QuoteThe words "transit" and "crisis" have been associated in the American lexicon for nearly 60 years. It is time to recognize this as a chronic condition rather than a temporary event. Current strategies have not placed transit on a financially sustainable path.
From the mid-19th century through the mid-20th, transit was privately operated, usually running on public rights-of-way (which companies often were obligated to maintain), charging a government-regulated fare. This model was hugely profitable for decades, until it wasn't.
The causes for transit's decline are many, but rising incomes, suburbanization, and of course a much faster competitor in the automobile and highway system are among them. At that point, which ran from the 1930s to the 1960s depending on where you were in the United States, the private sector abandoned transit and the public sector took over.
Over the past half century, U.S. transit under public ownership has seen an enormous and growing per passenger subsidy. The debate over the merits of subsidy has become partisan.
full article: http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/06/how-to-make-mass-transit-financially-sustainable-once-and-for-all/372209/
"But the primary problem with transit operations funding is not that poor people are subsidized.
Since the routes serving low-income travelers are often profitable (fares cover operating costs), it is that long-distance, inefficient suburban routes are very heavily subsidized by profitable or near-profitable urban routes.
If the average farebox recovery is one-third, many routes are much higher and other routes are much lower.
The lowest performing routes are typically in suburban districts, where transit dollars are spent as part of a political bargain to obtain some form of general revenue funding from suburban jurisdictions."
This is very similar to the argument of Amtrak's Long Distance Trains being less profitable than the corridor short haul service! The automobile's "convenience" can't be beaten! The areas that have good transit have great population density! Imagine Chicago without their transit system! It would come to a halt, and the people would be outraged! They're willing to pay for that service!
Jacksonville its highways and it is more spread out than the bigger cities (population; for now) People want the perceived low cost of living! Viewing transit a JEA like utility probably wouldn't go over too well!
They would have to put tolls at the biggest intersections in town (like 103rd & Blanding) to pay for some real transit!
The best thing for transit in Jax is to not worry about providing bad service across 800 square miles of low density. Focus on doing a smaller area of the city right and coordinating land use development/policy to support the public investment. Ultimately, residents will have to make a decision on if they rather live in areas with good transit or areas without it. As time goes on and new opportunities present themselves, the system can be incrementally expanded.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 20, 2014, 02:15:07 PM
The best thing for transit in Jax is to not worry about providing bad service across 800 square miles of low density. Focus on doing a smaller area of the city right and coordinating land use development/policy to support the public investment. Ultimately, residents will have to make a decision on if they rather live in areas with good transit or areas without it. As time goes on and new opportunities present themselves, the system can be incrementally expanded.
Agreed!
Quote from: SightseerLounge on June 20, 2014, 03:45:19 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 20, 2014, 02:15:07 PM
The best thing for transit in Jax is to not worry about providing bad service across 800 square miles of low density. Focus on doing a smaller area of the city right and coordinating land use development/policy to support the public investment. Ultimately, residents will have to make a decision on if they rather live in areas with good transit or areas without it. As time goes on and new opportunities present themselves, the system can be incrementally expanded.
Agreed!
^^True. Build it and they will move near it. The available transit itself will be the draw. Not just for transplants, but even locals who are tired of the commutes.