The prospect of a student pass program

The MBTA Rider Oversight Committee released an interesting new report on the prospect of an unlimited ride student pass that could be issued through universities to their population. If the university commits to bringing 100% of their student body into the system, then the MBTA can offer a steep discount for the passes. The author went through the trouble of interviewing and collecting data from three other cities: Chicago, Milwaukee, and San Francisco regarding their student pass programs. The second part of the report considers using the revenue generated by the student pass program for funding late night bus service (a.k.a. Night Owl) and some other improvements.

My personal experience with student passes comes from Pittsburgh where I attended my undergraduate program. My freshman year, the university offered a $35/semester unlimited bus pass "sticker" to be applied to our ID card. I didn't know much about the bus system but it seemed to be a no-brainer: I took it. Apparently, many other people felt the same way, because the following year the sticker was automatically bundled with the ID, and that remains the case to this day. I never had to pay cash for an individual ride while I lived there and I began using the bus system quite regularly. Looking back, I realize that this was a pretty significant benefit. The monthly pass cost appears to be $97.50 now, although that is after several rounds of fare hikes and a complete system reconfiguration that happened long after I left.

I don't want to dwell too long on Pittsburgh because they have some other, more fundamental problems to deal with. The question is, should we bring this kind of program here? I believe the answer is: most definitely yes. Plenty of students are already using the T, as anyone who rides it can attest. The value proposition is tremendous, with the discount that can be offered. And the convenience is key. I remember it was always nice to know that a group of us could always easily hop on the bus because we all had passes linked to our IDs. We didn't have to think about it at all. It doesn't seem like much, but it makes a big difference.

I would also like to point out a quote from this article (see also: older article) which popped up last week, about Mark Aesch who found ways to turn a sputtering Rochester bus agency into a lean and self-sustaining success:

His biggest achievement came through securing partnerships with the community. Once bus service improved, Aesch sent out a sales force to college campuses, shopping centers, apartment complexes, and the like, and asked them to pay for the better service that now carried so many students and customers and residents through their corridors. Sometimes he drew a comparison to a utility: just as a housing development might pay the water bill for tenants, so too should it pitch in for transit.

Working out student pass agreements with local universities would fit right into this kind of mold.

Now regarding the proposal to fund Night Owl service this way: it's good that we're talking about bringing this kind of service back, but I'm not sure it should be tightly linked to "student passes" because that gives the impression that the service is primarily for students. It's not. It's for everyone, and it'll be a big boon to late-night workers who need a way to get home, as well as a tool to reduce incidences of drunken driving. That's not to say that we shouldn't use the revenue from student passes to help fund Night Owl, but it shouldn't be linked. Night Owl is a justifiable service that stands on its own. I already wrote about how Night Owl ought to be designed, so I won't go further into that right now.

The MBTA ROC report includes an Appendix D about fare evasion statistics collected by CTPS. The presumption seems to be that students are a prime suspect in fare evasion. Leaving aside whether that is a fair characterization, this marks the first time I've seen anyone attempt to provide hard data about fare evasion on the MBTA. However, I will push this topic to the next blog post because this post is already too long.

A bad sign

A quick follow-up to my previous post: When I first spotted this pictured advertisement on a Pittsburgh bus, I didn't think much of it. But then I read it, and realized that there was an attitude fundamentally wrong behind it. It's nice to say things like "Don't litter" or "Don't engage in loud or rowdy behavior." But what alarmed me was the final message: "Inconsiderate behavior can result in the loss of your bus stop!"

It took me a moment to process that. What the Port Authority seems to be claiming here is that the actions of one person can be used to justify punishment of the group of people who use that bus stop. That seems insane. I don't know if this has ever been carried out, or if this threat is empty.

But what portends for worse is the phrasing. It's about "your bus stop" and "your bus." A long time ago, I distinctly remember someone explaining proudly to me that in Pittsburgh "everyone rides the bus." It's not just for the poor and disenfranchised, as in some places, but for a diverse cross section of the population. It seemed to be quite true at the time. I have been away for many years. I don't know how things have been changing. But it is a bad sign if bus riders are being separated from the rest of society, as a class, and then treated like children whose "bus privileges" may be taken away arbitrarily. This is supposed to be everyone's bus, and everyone's bus stop. Can you imagine the city threatening to close a road because some driver littered? Why should buses get this kind of treatment?

Problems in Pittsburgh

A street in Shadyside

In a departure from my normal topic, today I am going to write about Pittsburgh, where I have just visited after a very long hiatus. I still have friends left from the time I lived there, and remember many good places to go (plenty of great dive bars, and "Happy Hour" is legal!). The city has approximately half the population of Boston, but a similar kind of "neighborhood" feel to it. There are plenty of good walking streets, and a sizable collection of parks named for the rich robber baron benefactors who still seem to hover over the city.

There are also considerable patches of empty or disinvested space. Part of this is due to geography, with the three rivers and many steep hills, it has always posed a challenge. But everyone knows Pittsburgh as the former prototypical "steel town" which collapsed, people and money fleeing outward to the sprawling suburbs and beyond. That combined with "urban renewal", bringing in civic arenas and massive elevated highways that cut off neighborhoods and blighted large areas, sent the city into a downward spiral from which it is still climbing out. It has largely reinvented itself as a financial and scientific center, with many banking headquarters as well as world class universities.

Central Northside

However, there's still a long way to go. Just take a stroll around Downtown in the early evening and you will notice a disturbing trend: shops are closing up, and the only people you see are eager to leave, waiting by the numerous bus stops. The Fort Pitt bridge and tunnel are jammed to a standstill with commuters heading home, as the immense downtown parking garages empty out. In a few hours, the city is silent and mostly empty. I had hoped this had changed in the years since I left, I know there are efforts to try and diversify uses, but it seems not to be so.

An even more disturbing crisis is brewing, one that will be familiar to Bostonians: the Port Authority (PAT) which runs the public transportation system, is facing a $64 million deficit and is proposing a plan that incorporates incredibly drastic service cuts as well as fare hikes. It eliminates nearly half of all routes, cuts service on the others, raises Zone 1 fares to $2.50, Zone 2 to $3.75, and hurts paratransit as well. As one of my friends put it, this plan will likely lead to economic devastation in Pittsburgh, as the roads and parking lots become even more clogged with additional commuters.

First Avenue Station, facing the portal

Historically, Pittsburgh has had a relatively good bus system. It is based on the very extensive trolley network that employed nearly 700 streetcars, and it was largely abandoned in the 1960s, with the exception of a few South Hills routes. The modern subway system under the streets of Downtown was mostly constructed in the 1980s, though it did re-use a couple of old tunnel sections and a railroad bridge. Curiously, it is also named the "T" and uses a very similar logo to Boston. The South Hills light rail trains access several downtown stations using this subway, and all travel within the downtown area is free of charge due to the fare collection system used by PAT. Essentially, all buses and trains collect fare on boarding when headed inbound, and on alighting when headed outbound, at least during peak. I always found the rule to be somewhat confusing, especially when taking a "crosstown" bus, but it does keep things moving in the most congested areas.

Unfortunately, the light rail system does not extend eastward to the heavily populated neighborhoods of Oakland, Shadyside and Squirrel Hill, although that was proposed nearly twenty years ago. As a result, ridership on the trains only constitutes about 11% of total weekday ridership, the rest being carried by buses. Pittsburgh pioneered the use of dedicated busways in the United States, with roads running south, east and west, and they have been very successful for providing access to the outlying neighborhoods and suburbs. The inner portions of the city don't enjoy such amenities, other than a contra-flow bus lane on Fifth Avenue in Oakland. There are, however, several trunk roads which each carry a number of routes, that provides very decent effective headways for many trips.

Detached single family homes, across from a major "T" station

On March 25th, the Port Authority opened the North Shore Connector for the "T" subway. I made sure to check it out while I was visiting. It connects the subway to a new Gateway Center station downtown, and then burrows in two single-track tubes under the Allegheny river to two new stations on the North Shore. A curious thing I noticed about the new tunnels is that they have a continuous platform throughout their length, probably to enhance rescue operations. The two new stations are near the baseball stadium (PNC Park) and the football stadium (Heinz Field), as well as the science museum and the casino.

The cost of the North Shore Connector was $523.4 million for a 1.2 mile (1.9 km) line, clocking in at approximately $270 million/km. Which is actually pretty cheap when compared to other United States projects, and that includes the money which went into the overly elaborate headhouse for the Gateway Center station. The extension has been accused by Senator McCain of being a boondoggle, but that was likely a partisan (or spiteful) opinion, since it was funded partially through ARRA. However, even Governor Rendell had reservations about it, calling the Connector a mistake. There are some disturbing aspects of the project, since the two North Shore stations are swaddled in parking lots and elevated highways. However, if there is further extension into Manchester, then I think it will turn out to have been a great bargain after all.

The first thing you see upon exiting the North Side T station

It's unfortunate that the Federal government decided to play games with transportation funding in Pennsylvania, especially when they forbade the tolling of I-80. It would be especially shameful if this led to the self-destruction of PAT and the consequent economic devastation to the city of Pittsburgh. I hope, for the city's sake, that it does not come to that.