Isn't another piece of the explanation that the Census doesn't actually
measure trip-making as we typically define it? The Census mode-to-work
question is an odd thing -- see
http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/pdf/d02p.pdf questions 23a&b. The Census
day was 4/1/2000, and it asks "how did this person usually get to work
LAST WEEK?", and requires a one-mode answer (with "most distance" the
criteria for choosing main mode). So for a number of individuals and
families with whome I am anecdotally familiar, you don't count transit
even if you use it quite a bit. If you walk to transit to and from work
2 days a week and drive the others, you don't report transit. If you
carpool to a parking location and then take transit to your office every
day, you don't report transit. If you drive from Loudoun County VA to
the Vienna METRO to downtown Washington DC every day, you don't report
transit. So aren't the Census numbers ALWAYS going to be biased toward
the "dominant" mode (unless everyone does the same thing every single
day)? As others have posted, there are other reasons for disagreement
between Census travel trends and all other sources, but this is clearly
one.
Lots of people seek smart growth locations for home and work
specifically to have access to transportation choices. That doesn't
mean that every day, or even the majority of days, they won't drive. I
ranted a bit about this a couple weeks ago in response to Ken Orski's
flippant post to a thread started by Chuck Purvis. Using these flawed
Census numbers to argue for further depriving people of transportation
choices is completely outdated thinking.
Chris.
------------------------------------
Christopher V. Forinash
U.S. EPA: Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation
1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW (MC 1808), Washington DC 20460
(Delivery: 401 M St. SW, #WT-1013D)
202-260-5044 vox 0174 fax; forinash.christopher(a)epa.gov
------------------------------------
Development, Community & Environment Division:
http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth
A partner in the Smart Growth Network:
http://www.smartgrowth.org
"Gardner, John
F" To: 'Chuck Purvis'
<CPurvis(a)mtc.ca.gov>ov>, ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
<GardnerJF(a)dot.s cc:
tate.sc.us> Subject: RE: [CTPP] Reconciling Census
Transit Commuters with Ridership St atistics
Sent by:
owner-ctpp-news@
chrispy.net
07/08/2002 08:14
AM
Another explanation for the growth in total unlinked passenger trips,
while
total transit commuters remained stable, is the shift toward rail
transit by
many of the growing transit systems. In many cases, light rail replaced
express bus service. The express bus collected people in their
neighborhoods or at a park and ride lot and was a "one-seat" trip. Rail
often involves a transfer from a feeder bus to the train, so a trip that
formerly counted as one unlinked passenger trip now counts as two. A
better
measure would be "linked trips" (excludes transfers) when making this
comparison, but I don't believe they are reported.
John Gardner, AICP
SCDOT Office of Planning
PO Box 191
Columbia, SC 29202-0191
(803) 737 - 1444
gardnerjf(a)dot.state.sc.us
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Purvis [mailto:CPurvis@mtc.ca.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 6:36 PM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: [CTPP] Reconciling Census Transit Commuters with Ridership
Statistics
To: CTPP-News
One of the interesting journey-to-work results is the lack of change, at
the
NATIONAL level, in the total number of transit commuters. The US had
6,069,589 transit commuters according to the 1990 Census, and 6,067,703
transit commuters according to the 2000 Census, a 0.03 percent decrease.
(On
the other hand, the US transit commute SHARE declined from 5.3 percent
in
1990 to 4.7 percent in 2000.)
This compares to national transit ridership statistics which show a 6.4
percent increase in annual unlinked passenger trips comparing 1990 to
2000.
(Source is APTA's 2002 Public Transportation Fact Book, Table 26.) The
APTA
book (I would assume based on FTA-collected ridership statistics) shows
annual unlinked public transit trips increasing from 8,799 million trips
in
1990 to 9,363 million trips in 2000 (the 2000 numbers are preliminary,
according to the 2002 APTA Fact Book).
So, an issue is how to reconcile a 0.0 percent change in national
transit
commuters with a 6.4 percent increase in national transit ridership.
A plausible explanation is that the work trip share of public
transportation
trips has declined since 1990. According to the 1990 NPTS, 42.6 percent
of
public transportation person trips are for the purpose of "earning a
living"
(NPTS Databook, Vol. 1, Table 4.40).
So, I can calculate that about 3,748 million unlinked transit boardings
(in
1990) are "work trips" and that this might decline to about 3,747
million
unlinked transit boarding "work trips", in 2000. This means that perhaps
40
percent of year 2000 transit boardings are work trips (3,747 / 9,363),
which
is quite plausible at the national level.
The story might be that the national number of transit work trips, 1990
to
2000, has remained fairly stable, and that, at least at the national
level,
the growth in transit is attributable to non-work travel.
The data question is: is information available from either the 1995 NPTS
or
the 2001 NHTS that can corroborate this possible trend - - a decline in
the
work purpose share for public transportation trips?
Also, who has attempted to reconcile their change in regional transit
commuters with their own transit ridership statistics? What would be
most
helpful is any comparisons of on-board surveys or household travel
surveys
that show any changes in the trip purpose mix for transit trips.
(Other larger issues still loom in terms of the plausibility/fixability
of
the Census data. We are very concerned about the overall LOW numbers of
TOTAL commuters and employed residents we're seeing in the 2000 Census
in
our region....)
Wishing a Safe & Sane Happy Fourth of July to All!
Chuck Purvis
***********************************************
Charles L. Purvis, AICP
Senior Transportation Planner/Analyst
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, CA 94607-4700
(510) 464-7731 (office)
(510) 464-7848 (fax)
www:
http://www.mtc.ca.gov/
Census WWW:
http://census.mtc.ca.gov/
***********************************************