Competition with transit authority

[Busjack]

Tribune article about private bus lines using apps to book fares from yuppie areas for about $5-6, that parallel a Muni line that costs $2.25.

The surprising thing is that the executive director of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority* is fine with that because the public sector can't meet the demand. But, it being San Francisco, the activists are worried about the classes being separated.

Incumbent transit providers used to complain about competition with their franchises, but the impression I got since the RTA fare hikes in the late 1970s is that the public ones no longer care.

____________

*The description of San Francisco County Transportation Authority indicates that the governance structure there may be as messed up as here, but no mention of a suburban bus authority. Contra Costa Transportation Authority, of course, is on the other side of the bay.

[MetroShadow]

Service from the Marina is a pain in the butt anyway on transit. Makes more sense to use the private sector to do the job (but then again, they've begin to reimage their service as part of their MUNIForward program (complete with a MORE LEGIBLE MAP!!!) Keep in mind, this is the same Muni that allows for tech buses to make stops in the MTA ROW for a fee; but in the case for the Marina express, they aren't using any of the MTA stops.

A good start to get further research is the KQED Forum Podcast.

[rvwnsd]

Tribune article about private bus lines using apps to book fares from yuppie areas for about $5-6, that parallel a Muni line that costs $2.25.

The surprising thing is that the executive director of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority* is fine with that because the public sector can't meet the demand. But, it being San Francisco, the activists are worried about the classes being separated.

Incumbent transit providers used to complain about competition with their franchises, but the impression I got since the RTA fare hikes in the late 1970s is that the public ones no longer care.

____________

*The description of San Francisco County Transportation Authority indicates that the governance structure there may be as messed up as here, but no mention of a suburban bus authority. Contra Costa Transportation Authority, of course, is on the other side of the bay.

The other suburban bus agencies (or "districts") are SamTrans (San Mateo County) and Golden Gate Transit (Marin and Sonoma Counties).

[MetroShadow]

The issue with defining "suburban districts" is that they are not only their own entities, I wouldn't call them suburban agencies per se (Marin Transit and Golden Gate, for one, operate as the county provider (GGT Being the Commuter service and SMART as their commuter rail)).

SamTrans, Sonoma County Transit, Contra Costa and LAVTA (in Livermore) may be the only agencies in the Bay Area that could be defined as "suburban." I'd be careful to use that label, however.

/and as an aside, I'm glad Clipper exists out there because there are a lot of agency transfers/discounts that exist (or should), and at least the card addresses that (for now).

[Busjack]

The issue with defining "suburban districts" is that they are not only their own entities, I wouldn't call them suburban agencies per se (Marin Transit and Golden Gate, for one, operate as the county provider (GGT Being the Commuter service and SMART as their commuter rail)).

SamTrans, Sonoma County Transit, Contra Costa and LAVTA (in Livermore) may be the only agencies in the Bay Area that could be defined as "suburban." I'd be careful to use that label, however.

/and as an aside, I'm glad Clipper exists out there because there are a lot of agency transfers/discounts that exist (or should), and at least the card addresses that (for now).

I was thinking basically SamTrans, as there isn't a natural barrier. MUNI ends at the city/county line, but SamTrans has express service to downtown SF.

"Rapid" terminology must be borrowed from LA.

[jajuan]

I was thinking basically SamTrans, as there isn't a natural barrier. MUNI ends at the city/county line, but SamTrans has express service to downtown SF.

"Rapid" terminology must be borrowed from LA.

Maybe, but where Rapid in LA seems to be faux BRT like J14 here, Rapid is basically just the new terminology for MUNI's limited routes, their version of the 'X' routes in a similar manner CTA used to have.

EDIT: I now noticed the mention that their Rapid network will operate on special bus lanes and have signal priority.

[MetroShadow]

I was thinking basically SamTrans, as there isn't a natural barrier. MUNI ends at the city/county line, but SamTrans has express service to downtown SF.

"Rapid" terminology must be borrowed from LA.

LA Started the terminology back in the early 2000's.

Maybe, but where Rapid in LA seems to be faux BRT like J14 here, Rapid is basically just the new terminology for MUNI's limited routes, their version of the 'X' routes in a similar manner CTA used to have.

EDIT: I now noticed the mention that their Rapid network will operate on special bus lanes and have signal priority.

The other reason why they've switched from "Limited" to "Rapid" was because of the stigma of "Limited" service; the new

"Rapid" designation is supposed to give the connotation of faster service (although the 5 and 14 can be brutal without those added features).

[jajuan]

LA Started the terminology back in the early 2000's.

The other reason why they've switched from "Limited" to "Rapid" was because of the stigma of "Limited" service; the new

"Rapid" designation is supposed to give the connotation of faster service (although the 5 and 14 can be brutal without those added features).

I did a bit more reading around the upcoming changeover and it seems the changeover from 38L to 38R is a prelude for San Francisco MUNI's hope to have a Geary BRT up and running soon.