Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table

Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table (1625963)	Home · Maps · About

Home > SubChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2]

< Previous Page

Page 2 of 2

(1626079)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by Stephen Bauman* on Mon Oct 9 22:38:57 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by AlM on Mon Oct 9 18:20:17 2023.* You fixate on improving the factors you are able to measure, rather than examining whether you are measuring the right things. Let me point out some rather depressing metrics. Anyone can find them on the NTD: https://www.transit.dot.gov/ntd/ntd-data I'm looking at the Metrics Spreadsheet for 2019. https://www.transit.dot.gov/ntd/data-product/2019-metrics It's got the yearly totals for costs, vehicle miles, hours, passenger counts, etc. The NYCT ID's for bus operations are: 20008 (NYCT) and 20188 (MTA Bus) bus modes are: CB, MB, RB for Commuter Bus, Motor Bus and Rapid Bus. The NYCT ID's for heavey rail operation are: 20008 (NYCT) and 20099 (SIRT). Not all agencies separate bus operation modes, so I've totaled all bus modes and all agencies for bus and rail operations. The Fare Recover Ratio (FRR) is 30% for bus operations and 70% for rail operations. You may recall from Economics 101, if marginal expenses exceed marginal revenue go out of business. 30% isn't that bad for public transit operations in the US and 70% is great in the US. It's around 1.0 for London, Tokyo, and Singapore. However, it's a misleading statistic for NYC because passenger trips per service-mile or service-hour are much higher than almost all other US cities. If you compare operating cost per unit of service you get a much different picture. NYC's operating cost per vehicle-revenue-mile is the highest in the country for bus operations by a lot. It does not get much better if the metric is cost per vehicle-revenue-hour. It's in the worst 10% of agencies in the country. The costs are about 30% higher than for Chicago and Philadelphia. NYC's rail operations are not that much better, compared to the 13 or 14 other heavy rail systems. Chicago and Philadelphia cost much less per vehicle-revenue-mile and vehicle-revenue-hour. The systems operate at comparable average speeds of 18 mph. Boston also comes out better but the reasons for the collapse of its rail system would not make it a good model to follow. The MTA's problem is it's operating expenses have been increasing faster than the cost of living and faster than its operating subsidies. The NTD database goes back to 1997, although the relevant tables have different names. The place to start examining operating costs is where they are disproportionately high for the service provided. That's buses. Service cuts are not the answer because NYC's buses have a higher load factor than any other system, save San Francisco. This means people will notice any service cuts. Also, buses don't scale up like trains so more service to reduce the load factor won't reduce per unit cost due to increased operating speeds. There's another factor that indicates that bus service levels have exceeded the ability of the road network to handle them. NYC's experience is probably unique. There are several intersections that are scheduled to handle more than 200 bus crossings per hour. It can't be done, given bus speed, bus length and intersection length. This is especially true because these also happen to be intersections with heavy pedestrian traffic. Almost all are located around either the Jamaica Center or Main St Flushing subway stops. 57th and Madison and Fifth get a couple of honorable mentions for the top 50. However, Flushing and Jamaica present the major problem. So, there's: 1. a transportation agency that has no incentive to bring operating costs in line with industry averages 2. one of its operating modes has disproportionately higher operating costs than other modes and the industry average 3. a different mode offers better service, scales with increased loads and does not reach 25% of the population. The obvious solution would be to have this different mode reach the remaining 25% of the population and reduce reliance on the mode that has higher per unit operating costs.
Post a New Response

(1626080)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by Spider-Pig* on Mon Oct 9 22:47:12 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Oct 9 22:38:57 2023.* tl;dr
Post a New Response

(1626081)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by terRAPIN station* on Mon Oct 9 23:27:32 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Oct 9 22:38:57 2023.* Who’s gonna read all that? Seriously. You may be right but we’ll never know.
Post a New Response

(Sponsored)

iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It

(1626085)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by Jackson Park B Train* on Tue Oct 10 05:03:56 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Oct 9 22:38:57 2023.* Thanks for the analysis. About the fare box recovery ## in general. The very high numbers for the NYC Subway, and fairly high ## for other rail systems such as BART before covid, Caltrain before covid, CTA L before covid, are all nice, but obsolete as ridership is nowhere near as high. Ironically in BART's case because WFH has perhaps permanently shredded the well heeled techies willing/able to pay distance fares and filling rush hour trains have upended their budget causing them to beg for higher subsidy. Anti-transit suburbanites, particularly in Marin County oppose greater subsidy, demanding instead that BART somehow magically reduce operating costs. The usual "austerity" ideas, of degrading service, cutting back span of service have NEVER been successful at cutting deficits in normal ridership instances. Today, ridership has become relatively stronger evenings and weekends making the auisterity idea counterproductive. Going to be interesting...
Post a New Response

(1626087)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by New Flyer #857* on Tue Oct 10 07:53:42 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Oct 9 22:38:57 2023.* The obvious solution would be to have this different mode reach the remaining 25% of the population and reduce reliance on the mode that has higher per unit operating costs. Counter-argument: if you have a cross-125th subway line, you can reduce reliance on buses there too, even if more population isn't "reached." Flushing I know is it's own problem because there's basically only one subway station that all the buses want to go to, but in Jamaica I don't know why they do it the way they do. If every route just ended at the closest subway station to its route, traffic wouldn't be as bad. As it is, it's common for buses coming in along Hillside Ave from the east to just turn back (pre-scheduled) at 179th St Station because that's all most passengers want to reach. From the other directions, it doesn't seem to me that routes like the Q54 and Q56 need to go all the way through to 170th, and the Q110-to-114 as far north as Hillside.
Post a New Response

(1626088)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by New Flyer #857* on Tue Oct 10 07:58:06 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Oct 10 07:53:42 2023.* I'll just add that I know that there are people only transiting Jamaica and just want to change buses there and so need the connection to exist but it just doesn't seem like every route needs to go to every extremity the way they have it.
Post a New Response

(1626091)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by Catfish 44* on Tue Oct 10 08:33:49 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Oct 9 22:38:57 2023.* What? No pie graphs?
Post a New Response

(1626092)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by Catfish 44* on Tue Oct 10 08:34:38 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Stephen Bauman on Mon Oct 9 22:38:57 2023.* How’s about a histogram?
Post a New Response

(1626094)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by Stephen Bauman* on Tue Oct 10 09:09:44 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Oct 10 05:03:56 2023.* About the fare box recovery ## in general...before covid, Caltrain before covid, CTA L before covid, are all nice, but obsolete as ridership is nowhere near as high. I was interested in comparing operating cost per unit of service delivered. Fares were not my interest for this comparison. That's why I chose 2019. Operating procedures were changed because of Covid. I believe they might have skewed the results from the perceived "normal" and the "nirvana" to which public transit operators hope to return. I was primarily interested in bus operations. You may find the NTD's Service spreadsheet useful for comparing rail operations. They include train hours/miles as well as vehicle hours/miles. Ironically in BART's case... BART also came in low in terms of cost per VRM (lower cost --> more service per dollar). One big reason is its high operating speed. Divide VRM by VRH, if it's not a separate column. It was less impressive in cost per VRH. One needs to look at the overall picture in evaluating whether one is getting his money's worth from the FRR measure. One reason for BART's high operating speed is its relatively long distance between stations. This means that riders in other cities who walk to the station must take a bus to BART. Buses have much higher operating costs for capacity per unit service. What BART may be doing is outsourcing a more expensive public transit service. BART's bottom line may look better but the local bus operations are suffering financially. Just a thought. One of my current studies is evaluating what I call a transit oasis, as opposed to transit desert. In a transit oasis, there's a 5 minute walk to a bus and a 10 minute walk to a subway. There will be a bus available within a 10 minute window from the start of the walk. There will be a subway available within a 20 minute window from the start of the walk. I'm taking snapshots every 5 minutes from midnight to 2355. NYC comes out surprisingly well. About 95% of its residents live within a transit oasis, between 6am and 10pm. That figure goes down to around 60% in some boroughs during the graveyard shift. I wonder how the San Francisco area would fare with such a measure.
Post a New Response

(1626097)

view threaded

Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table

Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Oct 10 10:07:35 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Oct 10 07:53:42 2023.

Counter-argument: if you have a cross-125th subway line, you can reduce reliance on buses there too, even if more population isn't "reached."

A frequent misconception about connecting different lines is there's a significant demand to travel "crosstown" instead of "downtown."

My analyzer also measures 3 additional parameters that are designed to quantify demand for workers. The first is the number of workers among the population that live along the proposed route. The second is the number of jobs located along the route.

The third is the number of commuters along a proposed route. A commuter is a person who lives and works within 1/2 mile of one of the proposed stations.

The results show: the population is 135K (line 2); the number of workers is 65K (line 15); the number of jobs is 71K (line 31); and the number of commuters is 6K (line 48).

That's quite a drop from the workers who live along the route to those who live and work along the route. The numbers get worse. Some of those commuters live close enough to home to prefer active transportation i.e. walking. My threshold is 1 mile - a 20 minute or less walk to work. (Good for the soul, better for the cobbler.) This reduces the potential demand to 760 for the "crosstown" service offered by the 125th St extension.

Here are the numbers:

	item	Current2020	New2020	Current2010	New2010	Current2000	New2000
1	Combined Included Proposed Stops
2	- Population	135,288		128,077		125,371
3	- avg Dist To Subway (miles)	0.150	0.149	0.150	0.150	0.148	0.147
4	- median Dist To Sub (miles)	0.159	0.159	0.154	0.153	0.159	0.159
5	- Walk To Subway	135,288	135,288	128,077	128,077	125,371	125,371
6	- % Population	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
7	- Increase		0		0		0
8	- % Increase		0.0%		0.0%		0.0%
9	- Travel To Subway	0	0	0	0	0	0
10	- % Population	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
11	- Decrease		0		0		0
12	- % Decrease		nan%		nan%		nan%
13	- avg Dist to Subway (miles)	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan
14	- median Dist to Subway (miles)	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan
15	- Workers	65,432		46,018		20,968
16	- % Population	48.4%		35.9%		16.7%
17	- avg Dist To Subway (miles)	0.148	0.148	0.150	0.150	0.140	0.140
18	- median Dist To Sub (miles)	0.154	0.153	0.145	0.145	0.131	0.131
19	- Walk To Subway	65,432	65,432	46,018	46,018	20,968	20,968
20	- % Population	48.4%	48.4%	35.9%	35.9%	16.7%	16.7%
21	- Increase		0		0		0
22	- % Increase		0.0%		0.0%		0.0%
23	- % Workers	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
24	- Travel To Subway	0	0	0	0	0	0
25	- % Population	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
26	- % Workers	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
27	- Decrease		0		0		0
28	- % Decrease		nan%		nan%		nan%
29	- avg Dist to Subway (miles)	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan
30	- median Dist to Subway (miles)	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan
31	- jobs	70,570		48,073		8,865
32	- % Population	52.2%		37.5%		7.1%
33	- Jobs To Worker Ratio	1.08		1.04		0.42
34	- avg Dist To Subway (miles)	0.131	0.131	0.125	0.124	0.133	0.133
35	- median Dist To Sub (miles)	0.106	0.106	0.106	0.106	0.131	0.131
36	- Walk To Subway	70,570	70,570	48,073	48,073	8,865	8,865
37	- % Population	52.2%	52.2%	37.5%	37.5%	7.1%	7.1%
38	- Increase		0		0		0
39	- % Increase		0.0%		0.0%		0.0%
40	- % jobs	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
41	- Travel To Subway	0	0	0	0	0	0
42	- % Population	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
43	- % Jobs	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
44	- Decrease		0		0		0
45	- % Decrease		nan%		nan%		nan%
46	- avg Dist to Subway (miles)	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan
47	- median Dist to Subway (miles)	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan	nan
48	- Commuters	5,657		4,187		541
49	- % Population	4.2%		3.3%		0.4%
50	- % Workers	8.6%		9.1%		2.6%
51	- % Jobs	8.0%		8.7%		6.1%
52	- Walk To Work	4,897		3,674		497
53	- % Commuters	86.6%		87.7%		91.9%
54	- Travel To Work	760		513		44
55	- % Population	0.6%		0.4%		0.0%
56	- % Workers	1.2%		1.1%		0.2%
57	- % Jobs	1.1%		1.1%		0.5%
58	- % Commuters	13.4%		12.3%		8.1%
59	- Avg Commute (miles)	1.199		1.203		1.227
60	- Median Commute (miles)	1.165		1.173		1.169
61	- Walk Home To Subway	760	760	513	513	44	44
62	- % Population	0.6%	0.6%	0.4%	0.4%	0.0%	0.0%
63	- % Workers	1.2%	1.2%	1.1%	1.1%	0.2%	0.2%
64	% Travel Commuters	100.0%	100.0%,	100.0%	100.0%,	100.0%	100.0%,
65	- Avg Distance (miles)	0.134	0.131	0.134	0.130	0.116	0.138
66	- Median Distance (miles)	0.125	0.125	0.125	0.125	0.099	0.099
67	- Walk Job To Subway	760	760	513	513	44	44
68	- % Population	0.6%	0.6%	0.4%	0.4%	0.0%	0.0%
69	- % Jobs	1.1%	1.1%	1.1%	1.1%	0.5%	0.5%
70	- % Travel Commuters	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
71	- Increase		0		0		0
72	- % Increase		0.0%		0.0%		0.0%
73	- Avg Job To Subway Dist (miles)	0.131	0.131	0.125	0.124	0.133	0.133
74	- Median Job To Subway Dist (miles)	0.106	0.106	0.106	0.106	0.131	0.131
75	Proposed Stop Walking Increase
76	137th St		0		0		0
77	Broadway-125th St		0		0		0
78	Lenox Ave		0		0		0
79	St. Nicholas Ave		0		0		0

Post a New Response

(1626098)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by Wallyhorse* on Tue Oct 10 10:33:31 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Dyre Dan on Mon Oct 9 15:24:34 2023.* And I still say the mistake here is not considering a connection to the 8th Avenue line: Main purpose right now would be for the (A) and (D) when needed to have access to the upper portion of the SAS (whether emergencies or a G.O), with the A/D running to 63rd/Lex on the (Q) and then via 6th and 8th Avenue to get back to their regular lines. This also would allow for Yankee Stadium specials on the SAS and if with full CBTC there are capacity increases, the ability to send an SAS line via 8th Avenue to Bedford Park Boulevard on the B/D or 168 on the (C)/207 on the (A).. This would be about future proofing the line and more operational flexibility,
Post a New Response

(1626107)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by Jackson Park B Train* on Tue Oct 10 15:53:33 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Oct 10 10:07:35 2023.* creating new options allows riders to make different travel decisions.
Post a New Response

(1626108)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by Jackson Park B Train* on Tue Oct 10 16:11:09 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Oct 10 09:09:44 2023.* BART is a hybrid--that is west of the hills,it is a relatively normal subway serving ever more densely populated areas. East of the hills the stations are farther apart, and rarely used for local trips. Decades ago when the Contra Costa Times ran a whining commentary claiming the County was underrepresented on the BOD. My reply was that although the County had many residents, that if representation on the BOD were based on ridership, they would lose another seat. At the timethe only station in CCC with very high ridership was El Cerrito Del Norte which llike unto PAGWB hosts buses from multiple out of county areas across the SF Bay/Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta waterway. At the same time CCC also had 2 of the leastused stations. Post covid, with WFH the suburbanites who used to flood the financial district on rush hour sardined out trains have evaporated. There is some vestigial rush hour commuting from further out, but mostly BART's ridership recovery has been moreevenly spread--standees at 10PM leaving SF despitethe fear mongering from anti-transit media BS.
Post a New Response

(1626117)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by N6 Limited* on Tue Oct 10 22:43:29 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Oct 10 15:53:33 2023.* Which is part of the Bus Redesigns
Post a New Response

(1626119)	view threaded
Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table
Posted by Olog-hai* on Wed Oct 11 01:08:15 2023, in response to Re: Extending the SAS across 125th on the table, posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Oct 10 10:07:35 2023.* A frequent misconception about connecting different lines is there's a significant* demand to travel "crosstown" instead of "downtown."* Define "significant". Are the buses full? Are the crosstown arteries full of cars? My analyzer also measures 3 additional parameters that are designed to quantify demand for workers LOL! Enjoy your digital crystal ball.
Post a New Response

[1 2]
< Previous Page	Page 2 of 2

[ Return to the Message Index ]