Questions on the purpose/economics of The Ride

You know what's screwy ... the way highway projects are basically exempted from these kinds of accessibility requirements. Actually, they sometimes lean on transit to supply the accessibility, but it's not a requirement.

What I mean is: a good solid chunk of the population cannot drive. Whether that be due to age, disability, or other reason. The construction of a highway by the government is effectively saying: "here's mobility, but only for people who can drive." Somehow it just slipped through the cracks, the idea of ensuring that all people could actually make use of the highway that's built with public money.

Before someone makes the obvious retort: "oh, but they can get someone to drive them" let me remind you that we reject that argument when applied to transit. The goal of accessibility is independence, of not being forced to rely on your friends and family to get around.

It's puzzling that there isn't some sort of paratransit requirement or equivalent that is linked to the sphere of influence of a highway project.
 
Where is the money coming from to pay for paratranit linked to the sphere of influence of a highway project? We can barely pay for the Ride now and that's only with shortchanging the entire system.
 
I don't think that the question of money enters into this particular point. It's not linked to paratransit either, that was just a suggestion (hence: "or equivalent").

We didn't pass the Americans with Disabilities Act because we had the money for it. We passed it because it's the right thing to do.

My point is that it's a strange oversight in the law for government agencies to be building transportation infrastructure that necessarily excludes a sizable chunk of the population from using it.
 
Things that should happen with The Ride:

- It should be it's own separate entity from the MBTA.

Other than that, have at it.
 
Next City proposes the MBTA partnering with ride-share services to help handle The Ride. I know I've seen mention of this on aB before.
 
I'd love to see some tech-heavy startup bid on one of the regional contracts to just operate the service in full. The vehicles are leased from the MBTA, so the barriers to entry seem pretty low.

Do the current operators use any type of software systems to maximize the efficiency of their shared trips? I'd imagine that something like what Uber and Lyft are doing with Pool and Line, respectively, could go a long way. The Globe wrote a few weeks ago that one of the factors driving a recent rise in complaints is "drivers getting lost in new areas"; it's 2015, so there's no excuse for that.

Put a tablet in every vehicle, plan trips centrally with software designed to maximize route efficiency, and give the drivers turn-by-turn directions. Most trips get booked more than 24 hours in advance anyway, so plotting out efficient routes shouldn't be too hard.

I frequently get annoyed by people who tote "technological innovation" as a way to fix public transit, because generally software can't do much to change the physics of moving bodies. But given the cost disparity between the Ride and other private shared transportation services, it seems like a sizeable chunk of the Rides' problems are more organizational than physical. And startups are generally pretty good at tackling organizational problems.
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
Next City proposes the MBTA partnering with ride-share services to help handle The Ride. I know I've seen mention of this on aB before.
Click to expand...

I believe this has been talked about before.

The Ride service is for people who cannot use conventional transit "because of physical, cognitive or mental disabilities" (quote from their website). There is no way ride-sharing vehicles or operators are equipped or trained to provide transportation services for this part of the population. Its a fantasy.
 
JeffDowntown said:
I believe this has been talked about before.

The Ride service is for people who cannot use conventional transit "because of physical, cognitive or mental disabilities" (quote from their website). There is no way ride-sharing vehicles or operators are equipped or trained to provide transportation services for this part of the population. Its a fantasy.
Click to expand...

But they already are, in a pilot program, and it's working.

Existing ride sharing services can't replace The Ride as is in full, but they can certainly replace some portion of it. A paraplegic may not be able to call an Uber in place of the Ride, but a blind person certainly can.
 
JumboBuc said:
But they already are, in a pilot program, and it's working.

Existing ride sharing services can't replace The Ride as is in full, but they can certainly replace some portion of it. A paraplegic may not be able to call an Uber in place of the Ride, but a blind person certainly can.
Click to expand...

I did not realize blind people qualified for The Ride. I see them on the normal T services all the time.
 
JeffDowntown said:
I did not realize blind people qualified for The Ride. I see them on the normal T services all the time.
Click to expand...

They do indeed. Many birth-blind, are more self-sufficient and may opt to get around on their own via standard transit, but acquired-blindness is debilitating and not easy to adjust to. Many people who become blind after having been sighted use the Ride.

Expanding on Jumbo's point; beyond the blind, plenty of the Ride's users don't require wheelchair accessible vehicles.
 
The taxi/TNC program to replace some Ride trips seems to be working well to reduce costs:
9OCqwpW.png


(from the FMCB meeting last week)
 
Scipio said:
The taxi/TNC program to replace some Ride trips seems to be working well to reduce costs:
9OCqwpW.png


(from the FMCB meeting last week)
Click to expand...

This graph is very misleading. By design the Taxi/TNC programs are capped at $13 costs to the MBTA. Riders are responsible for everything over $15 and pay a $2 fare. The graph should show the total trip costs for taxi/tnc program split between MBTA/rider shares.
 
boston85 said:
This graph is very misleading. By design the Taxi/TNC programs are capped at $13 costs to the MBTA. Riders are responsible for everything over $15 and pay a $2 fare. The graph should show the total trip costs for taxi/tnc program split between MBTA/rider shares.
Click to expand...

Shocker. Misleading information presented by the FMCB...
 
^ This would imply that approximately 0% of the Taxi/TNC rides had total fares under $15. Uber/Lyft fares under $15 are rather common, so this is somewhat surprising to me.
 
JumboBuc said:
^ This would imply that approximately 0% of the Taxi/TNC rides had total fares under $15. Uber/Lyft fares under $15 are rather common, so this is somewhat surprising to me.
Click to expand...

Maybe all contracted drivers round up to $15 for any trip, knowing that they are guaranteed that money anyways by the state. They have no reason to ever claim a fare under $15.
 
^ That would be illegal fraud. Besides, I don't think the driver is even aware that the MBTA is paying the fare on these rides.

If I'm reading that presentation correctly it looks like the TNC Pilot hasn't started yet, so those numbers are only estimates.
 
JumboBuc said:
If I'm reading that presentation correctly it looks like the TNC Pilot hasn't started yet, so those numbers are only estimates.
Click to expand...

Still need to account for the potential added costs to the rider to make a fair comparison. Maybe the riders pay more, but have better service at less costs to the MTBA. Then it can be a cost benefit analysis and you can adjust the cap to what makes sense.

Another thing to note is that the table suggests these pilots are for short rides. That will need to be factored into the comparison as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top