The Future of Public Transportation in the U.S.

The Future of Public Transportation in the U.S.

Valedictory Presentation

November 9, 2017

Joel Volinski, Director ? National Center for Transit Research (retired)

Center for Urban Transportation Research | University of South Florida

A Quick Trip to the Past

In the late 1980s I was challenged to find a solution to low ridership in low density areas in Broward County

The County Administrator and Budget Director demanded efficiencies There were fixed routes that were carrying only 5 passengers per hour The only options at the time were to provide service or not provide

service The County Commission refused to discontinue service The County Administrator and Budget Director were not pleased

2

Results of the Challenge

I then had an Ah Hah moment ? work in partnership with the city and share minibuses, expertise, and expenses

A new concept called the Community Bus Program was established The city hired their own personnel or contractors to provide service

within their city with the county providing minibuses and subsidizing about one-third of the cost The service was fixed route, but almost door to door in many cases County costs were reduced by 80% Ridership increased by 100% in the low density areas County routes ridership increased because they were made straighter, providing faster service

3

A New Paradigm was Established

It was an out of the box solution for its time

An option was created to allow the cities to provide as much service as they wanted with County assistance

The cities and County, normally at odds, had a lovefest over transit The service was more customized to each city's needs We realized that one size does not fit all This model is now used in 35 cities throughout south Florida Community Bus ridership now averages over 16 passengers per hour This was unwittingly a forerunner to what will happen in the future

4

Why is the subject of the future of public transit particularly timely?

There has been a noticeable decline in ridership on public transit in the past few years :

5

Quarterly National Ridership by Mode

3,000,000 2,500,000

Total Ridership (000s)

Heavy Rail (000s)

2,000,000

Light Rail (000s)

1,500,000 1,000,000

500,000 0

Commuter Rail (000s) Trolleybus (000s)

Bus (000s)

Demand Response (000s) Other (000s)

1990 - Q1 1991 - Q1 1992 - Q1 1993 - Q1 1994 - Q1 1995 - Q1 1996 - Q1 1997 - Q1 1998 - Q1 1999 - Q1 2000 - Q1 2001 - Q1 2002 - Q1 2003 - Q1 2004 - Q1 2005 - Q1 2006 - Q1 2007 - Q1 2008 - Q1 2009 - Q1 2010 - Q1 2011 - Q1 2012 - Q1 2013 - Q1 2014 - Q1 2015 - Q1 2016 - Q1

APTA:

6

Contributing factors to ridership decline

1. Lower gas prices 2. Telecommuting (fastest growing segment of "mobility") 3. E-commerce (on line shopping) ? 7% of all purchases and growing 4. Transportation Network Companies (Uber, Lyft, etc.) 5. Bike Sharing (99 cities with 3,400 stations and 33,000+ bikes) 6. Car Sharing (21 active car sharing programs with 1.4 M members) 7. Better economy and more employment allows more car purchases 8. Distance Learning 9. More seniors who travel less 10. Less immigration 11. Poor service

7

People are Moving from Higher to Lower Transit Areas

Top 10 Largest-Gaining Counties (Numeric Change): July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016

County

Population

Numeric Change

Percent Change

Transit Commute Share 2015

Maricopa County, Arizona

4,242,997 81,360 1.95

2.3%

Harris County, 4,589,928 Texas

56,587 1.25

2.8%

Clark County, 2,155,664 46,375 2.2 Nevada

4.2%

King County,

Washington Tarrant County, Texas Riverside County, California

2,149,970 2,016,872 2,387,741

35,714 1.69 35,462 1.79 34,849 1.48

12.6% 0.6% 1.4%

Bexar County,

Texas Orange County, Florida Dallas County, Texas Hillsborough County, Florida Average

1,928,680 1,314,367 2,574,984 1,376,238

33,198 1.75 29,503 2.3 29,209 1.15 29,161 2.16

2.6% 3.2% 2.9% 1.7% 3.4%

Largest-Declining Counties or County Equivalents

(Numeric Change): July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016

County

Transit

Population

Numeric Change

Percent Commute Change Share

2015

Cook County, 5,203,499 -21,324 -0.41 18.8%

Illinois

Wayne County, 1,749,366 -7,696 -0.44 2.5%

Michigan

Baltimore city,

614,664 -6,738 -1.08 19.6%

Maryland Cuyahoga County, Ohio

1,249,352 -5,673 -0.45 5.1%

Suffolk County, 1,492,583 -5,320 -0.36 6.8%

New York Milwaukee County, Wisconsin Allegheny County, Pennsylvania San Juan County, New Mexico

951,448 1,225,365

115,079

-4,866 -0.51 -3,933 -0.32 -3,622 -3.05

6.2% 9.1% 0.3%

St. Louis City,

311,404 -3,471 -1.1

9.7%

Missouri Jefferson County, New York Average

114,006 -3,254 -2.78 0.0%

7.8%

8

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download