France: Montpellier makes public transport free of charge
France: Montpellier makes public transport free of charge
You're viewing part of a thread.
@tom_andraszek @ajsadauskas @TheOne I’d rather increase the frequency of PT before we remove fairs.
@tom_andraszek @ajsadauskas @TheOne I might also learn to spell one day 🤷♂️
@Danwwilson @tom_andraszek @TheOne I definitely agree that improving services should be a priority over removing fares.
Better to pay for a system that's good than get a free ride on one that's awful.
@ajsadauskas @tom_andraszek @TheOne I think it would be great to have a service that is as convenient as driving. I live near a major bus route working 6km of cbd as the bus goes, but can still wait up to 15 mins for a bus.
@Danwwilson @ajsadauskas @TheOne - frequency is freedom, when it is a metro style frequency: every 3 minutes or so, but PT should not run empty most of the time either, so punctuality/reliability is super important in non-metro services: people can plan activities when they know, to the minute, when the bus will come, even if it comes once an hour, but they switch to driving if the bus gets cancelled or is late, more than let's say once a month?
@tom_andraszek @ajsadauskas @TheOne that’s helpful to understand. 🙂
@tom_andraszek @Danwwilson @ajsadauskas @TheOne there’s a long commuter bus line near me that only comes every 45 minutes, and I’ve heard it has a habit of being like 10-15 minutes EARLY and then leaving early too. Totally misses the point. Makes it completely unusable unless you waste an extra 15 minutes every day accommodating its potential early running.
@ajsadauskas @Danwwilson @TheOne - sure, but in the Queensland example I gave removing fares may cost almost nothing.
Let's say running 10 bus services per day costs $100 (driver+fuel), fares bring $20, card readers+ticket inspectors+software cost $10. Net: 100+10-20=$90. You can make it free: 100, or double services, net: 200+20-40=180, or double and free: 200.
Fares and services are weakly related. It's not this OR that.
I know of one city where fares cover operating costs: Singapore.
@ajsadauskas @Danwwilson @TheOne - I forgot about Hong Kong, and Japan with many private rail operators: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farebox_recovery_ratio
@ajsadauskas @Danwwilson @TheOne - the Japanese include all revenue, not just fare revenue, and they make money from real estate at/around train stations.
@tom_andraszek @Danwwilson @TheOne Renting real estate above and around train stations is a model we should look a lot more at in Australia.
It means transport-oriented developments around stations, with the rents feeding back into covering the cost of train services.
There are some great examples of this in Australia already too. Chatswood and St Leonards in Sydney; Box Hill and Melbourne Central in Melbourne spring to mind.
It certainly makes a lot more sense than having open air car parks.
@tom_andraszek @ajsadauskas @TheOne to be honest I’d be happy if the govt spent as much on PT/active travel as they did on adding/maintaining roads. Now I haven’t looked at budgets to see if they do, I’m just making a big assumption that they don’t at the moment.
@Danwwilson @ajsadauskas @TheOne - the last time I looked at Queensland transport spending on new projects, the cars were getting the most of the funds...yep, look at the numbers in this misleading pie chart:
@tom_andraszek @ajsadauskas @TheOne absolutely WILD! I get roads connect cities and towns in a way that PT doesn’t, but I think we’d agree that once a road is in place, we shouldn’t need to widen it. Instead if demand gets too high, we clearly need to invest in alternative transport solutions like PT and active transport.
@Danwwilson @tom_andraszek @ajsadauskas @TheOne it hasn’t always been this way
Read the story of the Lincoln Highway from 100 years ago. Roads didn’t connect towns. You had to pop your car on the train.
@tom_andraszek @Danwwilson @ajsadauskas @TheOne #billiondollarnews hey look, Car Money is like Dog Years