TTC ridership record - an alternate look

[Glen]

With the announcement of the TTC's record breaking ridership statistics, I thought that we should add some context to the figures.


466,700,000 riders carried!
TTC records highest ever ridership
March 2009

The TTC broke its all-time highest ridership record by carrying 466.7 million customers in 2008.

The TTC had its largest service increase on record last year. More than 100 buses were added to peak period service, and new evening and weekend services were introduced so that all bus and streetcar routes run all day, every day, bringing service within a convenient walking distance of all neighbourhoods in Toronto, at all times.

Last November, the TTC’s 12-month ridership hit an all-time record of 465 million rides, surpassing 1988’s record of 463.5 million. The year-end total came in at 466.7 million.

In 2009, additional service increases – and improved customer communications – will make public transit in Toronto an even better experience for everyone.

Lets compare today to the previous high water mark in 1988;

In 1988 the GTA had a population of 3.6 million.
In 1988 the TTC had ridership of 463.5 million.

Daily average ridership as a % of GTA population = 35.27%


In 2009 the GTA has a population of 5.8 million
In 2009 the TTC had ridership of 466.7 million

Daily average ridership as % of GTA population = 22.04%

It should be expected that the % should decline as the percentage of GTA residents living and working outside of the GTA grows much faster than the mature city proper. What is remarkable is not the decrease in GTA utilization but that the actual ridership took so long to reach a new peak. Twenty one years to break the record. This while the region grew by 62% and gas prices increased dramatically.

To add injury to insult the TTC budget has increase 17% faster than the rate of inflation.*


----------
*In 1988 the TTC provided 463.5 million rides with an operating budget of 532 million. Fast forward to 2005 and they provided 431.2 million rides with an operating budget of 962 million. Using the inflation calculator it shows that the the TTC budget of 532 million would amount to 791.75 million in 2005 dollars. Compare that to an actual of 962 million. That is still a 170 million above inflation, or 17% above the rate of inflation.

 

[Translude15]

Glen, your stats just go to show the GTA's car dependant habits. Simply put, the TTC and the region's other modes of transportation do not offer the convenience and comfort of the vehicle to get from point A to point B. Sure, the subway can be convenient to get to and from work for people living within the 416, but getting around in the GTA without a car is a real pain in the ass.

 

[kEiThZ]

Please.... The Mike Harris years had a lot to do with those stats... As did the fact that most of the GTA population and job growth in the last decade or two has occurred outside of the 416. A much fairer comparison would be using population numbers of the 416 only (for the TTC) or including the transit ridership of all the GTA transit agencies (for a GTA wide analysis).

 

[catcher_of_cats]

There is one key point missing here in this comparison, and that is the ridership levels of the suburban municipalities. If comparing only the TTC numbers, then use only the city of Toronto's population which creates a vastly different set of numbers.

 

[BobBob]

You compare the TTC's ridership to the population of the region, but the TTC doesn't serve the region. It serves the City of Toronto, whose population hasn't grown very much in the intervening 20 years.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Glen, your stats just go to show the GTA's car dependant habits. Simply put, the TTC and the region's other modes of transportation do not offer the convenience and comfort of the vehicle to get from point A to point B. Sure, the subway can be convenient to get to and from work for people living within the 416, but getting around in the GTA without a car is a real pain in the ass.

That's really not true. Other than a few loopy 905 routes that serve high schools and shuffle seniors to the library, there aren't many routes in the GTA that aren't extremely well-used, if not overcrowded. The problem is not a car-dependent habit or the comfort and convenience of transit, it's the outright lack of transit.

As for comparing the GTA population to TTC stats, it's not very useful - the only fair thing to do is add 905/GO ridership to account for the larger percentage of people living in areas underserved by transit. Compared to 1989, I wonder how many more people 416ers are walking/cycling (the large increase in downtown-dwellers has probably done a lot for these two modes), or taking GO/905 routes

 

[kettal]

Your logic is pathetic, Glen.

You can only compare it to the number of residents and jobs within the TTC's jurisdiction. Population growth in Oakville or Ajax has little relevance as the TTC doesn't even serve these areas.

 

[Glen]

You compare the TTC's ridership to the population of the region, but the TTC doesn't serve the region. It serves the City of Toronto, whose population hasn't grown very much in the intervening 20 years.

I addressed this in the OP....

It should be expected that the % should decline as the percentage of GTA residents living and working outside of the GTA grows much faster than the mature city proper. What is remarkable is not the decrease in GTA utilization but that the actual ridership took so long to reach a new peak.

More important is the fact that it has been twenty one years to match the previous peak. This, while the region's population has grown tremendously. The city, especially the core, should have been able to attract some reasonable percentage of this growth. Both on a discretionary (theaters, harbourfront, shopping or downtown itself) and non discretionary level (hospitals, courts, UoT, etc.). But it has not.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

This, while the region's population has grown tremendously. The city, especially the core, should have been able to attract some reasonable percentage of this growth. Both on a discretionary (theaters, harbourfront, shopping or downtown itself) and non discretionary level (hospitals, courts, UoT, etc.). But it has not.

You're comparing apples with oranges - TTC stats covers only one mode of transportation, when we already knew that there is significant growth in GO usage (as well as pedestrian and cycling).

AoD

 

[threnody]

In other threads it's been pretty clear that glen has a real axe to grind, and this one is no different. Is there any point in going through the same arguments all over again? He's shown time and time again that he won't be swayed by anything anybody says, while simultaneously believing that drivel like this constitutes a convincing argument.

 

[fiendishlibrarian]

Have to think that the old Metro plan to encourage the development of "city centres" had something to do with this, as it dispersed office and other jobs away from the core that was served best by transit. Wasn't there also some back-room shenanigans between Layton and Eggleton/Tonks/Godfrey to *discourage* core office tower development, and thus scuttle old DRL plans, etc.?

 

[Jonny5]

I addressed this in the OP....



More important is the fact that it has been twenty one years to match the previous peak. This, while the region's population has grown tremendously. The city, especially the core, should have been able to attract some reasonable percentage of this growth. Both on a discretionary (theaters, harbourfront, shopping or downtown itself) and non discretionary level (hospitals, courts, UoT, etc.). But it has not.

You didn't address it, you just dodged it.

What scarberiankhatru is spot on. Population is growing in areas where there is little or no service, especially not TTC service, because they don't operate there!

 

[unimaginative2]

It wasn't even in the backroom. Layton and his downtown council allies openly and actively opposed the DRL on the grounds that it would bring additional development to the downtown core. All of Metro council in the 1980s, especially the downtown councillors, agreed that development should be funneled to the suburban town centres. Unfortunately, they had all the drawbacks of a 416 location (taxation) without the advantages of downtown (clustering, image, accessibility) and so the strategy wound up driving most new office development to the 905.

I think in the long term, that planning decision is what has hurt transit growth along with a lack of rapid transit expansion. At least the 416 suburban centres were planned with fairly high density and walkability around rapid transit routes. Once the development got pushed out to the 905, it was a complete free-for-all with no planning controls at all. Office parks were built on greenfields near highways with no consideration given to transit accessibility. You can walk from the far end of the Consumers business park or the office complexes at Scarborough Centre to transit routes quite easily. Walking from one end of the Airport or Meadowvale business parks to the other is just not feasible.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Have to think that the old Metro plan to encourage the development of "city centres" had something to do with this, as it dispersed office and other jobs away from the core that was served best by transit. Wasn't there also some back-room shenanigans between Layton and Eggleton/Tonks/Godfrey to *discourage* core office tower development, and thus scuttle old DRL plans, etc.?

Though this decentralization wouldn't be a ridership problem if they actually built transit to these centres.

More important is the fact that it has been twenty one years to match the previous peak. This, while the region's population has grown tremendously. The city, especially the core, should have been able to attract some reasonable percentage of this growth. Both on a discretionary (theaters, harbourfront, shopping or downtown itself) and non discretionary level (hospitals, courts, UoT, etc.). But it has not.

Actually, parts of the 416 have seen huge growth in both population and employment since 1989, but others have not or have seen declines. Parts of the 905 are also stagnant, though, including population declines in many, many areas.

It's been hard for TTC ridership to bounce back from service cuts, though, especially (I think) a lot of suburban bus routes, which have probably only rebounded due to population growth or changes like more seniors, poorer people, etc.

 

[spider]

Before the street dancing begins to celebrate the TTC's expanding ridership it would be wise to verify their numbers which of course is impossible.

I, for one, don't believe a word of it because what I learned when a local route expansion a few years ago was trialled. A non official but exact count revealed the TTC count to be wildy optimistic to be charitable. The bottom line was that the TTC ridership numbers were self serving nonsense, they probably still are.

The data on the referenced link is 4 years old, the route extension not only still exists but has been extended another 4 hours on weekdays and now runs on weekends too. Ridership remains within a percentage point or two of the 2005 numbers.


http://www3.sympatico.ca/donvalley/index.htm