This link, from Getreal at the TU forum, was provided as a reason of why mass transit is not needed in Jacksonville.
http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/MassTransit.HTM (http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/MassTransit.HTM)
Steven Dutch, Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Wisconsin - Green Bay
Conclusion 1: Transportation Costs Less at High Speeds.
Corollary: Low Speed Limits Raise the Cost of Travel.
Corollary: Interruptions Raise the Cost of Travel.
Conclusion 2: Slow Transportation Penalizes Affluent Customers.
Corollary: Affluent Customers Will Not Use Mass Transit.
Corollary: Infrequent Transit Schedules Discourage Use of Mass Transit.
Conclusion 3: Flat Fares Discourage Use of Mass Transit for Short Commutes
Additional Factors
Exact Change
Is there a single, more stupid tactic for discouraging mass transit than requiring exact change? Especially when fares change frequently enough that a new user can't find out the fare except by calling the transit company? Hopefully, rechargeable fare cards will become universal enough to remedy this problem. Systems like BART and many European systems that use vending machines for fare, of course, don't have this problem.
Fixed Costs
In addition to the per-mile indirect costs of owning a car, there are fixed costs that exist whether you drive the car or not. Chief among these is depreciation. Depreciation is not that much of an issue for people who buy used cars and drive them as long as possible, but for those who buy new cars and trade them in regularly it's a major cost. Depreciation has to be added to the cost of whatever transportation the individual uses. If the person drives, depreciation is part of the cost of driving, obviously. If the person uses mass transit, depreciation is still part of the cost of using mass transit because the person has a car sitting in the garage unused, but still declining in value. In fact, all hidden costs have to be added to the cost of mass transit - you still pay taxes to pave roads and defend oil supplies whatever you do. Only out of pocket expenses count in determining the cost-effectiveness of mass transit versus the automobile, because the indirect and "hidden" costs are still there whatever mode of transport you use.
Cargo
In New York City, someone who lives alone might be able to buy groceries every single day and tote them home. But what about someone with five kids? What about someone who needs to transport sheets of plywood or drywall, concrete blocks or sacks of fertilizer? In a few places, buses have provisions for carrying bicycles, but for the most part people who have frequent needs to haul cargo have no real alternative to the automobile. Delivery services might alleviate this problem somewhat.
Groups
While visiting my parents in the San Francisco Bay Area some years ago, we decided to take a trip to Fisherman's Wharf via the BART system. There were six of us altogether. We found the lot at the BART station full, so we drove in to San Francisco. Even counting bridge tolls and parking, it only cost a little more than riding BART[/u]
Conclusions
A. In sparsely-populated areas, there simply is no practical alternative to the automobile.
B. At off-peak times, there simply is no practical alternative to the automobile.
C. People who haul cargo have no practical alternative to the automobile.
D. The only way to diminish reliance on the automobile is to create a mass transit system that is superior to the automobile by the standards of automobile users.
E. Attempts to promote mass transit through coercion will inevitably fail
F. Voodoo Economics won't work.
G. Wishful thinking won't cut it.
Full article: http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/MassTransit.HTM (http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/MassTransit.HTM)
So what's your take? Should we just pack up the buses, rail and boats and go home in our cars?
QuoteExact Change
Is there a single, more stupid tactic for discouraging mass transit than requiring exact change? Especially when fares change frequently enough that a new user can't find out the fare except by calling the transit company? Hopefully, rechargeable fare cards will become universal enough to remedy this problem. Systems like BART and many European systems that use vending machines for fare, of course, don't have this problem.
You answered your own question. Fare cards are quickly replacing loose change.
QuoteFixed Costs
In addition to the per-mile indirect costs of owning a car, there are fixed costs that exist whether you drive the car or not. Chief among these is depreciation. Depreciation is not that much of an issue for people who buy used cars and drive them as long as possible, but for those who buy new cars and trade them in regularly it's a major cost. Depreciation has to be added to the cost of whatever transportation the individual uses. If the person drives, depreciation is part of the cost of driving, obviously. If the person uses mass transit, depreciation is still part of the cost of using mass transit because the person has a car sitting in the garage unused, but still declining in value. In fact, all hidden costs have to be added to the cost of mass transit - you still pay taxes to pave roads and defend oil supplies whatever you do. Only out of pocket expenses count in determining the cost-effectiveness of mass transit versus the automobile, because the indirect and "hidden" costs are still there whatever mode of transport you use.
Then the depreciation of your vehicle is linked to your requirement for a higher "quality of life". If you have to own a new car then the depreciation of your vehicle is more of a concern wether you use transit or not. Actually, I would say having the car parked much of the time does more to protect its value because lower mileage cars are more valueable at trade in then higher milage cars are.
QuoteCargo
In New York City, someone who lives alone might be able to buy groceries every single day and tote them home. But what about someone with five kids? What about someone who needs to transport sheets of plywood or drywall, concrete blocks or sacks of fertilizer? In a few places, buses have provisions for carrying bicycles, but for the most part people who have frequent needs to haul cargo have no real alternative to the automobile. Delivery services might alleviate this problem somewhat.
No, you can't bring home a pallet full of drywall on a bus or train. Delivery is a great way to get that bulky cargo to your home. Also, those that have to shop for 5 kids on a weekly basis in NYC are able to have their groceries deliverd as well. In places where densities are lower and transit systems less comprehensive, then take the family car to the neighborhood grocery store once a week and buy all the drywall and food you can carry.
QuoteGroups
While visiting my parents in the San Francisco Bay Area some years ago, we decided to take a trip to Fisherman's Wharf via the BART system. There were six of us altogether. We found the lot at the BART station full, so we drove in to San Francisco. Even counting bridge tolls and parking, it only cost a little more than riding BART[/u]
Thats great. But that station was full for a reason. People are actually using the transit system, WILLINGLY!