Comments for Charting Transport

Comment on What’s driving Melbourne public transport patronage? by Chronic commuter congestion fills Flagstaff | Waking up in Geelong

Chronic commuter congestion fills Flagstaff | Waking up in Geelong — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 20:32:17 +0000

[...] exit Flagstaff station are only going to get worse, before they (fingers crossed) get better.SourcesCharting Transport: What’s driving Melbourne public transport patronage? – showing patronage growth trending upwardsMedia Release: Melbourne’s public transport [...]

Comment on Traffic volumes on Australian toll roads by Geoff

Geoff — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 08:38:16 +0000

What a good presentation. Its good to know the facts on our major roads.

Comment on What’s driving Melbourne public transport patronage? by Julie

Julie — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 05:43:07 +0000

The first chart IS actually quite linear in sections (although the gradient is greater than 1 so logically there must be more going on than population growth). The second chart is no more linear than the first; only the wiggly bits at the end are cut off as the time period is different. These two charts look basically the same to me, which is probably due to inner city population remaining the same proportion of total population over that time period.

It’s probably quite difficult to tease out all of the inter-dependencies between different factors when you don’t have a lot of data points, but did you consider plotting the charts with time on the x-axis and the ratio of patronage to possible driving factor (eg trips per head of population) on the y-axis? A direct 1-1 relationship would then be a flat line and it would be easier to see the time periods where different relationships applied. This would still be a very rough proxy of a multilinear regression and driver analysis, but at least it would be easier to compare the (possible) influence of different factors at different times.

Comment on Public transport patronage trends in Australasian cities by Links for urbanists No. 5 « The Melbourne Urbanist

Links for urbanists No. 5 « The Melbourne Urbanist — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 08:26:56 +0000

[...] Public transport patronage trends in Australasian cities – updated [...]

Comment on Public transport patronage trends in Australasian cities by Harold Winthrop

Harold Winthrop — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 04:17:32 +0000

Thanks Chris, it’s interesting that CityRail never really recovered from the Olympics patronage ‘spike’. Or alternatively, there was less new (Perth) or underused capacity (Melbourne) to be soaked up post-2000. Am I right in thinking Melbourne’s patronage in 2006 excludes the Comm. Games ‘spike’?
HW

Comment on Public transport patronage trends in Australasian cities by chrisloader

chrisloader — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 23:53:29 +0000

Olympics patronage is included. The higher PT boardings per capita figure for Sydney 2000-01 will almost certainly be explained by the Olympics.

Comment on Public transport patronage trends in Australasian cities by Harold Winthrop

Harold Winthrop — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 21:51:38 +0000

Chris, great piece of work here to pull things together. It’s important to have this baseline data to refer to.

Just one minor question about the Sydney heavy rail data – do the 2000/2001 numbers have Olympic patronage out or in? Once again, great stuff.

Comment on Evidence of mode shift in Australian cities (BITRE data) by Are congestion costs going to double? An analysis of vehicle kms in Australian cities « Charting Transport

Tue, 25 Oct 2011 13:28:25 +0000

[...] another post, I used BITRE yearbook data on motorised passenger kms per capita. BITRE Report 124 only includes [...]

Comment on Useful references by Martin Prahran

Martin Prahran — Sun, 04 Sep 2011 05:20:27 +0000

Hi ABS analysis gurus
There is a problem in VCAT Planning cases, where partisan developer Experts quote ABS car ownership rates for ‘Flat Unit or Apartment in a 4 or more storey block’ that severly understate the true figure. They do this by including undisclosed, a significant number of Office of Housing (OOH) towers. E.g. for Melbourne-Prahran, best I can make of (shaky) Cdata analysis is that 1 bedroom rate jumps from 0.4 to 0.8 when OOH is excluded. But my analysis is generally frustrated by randomization – numbers for Melbourne-Windsor turn negative when OOH is removed!

Big ask I know, but there is a vital need to publish proper tables from reliable, expensive ABS Tablebuilder type stats for all State Sburb names (within LGA bounds) for the real parking rates in such blocks, inclusive and exclusive of the Llandlord type of ‘State Housing Authority’.
VCAT is digging us into a hole here!
thanks
Martin

Comment on What’s happening with car occupancy? by chrisloader

chrisloader — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 13:58:52 +0000

Hi Tony,

I’ve discovered I was using the wrong field hence the strange occupancy by hour figures. I’ve been using the ‘stops’ table, and “STARTHOUR” appears to apply for this leg, while “DEPHOUR” appears to be for the next trip from the destination location (not sure why). I needed to use “STARTHOUR” and I’ve now replaced the chart and it looks much more sensible.

To derive “trip purpose”, I use the destination purpose. unless the destination is “go home” – in which case I use the origin purpose instead. It gets around the 49% “go home” problem, but it does mean that the last non-home activity in a trip chain will be counted twice. I probably should have explained that.

Don’t disagree with your point about all car kms on the road between 8 and 9 am. There will be some school drop off trips that start before 8 am, but a lot more work trips that start before 8 am, and work trips are generally much longer too.