Comments on: Bloomberg Tests Free-Transit Waters http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/ Covering the New York City Streets Renaissance Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:07:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ian Turner http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-102571 Ian Turner Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:01:55 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-102571 Rod, Do you have some evidence to support your claim that it costs $5-$7 per passenger to collect and administer fares? Rod,

Do you have some evidence to support your claim that it costs $5-$7 per passenger to collect and administer fares?

]]> By: Rod Cleveland http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-102441 Rod Cleveland Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:14:56 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-102441 Since you could never charge the actual cost of the fare ($4 - $7). Then why charge a fare that is eaten up by the overhead to collect and account for it. If your goal is truely to relieve congestion then this is a way. I would love to see the formula that they came up with to justify this. Since you could never charge the actual cost of the fare ($4 – $7). Then why charge a fare that is eaten up by the overhead to collect and account for it. If your goal is truely to relieve congestion then this is a way. I would love to see the formula that they came up with to justify this.

]]> By: Jarrett at HumanTransit.org http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-97271 Jarrett at HumanTransit.org Sat, 08 Aug 2009 22:54:10 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-97271 Fare-free operation of the crosstowns is a great idea, by the way. I would suggest, though, that NYC's conditions are so unusual, and so prone to nonlinear or "chaos" effects, that I'd rather see the results of a month's trial than an effort to predict the outcomes based on existing data. (Yes, transit geeks do get more empirical as they get older, just like almost everyone else.) Fare-free operation of the crosstowns is a great idea, by the way. I would suggest, though, that NYC’s conditions are so unusual, and so prone to nonlinear or “chaos” effects, that I’d rather see the results of a month’s trial than an effort to predict the outcomes based on existing data. (Yes, transit geeks do get more empirical as they get older, just like almost everyone else.)

]]> By: Jarrett at HumanTransit.org http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-97261 Jarrett at HumanTransit.org Sat, 08 Aug 2009 22:50:40 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-97261 Re transit boarding time, another useful element would be a business-driven campaign to put more $1 coins in people's pockets, rather than bills. See here: http://www.humantransit.org/2009/08/mundane-things-that-really-matter-us1-bills.html Re transit boarding time, another useful element would be a business-driven campaign to put more $1 coins in people’s pockets, rather than bills. See here:

http://www.humantransit.org/2009/08/mundane-things-that-really-matter-us1-bills.html

]]> By: Dave Olsen http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-96241 Dave Olsen Thu, 06 Aug 2009 22:20:19 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-96241 Good luck Dominic! Here's a link (http://humanpowered.wordpress.com/2007/07/20/fare-free-transit-is-it-finally-time/) to a huge amount of research on Fare Free Transit, some of which looks at Translink's system...feel free to contact me for more! Good luck Dominic! Here’s a link (http://humanpowered.wordpress.com/2007/07/20/fare-free-transit-is-it-finally-time/) to a huge amount of research on Fare Free Transit, some of which looks at Translink’s system…feel free to contact me for more!

]]> By: Dominic Brown http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-96181 Dominic Brown Thu, 06 Aug 2009 20:49:49 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-96181 Forgot to mention: Charles, could I trouble you for those spreadsheets as well, please? I have an informal proposal to TransLink (Vancouver’s transit authority) that could do with more hard numbers to back it up. Thanks in advance! —Dom Forgot to mention: Charles, could I trouble you for those spreadsheets as well, please? I have an informal proposal to TransLink (Vancouver’s transit authority) that could do with more hard numbers to back it up. Thanks in advance!

—Dom

]]> By: Dominic Brown http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-96171 Dominic Brown Thu, 06 Aug 2009 20:43:52 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-96171 Brent, I wonder if using both front and back doors for boarding had something to do with that reduction in dwell time? In Vancouver, BC, the big articulated coaches use three-door boarding at certain busy stops. The speed with which people get off is striking, both because they have three times as many openings, and because the opening they go out is much closer to their seat. The slow shuffling line gets replaced with a few quick steps, and the coach is empty in seconds. Boarding is dramatically faster, and in fact better and friendlier. The painfully-slow-person (there’s always one) can only hold up one stream of passengers, and wheelchair passengers don’t make nearly as much of a difference. In fact if there’s a wheelchair at the front door, everyone else boards by the other two—flexible parallel processing. People no longer struggle to dig out change (in everyone’s way, of course); no one argues over age ID. I can well believe an 80% reduction in dwell time—the difference really is astonishing once you see it. Granted, I’m talking about an artic, not a regular 12 metre diesel coach, but I don’t think it’s that great a stretch. It’s not dropping in the change or flashing the card that takes the time, it’s shuffling past the driver single file so she can see you do it. Brent, I wonder if using both front and back doors for boarding had something to do with that reduction in dwell time? In Vancouver, BC, the big articulated coaches use three-door boarding at certain busy stops.

The speed with which people get off is striking, both because they have three times as many openings, and because the opening they go out is much closer to their seat. The slow shuffling line gets replaced with a few quick steps, and the coach is empty in seconds.

Boarding is dramatically faster, and in fact better and friendlier. The painfully-slow-person (there’s always one) can only hold up one stream of passengers, and wheelchair passengers don’t make nearly as much of a difference. In fact if there’s a wheelchair at the front door, everyone else boards by the other two—flexible parallel processing. People no longer struggle to dig out change (in everyone’s way, of course); no one argues over age ID.

I can well believe an 80% reduction in dwell time—the difference really is astonishing once you see it. Granted, I’m talking about an artic, not a regular 12 metre diesel coach, but I don’t think it’s that great a stretch. It’s not dropping in the change or flashing the card that takes the time, it’s shuffling past the driver single file so she can see you do it.

]]> By: John Coanda http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-95331 John Coanda Wed, 05 Aug 2009 18:26:45 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-95331 This is a very interesting idea. The loading times do represent a non-trivial amount of time in the overall duration of a trip. Anything to make the trips faster should be considered. Cities have already tried the dedicated lane concept, and that is normally met with howls of protest from auto drivers who are not happy to lose 25% to 50% of the lanes (depending on on the number of lanes in each direction, the most common being 2 or 3). Keep in mind that the fares do not come close to paying for the true cost of the ride. Bus riding is already subsidized by the city. Perhaps the money that is lost could be collected from another source, as mentioned in previous comments. With less people in taxis and cars, auto drivers would benefit by having less congestion, and therefore, they could be a source of the lost funds. This is a very interesting idea. The loading times do represent a non-trivial amount of time in the overall duration of a trip. Anything to make the trips faster should be considered.

Cities have already tried the dedicated lane concept, and that is normally met with howls of protest from auto drivers who are not happy to lose 25% to 50% of the lanes (depending on on the number of lanes in each direction, the most common being 2 or 3).

Keep in mind that the fares do not come close to paying for the true cost of the ride. Bus riding is already subsidized by the city. Perhaps the money that is lost could be collected from another source, as mentioned in previous comments. With less people in taxis and cars, auto drivers would benefit by having less congestion, and therefore, they could be a source of the lost funds.

]]> By: I \v/ NY http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94711 I \v/ NY Wed, 05 Aug 2009 03:30:41 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94711 forget free transit, what you really need for crosstown buses are dedicated 24 hour bus lanes surrounded with a moat filled with acid, alligators and barbed wire to keep everything other than buses out of the lanes. forget free transit, what you really need for crosstown buses are dedicated 24 hour bus lanes surrounded with a moat filled with acid, alligators and barbed wire to keep everything other than buses out of the lanes.

]]> By: Charles Komanoff http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94631 Charles Komanoff Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:38:57 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94631 Brent -- Thanks for your question. Glad to see someone else out there is interested in data and analysis. You're right in wanting details on dwell time. I've got some in the Bus Boarding worksheet of the BTA, dunno if you downloaded the spreadsheet and took a look. But there's a wealth of underlying detail from the MTA's original spreadsheet analysis that I neglected to include or fully reference. I've got the MTA spreadsheet and am sending it to you separately. Let's each take a look (I haven't visited it since late 2007) and compare notes here. -- Charles Brent –

Thanks for your question. Glad to see someone else out there is interested in data and analysis.

You’re right in wanting details on dwell time. I’ve got some in the Bus Boarding worksheet of the BTA, dunno if you downloaded the spreadsheet and took a look. But there’s a wealth of underlying detail from the MTA’s original spreadsheet analysis that I neglected to include or fully reference.

I’ve got the MTA spreadsheet and am sending it to you separately. Let’s each take a look (I haven’t visited it since late 2007) and compare notes here.

— Charles

]]> By: Brent http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94591 Brent Wed, 05 Aug 2009 01:58:39 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94591 While I don't dispute that a move to fareless service would speed up boarding times, the dwell time estimates seem really out of whack to me. 16:16 (16.25 min) in delays due to boarding now, reduced to 2:36 (2.6 min) -- that says that only 16% of the time to board is passenger movement, and 84% is time to pay fares (or flash a transfer or a pass). This I find hard to believe, unless everyone is paying with dimes and quarters. Do you have any more details that went into these calculations (e.g. actual average service times per passenger)? If they are true, this is a major revelation and should be more widely disseminated, but I am much more inclined to believe the opposite -- that the time savings would be 2:36 (a 16% reduction in dwell time). While I don’t dispute that a move to fareless service would speed up boarding times, the dwell time estimates seem really out of whack to me. 16:16 (16.25 min) in delays due to boarding now, reduced to 2:36 (2.6 min) — that says that only 16% of the time to board is passenger movement, and 84% is time to pay fares (or flash a transfer or a pass). This I find hard to believe, unless everyone is paying with dimes and quarters. Do you have any more details that went into these calculations (e.g. actual average service times per passenger)? If they are true, this is a major revelation and should be more widely disseminated, but I am much more inclined to believe the opposite — that the time savings would be 2:36 (a 16% reduction in dwell time).

]]> By: fpteditors http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94481 fpteditors Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:48:48 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94481 Public transit is a public investment, like sidewalks. It should be free. There has been a massive propaganda campaign to convince people that the private auto has won a "free market" contest for the preferred system of transporting people. It did not. The film "Taken for a ride" shows unequivocally that the streetcar system was methodically and illegally dismantled will malice aforethought. The private auto is restraint of trade. It clogs commerce and is subsidized heavily to benefit a subset of corporations at the expense of the economy, social systems, and international peace. Public transit is a public investment, like sidewalks. It should be free. There has been a massive propaganda campaign to convince people that the private auto has won a “free market” contest for the preferred system of transporting people. It did not. The film “Taken for a ride” shows unequivocally that the streetcar system was methodically and illegally dismantled will malice aforethought. The private auto is restraint of trade. It clogs commerce and is subsidized heavily to benefit a subset of corporations at the expense of the economy, social systems, and international peace.

]]> By: Charles Siegel http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94471 Charles Siegel Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:13:46 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94471 Should transit be free, or should it require a token payment? (joke) Should transit be free, or should it require a token payment? (joke)

]]> By: Carms http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94371 Carms Tue, 04 Aug 2009 20:38:48 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94371 Erik, the one problem with pre-pay is that it takes up lots of room on the sidewalk. Unlike some corridors where signal priority can help the buses without causing much trouble, Manhattan is so crowded that you can't add signal time crosstown without delaying Uptown/Downtown buses, pedestrians etc. Maybe the free crosstown won't work. Why not try it for a couple months and see what happens? No matter what, we'll learn a lot from doing. Erik, the one problem with pre-pay is that it takes up lots of room on the sidewalk. Unlike some corridors where signal priority can help the buses without causing much trouble, Manhattan is so crowded that you can’t add signal time crosstown without delaying Uptown/Downtown buses, pedestrians etc. Maybe the free crosstown won’t work. Why not try it for a couple months and see what happens? No matter what, we’ll learn a lot from doing.

]]> By: Erik Sandblom http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94281 Erik Sandblom Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:53:23 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94281 Can't they just do the usual bus lanes, traffic light priority and pre-paying passengers? Can’t they just do the usual bus lanes, traffic light priority and pre-paying passengers?

]]> By: Carms http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94121 Carms Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:23:59 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94121 We won't know if swarms will switch from walking to a free crosstown bus unless we try it. That would be the point of the experiment. The stakes are low. We can put the fare back on the buses if they get overloaded. We won’t know if swarms will switch from walking to a free crosstown bus unless we try it. That would be the point of the experiment. The stakes are low. We can put the fare back on the buses if they get overloaded.

]]> By: Erik Sandblom http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94111 Erik Sandblom Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:02:17 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94111 Carms, crosstown buses are essentially a shuttle service paid for subway riders. Fine. But don't you think that will change if you make them free? Carms, crosstown buses are essentially a shuttle service paid for subway riders. Fine. But don’t you think that will change if you make them free?

]]> By: Carms http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94101 Carms Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:51:33 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94101 It's quite a leap from free crosstown buses to free buses everywhere paid for by congestion pricing. The crosstown buses are essentially a shuttle service for paid subway riders. The whole point is that the MTA won't lose money by running free crosstown service, and may even save money. Congestion pricing is totally dead in the water and free bus service is not going to revive it. Bus riders have no political power. It’s quite a leap from free crosstown buses to free buses everywhere paid for by congestion pricing. The crosstown buses are essentially a shuttle service for paid subway riders. The whole point is that the MTA won’t lose money by running free crosstown service, and may even save money. Congestion pricing is totally dead in the water and free bus service is not going to revive it. Bus riders have no political power.

]]> By: Erik Sandblom http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/08/04/bloomberg-tests-free-transit-waters/comment-page-1/#comment-94071 Erik Sandblom Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:36:35 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=22351#comment-94071 Free transit is a bad idea because it discourages walking and cycling. Making transit free is about as smart as having a congestion charge and then removing it, in my opinion. Free transit is a bad idea because it discourages walking and cycling.

Making transit free is about as smart as having a congestion charge and then removing it, in my opinion.

]]>