 |
SMART Avg. Weekday Ridership from the MTC
Author: Robert Mueller
Date: 02-04-2018 - 09:37
I don't know why SMART continues to mislead the public regarding
ridership. The MTC circulates a weekly ridership report for all
transit agencies, including SMART, based on Clipper Card data.
And, yes, Clipper data has an undercount, but in SMART's case it is not material.
(~ 300 riders/day). By the way, an example of the undercount when
it was substantial was 10/13 and 10/20 during the fires when SMART provided free service.
Other than that the figures are consistent with the monthly finance
reports that contain the fare revenue line.
Conclusions: average weekday ridership has been flat almost from the beginning.
Weekday ridership below the agency's official forecast by substantial amounts.
And, no matter what one thinks about this transit system, ridership during the weekday is paltry.
On the positive side, weekend ridership (based on interpolations) appears to be about 500/weekend day which is above forecast.
Consider this: given the experience of riders touting "lots of riders" on trains they do take, I suspect there is significant concentration of the ridership on the peak hour trains,
(or about 12 trains per day), leaving really minor ridership distributed to the 22 other
trains. It's in the ridership math. Ultimately, the financial constraints the agency
will face, will force them to cut back on the trains with few riders.
And consider how the math works out when operating trains in 2 directions. About half of the riders are in the morning and half are in the evening. Suppose all of the riders are peak hour riders and about 2/3 of the AM peak riders are southbound. Again the math
using the 2,300 daily ridership figure: about 2/3 * 1/2 *2,300 = 767 sb and 383 nb (again just a back of the envelope calculation).
Does anyone think this kind of ridership could be classified as a "success"? Does anyone think this train has a gnat's chance of addressing the growing congestion in peak hour traffic on the freeway? And even if ridership grows a bit, will it make any difference?
Hate to say it, but this isn't a short term problem. The public is going to eventually learn that they have spent $650 million on a rail system that delivers very limited benefits to a relatively small group of people. And Jake McKenzie's plan to build TODs simply isn't going to change these dynamics meaningfully.
It is unfortunate that the GM continues to make claims about "total ridership" because
that includes the first weekends of operations containing gobs of excursion riders. Gobs.
Wouldn't it be in everyone's interest for the agency just to release the counts
that it is making? It has released nothing since October.
Here are the Clipper Card figures from the "Clipper Weekly Operations Summary Report"
Week Ending Avg. Weekday Ridership
10/6/2017 1,999
10/13/2017 145
10/20/2017 57
10/27/2017 1,923
11/3/2017 na
11/10/2017 1,888
11/17/2017 1,828
11/24/2017 1,752
12/1/2017 1,900
12/8/2017 na
12/15/2017 1,872
12/22/2017 1,726
12/29/2017 1,726
Monthly:
September 48,047
October 29,587
ridership. The MTC circulates a weekly ridership report for all
transit agencies, including SMART, based on Clipper Card data.
And, yes, Clipper data has an undercount, but in SMART's case it is not material.
(~ 300 riders/day). By the way, an example of the undercount when
it was substantial was 10/13 and 10/20 during the fires when SMART provided free service.
Other than that the figures are consistent with the monthly finance
reports that contain the fare revenue line.
Conclusions: average weekday ridership has been flat almost from the beginning.
Weekday ridership below the agency's official forecast by substantial amounts.
And, no matter what one thinks about this transit system, ridership during the weekday is paltry.
On the positive side, weekend ridership (based on interpolations) appears to be about 500/weekend day which is above forecast.
Consider this: given the experience of riders touting "lots of riders" on trains they do take, I suspect there is significant concentration of the ridership on the peak hour trains,
(or about 12 trains per day), leaving really minor ridership distributed to the 22 other
trains. It's in the ridership math. Ultimately, the financial constraints the agency
will face, will force them to cut back on the trains with few riders.
And consider how the math works out when operating trains in 2 directions. About half of the riders are in the morning and half are in the evening. Suppose all of the riders are peak hour riders and about 2/3 of the AM peak riders are southbound. Again the math
using the 2,300 daily ridership figure: about 2/3 * 1/2 *2,300 = 767 sb and 383 nb (again just a back of the envelope calculation).
Does anyone think this kind of ridership could be classified as a "success"? Does anyone think this train has a gnat's chance of addressing the growing congestion in peak hour traffic on the freeway? And even if ridership grows a bit, will it make any difference?
Hate to say it, but this isn't a short term problem. The public is going to eventually learn that they have spent $650 million on a rail system that delivers very limited benefits to a relatively small group of people. And Jake McKenzie's plan to build TODs simply isn't going to change these dynamics meaningfully.
It is unfortunate that the GM continues to make claims about "total ridership" because
that includes the first weekends of operations containing gobs of excursion riders. Gobs.
Wouldn't it be in everyone's interest for the agency just to release the counts
that it is making? It has released nothing since October.
Here are the Clipper Card figures from the "Clipper Weekly Operations Summary Report"
Week Ending Avg. Weekday Ridership
10/6/2017 1,999
10/13/2017 145
10/20/2017 57
10/27/2017 1,923
11/3/2017 na
11/10/2017 1,888
11/17/2017 1,828
11/24/2017 1,752
12/1/2017 1,900
12/8/2017 na
12/15/2017 1,872
12/22/2017 1,726
12/29/2017 1,726
Monthly:
September 48,047
October 29,587
SMART Avg. Weekday Ridership from the MTC