[Previous entry: "Matt Simmons: Peak Oil Is here"] [Next entry: ""Capitalist Roaders""]

07/02/2006: "Ride, Sally, Ride...."

If we ask ourselves what a metropolis might do when it wants to increase the use of its mass transit system, how would you answer? Yes, have a robust network of lines, that's obvious. Some would say to make it free to ride. That's fine. Reliability? Of course. And let's not forget the information campaign.

Indeed, this question is on the minds of many system planners whose ridership isn't what ought to be.

Now let us ask ourselves "who?" Who will be among the new users? The easy ones are those who would use the system anyway, but either did not know how to use, or could not gain convenient access to, the system. As soon as you reach them, they are on board. But most metropolitan systems already reach the bulk of this demographic. Then there are those who do not like the idea of mass transit. Forget getting them to ride, right now.

Then who? As it is with any change in a population's behavior, those on and near the behavioral line of adoption are most likely to "test the waters." They are willing to try it once or twice to see if they like it. With luck they'll tell their friends

Next, then, we have to ask "how?" How will these people test the water? Are they more likely to take the bus to work and risk being late, or would they prefer to try the system on some less risky adventure like going out on the weekend or after work? A little of both, but I am willing to go out on a limb and say that people would rather adopt innovation at low-risk than at high. Bus to the beach, subway to a concert, but gotta drive to work.

I know, I know, "there are studies out there that say..." etc. But take for a minute two recent examples from my own little experiment:

The other month, the various Los Angeles area mass transportation systems celebrated "Ride Your Bike to Work" week with a nice offer: Ride any bus or train for free as long as you have your bicycle with you. A great idea and I was happy to take them up on their offer. It seemed a simple way of trying something new.

MTA is a pretty good system, and during peak periods, busses and trains in the L.A. Basin are packed. I am a car commuter, yet, I still liked the idea of trying the bike/train combo.

Unfortunately, once I got past the great idea phase and into the actual planning phase, things got a little complex. First, bicycles are not allowed on any downtown bound train during rush hour. The Red Line train doesn't allow bicycles at all during rush hour. A sensible restriction, as the system is packed during peak periods. Second, not all busses have bicycle racks. A rider could still take advantage of the offer as long as they had their helmet with them, but what if you need your bike for the last leg of your commute? On the homeward commute, I was still in the system after the peak schedule making my wait for a transfer very long. In the end, I survived, but it was a significantly greater amount of stress and trouble than it was worth.

Example two. Last Saturday, my husband and I decided to bus downtown to see an outdoor concert. We occasionally try this model--weekend bus to the beach or downtown. We left at 6 o'clock in the evening and it took us a full hour door-to-door, no transfers, to travel 5 miles. 50% of that time was spent waiting for the ballyhooed Rapid bus. Extended waits like this, though not the norm during evening and weekends, are not uncommon either. We intended to arrive early to get a seat, but we barely made it on time and stood in the back.

No one who walks away from their first mass transit experience feeling like I did would be likely to look kindly on the system. Yet "test the water" riders are important to system growth. And if peak is packed and off-peak is an entry point for new users, where should we be looking to increase ridership? Off peak.

The final question: How are you investing in your system to encourage these new riders? New vehicles, improved stations, extended lines are all fine ways of spending money and gaining rider loyalty. But it will take more than that to get people to dive in. We have to make it as painless as possible. Pain is having to idle about at a stop without benches in the heat of day or cold of night waiting for a bus. Pain is having to block out a huge hunk of time to travel a short distance.

For a blog posting this is getting long, so let me cut to the chase:
With mass commuting there is the carrot and the stick. The stick is impossible car traffic drives people into the system. The carrot is making the system wonderfully easy. I propose that we act on the latter. Invest in the system, fully. Let us capture those maybe riders and move the line a bit.

1. Increase (i.e. broaden) peak services periods.
   
2. Increase frequency during off peak periods.

Yes, it means letting vehicles run with fewer passengers more often, and yes it means paying more driver-hours, and yes it means more maintenance. But the potential returns are huge. We are all familiar with the dreamy ridership of systems like Tokyo, Paris, San Francisco, and others. Think of your metro system on that list. Think of the cars off the road, the miles of pavement never to be made, and the socio-economic future of your city.

GS Morey, on 07.02.06 @ 18:10PST