3 ms·

Bus coverage isn’t the only metric that matters. Frequency is also terrible. It is entirely a symptom of investment. Bus ridership was found to decline in larg

Bus coverage isn’t the only metric that matters. Frequency is also terrible. It is entirely a symptom of investment. Bus ridership was found to decline in large part because the actual amount of service hours had declined as well. https://humantransit.org/2015/06/pity-the-poor-city-bus-writes-jacob-anbinder-in-an-interesting-essay-at-the-century-foundations-website-anbinder-b.html https://humantransit.org/2015/06/pity-the-poor-city-bus-writ... Canada has significantly higher bus ridership than the US despite having pretty similar urban forms and it is entirely due to the difference in services provided. Seattle has seen noticeable increases in bus service hours and ridership from across income ranges, and the new rail extensions are performing similarly well.

bsder 2y ago
> Frequency is also terrible. This is almost completely the issue. If I can count on a bus every 10 minutes, I will take a bus. If I can't just hop off a bus and back on the next because of long time intervals, I won't take a bus because I know something will go wrong and waste a huge chunk of my time. The political problem is that you need to keep a bunch of empty buses running continuously in order to change the behavior of people to start taking those buses more often at which point they quit being empty. The current problem is that in most places I have lived, I can WALK between points faster than I can take a bus. It will be 40-60 minutes between buses and because those buses are unreliable I can't count on my transfer, so I can wind up with a 2 hour+ bus ride for something which is less than 15 minutes by car.
- squeaky-clean 2y ago
  I just checked the bus stop near my parents' place in Miami (I'm living in NYC now). The next bus arrives in 14 hours lol. Busses for that stop run hourly between 11am-4pm. I don't get how they think anyone can depend on that. Not only is an hour between busses incredibly frustrating, if I needed to do anything past 4pm, (like I don't know... commute to work?) I would have no way back home until the next day.
  - EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
    I think in such places it makes sense for a municipality to pay for Uber rides for residents, instead of maintaining bus routes.
    - rdtsc 2y ago
      Or have minibuses that are smaller and come more frequently. Find a few drivers willing to work after hours as a second job perhaps and let them drive smaller shuttle buses or larger passenger vans. When big buses stop their routes the smaller ones would start. The key is frequency and dependability.
      - kjkjadksj 2y ago
        Labor is a huge cost and these transit agency budgets are thin
        rangestransform 2y ago
        this is a problem that autonomous driving could fix more easily than the general driving problem due to the fixed route, but good luck having the bus driver union not throw rocks at your AVs
        rdtsc 2y ago
        I like the sibling comment idea of using AI eventually. But in general for public transportation I think running at a loss is not unreasonable. It's nice if it's profitable, but it's ok if it isn't. Hopefully it's reducing emissions, giving people who can't or don't want to drive reliable access to their employment, etc. is still worth it.
        bobthepanda 2y ago
        the problem, generally speaking, is even if it reduces costs per ride, if it becomes popular it quickly becomes too expensive. New York City tried replacing its dial-a-ride accessibility public transit service that required 24h advance appointments with an e-hailing subsidy and blew out its budget. https://www.thecity.nyc/2023/06/22/mta-paratransit-ehailing-expands/ https://www.thecity.nyc/2023/06/22/mta-paratransit-ehailing-...

bsder 2y ago

> Frequency is also terrible. This is almost completely the issue. If I can count on a bus every 10 minutes, I will take a bus. If I can't just hop off a bus and back on the next because of long time intervals, I won't take a bus because I know something will go wrong and waste a huge chunk of my time. The political problem is that you need to keep a bunch of empty buses running continuously in order to change the behavior of people to start taking those buses more often at which point they quit being empty. The current problem is that in most places I have lived, I can WALK between points faster than I can take a bus. It will be 40-60 minutes between buses and because those buses are unreliable I can't count on my transfer, so I can wind up with a 2 hour+ bus ride for something which is less than 15 minutes by car.

squeaky-clean 2y ago
I just checked the bus stop near my parents' place in Miami (I'm living in NYC now). The next bus arrives in 14 hours lol. Busses for that stop run hourly between 11am-4pm. I don't get how they think anyone can depend on that. Not only is an hour between busses incredibly frustrating, if I needed to do anything past 4pm, (like I don't know... commute to work?) I would have no way back home until the next day.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
  I think in such places it makes sense for a municipality to pay for Uber rides for residents, instead of maintaining bus routes.
  - rdtsc 2y ago
    Or have minibuses that are smaller and come more frequently. Find a few drivers willing to work after hours as a second job perhaps and let them drive smaller shuttle buses or larger passenger vans. When big buses stop their routes the smaller ones would start. The key is frequency and dependability.
    - kjkjadksj 2y ago
      Labor is a huge cost and these transit agency budgets are thin
      - rangestransform 2y ago
        this is a problem that autonomous driving could fix more easily than the general driving problem due to the fixed route, but good luck having the bus driver union not throw rocks at your AVs
      - rdtsc 2y ago
        I like the sibling comment idea of using AI eventually. But in general for public transportation I think running at a loss is not unreasonable. It's nice if it's profitable, but it's ok if it isn't. Hopefully it's reducing emissions, giving people who can't or don't want to drive reliable access to their employment, etc. is still worth it.
        bobthepanda 2y ago
        the problem, generally speaking, is even if it reduces costs per ride, if it becomes popular it quickly becomes too expensive. New York City tried replacing its dial-a-ride accessibility public transit service that required 24h advance appointments with an e-hailing subsidy and blew out its budget. https://www.thecity.nyc/2023/06/22/mta-paratransit-ehailing-expands/ https://www.thecity.nyc/2023/06/22/mta-paratransit-ehailing-...