Dublin - why no zonal sytem for Public Transport?

Waestrel

I am sure this has been raised before, but standard operating system in other cities worldwide is some kind band or zone sytem for fare payment in the public transport network. You simply buy one ticket for a time period in teh zone or zones you want to travel in and what method you take, be bus, tram or rail is irrelevant. This sytem works well in Berlin (where there is S bahn, U bahn, bus and trams) Madrid and Perth. to name a few. Why, oh why do we not have this here? We have Bus, Dart and Luas, which seem to have a variety of ticketing, but very little joined up thinking in their fare structures.

I may be opening a can of worms here, but is there a reason for this? Is it technological, or a genuine lack of political will?

murphaph

It's the latter, which is not just the fault of politicians but of the electorate who don't demand such things from them. Public transport is always a big election issue in Berlin....in Ireland, not so much. People care more about a 1% income tax cut (whilst getting robbed in other taxes) than about "boring" things like integrated fares and ticketing.

A big blocker in all this is also the civil service. There are people in there in the Dept. of Transport who do not want to give up their control over things. You've probably seen Sir Humphrey in "Yes, Minister", well these characters really do exist and do not care about the greater good.

Waestrel

well, i can only hope then that people will begin to care about public transport as petrol nudges ever closer to 2 euro a litre

AlekSmart

Waestrel wrote: »

I am sure this has been raised before, but standard operating system in other cities worldwide is some kind band or zone sytem for fare payment in the public transport network. You simply buy one ticket for a time period in teh zone or zones you want to travel in and what method you take, be bus, tram or rail is irrelevant. This sytem works well in Berlin (where there is S bahn, U bahn, bus and trams) Madrid and Perth. to name a few. Why, oh why do we not have this here? We have Bus, Dart and Luas, which seem to have a variety of ticketing, but very little joined up thinking in their fare structures.

I may be opening a can of worms here, but is there a reason for this? Is it technological, or a genuine lack of political will?

Totally 100% Lack of Political Will,reinforced by an even greater lack of simple comprehension.

You quite correctly refer to Bus,Dart and Luas,to which you can add Suburban Commuter Rail.

So,on the surface,we have three of the mainstream modes under the direct control of a single State Owned Parent company,whilst the other (Luas) is operated by a private company on behalf of the same State.

Therefore it represents almost the ideal situation for a totally integrated system,in fact it is hard to conceive how such a system managed to reach the disjointed maladministered mess that it currently is.

Twelve years ago,the Government of the Day decided to make a bit of an oul effort,just to keep the EU offa their back I'd say.

It set up the Integrated Ticketing Implimentation Group.

http://www.rpa.ie/en/its/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.rpa.ie/en/rpa/about/Pages/background.aspx

Set up on foot of a Statutory Instrument (S.I. 84) this new agency was tasked and empowered to make sweeping changes to how Public Transport worked in Ireland.

THe actual point at which the ITIG lost it's way can be pinpointed IMO,to here...

In December 2002, the ITS Project Team developed a detailed project plan that was presented to the Department of Transport in December 2002.

The plan envisaged a four-phase project:

Establishment - Completed
Design and specification - Completed
Procurement – In Progress
Implementation – Phased implementation to commence following completion of the build of the back office systems. ITS smart cards are being introduced on individual operator’s services before being rolled out across all operators on an integrated basis once extensive testing has been completed.

The Design and Specification task,was where the ITIG had it's first opportunity to really make that difference to not only Dublin,but the Country as a whole.

That final element of the Quartet,Implementation then saw the ITIG ratify that D & S decision to allow Individual Operators to maintain and further develop their different stand-alone systems with a resounding assurance that "extensive testing" would eventually result in a seamless integration at a later date.

The opportunity existed then in 2001 for the RPA/ITIG with full leglislative backing to,at that point,introduce it's new basic system and INSTRUCT the various operators to get with that programme asap.

Had that decision been implemented The ITS project would,to use a Noonanism,taken off like a rocket,and LeapCard would now be as popular as Oyster in London or Octopus in Hong Kong.

Even now,12 years on,as other operators come on board all we can point to is the increased use of LeapCard as a e-Purse,when it has a capability far in excess of this.

For anybody with an enthusiasm or a belief in Public Transport,it is soul destroying to be involved in the stuff currently being trotted out as Integrated Ticketing,and which still stops well short of the integration achieved 40 years ago with the CIE Rambler Ticket,even if it was for visitors.

Some further information,albeit dating back to 1999,is to be found here,and it makes VERY interesting reading when put against where we are right now in 2013 !!

http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/2648-0.pdf

Are these cans big enough do you think ? :eek:

Waestrel

I would imagine that ridership would increase with zonal System as the service would be much more flexible . It would be actually useful as a service other that a suburb to centre transport service.

For me to go from Templegoue to bray was a bus into town and a dart to Bray, - a seperate ticket each way costing 5 euros or so. In Perth a similar dogleg style route would cost me a single 2 or 3 zone ticket.

its a no brainer really.

AngryLips

I think the the more relevant reason for a lack of zonal system is the lack of opportunity for multi-modal journeys in Dublin. There just isn't enough Luas or Dart across the city to make it a pressing requirement for the vast majority of journeys. And as for the DB network, while I'm quite a heavy non-commuter user, I rarely find need to use more than one DB service at a time. Also, zonal is better suited to rail-based rather than bus-based journeys and - actually - it seems to me that flat-fare is the way forward when it comes to busses because it reduces dwell times and is easier to police on the revenue front.

Shedite27

Waestrel wrote: »

I would imagine that ridership would increase with zonal System as the service would be much more flexible . It would be actually useful as a service other that a suburb to centre transport service.

For me to go from Templegoue to bray was a bus into town and a dart to Bray, - a seperate ticket each way costing 5 euros or so. In Perth a similar dogleg style route would cost me a single 2 or 3 zone ticket.

its a no brainer really.

While I agree with your point, it's a no-brainer for you, as you want to spend less. Tell that to Mr.Dart who will suddenly only get half the income from you.

n97 mini

1. Easier to do nothing.
2. Cheaper to do nothing, no consultants needed etc.
3. More revenue from the existing transport "system".

Win, win, win. Why would anyone want to change it (except the people who actually use it)?

LXFlyer

There is a commitment in the NTA Dublin Bus fare determination document issued last December for a complete review of the Dublin Bus fare structure to be completed within 2 years.

This is by no means a simple issue.

Whatever system is introduced, there are several key issues:
1) The impact has to be revenue neutral on the operators - in other words it should not cost more than the existing fare system

2) It needs to be simple and understandable for the user

As revenue goes direct to operators (rather than a central pot with operators getting contracted amounts), this is not going to be easy. Personally I'd like a flat fare on the buses (two fares - one for inner suburban, and a second for outer suburban), but it's difficult to know what the price elasticity is - in other words how many people currently using the bus and paying the lower fares will be prepared to pay a higher fare. I suspect some form of zonal fares will be introduced on the buses, but I can't see standard fares across all modes being the route taken, given the impact this would have on revenue.

LEAP will in time deliver multi-modal single tickets at a reduced price, but in the meantime there are some multi-mode period passes available (bus/rail, bus/LUAS and rail/LUAS) in 1 day, weekly, monthly and annual versions, and also monthly and annual bus/rail/LUAS passes.

LXFlyer

Waestrel wrote: »

I would imagine that ridership would increase with zonal System as the service would be much more flexible . It would be actually useful as a service other that a suburb to centre transport service.

For me to go from Templegoue to bray was a bus into town and a dart to Bray, - a seperate ticket each way costing 5 euros or so. In Perth a similar dogleg style route would cost me a single 2 or 3 zone ticket.

its a no brainer really.

Incidentally, you could have done trip that using one journey on a 10 journey travel 90 ticket for €2.50 using two buses (75 and 145) changing at Foxrock Church, or indeed a 15 and 145 changing in the city.

Such tickets are usually valid for 18 months or so.

Victor

The Luas zones are fares are also to be realigned with the prospect of the two lines being joined.

bk

I believe we should skip zonal system and go straight for a distance based system.

Zonal systems were introduced by many European cities to promote integrated multi-mode transport use.

It works, but is a pretty blunt tool. It is a system designed before there were smart cards and GPS.

The problem with a zonal system is that person A who is only travelling 1km, could end up paying far more then person B who is travelling 5km, simply because person A happens to be crossing a zone, while person B is doing all their travel within a zone. Not very fair!

A system based on you paying for exactly how far you travel is much fairer. In the past this wasn't reasonably possible to do. But with modern technology, GPS and smart cards it is very easy to do.

Take the Amsterdam system which I consider the ideal:

- You tag-on with your smart card when you board a bus/tram/metro and are charged 80c
- You tag-off at the end of your journey and you are charged 15c * per km you travelled during the trip.
- If you get on another bus/tram/metro within 30 minutes, you are NOT charged the initial 80c again, just the 15c per km charge.

It is a brilliant system, almost the ideal system. Much fairer as everyone pays for the distance you travel.

We should take advantage of the fact that we never had a zonal system and skip over it and go directly to a distance based system.

Instead I fear we will continue to be 30 years behind the rest of the world and go for a zonal system while everyone moves to a distance based system.

* the 15c per km charge can actually vary between 14c and 18c depending on the form of transport you are taking, to take into account the differences in costs of running bus vs tram vs metro and their popularity.

The great thing about a system like this, is that it should be possible to design it in such a way to have no negative effect on the fare box.

Geuze

bk,

Good post, I agree.

I am a big fan of zones (concentric circles?) like in London, Paris or Berlin.

Zone A would be inside the canals, zone B from the canals to the M50, zone C outside the M50, etc. etc.

However, with the introduction of smart card technology, etc. I think that we should move to a Dutch-style fixed fee + distance-based fare.

HydeRoad

Dwell time is one of the most costly and detrimental issues. It is hard to overstate that.

It delays the bus. It delays all the other buses that share a stop. It means longer journeys, longer turnaround, more vehicles, more staff, less laps, and God knows how many passengers are lost to the network. The cumulative effect is simply massive.

It should be possible to save one or two vehicles from each route, and even more on a busy route like the 46A, simply by getting that dwell time right down. That is more buses that can increase the frequency, or more buses that can be sent out on other routes, or more buses that simply do not have to be purchased in the first place.

It also saves on staff, and gets that wage bill down. A quicker turnaround means that an extra lap might be managed on a typical day's roster. It also makes it easier to prepare an efficient day's roster. But the unions won't want to hear that, of course.

The sheer cost of too many buses on a route, cluttering up the road space on each other, and on everyone else, is inordinate. If it could be cut, the savings would far, far outweigh any meagre and worrisome losses that might occur with a change over to flat fares or something similar.

Perhaps if the authorities had people involved who understood these things, instead of people with political agendas, then there would be some chance of improvement. But people who can fix things are not wanted. We are happy with the rotten, tired old system we have, thank you.

devnull

Also flat fares would render over-riding fare evasion dead and that needs to be realised as well as improving dwell time and this needs to be factored into any assessment of how a flat fare will effect fare-box revenue.

Shedite27

The dwell time should be counteracted by paying before you get on a bus, either by tagging or pay stations like at a luas. Especially at busy city centre locations where there's more people getting on.

Victor

bk wrote: »

The problem with a zonal system is that person A who is only travelling 1km, could end up paying far more then person B who is travelling 5km, simply because person A happens to be crossing a zone, while person B is doing all their travel within a zone. Not very fair!

This doesn't really happen all than much. While boundaries will always create some anomalies, they have to happen somewhere. The solution is to work on a 'base fare + distance' model, where distance can be worked by zones or km or stages.

Geuze wrote: »

I am a big fan of zones (concentric circles?) like in London, Paris or Berlin.

I'm not sold, as they fail to consider cross-radial trips, e.g. Tallaght-Dun Laoghaire might be in one zone. While it avoids expensive city centre capacity, it might also be a long trip for little money.

A hex map: https://www.google.ie/search?q=hex+map&client=firefox-a&hs=mxd&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=JgbmUeS6PI_e7AbcoIHgCA&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1680&bih=896 arrangement may be more approriate to large cities.

devnull wrote: »

Also flat fares would render over-riding fare evasion dead and that needs to be realised as well as improving dwell time and this needs to be factored into any assessment of how a flat fare will effect fare-box revenue.

A flat fare for how far?