Downtown Population increased 25% since 2000 (Pittsburgh, Penn: bike, Amtrak, required)

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

Not sure that is quite correct. There has to be some optimal point of ridership that maximizes revenue vs. cost. That tipping point on a curve will probably never be achieved - PAT could use MORE ridership at certain days/times, on certain routes.

Yes, you can maximize revenue without increasing cost where you have extra seats. The fixed costs of running the route don't change when you add more passengers. Also, many of the routes are not receiving much of a subsidy at all. Some would run for a profit.

[pman]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

That would be a sure way to make the dense compact core less dense.

If people living in town or their guests, don't have a convenient place to keep their rides, they'll be less anxious to move their in the first place..

There's very little truth to your statement. Parking garages do not drive density , development does. If the parking were so necessary would the parking authority need to step in and build a monstrosity? No. Adding a crappy little retail space is no way to make up for a 570 space garage with 77 units (what a joke) across from another garage and park. Providing subsidized parking provides the wrong signal. there's plenty of parking in detroit. It's no coincidence this development is driven by the cronies

[PghYinzer]

Originally Posted by pman

There's very little truth to your statement. Parking garages do not drive density , development does. If the parking were so necessary would the parking authority need to step in and build a monstrosity? No. Adding a crappy little retail space is no way to make up for a 570 space garage with 77 units (what a joke) across from another garage and park. Providing subsidized parking provides the wrong signal. there's plenty of parking in detroit.

Millcraft and McKnight Realty are the developers on the project, not the Pittsburgh Parking Authority.

[pman]

Originally Posted by PghYinzer

Millcraft and McKnight Realty are the developers on the project, not the Pittsburgh Parking Authority.

It's a ura project, sorry mixed up the public entities
http://www.post-gazette.com/business...s/201412120077

[szug-bot]

What they should try to design for is a bus loading area that can accomodate 3 parked buses, possibly with a dedicated waiting lane. I read this thread and see good points for and against more parking. But Smithfield Street isn't going to get any wider. With hundreds of new residents, you can potentially double, or triple the traffic in the late rush hour, with people coming home from outside the Downtown, or leaving home for dinner or suburban shopping, etc.

Why not encourage mass transit with shuttles, and maybe a Golden Triangle loop route or something? If THAT existed, I would think $200,000 for a condo there (and thats probably low) would be attractive.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by Moby Hick

Yes, you can maximize revenue without increasing cost where you have extra seats. The fixed costs of running the route don't change when you add more passengers. Also, many of the routes are not receiving much of a subsidy at all. Some would run for a profit.

Subsidy is the highest in the US at $5.22 per passenger. This was not hard to find.
https://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/2...-seems-bargain

[pman]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

...

Why not encourage mass transit with shuttles, and maybe a Golden Triangle loop route or something? If THAT existed, I would think $200,000 for a condo there (and thats probably low) would be attractive.

you want to encourage the people who do not live there to take transit, preferrably instead of driving through a tunnel.

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by FallsAngel

Subsidy is the highest in the US at $5.22 per passenger. This was not hard to find.
https://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/2...-seems-bargain

It must be harder to find the right, current figure, because it's only $2 per ride.

http://www.portauthority.org/paac/po...budgetbook.pdf

Plus, my point was that the routes run at or near the line of profitability. See for example the comments in this discussion.

Nullspace: Bus economics and the (proposed) demise of the 28X Airport Flyer

I've been a fan of PAT since they actually did improve and correct the problems Zapinski notes there.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by Moby Hick

It must be harder to find the right, current figure, because it's only $2 per ride.

http://www.portauthority.org/paac/po...budgetbook.pdf

Plus, my point was that the routes run at or near the line of profitability. See for example the comments in this discussion.

Nullspace: Bus economics and the (proposed) demise of the 28X Airport Flyer

I've been a fan of PAT since they actually did improve and correct the problems Zapinski notes there.

My bad, I thought this was a 2014 article. It's also possible that it depends on how the subsidy is calculated, since that's quite a drop in a year (my article was 2012, the budget is 2013-14). In any event, all public transportation is subsidized.

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by FallsAngel

In any event, all public transportation is subsidized.

So is all private transportation.