An Economic Analysis of Taxicab Regulation

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

An Economic Analysis of Taxicab Regulation Federal Trade Commission An Economic Analysis of Taxicab Regulation Mark W. Frankena Paul A. Pautler Bureau of Economics Staff Report May 19B)! FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION JAMES C. MILLER III, Chairman MICHAEL PERTSCHUK, Commissioner PATRICIA P. BAILEY, Commissioner GEORGE W. DOUGLAS, Commiss ioner TERRY CALVANI, Commissioner BUREAU OF ECONOMICS WENDY L. GRAMM, Director RONALD S. BOND, Deputy Director for Operations and Research DAVID T. SCHEFFMAN, Deputy Director for Competition JOHN L. PETERMAN, Associate Director for Special Projects RICHARD HIGGINS, Deputy Directory for Consumer Protect ion JOHN E. CALFEE, Special Assistant to the Director ROBERT ZWIRB, Special Assistant to the Director JAMES A. HURDLE, Special Assistant to the Director THOMAS WALTON, Special Assistant to the Director KEITH B. ANDERSON, Assistant Director for Regulatory Analysis PAUL RUBIN, Assistant Director for Consumer Protect ion ROBERT BROGAN, Assistant Director for Competition Analysis PAULINE IPPOLITO, Assistant Director for Industry Analysis JAMES M. FERGUSON, Assistant Director for Antitrust This Report has been prepared by the Bureau of Economics of the Federal Trade Commi ss ion. I t has not been reviewed by, nor does it necessarily reflect the views of, the Commi ss ion or any of its members. -i i- ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to thank the many members of the Bureaus of Economics and Competition who reviewed various drafts of this report and who provided valuable assistance during the time this report was prepared. In particular, we would like to acknowledge the assistance of Denis Breen, Robert Lande, William MacLeod, Jerry Philpott, and David Scheffman in reviewing the manuscr ipt. In addition, we would thank Edward Gallick, whose own work on taxicab regulation stimulated our thinking on the subject. Finally, we would like to thank Pamela Armiger and Paul Abraham, who typed several of the drafts, and the Bureau of Economics Word Processing staff, who prepared the final version. -i i i- ................................................ ......... .............................................................. ... ...... .................................... ............. ........... ............................................... ........... .... ... ......... .......... ...... ........ ..... .. .... CONTENTS Page Introduction and Policy Conclusions. Arguments for Regulation....................................... Costs of Regulation...................... Experiences with Regulatory Reform. Outline of Report.................. .SA.. II. The Taxicab Industry... The Role of the Taxi. Market Segments.... 1. Cruising' Cabs........... 2. Taxicab Stands........ 3.. Radio-Dispatched Cabs................................................ 4. Contract Services 5. Relative Sizes of Segments............... Firm Organi zat ion. Forms of Regulation.................................................... 1. Entry Regulation........ 2. Fare Regulation.. 3.. Service Restrictions............... 4. Service Requirements. Quality Regulation............... III . Theoretical Mode 1 Taxicab Market.. IV. Rationales for Regulation. Potent ial Sources of Market Fai lure. 1. Congestion and Pollution Externalities....... a. Congestion....... ... b. Air Pollution............................ Overpricing of Public Transit. Indeterminacy of Cruising Equilibrium........ Impediments to Price Compet it ion. a. Cruising Cabs............................ b. Taxi Stands... Bargaining over Price.. Economies of Scale.... Informational Problems....................... Waiting Time Externalities...... Inefficiently High Taxi Fares................ a. An Extreme Example: An Airport.......... b. Another Example: Air 1 i ne Regu lat ion. c. Radio- Dispatch and Cruising Segments.. -iv- . ... ..... ............. .. ... .... ... ... ... .... .... ...... .. .... ...... ...... .. .. .. ......... .... .. .................. ..... ................ ............................................ .. ... .... .. ......... ..................... .................................................................. .... .. ........ ... .......................... .................... .. .................. .. .. ... .... ... .. ...... ........ Page 10. Mispricing of Taxi Trips...................... 11. Enforcement of Taxi Regulations........ 12. Conclusion.......... ...... Regulation in Practice.. 1. Motivations for Regulation... a. Protection of Public Transit and Taxis. b. Promotion of City Image................. Self-Interest of Regulators. Quality of Taxi Service...... Other Suggested Justifications for Regulation. ................... History of Taxi Regulation.................... Economic Effects Regulation............. Effects I ndustri al Structure.. Franch ises.. 2. Numerical Restrictions on Taxicabs... 3. Allocation of New Licenses.. 4. Firm Size and Service Requirements. Effects on Industry Performance........ 1. Fare Level............................. 2. Number of Cab Hours of Service.. 3. Waiting Time.... 4. Number of Trips. 5. Quality of Service....... 6. Cost of Producing Cab Service. 7. Allocation of Cabs....................... 8. Types of Service.................. 9. Effects on Other Markets Effects on Efficiency of Resource Allocation. Effects on the Distribution of Well-Being. 101 1. Los e- 5 . 101 a. Consumers. .. IO.. 101 b.. Workers. IO" .. IO. IO.. IO.. ... .. .. 104 c. Ta.xpayers.... 105 Gainers. 105 Inf erences from Medallion Prices.... 105 VI. Regulatory Reform. 112 Motivations for Regulatory Reform................. 112 Effects of Regulatory Reform...................... 113 1. Radio-Dispatched Market Segment............... 114 Industrial Structure...................... 115 Fare Level.............. 115 Number of Cab Hours of Service. 116 Waiting Time................... 117 . ..-- . .. ............. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. ............. .. ... .. .. ... .. ... .......... .. ......... .. ............... .. .. .. ............. ............ .. .. ....... .. .... .. Page Number of Trips.......................... 118 Quality of Service....................... 118 Cost of Administering Cab Regulations.... 119 Alloea t ion of Cabs....................... 120 Types of Service......................... 121 Conges t ion. 121 k. General Reactions to Regulatory Reform... 121 Airport Servi ce. 123 Additional Considerations............... 124 Case Studies of Regulatory Reform....... 125 a. Seattle. 125 b. San Diego........................... 132 Oakland and Berkeley..................... 136 Phoenix and Tucson....................... 141 Other Experiences with Regulatory Reform. 144 1. Atlanta.... .......................... 144 Indianapolis..... 146 Port land. 148 Pres no. 150 Spokane. 151 Sacramento...................... 152 Charlotte.............. ...... 153 VII. Conclusion.... 155 Appendix A. Elaboration the Theoretical Model.. 157 Appendix B. Empirical Estimates of the Demand for Taxi Service................................ 162 The Demand for Taxi Rides.... 162 a. Fare Elasticity.......... 162 Waiting-Time Elasticity................... 165 c. Income Elasticity......................... 165 Substitution Between Taxis and Other Services. 166 The Value of Waiting Time..................... 167 Bibliography. 169 vi- ...................;,.... LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 Taxicab Licensing............................... Table 2 Taxi Regulations in u. s. Cities with Populations over 100, 000..............., Table 3 Ranking of Cities by Fare for Three-Mile Taxi Trip by One Person, 1984.... Table 4 Fares in Washington, D. C., and Eight Other Cities, 1984............................ Table 5 Prices of Taxicab Medallions..... :i............. 106 Table 6 Estimates of the Fare Elasticity of Demand for Taxi Rides.................................... 163 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Mode 1 Taxi Market Fare-Service Space.... Figure Mode 1 Taxi Market with Entry Restriction... 110 Figure Mode 1 Taxi Market Service-Rides Space... 158 vii- INTRODUCTION AND POLICY CONCLUSIONS The taxicab industry is heavily regulated, mainly by local governments. Entry, fares, services, and qual i ty are restr icted in a substantial majority of large urban areas. However, a number of cities have recently deregulated entry, fares, and some aspects of service. This report provides an economic analysis of these taxicab regu lat ions and experiences wi th regulatory reform. The principal conclusion of this report is that no persua- sive economic rationale is avai lable for some of the most important regulations. Restrictions on the total number of firms and vehicles and on minimum fares waste resources and impose a disproport ionate burden on low income people. A number of cities have achieved favorable results by deregulating entry and minimum fares in the radio-dispatched market segment, which typically accounts for around 75 percent of all cab trips. Similarly, there is no economic justification for regulations that restrict shared-ride, dial- ride, and jitney service. By contrast, potential market failures provide a credible theoret ical rationale for some other types of regulat ions, including fare ceilings and regulations dealing with vehicle safety and liability insurance. Most of the problems cities have experienced with taxicab regulatory reform can be traced to high fares at airport cab stands. There are several ways to deal with these problems, including revisions in the first-in-first-out queue system, improvements in fare posting requirements, increased cab line user fees, or lower fare ceilings. Finally, some regulations might conceivably
Recommended publications
  • Rules and Procedures
    BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT RULES AND PROCEDURES Rule 403 October 30, 2015 HACKNEY CARRIAGE RULES AND REGULATIONS SECTION 1: OVERVIEW I. Definitions a. Boston Police Officer: An individual appointed by the Police Commissioner to carry out the functions of the Boston Police Department, including but not limited to, the preservation of the public peace, the protection of life and property, the prevention of crime, the arrest and prosecution of violators of the law, the proper enforcement of all laws and ordinances and the effective delivery of police services. b. Hackney Carriage: A vehicle used or designed to be used for the conveyance of persons for hire from place to place within the city of Boston, except a street or elevated railway car or a trackless trolley vehicle, within the meaning of Massachusetts General Laws chapter 163 section 2, or a motor vehicle, known as a jitney, operated in the manner and for the purposes set forth in Massachusetts General Laws chapter 159 A, or a sight-seeing automobile licensed under Chapter 399 of the Acts of 1931. Also known as a taxicab or taxi. c. Inspector of Carriages: A superior officer of the Boston Police Department assigned by the Police Commissioner to command the Hackney Carriage Unit. d. Licensed Hackney Driver: An individual, also referred to as a “Driver,” granted a license to operate a Hackney Carriage by the Police Commissioner. e. Medallion Owner: An individual, also referred to as an “Owner,” who has been deemed a suitable individual by the Police Commissioner to own a Hackney Carriage Medallion and who has purchased one or more such Medallions.
    [Show full text]
  • Monday Through Friday Mt
    New printed schedules will not be issued if trips are adjusted Monday through Friday All trips accessible by five minutes or less. Please visit www.go-metro.com for the go smart... go METRO 24 most up-to-date schedule. 24 Mt. Lookout–Uptown–Anderson Riding Metro From Anderson / To Downtown From Downtown / To Anderson . 1 No food, beverages or smoking on Metro. 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2. Offer front seats to older adults and people with disabilities. METRO* PLUS 3. All Metro buses are 100% accessible for people 38X with disabilities. 46 UNIVERSITY OF 4. Use headphones with all audio equipment 51 CINCINNATI GOODMAN DANA MEDICAL CENTER HIGHLAND including cell phones. Anderson Center Station P&R Salem Rd. & Beacon St. & Beechmont Ave. St. Corbly & Ave. Linwood Delta Ave. & Madison Ave. Observatory Ave. Martin Luther King & Reading Rd. & Auburn Ave. McMillan St. Liberty St. & Sycamore St. Square Government Area B Square Government Area B Liberty St. & Sycamore St. & Auburn Ave. McMillan St. Martin Luther King & Reading Rd. & Madison Ave. Observatory Ave. & Ave. Linwood Delta Ave. & Beechmont Ave. St. Corbly Salem Rd. & Beacon St. Anderson Center Station P&R 11 ZONE 2 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 1 ZONE 2 43 5. Fold strollers and carts. BURNET MT. LOOKOUT AM AM 38X 4:38 4:49 4:57 5:05 5:11 5:20 5:29 5:35 5:40 — — — — 4:10 4:15 4:23 — 4:35 OBSERVATORY READING O’BRYONVILLE LINWOOD 6.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Fare-Collection Strategies on Transit Level of Service
    Transportation Research Record 1036 79 The Effects of Fare-Collection Strategies on Transit Level of Service UPALI VANDEBONA and ANTHONY J. RICHARDSON ABSTRACT It is known that different fare-collection strategies have different passenger boarding and alighting rates for street-based public transport services. In this pape r, various models of stop service times are reviewed, the available empirical observations of boarding and alighting rates are summarized, and the effects of different average boarding rates and coefficients of variation of boarding rates on the route performance of a tram (light rail transit) service are examined. The analysis is conducted using the TRAMS (Transit Route Anima­ tion and Modeling by Simulation) package. This modeling package is briefly described with particular attention to the passenger demand subroutine as well as the tram stop service times subroutine. As a result o f the analysis , it was found that slower boarding rates produce a slower and less reliable service along the route. The variability of boarding rates has no effect on route travel time but does contribute to greater unreliability in level of service. It is concluded that these level-of-service effects need to be considered when assessing the effect of changes in fare-collection strategies. Public transport operators and managers have found systems to proof-of-payment systems will generally themselves under increasing pressure in recent years bring about significant level-of-service improve­ because of conflicting expectations from different ments that should be considered in any analysis of groups in the community. On the one hand, public such fare collection strategies.
    [Show full text]
  • Reduced Cost Metro Transportation for People with Disabilities
    REDUCED COST AND FREE METRO TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES Individual Day Supports are tailored services and supports that are provided to a person or a small group of no more than two (2) people, in the community. This service lends very well to the use of public transportation and associated travel training, allowing for active learning while exploring the community and its resources. While the set rate includes funding for transportation, it is important to be resourceful when possible, using available discount programs to make your funds go further. METRO TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY CENTER The Metro Transit Accessibility Center (202)962-2700 located at Metro headquarters, 600 Fifth Street NW, Washington, DC 20001, offers the following services to people with disabilities: Information and application materials for the Reduced Fare (half fare) program for Metrobus and Metrorail Information and application materials for the MetroAccess paratransit service Consultations and functional assessments to determine eligibility for MetroAccess paratransit service Replacement ID cards for MetroAccess customers Support (by phone) for resetting your MetroAccess EZ-Pay or InstantAccess password The Transit Accessibility Center office hours are 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. weekdays, with the exception of Tuesdays with hours from 8 a.m. - 2:30 p.m. REDUCED FAIR PROGRAM Metro offers reduced fare for people with disabilities who require accessibility features to use public transportation and who have a valid Metro Disability ID. The Metro Disability ID card offers a discount of half the peak fare on Metrorail, and a reduced fare of for 90¢ cash, or 80¢ paying with a SmarTrip® card on regular Metrobus routes, and a discounted fare on other participating bus service providers.
    [Show full text]
  • PATCO New Automated Fare Collection System, Smart Card Or Magnetic- Your Choice
    PATCO New Automated Fare Collection System, Smart card or Magnetic- Your choice PATCO’s new fare collection system will feature the FREEDOM card, which will revolutionize how customers purchase their fares and travel on the PATCO system. The FREEDOM card is a smart card that will provide a high level of convenience and reliability to customers who use PATCO consistently. For customers who do not opt to use the FREEDOM card or who use PATCO infrequently, new magnetic tickets will be available. In PATCO’s current fare system, plastic tickets that use first generation magnetic technology are used. Although that technology was state of the art several decades ago, the technology is outdated and the tickets are prone to damage by devices commonly found in today’s environment. Unlike the current tickets, which are re-encoded numerous times for use after being captured by the fare gates, the new magnetic tickets will be paper tickets and will not be reused after capture. The new magnetic tickets can be purchased using either cash or coins. This means that customers choosing to purchase a ticket will not have to first stop at a change machine to convert their bills to coins. Both one- and two-ride tickets can be purchased from all new ticket vending machines located outside the fare gates. A customer wishing to purchase a magnetic ticket will simply select the prompt on the ticket vending machine screen for purchase of a ticket and then select the destination and whether a single ride or double ride ticket is desired. The ticket vending machine will list the price of the purchase.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewal Licensing Division New Application for Taxicab/Limousine Owner’S License Replacement Provide Vin of Vehicle Being Removed for Replacement______
    RENEWAL LICENSING DIVISION NEW APPLICATION FOR TAXICAB/LIMOUSINE OWNER’S LICENSE REPLACEMENT PROVIDE VIN OF VEHICLE BEING REMOVED FOR REPLACEMENT_____________________ A Taxicab/Limousine Owner’s License does not entitle owner to drive a vehicle without also obtaining a Taxicab/Limousine Driver’s License. This application MUST be filled out for each and every taxicab/limousine applied for: Date: __________________________________ Company Name/Owner: _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________________________________________________________________, the undersigned, hereby applies to the Town of Dover for a license to operate a public taxicab/limousine as desired below within the Town of Dover. The following questions MUST be answered: Home Phone____________________________________ Are you legally eligible to work in the United States? YES NO Business Phone__________________________________ Residential Address:______________________________________________________ Fax No._________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ e-mail address: __________________________________ Attach identification of proof that you are at least 21 years of age. If partnership, the following questions MUST be answered: Give firm name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Office Location:_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Fares on Transit Riding
    Effect of Fares on Transit Riding JOHN F. CURTIN, Partner, Simpson & Curtin, Philadelphia • FARES are perhaps the most sensitive aspect of transit service-balancing uneasily between political pressures and the need for operating revenue. Political campaigns in major American cities have been won and lost over transit fare issues, and there is substantial evidence that patrons react to fare increases at the turnstiles as well as at the polls. The correlation of price increase with loss of transit riding has been well established. Most utility commissions use a variation of the "shrinkage formula" devised by our firm more than 20 years ago when pressures of inflation first became manifest in fare increase proposals by transit companies. But the corollary questions of price differential among competing transit services, and the effect of joint fares in coordinated transit operations, have not been so well explored. What is the "sub-modal split" of riding between surface and rapid transit connecting two points, when the fare is 15 cents on one and 25 cents on the other? How much added traffic is attracted to rapid transit when the feeder bus fare is dropped from 20cents to 10 cents? When feeder and trunk lines are separate operations, how should the feeder line discount in the combination fare be shared between them? These are fundamental questions of revenue and cost apportionment in developing coordination between surface and rapid transit systems. Auto travel switches freely between systems-from county roads to city streets to state highways-without motor­ ists' awareness; division of motor fuel revenues among these systems is accomplished by legislative standards with varying degrees of sophistication.
    [Show full text]
  • Fare Policy Analysis for Public Transport: a Discrete‐Continuous Modeling Approach Using Panel Data
    Fare Policy Analysis for Public Transport: A Discrete‐Continuous Modeling Approach Using Panel Data by Hazem Marwan Zureiqat B.A. in Economics Macalester College, 2006 Submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Transportation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June 2008 © 2008 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved Signature of Author ………………………………………………………………………… Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering May 16, 2008 Certified by ……………………………………………………………………...................... Nigel H. M. Wilson Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering Director, Master of Science in Transportation Program Thesis Supervisor Accepted by …………………………………………………………………………………. Daniele Veneziano Chairman, Departmental Committee for Graduate Students 2 Fare Policy Analysis for Public Transport: A Discrete‐Continuous Modeling Approach Using Panel Data by Hazem Marwan Zureiqat Submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering on May 16, 2008, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Transportation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Abstract In many large metropolitan areas, public transport is very heavily used, and ridership is approaching system capacity in the peak periods. This has caused a shift in attention by agency decision‐makers to strategies that can more effectively manage the demand for public transport, rather than simply increase overall demand. In other words, a need has arisen to understand not only why people use public transport as opposed to other modes but also how they use public transport, in terms of their ticket, mode, and time‐of‐day choices. To that end, fares become an increasingly important policy tool that can trigger certain behavioral changes among riders.
    [Show full text]
  • Passenger and Vehicle Fare Information Surcharges Seattle/Bainbridge, Seattle/Bremerton, Edmonds/Kingston Fauntleroy/Vashon
    19-08-0392 Printed in the USA on recycled/recyclable paper. recycled/recyclable on USA the in Printed Seattle/Bainbridge, Seattle/Bremerton, Fauntleroy/Vashon, Point Defiance/Tahlequah, Americans with Disabilities Edmonds/Kingston Southworth/Vashon Mukilteo/Clinton Act (ADA) and Title VI Notice Seattle, Washington 98121-3014 Washington Seattle, 2901 Third Avenue Suite 500 Suite Avenue Third 2901 Passenger Regular Fare 8.65 Passenger Regular Fare 5.65 Passenger Regular Fare 5.20 It is the Washington State Department of Washington State Ferries State Washington In vehicle or walk on Senior/Disability/Medicare Card Fare 4.30 In vehicle or walk on Senior/Disability/Medicare Card Fare 2.80 In vehicle or walk on Senior/Disability/Medicare Card Fare 2.60 Transportation’s policy to ensure that no Youth Fare 4.30 Youth Fare 2.80 Youth Fare 2.60 person shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin, or sex, as provided by Title VI Wave2Go Multi-Ride Card 69.70 Wave2Go Multi-Ride Card 45.70 Wave2Go Multi-Ride Card 42.10 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or based on Monthly Ferry Pass 111.55 Monthly Ferry Pass 73.15 Monthly Ferry Pass 67.40 disability as provided by the Americans with Bicycle Surcharge Passenger Fare Plus 1.00 Bicycle Surcharge Passenger Fare Plus 1.00 Bicycle Surcharge Passenger Fare Plus 1.00 Disabilities Act, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise Small Vehicle & Driver Regular Fare 12.35 Peak Season 16.00 Small Vehicle & Driver Regular Fare 15.75 Peak Season 20.40 Small Vehicle & Driver Regular Fare 7.40 Peak Season 9.70 discriminated against under any of its federally @WSFerries funded programs and activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 25 Vehicles for Hire
    CHAPTER 25 VEHICLES FOR HIRE1 Art. I. In General, §§ 25-1. -- 25-15. Art. II. Taxicabs, § 25-16 -- 25-53. Div. 1. Generally, §§ 25-16. -- 25-30. Div. 2. Business License, §§ 25-31. -- 25-45. Div. 3. Driver’s License, §§ 25-46. -- 25-53. ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Secs. 25-1. -- 25-15. Reserved. ARTICLE II. TAXICABS DIVISION 1. GENERALLY Sec. 25-16. Definitions. The following words and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them: Motor Vehicle for Hire. The term “motor vehicle for hire” shall mean a motor vehicle not equipped with a taximeter designed to carry seven (7) or less persons for public hire at an hourly rate. Taxicab. The word “taxicab” shall mean a motor vehicle for transportation of seven (7) or less persons for hire upon a trip or mileage basis. (Code 1957, § 7.131) Cross reference - Definitions and rules of construction generally, §§ 1-2. Sec. 25-17. Lost Articles. Every taxicab driver, immediately after the termination of any hiring or employment, shall carefully search such taxicab for any property lost or left therein, and any such property unless sooner claimed or delivered to the owner shall be taken to the headquarters of the Police Department and deposited with the officer in charge within twenty-four (24) hours after the finding of such article. (Code 1957, § 7.147) 1 Cross reference – Traffic and motor vehicles, Ch. 22. 25-1 Detroit_906167_1 Sec. 25-18. Passengers. Every taxicab driver shall have the right to demand payment of the legal fare in advance, and may refuse employment until so prepaid, but no taxicab driver shall otherwise refuse or neglect to convey any orderly person upon request anywhere in the City unless previously engaged or unable to do so.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Free Fare Public Transport: Objectives and Alternatives September | 2020
    POLICY BRIEF FULL FREE FARE PUBLIC TRANSPORT: OBJECTIVES AND ALTERNATIVES SEPTEMBER | 2020 INTRODUCTION At a time when cities must prepare for and face serious services and infrastructure must remain the overarching environmental and societal challenges, sustainable principle throughout these discussions. It is therefore urban mobility has never been this high up on the crucial to carefully consider the stated objectives which agenda. With the transversal role that public transport this measure is meant to achieve as well as its impacts, in plays in terms of urban quality of life, increasing and order to decide whether or not it is the most appropriate facilitating its access is a major challenge. Following use of public funds. In doing so, one must keep in mind this line of thought, the concept of free fare public that free public transport as such does not exist, as transport (FFPT) has been gaining traction in the public transport service and infrastructure has to be funded discourse, as several large cities have been considering one way or another. Hence the reference to free fare this possibility. public transport means that public transport users do not contribute to funding the service directly through While free public transport is often brought up in the payment of a fare. political discussions, its implementation has very concrete implications on the organisation of public Drawing from the experience of FFPT cities, this Policy transport. Yet, the strengthening of public transport Brief provides an analysis of the various stated objectives and the extent to which FFPT is the right tool to achieve them.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Element to the Premium and Primary Transit Networks
    Table of Contents I. Introduction …………………………………………………………………....1 II. Summary …………………………………………………………………….....3 III. Policies, Implementation Actions and Performance Measures……....6 IV. The Transit Network…………….….…………………………………...…18 o Characteristics of a Primary Transit Network o What Makes a Transit Network Function? o Networks, Key Characteristics, and Improvements o Implications of the Increase in Bus Service o Paratransit V. Planned Rail System Improvement……………………………….…...…...28 o Metrorail System Capacity Improvements o Northern Virginia High-Capacity Transit Improvements o Station Enhancements and Access Improvements VI. Program Implementation Strategies.……………………………………. 31 o Transit Development and Coordination Plan o Regional Coordination Appendix A: The Existing Transit System ……………………………………33 o Systems Managed by Arlington, WMATA or NVTC o Bus Facilities o Additional Public Transit o Private Commuter, Employee/Student, and Airport Service o Paratransit and Taxicab o Bikeshare o Department of Human Services and other Specialized Transportation I. Introduction The Master Transportation Plan (MTP) Goals and Policies document specifies three general policies that form the foundation of the MTP and, therefore, transportation in Arlington in the years ahead: integrating transportation with land use, supporting the design and operation of complete streets, and managing travel demand and transportation systems. Between 2015 and 2030, Arlington County population is projected to increase 25 percent and employment is projected to increase by 20 percent. Increasing and enhancing transit options is a prerequisite to accommodating continued long-term growth in Arlington’s population and business activity. As noted in the MTP, the integration of transit and land use, the organization of community development around high quality transit service, has been a foundational policy for the Metrorail corridors in the County for more than 30 years.
    [Show full text]