Thinking in terms of time management, I would reconfigure some "longhaul" busses (those operating inbound/outbound from downtown to the suburbs) with desk top seating. Combine individual and community "Work Stations" onboard some of these vehicles. Offer motem and cellular hookups, power and pay copy & fax machines.

That's VALUE! If I'm going to spend an hour (each way) in traffic, I would prefer to utilize my time more effectively. Ergonomic, reclinable seating would provide added value for those who care to read or doze.

I think advertisers and office furniture manufacturers would jump on the chance to partner in making public transportation workable and enjoyable here, in Washington. This idea could also be applied to the Ferry's.

Let's think in terms of demographics! Identify exsisting and potential ridership.

I would also like to see some of the large busses replaced with 20-30 passenger "airport style" van/bus bodies. They're lighter and can also run on propane or electric. They're lower in profile and shorter in distance.

Doug Masser

-- Doug Masser (dougmasser@truckmail.com), December 25, 1999

Answers

And in fact, that's what multiple surveys of current and potential transit riders consistently say. They want more room, more creature comforts (individual CD, etc.) If you get them to specify what they DO want, you come to the conclusion that they want something that looks more and more like .... an HOV. As you decrease the number of people per vehicle (particularly, when you keep a professional driver as opposed to an owner-driver), you dramatically raise the per person mile cost of transit.

So Doug- you are partly right. The problem with transit (at least in King County today) is one of demand. It is so far out of its natural niche, that it is not cost efficient.

You are proposing changes that will increase demand, but increase cost even more. The net result of what you propose will be more costly transit, with a modest increase in demand (because the demographics are even against two person HOVs). When you lose more money per unit as you increase the number of units sold, and you already are losing a quarter billion dollars a year, you really can't afford to increase demand much. Metro is already the biggest line item in the King County budget. Is it worth it to double the cost for a five or ten percent increase in utilization. Remember, it only carries about 5% of the commuter traffic and 2% of the total traffic now. Is it worth another $300 million to boost these numbers to 5.5% and 2.2% respectively?

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), December 25, 1999.

I have always agreed that the number of ridership verses operational costs is way out of balance and currently not within the perameters of justifying it's exsistance. I do however, believe that if we create a greater demand, we are essentially increasing the potential for revenue generating participation from private business. Public Transportation officials need to reach a greater marketshare. They can only do so by identifying the NEEDS of POTENTIAL riders in this case.

If we PACKAGE the product right, Public Transportation could become a profit center as opposed to a financial liability. VALUE is the key component here. I would gladly use the system if it offered me it's product as being an asset to my lifestyle.

You make excellent points. I would like to read your thoughts about your utilization of public transportation as we've discussed should some of these ideas be implimented, even on a test basis.

Doug

-- Doug Masser (dougmasser@truckmail.com), December 26, 1999.

" If we PACKAGE the product right, Public Transportation could become a profit center as opposed to a financial liability. VALUE is the key component here. I would gladly use the system if it offered me it's product as being an asset to my lifestyle." But like most businesses, it has its niche. And the financial viability of transit is highly dependent on the number of transit dependent people, which is shrinking, other demographics, but most importantly, POPULATION DENSITY. But we've lost common sense when it comes to the latter. Did you know that WA-DOT provided a grant to establish transit in the Okanogan, AFTER THE VOTERS TURNED IT DOWN.

When population density is sufficiently low, the geometry just almost precludes reasonable financial operations. The other demographics are also equally against transit. Review the threads about Sound Transit, demographics, and Public Transit. There are numerous references that document the problem that transit is facing, both locally and worldwide. In high density areas it can be effective for a fraction of the people. But we are already building $29,000 a stall underground parking garages for rich people in Mercer Island, in hopes of them using transit for half a bridge. If what we are doing is already ridiculously expensive per rider gained, I'm not sure we can afford to do a lot more to meet your additional needs.

-- (craigcar@crosswinds.net), December 26, 1999.

to Doug: Some of us would just like to have a bus, period. It doesn't have to be so fancy. I live in Gig Harbor. Is there a non- stop express bus to the Tacoma Dome Park'n'Ride, where I could link up with vanpools or catch other buses to useful destinations? Is there a non-stop express bus to the massive Park'n'Ride at I-5 and 320th in Federal Way, where I could link up with many vanpools? Is there a non-stop express bus to Bellevue, where I would have access to high-paying jobs?

Sadly, these are all rhetorical questions. As the answer is a resounding NO. We're going to face unlimited tolls in the near future. And, the higher tolls go, the more we can create a business case for transit. So, who knows, maybe we'll get the bus routes we need, after all.

-- Matthew M. Warren (mattinsky@msn.com), December 26, 1999.

"Some of us would just like to have a bus, period. It doesn't have to be so fancy. I live in Gig Harbor. Is there a non- stop express bus to the Tacoma Dome Park'n'Ride, where I could link up with vanpools or catch other buses to useful destinations? Is there a non-stop express bus to the massive Park'n'Ride at I-5 and 320th in Federal Way, where I could link up with many vanpools? Is there a non-stop express bus to Bellevue, where I would have access to high-paying jobs? Sadly, these are all rhetorical questions. As the answer is a resounding NO." Well Matt, as I see it, there are two possibilities. Since it has already been established that transit in this state is highly subsidized and runs many routes that are ridiculously non cost-effective, the fact that Pierce Transit hasn't put these routes together for YOU would have to reflect one of two things. Either these routes would be ULTRA non-cost-effective, or the people who run transit are incompetent.

Now if those who run transit are incompetent, I don't want to give them another dollar, and I think we ought to do what we can to take away those of OUR dollars that they already have. If the routes you propose are merely ULTRA non-cost effective, please explain why I(and others like me) ought to subsidize YOUR lifestyle of living in Gig Harbor and commuting (at our expense) to Bellevue. I understand the wages are high in San Francisco and Silicon Valley, why don't you ask us to subsidize you to commute there too?

-- Mike Alworth (m_alworth@olympusnet.com), December 26, 1999.