A bus service with the funding 100% from the government takes away the "voting with your wallet" aspect of having a farebox. If bus service and routes are determined by the government, stakeholder groups with more eloquent, persuasive presentations are likely to convince the city to meet their needs. A "free transit" model might lead to a weakening of service to poor, high unemployment neighborhoods, as they are less likely to do presentations at the transit planning board.
Pricing has other options beyond full fare vs free. Peak hour pricing and discounts for off-peak travel helps reduce crowding at peak times, as some users will choose to travel off-peak.
The off-peak pricing is also a defacto discount for seniors, as they aren't typically working so they can travel on off-peak hours.
“…you know the next bus will arrive shortly.” That’s so important and it’s the biggest obstacle to me using transit in my daily life. Do you think it is better for a transit authority to have many bus routes which have a 60min frequency or fewer routes with 15min frequency?
Coverage vs. frequency is an important debate that too few localities have. Each has trade-offs. I can image there are sprawled out counties where coverage is more important and 60-min headway is acceptable to riders. In a city, I think the default position should be high frequency. In a city, you've got the bones (street grid) for walking and bicycling to get to the high frequency service areas.
I think in the suburbs, it needs to be a little bit of both. In the DC area, there should be better frequency inside the Beltway, and along the development corridors. Years ago, you had the streetcar suburbs. You built the streetcar line, and the development followed. Now you have the development without the streetcars, just cars with an occasional bus. I'm in College Park MD. There is a lot of mixed-use development being built along US 1, Baltimore Avenue. There needs to be more frequent bus service to support it. If not, you are going to get a lot more cars on the road. When a bus only comes every half hour, or even every hour, people are going to drive.
There is a double-meaning of "more people will ride the bus." We should be seeking "more people riding the bus" in the sense of modal replacement of car trips with bus trips. But we should not be seeking to maximizing bus trips in the broader sense. This implies a fare-pricing policy that makes bus riding much less expensive than driving, but charging a fare high enough to imply economic value.
The irony is making bus service free quickly makes it something that a lot of people don’t want to use which then costs political support which leads to funding and service cuts and an eventual death spiral.
I really enjoyed reading this article, Andy. A bus as a moving sidewalk. I would never have thought of that. I use both Metrorail and Metrobus regularly, whenever I go into Washington, DC, from my home in the suburbs. I do drive to the Metro station, it's about 2.5 miles, because the bus service on a major commuter artery, US 1 Baltimore Avenue, only runs every half hour or hourly, and stops running too early on Sunday. Once I'm in the city, the bus is a great way to get around.
The problem as I see it, besides the frequency of service, is Metro doesn't do a good enough job selling their bus service. You don't sell the steak, you sell the sizzle. 99% of the buses I've been on, have been spotlessly clean, and the drivers are friendly, polite, and quite knowledgeable about how to get around the city. Some bus lines do offer 24/7 service, servicing all 8 wards. I'm hoping that there will be more service here in the suburbs, as we densify. I would love to be able to walk 2 blocks the bus stop, and take a bus to the Metro station, rather than driving there and paying to park. I'd rather pay the bus fare. Sometime in June, the new Better Bus Network is supposed to take effect. I'll be interested to see if it is an improvement. Once it does, Metro should go on an advertising blitz, selling the new bus service's "sizzle."
Great piece The transit conversation (and funding) has been stuck in the the same dead end loop for decades. If we want to move forward, I think you're right: the conversation must be reframed.
A bus service with the funding 100% from the government takes away the "voting with your wallet" aspect of having a farebox. If bus service and routes are determined by the government, stakeholder groups with more eloquent, persuasive presentations are likely to convince the city to meet their needs. A "free transit" model might lead to a weakening of service to poor, high unemployment neighborhoods, as they are less likely to do presentations at the transit planning board.
Pricing has other options beyond full fare vs free. Peak hour pricing and discounts for off-peak travel helps reduce crowding at peak times, as some users will choose to travel off-peak.
The off-peak pricing is also a defacto discount for seniors, as they aren't typically working so they can travel on off-peak hours.
“…you know the next bus will arrive shortly.” That’s so important and it’s the biggest obstacle to me using transit in my daily life. Do you think it is better for a transit authority to have many bus routes which have a 60min frequency or fewer routes with 15min frequency?
Coverage vs. frequency is an important debate that too few localities have. Each has trade-offs. I can image there are sprawled out counties where coverage is more important and 60-min headway is acceptable to riders. In a city, I think the default position should be high frequency. In a city, you've got the bones (street grid) for walking and bicycling to get to the high frequency service areas.
I think in the suburbs, it needs to be a little bit of both. In the DC area, there should be better frequency inside the Beltway, and along the development corridors. Years ago, you had the streetcar suburbs. You built the streetcar line, and the development followed. Now you have the development without the streetcars, just cars with an occasional bus. I'm in College Park MD. There is a lot of mixed-use development being built along US 1, Baltimore Avenue. There needs to be more frequent bus service to support it. If not, you are going to get a lot more cars on the road. When a bus only comes every half hour, or even every hour, people are going to drive.
There is a double-meaning of "more people will ride the bus." We should be seeking "more people riding the bus" in the sense of modal replacement of car trips with bus trips. But we should not be seeking to maximizing bus trips in the broader sense. This implies a fare-pricing policy that makes bus riding much less expensive than driving, but charging a fare high enough to imply economic value.
The irony is making bus service free quickly makes it something that a lot of people don’t want to use which then costs political support which leads to funding and service cuts and an eventual death spiral.
I really enjoyed reading this article, Andy. A bus as a moving sidewalk. I would never have thought of that. I use both Metrorail and Metrobus regularly, whenever I go into Washington, DC, from my home in the suburbs. I do drive to the Metro station, it's about 2.5 miles, because the bus service on a major commuter artery, US 1 Baltimore Avenue, only runs every half hour or hourly, and stops running too early on Sunday. Once I'm in the city, the bus is a great way to get around.
The problem as I see it, besides the frequency of service, is Metro doesn't do a good enough job selling their bus service. You don't sell the steak, you sell the sizzle. 99% of the buses I've been on, have been spotlessly clean, and the drivers are friendly, polite, and quite knowledgeable about how to get around the city. Some bus lines do offer 24/7 service, servicing all 8 wards. I'm hoping that there will be more service here in the suburbs, as we densify. I would love to be able to walk 2 blocks the bus stop, and take a bus to the Metro station, rather than driving there and paying to park. I'd rather pay the bus fare. Sometime in June, the new Better Bus Network is supposed to take effect. I'll be interested to see if it is an improvement. Once it does, Metro should go on an advertising blitz, selling the new bus service's "sizzle."
Exactly -- advertisers know how to handle this stuff!
Great piece The transit conversation (and funding) has been stuck in the the same dead end loop for decades. If we want to move forward, I think you're right: the conversation must be reframed.
Thanks Brent. I think the magic is in getting normies to see themselves as regular bus riders. It's doable!