Calgary Public Transit II

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by AgentGibb

I'm not convinced that we'd need a different fare structure for these routes. I think these are examples of situations where the already-existing $9 day pass would make good sense:
http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/fares.html

It doesn't make sense for the typical suburbanite 2-trips-per-day usage pattern, but it *would* make sense in the examples listed here. Perhaps this could be simply resolved by making the day passes more widely known and available.

Also, as has been suggested, this could also be addressed easily with the connect card... fares are $3 each to a daily max of $9?

I like this idea, also having the ability to buy multi-day passes would help for visitors, I know Chicago has a 3 and 5 day pass.

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by AgentGibb

I'm not convinced that we'd need a different fare structure for these routes. I think these are examples of situations where the already-existing $9 day pass would make good sense:
http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/fares.html

It doesn't make sense for the typical suburbanite 2-trips-per-day usage pattern, but it *would* make sense in the examples listed here. Perhaps this could be simply resolved by making the day passes more widely known and available.

Also, as has been suggested, this could also be addressed easily with the connect card... fares are $3 each to a daily max of $9?

I like this general idea a lot too, but I think the $9 would be too much for the couple in example 2, and I still think the ICB fares should be reduced.

Consider the couple in example 2. They would be looking at either paying 2 x $9 = $18 for transportation for the evening, or taking their car, which would be a total cost of likely between $5 and $10. If that’s the choice then I think most people would take the car. And once they’ve ahd their meal in Mission, where they didn’t have any wine because 🞵🞵🞵🞵 has to drive, they then may decide to skip Central Memorial, because of the hassle of finding a parking space just for that short side trip to enjoy the fountains, and they might also debate whether to go to the Simmons building or just drive to some place in the burbs for coffee, because parking is easier in the burbs.

Example 1 probably wasn’t great because anyone who uses the buses that much should probably buy a pass, so let’s tone that one down a bit. Let’s say that Suzie walks to work 3 days per week, but the other two days she needs to come in a bit early so she would like to take the bus and save 15 minutes, and let’s say she doesn’t go to the Talisman Centre after work. Now she’s more of an occasional user and it probably doesn’t make sense for her to buy a pass, but there are a handful of times every week where should would like to use an ICB. But at $3 per trip she feels cheated. Her coworkers ride in from the burbs for 100 blocks and only pay $3 per trip. She just needs to take short 10 block hops, and yet she’s being charged the same $3 per trip? I think a lot of people would feel gouged by that fare, and I think it would be a big deterrent. Frequent transit users would probably have passes anyway and wouldn’t care, but more casual users I think would feel gouged and would tend not to use these buses.

Edit: Ideally there would be people getting on an off these busses all the way along the line, and what you would lose from the reduced fares you would gain back from increased number of shorter rides.

[Spring2008]

Originally Posted by Aegis

Why did Spring2008 get suspended?

Apparently posting a violin emoticon is a big no no here!

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Allan83

I like this general idea a lot too, but I think the $9 would be too much for the couple in example 2, and I still think the ICB fares should be reduced.

Consider the couple in example 2. They would be looking at either paying 2 x $9 = $18 for transportation for the evening, or taking their car, which would be a total cost of likely between $5 and $10. If that’s the choice then I think most people would take the car. And once they’ve ahd their meal in Mission, where they didn’t have any wine because 🞵🞵🞵🞵 has to drive, they then may decide to skip Central Memorial, because of the hassle of finding a parking space just for that short side trip to enjoy the fountains, and they might also debate whether to go to the Simmons building or just drive to some place in the burbs for coffee, because parking is easier in the burbs.

Example 1 probably wasn’t great because anyone who uses the buses that much should probably buy a pass, so let’s tone that one down a bit. Let’s say that Suzie walks to work 3 days per week, but the other two days she needs to come in a bit early so she would like to take the bus and save 15 minutes, and let’s say she doesn’t go to the Talisman Centre after work. Now she’s more of an occasional user and it probably doesn’t make sense for her to buy a pass, but there are a handful of times every week where should would like to use an ICB. But at $3 per trip she feels cheated. Her coworkers ride in from the burbs for 100 blocks and only pay $3 per trip. She just needs to take short 10 block hops, and yet she’s being charged the same $3 per trip? I think a lot of people would feel gouged by that fare, and I think it would be a big deterrent. Frequent transit users would probably have passes anyway and wouldn’t care, but more casual users I think would feel gouged and would tend not to use these buses.

Edit: Ideally there would be people getting on an off these busses all the way along the line, and what you would lose from the reduced fares you would gain back from increased number of shorter rides.

This is where zone based fares come in, that way Suzie, pays for a single zone fare ($2) and the commuter pays a 2-3 zone fare ($3-$5) this then provides more revenue for the longer routes to operate.

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

This is where zone based fares come in, that way Suzie, pays for a single zone fare ($2) and the commuter pays a 2-3 zone fare ($3-$5) this then provides more revenue for the longer routes to operate.

Yes. This is essentially what I'm saying. I think the short hop routes in the inner city should be essentially a different zone, and have lower fares. I still kind of like the idea of a special evening pass which would get you downtown and then give you unlimited trips on the ICBs as well, but that's kind of a separate special case. Maybe that's the one that the downtown BRZs might like to subsidize.

This is very random, but I just did a quick search on "short hop" and found this system in Cardiff which appears to use short hop routes and fares.
http://www.cardiffbus.com/english/shorthop

[milomilo]

It would be worth waiting for a smartcard system to be rolled out before implementing any zone system. When Oyster was brought out in London fares were much lower than using paper tickets to encourage people on to the new system. The same could be done here with smartcard users paying the reduced downtown fare you propose and anyone else continuing to pay the $3. It would simplify the upcharge if people transferred to the main bus system or LRT also.

[RyLucky]

I'm anti-zone. I'm totally fine with subsidizing suburban public transit.

[J-D]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

I'm anti-zone. I'm totally fine with subsidizing suburban public transit.

I don't know if zones are necessarily the solution, but you think there'd be some sort of workaround for VERY short trips.

There have been so many times where I could take transit 1-2 stops (perfectly pleasant) but just drive or walk instead... why pay $3 for 2-3 minutes of travel?

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by J-D

I don't know if zones are necessarily the solution, but you think there'd be some sort of workaround for VERY short trips.

There have been so many times where I could take transit 1-2 stops (perfectly pleasant) but just drive or walk instead... why pay $3 for 2-3 minutes of travel?

There's the free fare zone. Or walking. Or $3. Or buying a transit pass.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

I'm anti-zone. I'm totally fine with subsidizing suburban public transit.

I feel the same way. I'd only want zones if transit entered different municipalities.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by J-D

I don't know if zones are necessarily the solution, but you think there'd be some sort of workaround for VERY short trips.

There have been so many times where I could take transit 1-2 stops (perfectly pleasant) but just drive or walk instead... why pay $3 for 2-3 minutes of travel?

A trip that only lasts a couple of minutes has less value for the rider than a long commute but it often has a higher marginal cost to Calgary Transit than a long suburban commute. Having built the C-Train, it costs next to nothing to add another rider from Somerset-Bridlewood. Alternatively, an off peak bus driving a handful of people a couple of blocks would cost much more to introduce.

[technomad]

Came across this this morning, wonder how well it could work for a Centre St line?

http://youtu.be/_n47ExxV6QY

• Video Link

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Allan83

...
Example 1 probably wasn’t great because anyone who uses the buses that much should probably buy a pass, so let’s tone that one down a bit. Let’s say that Suzie walks to work 3 days per week, but the other two days she needs to come in a bit early so she would like to take the bus and save 15 minutes, and let’s say she doesn’t go to the Talisman Centre after work. Now she’s more of an occasional user and it probably doesn’t make sense for her to buy a pass, but there are a handful of times every week where should would like to use an ICB. But at $3 per trip she feels cheated. Her coworkers ride in from the burbs for 100 blocks and only pay $3 per trip. She just needs to take short 10 block hops, and yet she’s being charged the same $3 per trip? I think a lot of people would feel gouged by that fare, and I think it would be a big deterrent. Frequent transit users would probably have passes anyway and wouldn’t care, but more casual users I think would feel gouged and would tend not to use these buses.

Edit: Ideally there would be people getting on an off these busses all the way along the line, and what you would lose from the reduced fares you would gain back from increased number of shorter rides.

You don't even need to make up imaginary people for examples, you can use me! I take the bus in every day all winter (bike all spring-summer-fall) and walk home 3-4 days a week(when the temp is over -5°C). A monthly pass makes no sense, and I'm a bit ticked they got rid of the discounted 10-pass. Now, I work on 8th ave, but like to shop and eat on 17th for lunch some times. Given the horrendous timing of pedestrian lights, it can take 20 minutes to get there, but if there was a bus I could hop on, I'd visit those stores/restaurants more often. At $3 a trip though (which also means I spend $6 that day on transit) I wouldn't take it. At $1 I certainly would, and may even pay $1 each direction.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

You don't even need to make up imaginary people for examples, you can use me! I take the bus in every day all winter (bike all spring-summer-fall) and walk home 3-4 days a week(when the temp is over -5°C). A monthly pass makes no sense, and I'm a bit ticked they got rid of the discounted 10-pass. Now, I work on 8th ave, but like to shop and eat on 17th for lunch some times. Given the horrendous timing of pedestrian lights, it can take 20 minutes to get there, but if there was a bus I could hop on, I'd visit those stores/restaurants more often. At $3 a trip though (which also means I spend $6 that day on transit) I wouldn't take it. At $1 I certainly would, and may even pay $1 each direction.

To make the trip faster, including waiting times would be pretty hard, especially since the buses can't just operate for 2 hours then go off line again (only so many contracted school routes).

The farebox recovery ratio would be the hardest part of downtown routes.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

I feel the same way. I'd only want zones if transit entered different municipalities.

Agreed. Those places that do have them, usually have multiple jurisdictions that they cross over. BART in the Bay Area (San Francisco, Oakland, Berkely, Hayward, Freemont, etc) and Barcelona's Renfe and FGC systems (Barcelona, Terrassa, Sabadell, Besos Valley, Llobregat Valley) are two examples I can think of. I know Berlin has a zone system, but not sure about the metropolitan configuration.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by fusili

Agreed. Those places that do have them, usually have multiple jurisdictions that they cross over. BART in the Bay Area (San Francisco, Oakland, Berkely, Hayward, Freemont, etc) and Barcelona's Renfe and FGC systems (Barcelona, Terrassa, Sabadell, Besos Valley, Llobregat Valley) are two examples I can think of. I know Berlin has a zone system, but not sure about the metropolitan configuration.

Paris has one too, but I'm not sure if they are all within the same jurisdiction or not

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

To make the trip faster, including waiting times would be pretty hard, especially since the buses can't just operate for 2 hours then go off line again (only so many contracted school routes).

The farebox recovery ratio would be the hardest part of downtown routes.

I’m not following. The bus is faster than walking, right? And I think these routes would be busy throughout the work day and probably into the early evening, at which time the frequency could be reduced. I haven’t crunched the numbers but this is the usage patter that seems most likely to me.

Another important question would be, would 3 times as many people use these routes if the fare was $1 instead of $3? I suspect the answer is yes. I think there are a lot of people like Fuzz who live in the areas serviced by these routes. I also think there are a lot of people who work downtown who would use it during the day for various reasons if the fare was $1. You’d need some sharp transportation engineers to think it through and crunch the numbers, of course, but this is what seems logical to me.

[MalcolmTucker]

Well, if you want to get into the transportation economics of it you have to start with an assumption, in this case I will assume a time value of 25 ¢ a minute. I'll assume the centre of downtown is Knox United Church.

Destinations:
17th Ave and 8th Street SW
26th Ave and 4th St SW
17th Ave and 14th St SW

At what frequencies could you operate if you charged nothing, and still have 50% of people of the transit/walk modal share choose transit?

Capturefree by Odarwin1, on Flickr

Fares for 15 minute frequency

Capture15 by Odarwin1, on Flickr

Fares for 10 minute frequency

Capture10 by Odarwin1, on Flickr

Fares for 5 minute frequency

Capture5 by Odarwin1, on Flickr

You have to operate at 5 minute frequencies before you can attract half of the walk/transit trips between the centres at close to current fares.

Based on my memory of a 3rd year transportation economics class more than a few years ago.

Given that an hour of transit service has the operational cost of $116.40, and for those three barebones routes you would need 14 buses on the road (with very little room for contingency, turnarounds, breaks), you would need to generate more than 1000 boardings an hour across all service hours to get to 50% farebox ratio. For 7 am - 7 pm it would be $3,5 million a year if ridership goals were met. (this assumes you serve the 14th street and 8th street routes as different routes)

[Allan83]

Good stuff! I'll have to look at this later, however, as I'm out this afternoon.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Well, if you want to get into the transportation economics of it you have to start with an assumption, in this case I will assume a time value of 25 ¢ a minute. I'll assume the centre of downtown is Knox United Church.

Yeah, people definitely don't think or behave this way. Treating travel behavior through an rationale choice theory model is stupid for several reasons. First, rationale choice theory was thoroughly trashed by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky in their studies of decision making behavior. Second, travel decisions are about a lot more than time and money. Let's just stop using completely failed economic models to try and explain, let alone predict anything.

Here is a start: Peter Jones, et al "Understanding Travel Behavior", Aldershot Press (IIRC) 1980.