Jump to content

Commuter Rail Can Be a Bang for Your Buck, Unless You Live in the Bronx


bobtehpanda

Recommended Posts

Source: http://lab.rpa.org/commuter-rail-can-be-a-bang-for-your-buck-unless-you-live-in-the-bronx/


The New York region benefits from an extensive commuter rail network. But despite the convenience of these rail lines in the Bronx, Queens and Brooklyn, new RPA analysis suggests that fare pricing could be steering New York City’s commuters away from speedy commuter rail service.


In our work on the Fourth Regional Plan, A Region Transformed, we’ve been exploring where our current transit system falls short, especially for outer-borough commuters like those in the Bronx. RPA is not only evaluating how new rail service or bus routes might address current gaps in the system, but is also taking into consideration the ways that our existing infrastructure can better meet the region’s needs through policy changes.


Take fare policy. As part of our research on the region’s commuter rail system, we have been scrutinizing the relationship between commuter rail fares and trip distance.


As shown in the chart below, the price of a peak one way ticket on Metro-North to Grand Central is strongly correlated with the distance from Grand Central to the station the ticket was purchased for. It makes sense that you would pay more the further you travel. Taken at face value, this correlation implies that riders at stations such as the Bronx’s Morris Heights and Tremont are the beneficiaries of this system. But the picture changes dramatically when we look at the price per mile paid by the commuter.


peak-one-way.png


The second chart shows how price per mile varies by trip length and the relationship between price and distance traveled has clearly changed from positive to  negative. That is, as you increase your trip length you pay less per mile for each additional mile you travel. Again, this makes sense because as the railroad provides you with more of a service, in this case the length of your trip, it can afford to do so at a lower marginal cost because of the economies of scale related to running a railroad (e.g. labor and fuel costs). While this is true, examining which stations pay the most per mile suggests there may be unintended consequences of this pricing model.


dollars-per-mile.png


Specifically, the Metro-North stations that pay the highest price per mile are all within the Bronx. In a study RPA released last year looking at gaps in the city’s transit system, we found many communities in the outer boroughs, including the Bronx, don’t have easily accessible or speedy transit options. Moreover, many of these communities have lower median incomes, making these higher prices seem even further out of reach for the average commuter. Is it any wonder then that we see lower levels of commuter rail ridership at these stations despite being located in places with fewer subway stations and longer bus or subway travel times?


median-income-east.png


 


As evidenced in this interactive below, we see a similar conclusion when repeated for Long Island Rail Road peak one way tickets to Penn Station.


It’s likely that the current pricing structure for our commuter rail systems along with other usability issues, such as low non-peak service frequencies, is preventing outer borough residents from using transit lines that in some cases pass through their backyards. Solving the complex equity questions raised by this analysis is a challenging task, but the MTA has begun to tackle them with the implementation of the City Ticket program and the recent announcement of additional service on the Harlem Line. Solutions to questions like these are what we hope to provide with the Fourth Regional Plan.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


I disagree with this article. It isn't just income but lifestyles too... Somebody living in an area like Morris Heights or University Heights likely doesn't work in the Grand Central area or even Manhattan to begin with (likely stay local in the Bronx). Even if they do, the frequencies offered makes the subway the prime option. Those are urban neighborhoods, where as suburban areas function more like the suburbs. You're used to timed schedules, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with this article. It isn't just income but lifestyles too... Somebody living in an area like Morris Heights or University Heights likely doesn't work in the Grand Central area or even Manhattan to begin with (likely stay local in the Bronx). Even if they do, the frequencies offered makes the subway the prime option. Those are urban neighborhoods, where as suburban areas function more like the suburbs. You're used to timed schedules, etc.

Better integrate the rail infrastructure into the subway. I get on at Morris Heights why can't I transfer for the (D) or (7) if I need to continue my trip.? It's infrastructure. Talking two rails 4'8" apart. I can repurpose it for anything I want to run on it. I've ridden subway lines that share trackage/ROW with commuter trains. This seems less complicated than that. What's the block?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better integrate the rail infrastructure into the subway. I get on at Morris Heights why can't I transfer for the (D) or (7) if I need to continue my trip.? It's infrastructure. Talking two rails 4'8" apart. I can repurpose it for anything I want to run on it. I've ridden subway lines that share trackage/ROW with commuter trains. This seems less complicated than that. What's the block?

You come up with these lovely ideas... You want Metro-North fares lowered for the South Bronx? Who is going to pay for the lost revenue? Commuter rails have their purpose and they are not subways. Integrate them by offering transfers to other modes, but not by lowering the fares... There's already City Ticket on weekends to encourage ridership and a lot of people from these areas of the Bronx only pay $3.00 anyway since they travel to Marble Hill or Yonkers. The people paying more are those traveling into Grand Central.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You come up with these lovely ideas... You want Metro-North fares lowered for the South Bronx? Who is going to pay for the lost revenue? Commuter rails have their purpose and they are not subways. Integrate them by offering transfers to other modes, but not by lowering the fares... There's already City Ticket on weekends to encourage ridership and a lot of people from these areas of the Bronx only pay $3.00 anyway since they travel to Marble Hill or Yonkers. The people paying more are those traveling into Grand Central.

 

The riders getting on who would've otherwise paid the basic $2.75 fare and decided to pay a little more (maybe even the price of the express bus with a transfer) to take Metro-North.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir, it's an RPA report. Let the engineers and professionals let you know what the possibilities are and present the data before we start with that who's going to pay stuff. NYS wants to keep making money there going to spend it. If we can repurpose existing rail be better to serve our region let's have at the data Heck of a lot cheaper than building from scratch and doing nothing is becoming more and more out of the question.      


The riders getting on who would've otherwise paid the basic $2.75 fare and decided to pay a little more (maybe even the price of the express bus with a transfer) to take Metro-North.

Right!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You come up with these lovely ideas... You want Metro-North fares lowered for the South Bronx? Who is going to pay for the lost revenue? Commuter rails have their purpose and they are not subways. Integrate them by offering transfers to other modes, but not by lowering the fares... There's already City Ticket on weekends to encourage ridership and a lot of people from these areas of the Bronx only pay $3.00 anyway since they travel to Marble Hill or Yonkers. The people paying more are those traveling into Grand Central.

Correction both Commuter Rail and Subway serve the same purpose and that's to move people from A to B be that 5 miles or 50. The Hudson line over crosses or connects with the subway at 153rd, 125th in a decade or so and GC. Why wouldn't I use this infrastructure to extend reach and filter people in these underserved areas into the subway? City ticket  prices and a transfer to the Bus or Subway. Your losing me? It's gaps in service and coverage in these area's you can't do nothing or say tough that's your issue. Wouldn't it be logical to use infrastructure already in place?  What's the fare from GCT within the city? $6-$7? Wouldn't you make the money up in volume?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The riders getting on who would've otherwise paid the basic $2.75 fare and decided to pay a little more (maybe even the price of the express bus with a transfer) to take Metro-North.

What's stopping them from paying a "little more now"? As I said if people from these areas don't go to GCT then there's no point. You have people that live in the South Bronx that never leave the Bronx and when they do, they use the subway. Waste of money...

Correction both Commuter Rail and Subway serve the same purpose and that's to move people from A to B be that 5 miles or 50. The Hudson line over crosses or connects with the subway at 153rd, 125th in a decade or so and GC. Why wouldn't I use this infrastructure to extend reach and filter people in these underserved areas into the subway? City ticket prices and a transfer to the Bus or Subway. Your losing me? It's gaps in service and coverage in these area's you can't do nothing or say tough that's your issue. Wouldn't it be logical to use infrastructure already in place? What's the fare from GCT within the city? $6-$7? Wouldn't you make the money up in volume?

Oh please. The people paying for the monthlies will be the ones yelling the loudest and I don't blame them. These are UBRAN neighborhoods with subways. Let them take the subway.

City Ticket with a transfer.. done.

That's overkill. It's already $4.25. That's cheap enough for a super fast commute on a commuter rail. Next you'll be calling for Amtrak to lower their prices because it runs in the city. The (MTA) has also stated that they don't think they'd be able to handle the additional crowds anyway so until they can do that keep things as is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You come up with these lovely ideas... You want Metro-North fares lowered for the South Bronx? Who is going to pay for the lost revenue? Commuter rails have their purpose and they are not subways. Integrate them by offering transfers to other modes, but not by lowering the fares... There's already City Ticket on weekends to encourage ridership and a lot of people from these areas of the Bronx only pay $3.00 anyway since they travel to Marble Hill or Yonkers. The people paying more are those traveling into Grand Central.

 

Somehow most European cities manage to have all transport under the same fare structure and the world keeps spinning. It's certainly not any more expensive; a three-zone monthly in Berlin is cheaper than an unlimited Metrocard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somehow most European cities manage to have all transport under the same fare structure and the world keeps spinning. It's certainly not any more expensive; a three-zone monthly in Berlin is cheaper than an unlimited Metrocard.

 

^THIS!

 

Also, thanks for posting this in the first place. It backs up our suspicions from earlier threads like this with actual numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's stopping them from paying a "little more now"? As I said if people from these areas don't go to GCT then there's no point. You have people that live in the South Bronx that never leave the Bronx and when they do, they use the subway. Waste of money...

 

How much does Metro-North cost from the Bronx to GCT? $8.75 for a peak fare with no transfers offered. How much does an express bus cost? $6.50 with a transfer included. I'm willing to pay an extra $3.75 for quick service. I'm not willing to pay an extra $6 and then possibly another $2.75 on top of that to get where I need to go.

 

And clearly considering how crowded the (4) & (5) lines are, a lot of people from those areas do go to Manhattan, even if there's a lot of them who don't (The Bronx has 1.4 million people. There's a lot of people doing a lot of things). And yeah, with the high price and crappy frequencies, who can blame them for taking the bus to the subway over Metro-North.

 

Oh please. The people paying for the monthlies will be the ones yelling the loudest and I don't blame them. These are UBRAN neighborhoods with subways. Let them take the subway.

 

There's a brand called UBRAN that provides transit service or something?

 

And no, those aren't areas with subways. Saying Morris Heights/University Heights are served by the (4) train is like saying Riverdale is served by the (1) train (or more precisely "Upstairs Riverdale" as you like to call it). Distance-wise and topography-wise the situation is similar. Tremont has the reverse situation, being downhill from the Grand Concourse. Melrose has the initial hill heading east from River Avenue, but it's still a bit of a trek to the Melrose station.

 

The article specifically says: "Is it any wonder then that we see lower levels of commuter rail ridership at these stations despite being located in places with fewer subway stations and longer bus or subway travel times?"

 

That's overkill. It's already $4.25. That's cheap enough for a super fast commute on a commuter rail. Next you'll be calling for Amtrak to lower their prices because it runs in the city. The  (MTA) has also stated that they don't think they'd be able to handle the additional crowds anyway so until they can do that keep things as is.

 

You do have a point that $4.25 may be a little too cheap, but what's wrong with making the prices the same as the express bus fare? (For that matter, I think express buses should have peak/off-peak pricing as well). For $2.25 more than a CityTicket, you get an automatic transfer. Sounds fair to me.....

 

I disagree with this article. It isn't just income but lifestyles too... Somebody living in an area like Morris Heights or University Heights likely doesn't work in the Grand Central area or even Manhattan to begin with (likely stay local in the Bronx). Even if they do, the frequencies offered makes the subway the prime option. Those are urban neighborhoods, where as suburban areas function more like the suburbs. You're used to timed schedules, etc.

 

The Bx18 serves both Morris Heights & University Heights, and runs every 15-20 minutes during rush hour and 30 minutes off-peak, yet still manages to get decent ridership. (As is the case with many routes across the city, including some in Manhattan itself. Look at routes like the M20 & M50). If the quickest way happens to be to time yourself for a train that runs every 30 minutes, then so be it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somehow most European cities manage to have all transport under the same fare structure and the world keeps spinning. It's certainly not any more expensive; a three-zone monthly in Berlin is cheaper than an unlimited Metrocard.

Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somehow most European cities manage to have all transport under the same fare structure and the world keeps spinning. It's certainly not any more expensive; a three-zone monthly in Berlin is cheaper than an unlimited Metrocard.

The (MTA) is a completely different animal. Given the high pension costs and other costs that the (MTA) will have to deal with, I don't see any change in the structure anytime soon. I should point out that Europeans pay a lot in terms of taxes to subsidize lower fares. I would travel regularly from my apartment in Florence in Italy to Milan, Bologna and Rome for around 60€ round trip (at the time). You also have a different attitude there towards transit where people are encouraged to leave their cars at home.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (MTA) is a completely different animal. Given the high pension costs and other costs that the (MTA) will have to deal with, I don't see any change in the structure anytime soon. I should point out that Europeans pay a lot in terms of taxes to subsidize lower fares. I would travel regularly from my apartment in Florence in Italy to Milan, Bologna and Rome for around 60€ round trip (at the time). You also have a different attitude there towards transit where people are encouraged to leave their cars at home.

With autonomous technology on the horizon. Will the MTA even be as relevant? Will there even be a need for more rail when we can run vehicles a foot from each other? This is the 21st century after all progress isn't going to stop. No disrespect but in 50 years the only pensions the MTA will have to worry about is the few folks maintaining the computer networks and vehicles. I guess at that point we'll finally get the fully integrated transit network our region so desperately needs. Way too complicated for reasons I'll never fully understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With autonomous technology on the horizon. Will the MTA even be as relevant? Will there even be a need for more rail when we can run vehicles a foot from each other? This is the 21st century after all progress isn't going to stop. No disrespect but in 50 years the only pensions the MTA will have to worry about is the few folks maintaining the computer networks and vehicles. I guess at that point we'll finally get the fully integrated transit network our region so desperately needs. Way too complicated for reasons I'll never fully understand.

 

This is silly. 70 years ago everyone thought the automobile would kill the subway. 50 years ago everyone thought the monorail, or flying cars, or personal rapid transit, or maglev was going to kill the subway. Did TV kill the radio? No. Autonomous vehicles will only ever be as good as their basic geometric constraints, and the facts remain that the subway (or at least moving lots of people in mostly-standing-only vehicles) is the only way to efficiently move lots of people given limited space and time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is silly. 70 years ago everyone thought the automobile would kill the subway. 50 years ago everyone thought the monorail, or flying cars, or personal rapid transit, or maglev was going to kill the subway. Did TV kill the radio? No. Autonomous vehicles will only ever be as good as their basic geometric constraints, and the facts remain that the subway (or at least moving lots of people in mostly-standing-only vehicles) is the only way to efficiently move lots of people given limited space and time.

I get it! I fully understand the historical points here. Maybe times were simpler back then fewer blocks, bureaucracy. What's silly here is the constraints imposed and in many cases for less than rational reasons. We have the data we clearly see what's going to happen and how it's going to play out. But there's always a reason for why we can't improve or prepare. From a transit standpoint what I don't see is any urgency to expand or meet impending demands. But what I do see in the private sector is leaps and bounds LiDar and autonomous technology I own a car that parks itself. So when I hear sediment that we can't better integrate Rail because this is the way it's been or we can build new Subway's there nothing we can do! Shouldn't I be asking or wondering how this gap is going to be filled? The MTA isn't from what I'm hearing. All the young guys I have working at the office Lyft, Uber the gaps are already being filled where the MTA can't deliver. At least I'm seeing company's like Uber and Otto making progress why wouldn't I make the connection or at least ask the question what's silly about that? . Geometric constraints and the Subway moving in three-dimensional space trust lessons learned 15 years ago.  Now take my comments let me know how you think we can solve these issues and not the text book smart guy answers I studied under Robert Bea for four years I got them already from him. Real-world I don't care about the MTA pension problems solution. Let's hear more about the European systems. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technology never trumps PR or politics, and this is something every engineer is taught in their undergrad. Technologies all have political drawbacks. Let's take, for example, the fact that Long Island's rails are completely at capacity at the peak. Expanding LIRR infrastructure has led to the most expensive transportation project in human history on a per-mile basis. Want to dump everyone onto autonomous cars? Good luck finding the money or political will to expand highways. Lyft and Uber are lipstick on a pig, not an actual solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get it! I fully understand the historical points here. Maybe times were simpler back then fewer blocks, bureaucracy. What's silly here is the constraints imposed and in many cases for less than rational reasons. We have the data we clearly see what's going to happen and how it's going to play out. But there's always a reason for why we can't improve or prepare. From a transit standpoint what I don't see is any urgency to expand or meet impending demands. But what I do see in the private sector is leaps and bounds LiDar and autonomous technology I own a car that parks itself. So when I hear sediment that we can't better integrate Rail because this is the way it's been or we can build new Subway's there nothing we can do! Shouldn't I be asking or wondering how this gap is going to be filled? The MTA isn't from what I'm hearing. All the young guys I have working at the office Lyft, Uber the gaps are already being filled where the MTA can't deliver. At least I'm seeing company's like Uber and Otto making progress why wouldn't I make the connection or at least ask the question what's silly about that? . Geometric constraints and the Subway moving in three-dimensional space trust lessons learned 15 years ago.  Now take my comments let me know how you think we can solve these issues and not the text book smart guy answers I studied under Robert Bea for four years I got them already from him. Real-world I don't care about the MTA pension problems solution. Let's hear more about the European systems. 

You really can't compare transportation in (Western) Europe.  For starters, there is far more investment in the system.  Additionally, the major cities overall are fairly small in comparison to New York.  Let's take Milan for example.  It is considered the most "European" city in Italy and also the most modern.  There are numerous bus lines, a subway (albeit rather small lol) and even a tram system.  The times that I traveled there from my apartment in Florence I was always impressed by how much it felt like New York with the mix of the old and new, but the city is MUCH smaller than New York City.  In fact I don't think I used public transit at all outside of the then EuroStar Italia train from Florence to Milan.  I was able to walk and see all of the places I wanted to visit.  I experienced numerous strikes while living there (train, bus, etc.) because the unions wanted more money.  In some ways Europe is more advanced from a transportation standpoint, but there are some things that we definitely have in common.  Living in Northern Italy (more specially North Central Italy), politics stood in the way, having a direct impact on transportation.  For example, trains were significantly delayed when I traveled to the south (i.e. Naples) and filthy.  I never found such conditions traveling to other parts of Northern Italy (i.e. Genoa, Bologna, Milan, Turin, Venice, etc.).  Trips to other coastal cities in the Southern Italy, such as Bari, Lecce and Taranto had to be cancelled due to train strikes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technology never trumps PR or politics, and this is something every engineer is taught in their undergrad. Technologies all have political drawbacks. Let's take, for example, the fact that Long Island's rails are completely at capacity at the peak. Expanding LIRR infrastructure has led to the most expensive transportation project in human history on a per-mile basis. Want to dump everyone onto autonomous cars? Good luck finding the money or political will to expand highways. Lyft and Uber are lipstick on a pig, not an actual solution.

Not arguing that fact working within a box is an art within itself. It's one the most frustrating realities to come to grips with. As you can see I still have problems with it almost 20 years later. But as you get older you get into business for a bit you realize people are moved by two factors money and fear. Your powerful tools to move the needle. Let's look at money. Transit for a place like New York directly correlates to money the commodity, in this case, that would be talent and skill we know we have what a million more people moving to our great City in the next 20-30 years? We see this there's no question about it why wouldn't you use the power of money or greed to expand Subway's and Rail after all everyone wants to make more money correct? Fear. For some the fear of being left behind is enough of a carrot to get in front of someone. New York and the US as a whole being left behind you don't think someone could use that to get some wallets open? After all, a decline in infrastructure is a decline in economics in many ways. So the issue may be you need more engineers and transit advocates that aren't so socially awkward and that are speaking in political lingo. We need hybrids. Speak to the folks with the money a show them how there going to make more money, improve the city get credit and get the votes. As for tech and autonomous never said it's to replace the Subway or Rail just asked how relevant the MTA's issues are going to be in 50 years with this new technology emerging? Full Second Ave Subway or Second Ave Autonomous Busway? Will the value factor be there for building new rail or just invest in Autonomous BRT?  If MTA can't expand because of political constraints So what nothing's going to fill the gap? This is where I'm not getting an answer. Lyft,Uber yeah you may be correct but the perception right now is the Subway is slow and crowded and Uber is quicker perception is the core of PR after all and you can't trump that perception is reality. As for the LIRR 3rd track and being the most expensive project in human history per mile yeah pull the trumpets out. Guess what they're building it and they don't have an option. Gateway tunnels and countless other projects that are going to forced and take the new top spot as the most expensive. This can all be cause-and-effect started in some board room in the 60's because the guy that had the info and knowledge couldn't communicate with the guy cutting the check or political clout. Ultimately I don't see how autonomous isn't going to be a part of City transport more people than ever are moving into urban centers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really can't compare transportation in (Western) Europe.  For starters, there is far more investment in the system.  Additionally, the major cities overall are fairly small in comparison to New York.  Let's take Milan for example.  It is considered the most "European" city in Italy and also the most modern.  There are numerous bus lines, a subway (albeit rather small lol) and even a tram system.  The times that I traveled there from my apartment in Florence I was always impressed by how much it felt like New York with the mix of the old and new, but the city is MUCH smaller than New York City.  In fact I don't think I used public transit at all outside of the then EuroStar Italia train from Florence to Milan.  I was able to walk and see all of the places I wanted to visit.  I experienced numerous strikes while living there (train, bus, etc.) because the unions wanted more money.  In some ways Europe is more advanced from a transportation standpoint, but there are some things that we definitely have in common.  Living in Northern Italy (more specially North Central Italy), politics stood in the way, having a direct impact on transportation.  For example, trains were significantly delayed when I traveled to the south (i.e. Naples) and filthy.  I never found such conditions traveling to other parts of Northern Italy (i.e. Genoa, Bologna, Milan, Turin, Venice, etc.).  Trips to other coastal cities in the Southern Italy, such as Bari, Lecce and Taranto had to be cancelled due to train strikes. 

I guess the question I should be asking is what was your take away from the report? And how would you approach the issues of better transit coverage and growth in population? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess the question I should be asking is what was your take away from the report? And how would you approach the issues of better transit coverage and growth in population? 

Well I've talked about this at length over the years. I don't believe that we need to sink all of our resources into rail improvements.  The current administration is doing something that has been talked about for years, and that is utilizing our waterways to move people by introducing ferry service to areas that have limited transportation options where rail service may not make as much sense.   There are some areas that would be changed significantly with rail service, and I think we need to preserve the character of our communities and not ram subways down everyone's throats with the one size fits all thinking.  An area like Throggs Neck or Country Club for example perhaps could be better served with ferry service, something that some local leaders have called for.  Where it makes sense to implement rail service sure, if costs can be kept within reason.  I think that a lot of the future depends heavily on what sort of new payment system the (MTA) decides to implement.  I believe in a system in which buses compliment rail service, and so we have to look at getting people on buses again in areas where they've stopped using them.  I think that's the first thing we need to address... Have the system organized where different services compliment one another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.