.......8,092...1.50......21
Notes:
(1) buses now owned by county,separated from MTA, renamed NICE (Naussau Inter County Express), doesn't include Long Island Railroad
(2) separate from BART heavy rail, transfer fees
(3) has free zone, transfer fee, light rail surcharge
(4) now has LRT
(5) full fare transfer
(6) contracted service, doesn't include Long Island Railroad, transfer fee
(7) contracted service, transfer fee
(8) light rail surcharge, transfer fee
(9) transfer fee
(10) 188 heavy rail vehicles, all passengers must have EFP card
(11) contracted service, new LRT not on 2011 report, full fare/day pass transfer
(12) 72 directly operated & 60 contracted buses
This post is not meant to be an authoritative end-all; just a starting point on a few criteria. I probably missed a transfer policy somewhere.
TriMet really does well in providing trips in proportion to population. MARTA does better, but that may be due to out of area riders using the heavy rail service.
TriMet's transfer policy is much more liberal than that of many operators. Some don't even say what their policy is which gives the impression that they probably don't offer them.
Our fares are at the high end, but not exorbitantly so, especially when transfer policies are considered. One concern with TriMet fares is that the base fare is not only one of the highest in the nation, but it is also higher in real terms than it has ever been (partially due to the elimination of zones) and is also higher in proportion to the average fare than it has ever been. IOW, full fare riders are carrying an ever more disproportionate share of the load. TriMet is supposed to address this issue in July.
The table doesn't show fleet average age, and TriMet is tied with Michael Moore's Flint for having the oldest buses at 12.9 years for all public operators with more than 30 buses. It's kind of interesting that TriMet is installing paper transfer dispensers on buses while it's still studying going to EFP. Meanwhile, Salem's Cherriots are field testing EFP cards.
All in all, TriMet may well be doing a better than average job in many respects, but that doesn't excuse the district for not doing anything about WES, dereliction of bus service, subsidizing permanent fire sale streetcar fares while raising our fares and reducing our service, spending so much money on MLR, etc, etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment