IanO
Superstar
Good to see, bout time...
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
Platinum107
Senior Member
Amazing!
We're actually becoming a big transit system haha.EdmTrekker
Senior Member
4.00 is ridiculous.
The_Cat
Senior Member
I wonder how many people jump fares on Edmonton Transit. Hopefully the cards will discourage that.
Foolworm
Active Member
Just set the fares in crypto and have done with it. 10 Doge a ride and nobody would bat an eyelid.
David A
Senior Member
Ha ha ha - good one. Nope.
erudyk_29
Active Member
Free transit in my opinion should be priority for the city in the near future. Fees obviously aren't crazy high and are still much cheaper than driving but I think transit tickets/fees are a big barrier for getting people who would drive to take transit. Imagine someone living near Century Park and working downtown. They could take the LRT to work everyday but choose to drive because they own a car anyway (due to the nature of their neighborhood) why pay extra for an ETS pass when they can just drive. Free Transit fares could be the factor that makes them choose LRT over driving. This would also make it a lot easier to hop on the bus or LRT and go somewhere without needing to much prior planning and would overall increase ridership.
EdmTrekker
Senior Member
Does that include Strathcona Country or are they too privileged to participate in a metro initiative?
Glenco
Senior Member
CplKlinger
Senior Member
It does include them, yes.
thommyjo
Senior Member
Free transit is an interesting one. I know in edmonton the challenge is the sunk cost of a vehicle. Very few people can completely ditch a car, most families need it for longer trips, child safety, visiting friends in poorly served transit zones. So if people already have a car, paying 7 dollars for a day of transit seems silly. So people just drive. Being free would definitely remove that cost challenge. But with how low density our city is, im not sure we can afford it. I wonder if creating free transit zones would be better. Or certain times for free transit.
Maybe the city could partner with developers doing TOD and part of the perk of living in a condo next to a train station is a free pass? The more people we can get using transit, the faster we can start improving it. Students, universities, government, Healthcare, and downtown workers hould be like 60%+ transit commuters.
Maybe the city could partner with developers doing TOD and part of the perk of living in a condo next to a train station is a free pass? The more people we can get using transit, the faster we can start improving it. Students, universities, government, Healthcare, and downtown workers hould be like 60%+ transit commuters.
IanO
Superstar
I am damn near convinced that we should have free city-wide transit as a public service/amenity.
At the very least in core areas with similar boundaries to that of scooters ie. 76ave-111ave from 75st to 149.
At the very least in core areas with similar boundaries to that of scooters ie. 76ave-111ave from 75st to 149.
cliffapotamus
Active Member
^^ I like the idea of zones, or even just free passes to certain groups. I would look at anyone under 18 riding free, over 65, maybe some other groups. too, try to get people who can't/shouldn't have to drive out of cars. But i don't think we're ready for free transit yet. Free transit would be ideal; it removes the biggest barrier to access for our most vulnerable people and would boost ridership across all demographics. I do see a big issue with making transit free at this point in time.
Free transit to nowhere isn't worth having. the busses being free won't change the fact that they need to get people from people to where they need to go. I'm not steering this conversation towards BNR or the new routes or LRT. We're not going there in this conversation. but I will say that we're less likely to get new routes, extended service hours, or other service improvements if these changes are entirely financed by tax subsidy. the increased cost to ETS/the city would be a huge detractor to service improvements. it would be heavy lobbying (read:wealthier neighbourhoods with resources to lobby with) that would get any new services, and the rest of the city would be stuck with basic busses. I'm basing this off the situation in much of the US. they mostly don't have free transit there, but most cities, like Atlanta, San Francisco, L.A, heavily subsidize busses (ie %20 farebox recovery versus ~%40 here in Edmonton) with the logic that cheap transit increases ridership. unfortunately that makes buses so expensive to run, and so dysfunctional to ride, that transit modal share often winds up very low. the bus system is too expensive to run and expand, and underused as a result. The large burden on taxpayers (however justified, but we all know how paying for transit bugs people) and, to a much smaller extent, the lack of a profit motive (high-traffic routes can potentially break even or turn profits, fares create an incentive to make routes efficient and well used) means systems just plod along not doing much.
I fear that if Edmonton were to make transit free at this point in time, where ridership is still relatively low, LRT isn't sufficiently built out, and the BNR hasn't proven itself yet, ETS would slide into the pattern of cutting routes and not trying to invest in new services as a way of controlling taxpayer costs. In the future hopefully, but transit isn't integral enough to the city yet to avoid turning into a white elephant IMO.
I think we should be focusing on keeping fares at $3.50 as long as possible and improving service. we need the whole city to see that transit is important and viable for their commute/travel needs, and our system isn't close to that point yet. fares will get us to that point.
Free transit to nowhere isn't worth having. the busses being free won't change the fact that they need to get people from people to where they need to go. I'm not steering this conversation towards BNR or the new routes or LRT. We're not going there in this conversation. but I will say that we're less likely to get new routes, extended service hours, or other service improvements if these changes are entirely financed by tax subsidy. the increased cost to ETS/the city would be a huge detractor to service improvements. it would be heavy lobbying (read:wealthier neighbourhoods with resources to lobby with) that would get any new services, and the rest of the city would be stuck with basic busses. I'm basing this off the situation in much of the US. they mostly don't have free transit there, but most cities, like Atlanta, San Francisco, L.A, heavily subsidize busses (ie %20 farebox recovery versus ~%40 here in Edmonton) with the logic that cheap transit increases ridership. unfortunately that makes buses so expensive to run, and so dysfunctional to ride, that transit modal share often winds up very low. the bus system is too expensive to run and expand, and underused as a result. The large burden on taxpayers (however justified, but we all know how paying for transit bugs people) and, to a much smaller extent, the lack of a profit motive (high-traffic routes can potentially break even or turn profits, fares create an incentive to make routes efficient and well used) means systems just plod along not doing much.
I fear that if Edmonton were to make transit free at this point in time, where ridership is still relatively low, LRT isn't sufficiently built out, and the BNR hasn't proven itself yet, ETS would slide into the pattern of cutting routes and not trying to invest in new services as a way of controlling taxpayer costs. In the future hopefully, but transit isn't integral enough to the city yet to avoid turning into a white elephant IMO.
I think we should be focusing on keeping fares at $3.50 as long as possible and improving service. we need the whole city to see that transit is important and viable for their commute/travel needs, and our system isn't close to that point yet. fares will get us to that point.
IanO
Superstar
Will they? Cost recovery is generally abysmal anyways.
thommyjo
Senior Member
I wonder if an interesting model, similar to how Google has found much of its success, would be to target young people with hopes to form habits and give exposure that can lead to sustained use into the future? Lots of companies use Google suite now because Google deeply subsidized it for schools, so now all students from grades 3 to uni have grown up using it, have storage and Gmail and calendars linked to it, so when entering the workforce they want it (vs converting to Microsoft teams or others systems).
If we made transit free from 18-30...? Parents can still pay the cheap buses for kids, especially since so many choose to live in places hard to service. But if young adults had free transit, they might not only choose to rent and buy in places transit serves well, but they'll form habits that could continue past the free date. Like a free trial model haha. And the cost of adding a car to your budget is so expensive at 28 if you never owned. But when most people gets cars at 16/17, then start making better salaries after uni, they learn to always make room for 10-25% of their budget to be transportation.
I wonder if a similar model for biking could be used? Get a bike share system, but make it free. Bikes aren't expensive. Just have charges based on failure to return to docs and such
If we made transit free from 18-30...? Parents can still pay the cheap buses for kids, especially since so many choose to live in places hard to service. But if young adults had free transit, they might not only choose to rent and buy in places transit serves well, but they'll form habits that could continue past the free date. Like a free trial model haha. And the cost of adding a car to your budget is so expensive at 28 if you never owned. But when most people gets cars at 16/17, then start making better salaries after uni, they learn to always make room for 10-25% of their budget to be transportation.
I wonder if a similar model for biking could be used? Get a bike share system, but make it free. Bikes aren't expensive. Just have charges based on failure to return to docs and such