Archive | 2010

New Blog to Watch: Paul Barter on Parking

IMG_0179[1]Paul Barter, an Australian transport expert based at the National University of Singapore, has a new blog project, Reinventing Parking.  From his Introductory message:

A key aim of this blog is to help inform the parking policy choices
confronting decision-makers and communities. I have my own views of
course and I will not be shy to share them. However, I mostly want to
help you to clarify your own thinking on parking policy. I want to help
you understand the implications of the various parking policy choices,
so you can choose your own, with ‘eyes wide open’.  If you have very
firm ideas on parking policy, this site may shake them up a little
perhaps.
Continue Reading →

The Perils of Succeeding “On Average”

Two recent comments on different topics got me thinking about averages, and why people like to talk about them more than they like hearing about them.

Toronto transit expert Steve Munro made this comment on the familiar perils of transit operations in that city:

In Toronto, the TTC reports that routes have average loads on vehicles, and that these fit within standards, without disclosing the range of values, or even attempting any estimate of the latent demand the route is not handling because of undependable service.  Service actually has been cut on routes where the “averages” look just fine, but the quality of service on the street is terrible.  Some of the planning staff understand that extra capacity can be provided by running properly spaced and managed service, but a cultural divide between planning and operations gets in the way.

Continue Reading →

A Field Guide to Transit Quarrels: The Recommended Video

It turns out that the excellent blog Portland Transport created a really clear video of the Portland version of my presentation, “A Field Guide to Transit Quarrels.”  Only tonight have I had both the time and the bandwidth to look at it.  Apart from the well-amplified sniffles from my cold at the time, it looks and sounds pretty good.  Thanks to Bob Richardson and everyone else at Portland Transport who made it happen. Continue Reading →

Dissent of the Week: My Alleged “Bias” Against Rail

I’m relieved to report that commenters who actually saw me give the presentation “A Field Guide to Transit Quarrels” seem to agree that I wasn’t displaying a bias toward or against particular projects, except perhaps for projects that were based on misunderstanding or ignoring some basic geometry.

However, finally I have a comment that attacks me full-on, which gives me yet another opportunity to think about whether I do have a “modal bias.”  It’s from commenter Carl, who I believe saw the presentation in Seattle: Continue Reading →

Good Question of the Week: Transfer Penalties

A frequent commenter on HT asks this in an email (the links are mine, not his):

On Second Avenue Sagas, one of the discussions went on a tangent that left me wondering about transfer penalties. If you need to walk from one station to another on the street to transfer, do the ridership models assign a higher penalty than if there’s an enclosed corridor between the stations? In addition, for systems that have faregates, is there an extra penalty for transfers that require exiting and
reentering?

Continue Reading →

Toronto: A New Frequent Network Plan

In the midst of all the frequent-network-mapping fervor, here comes the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) with a proposal for consistent all-day 10-minute frequency on a network of critical lines covering high-density parts of the city.  A frequent network map is already in the newspaper, but it remains to be seen if this brand will make it onto their system map, along the lines of similar brands in  PortlandLos Angeles, Minneapolis-St.Paul, and Salt Lake City among other North American peers.  Anyway, here’s the map:

F456a1d74fd19961fbe397bf35a0 Continue Reading →

Singapore: Transfer Penalty Eliminated, Complaints Predictable

IMG_0263 Singapore’s weekend Straits Times was full of debate about the recent fare system changes, which finally eliminated fare penalties for connecting from one service to another.

Eliminating these penalties is a crucial step in creating an integrated and versatile transit network, because (a) networks designed around connections are more legible and frequent than those that aren’t and (b) transferring is already enough of a hassle without these penalties.  The new system means that your fare from A to B will now be the same regardless of the path you take and the number of times you transfer.  This, in turn, will allow the transit agency to design a simpler and more reliable system. Continue Reading →

Montréal’s New Frequent Network Brand

STM réseau 10 minutes max Montréal’s transit agency STM is the latest to introduce a frequent network brand for its buses.  The Réseau 10 Minutes (“ten-minute network”) will consist of 11 all-day services running every 10 minutes or better.  The excellent local urbanist blog Montréalites Urbaines (in French) has been following the story.  Sadly, it is not yet highlighted on the network map, at least not the map for the central city, but these things usually happen in several steps as the idea slowly takes root in different parts of an agency. Continue Reading →

Munich: Do Trams Cause Ridership? Vice Versa?

800px-Munichtramr33 My tour of Germany, France, and the Netherlands in July brought me to numerous situations where trams are used to great effect in handling high volumes of passengers moving in exclusive rights-of-way.  (I cannot emphasize too often that these are usually more like light rail than like US streetcars or Australian trams, which are often compromised by having to share a traffic lane.) Continue Reading →

Frequent Network Maps: Ideas from Vancouver

Fsn-map-vancouver-web-500x420 Inspired by my post on the urgent need for frequency mapping, Vancouver’s transit agency TransLink, via its blog The Buzzer, has been encouraging map enthusiasts to draw their own ideas for what a frequency-coded map might look like.

The most nuanced so far is this one by David M.  He’s sketched a bit of southern Vancouver and Richmond as an example.   Look at the original and note all the distinctions he’s tried to draw.  Continue Reading →