At the Vienna Community Fairfax Connector meeting several questions arose around bus service along Old Courthouse Road and Beulah Road, two neighborhood streets which FCDOT is still reviewing for compliance to bus feasibility. Some of the residents were worried with the size of the bus, others wanted the bus and were saddened to see the very limited hours of service. In discussion with Jenifer Joy Madden and Ed Tennyson it is clear that there are some serious issues that need resolution when it comes to bus service in Vienna.
Jenifer notes that access for most Vienna residents to the new Silver Line, painfully close but inaccessible by foot, remains disconnected from the County’s overall goal of better access. Many of the medium density neighborhoods, even in an area considered far more urbanized than most of Fairfax, remain in a transit dessert. Long time Transportation Planner and Commissioner Ed Tennyson notes that service to these neighborhoods is cost prohibitive for the 35′ Orion buses and in many cases unfeasible due to geometric constraints. Ultimately buses must run in major roadways such as Route 7 and Maple Avenue which are traffic nightmares. This provides no time savings for most of the potential neighborhoods.
If a route doesn’t make sense in terms of time savings, then 99% of Fairfax residents will be uninterested.
So I suggest the following case study. How can Service to Old Courthouse and Beulah be attained, without utilization of major roadways which are far from most residents and congested during peak hours? And how can this service be made more robust in hours of service so that it is not solely a commuter access.
We have taken a look at the cost difference between operating a 35′ Standard Connector Bus, a 22′(22-passenger) Compact Bus, and a 22′(22-passenger) Compact EV bus.
Driver Costs
No matter what kind of bus you have, the driver cost will likely be the main cost element. Drivers average $70,000 per year in benefits and pay for 2080 hours of operation. Considering the average bus travels approximately 15 miles per hour (including stops) the cost per mile becomes $2.25 for driver operation.
Vehicle Capital Costs
Whether you are buying the bus today, or have already bought it, there is an annualized cost to a bus either in purchase or depreciation. A 35′ Bus costs approximately $500,000 and should last 250,000 miles ($2.00 per mile in Capital Cost). A 22′ Compact Bus costs approximately $250,000 and should also last 250,000 miles ($1.00 per mile in Capital Cost). A 22′ Compact EV Bus costs approximately $350,000 and should also last 250,000 miles ($1.40 per mile in Capital Costs).
Vehicle Maintenance Costs
Although EV vehicles have gotten a bad rap for costly battery repairs, the life span of these larger bus battery systems is reported at an equivalent of a drive trains lifespan. EV vehicles do not have many of the mechanical problems of standard fuel vehicles such as tune ups, filters, and many drive train components so over the course of the vehicles lifetime costs are comparable through out. For those who might think that these systems are Alpha test technology it may come as a surprise that overseas systems like this have been in operation for over a decade, and even here in the US during the Atlanta Olympics and in some towns EV buses have been used for many years.
Vehicle Operation Costs
Now the interesting part. So often people view one choice over the other in black and white terms. This one is always better than that one. In reality, given the specific conditions, the answer on which selection is the best choice will vary with the parameters of the user. If your bus route is 20 miles, and the range for the bus is 80 miles, then you will have to stop and recharge ever 4 routes. That will likely mean some inefficiency and loss in service.
A 35′ Standard Bus costs $1.00 per mile in fuel cost. A 22′ Compact Bus costs $0.60 per mile in fuel cost. And a 22′ Compact EV Bus costs $0.14 per mile in fuel cost equivalence.
Compare
Let’s assume a typical route of 50,000 miles per year, split between two buses (25,000 miles each). Each route lap is 5 miles, similar to the Vienna Beulah/Old Courthouse routing. Let’s assume an average speed of 15 mph. Lastly let’s attribute the fare cost of $1.60 flat on any rider (the current Connector fee), which means per mile any rider pays $0.32 and assume that because of the medium density of Vienna that ridership will be approximately 3 passenger miles per bus mile.
Using these typical parameters one finds that the 35′ Standard Bus Route runs at a $4.29 per mile subsidy with a total annual budget cost of $214,500. The 22′ Compact Bus Route runs at a $2.89 per mile subsidy with a total annual budget cost of $144,500; $70,000 cheaper than the 35′ bus per year. The 22′ Compact EV Bus Route runs at a $2.83 per mile subsidy with a total annual budget cost of $141,500.
The smaller bus is 33% more cost efficient than the 35′ bus. The compact bus has no issues with over capacity because these are lesser used corridors. The compact bus is also able to route closer to residential areas providing more opportunity for ridership growth. Lastly, the smaller bus is capable of navigating smaller roads without the use of congestion major thoroughfares, providing a time incentive for their use.
Variables
So what happens when we start looking at tweaking the variables? And what changes can we make to fleet selection and routes to create the most efficient and cost effective systems?
Variable 1 – What happens when the duration of service is modified? This is one of the first choices made by FCDOT, and most transit services, when times are tough or ridership is limited. The difference between a 12-hour system (full day service) and a 6-hour system (rush hour only) is night and day. Reliable full day service means that more riders are likely to take the bus, and know that it will still be available, without massive headways, in case an emergency comes up. It also means that atypical schedule residents and retirees have access for errands or enjoyment. As is evident from the following chart, gutting of bus service to 6-hours only marginally exceeds the cost saving of operating a Compact Bus.
In other words cutting the hours of service is inefficient in saving cost. The reduction in hours also reduces the feasibility for ridership for some residents. While this may make sense for purely commuter heavy routes (not near commercial and retail regions), in areas where mid-day travel is viable it reduces the quality of the route.
Variable 2 – What happens when the length of the service is modified. By reducing the Lap Length for a route the riders now pay an effective high rate per mile. We noted that this rate for a 5 mile route is $0.32 per mile (based on a $1.60 flat fare). Shorter routes indicate more urban regions while longer routes indicate suburban and rural bus routes. For the most part, as long as the total miles for any route is 50,000 in a year, it makes relatively little variance to lengthen or shorten any given lap. Urban routes provide the most bang for the buck, but cost savings don’t occur until routes are reduced below 5 miles.
Variable 3 – What happens when the number of passengers on average goes up? Obviously the cost will go down, but how fast? Based on these conditions it is apparent that minute variances in the average number of riders make huge impacts on bus subsidies.
Each additional bus rider mile per bus mile equates to nearly a 10% decrease in the subsidy. Even more notably, the 35′ bus requires nearly 17 rider miles per bus mile to break even on all costs while it takes the EV/Compact only 12 rider miles per bus mile to break even on all costs.
Considering that buses have an intangible benefit, when properly operated, in reducing the expenditures necessary for road maintenance and widening it is a net benefit for society if the Compact bus can simply attain 3 rider miles per bus mile, less than $3 per bus mile.
So what is this telling us?