X hits on this document

29 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

8 / 11

systems individually reporting reductions of more than 400 staff positions. http://apta.com/resources/reportsandpublications/Documents/constraints 09.pdf

Comparative Review and Analysis of State Transit Funding Programs TRB NCHRP Report 569, 2006 This report examines the levels and types of state funding provided for public transportation. The report provides supplemental analyses of information collected in the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics’ annual survey of state public transportation funding and explores a framework for conducting peer analyses and offers ideas on how to fund the annual survey of state public transportation so that states could conduct additional analyses. The Survey of State Funding for Public Transportation is a primary resource for state-level data on transit funding used by states across the country to examine their public transportation funding programs in relation to other states. Prepared by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) Office of Survey Programs under the auspices of AASHTO and APTA, the Survey presents an array of useful information on funding by state. Presentation of the data is not in a way that is easy to make comparisons between states for purposes of benchmarking or conducting peer analyses. Organization of the survey is mostly by state with two pages per state showing the sources and eligible uses for each state’s transit funding. The Survey report also provides an overview of state and local ballot initiatives related to transit, and contains a set of summary tables displaying information on public transportation funding by state, including the following:

  • Historical state and federal funding of public transportation

  • Major sources of state transit funding

  • Types of expenditures for state transit funding

  • Changes in state transit funding levels

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp rpt 569.pdf

Transit Farebox Recovery: Investments (Not Cutting Back) Yield Return over Time Citizens Planning and Housing Association of Metropolitan Baltimore (CPHA), February 12, 2008 We are the Citizens Planning and Housing Association of Metropolitan Baltimore (CPHA) are concerned that Maryland’s 40 percent farebox recovery standard actually hinders the Maryland Transit Administration’s ability to provide high quality transit service with higher farebox recovery over the long term. The following charts use 2006 data – the latest available nationally – to compare farebox recovery performance for Baltimore and the other 24 largest metropolitan areas in the United States. http://www.cphabaltimore.org/pdf/TransitFareboxFactSheet2.08.pdf

Transit Ridership Efficiency as a Function of Fares for Public Transportation Systems in Washington State for 1994 By Gerrit R. Moore, Moore Planners and Consultants, Belfair, WA The purpose of this study is to assist in the development of transit fares policies which exploit the benefits of public transit in the mix of transportation options for Washington State. The study relates fares to Ridership Performance and Farebox Recovery parameters. To estimate ridership efficiency of each transit system, multiply the ridership (unlinked trips) by the median income, and divide by the urban population of the service area and the service investment (peak seats) of the system. A mathematical model exists to relate fares to Ridership Efficiency. The Ridership Efficiency function follows a Weibull distribution with the tail being reached at $0.41. Higher fares have little impact on Ridership Efficiency. An operating cost model is developed from the transit data in which the independent variables are ridership and revenue distance traveled. This model is used to estimate the farebox recovery and operating cost subsidy. Ridership and Farebox Recovery estimates are made for selected transits. Farebox Recovery reaches a maximum at $0.30, then decreases to a minimum at $0.50. With Urban systems, fares above $0.30 appear to result in a nearly constant subsidy requirement. The conclusion of the study suggests that a significant percentage of urban trips can be captured by transit if appropriate fares policies are established. A reduced fare experiment is recommended for a congested service area or traffic corridor to determine the effect on traffic counts and ridership to form the basis of traffic management policies by government agencies.

8

Document info
Document views29
Page views29
Page last viewedSat Dec 03 11:44:08 UTC 2016
Pages11
Paragraphs691
Words5411

Comments