Advertisement

Transportation

, Volume 2, Issue 2, pp 195–218 | Cite as

Consequences of service reduction in municipal transit: San Francisco’s muni

  • Douglass B. LeeJr.
Article

Abstract

Urban transit in the United States is going through a crisis of rising costs, increasing fares, falling patronage, and concomitant service reductions; typical of the pattern is San Francisco’s Municipal Railway, the agency in charge of all the City’s transit. From a basic fare of 15c in 1969, two increases brought the fare to 25c by 1972, and cut sharply into a previously stable patronage. The “Muni”, in an effort to reduce costs and meet its budgeted deficit, attempted to reduce service by ten to fifteen percent. From an analysis of the data which could be obtained, it appears that neither efficiency not equity in the City would have been served by the proposed cutbacks. The analysis draws from a variety of sources and methods in exploring the interactions within the transportation system and within the city budget.

Keywords

Income Public Transit Transit Service Urban Transportation Urban Transit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Domencich, T. A. and Kraft, G. (1970). Free Transit. Lexington, Mass: Heath Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  2. Fitch, L. and Associates (1964). Urban Transportation and Public Policy. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  3. Lee, D. B., Jr. (1972a). “The Costs of Private Automobile Usage to the City of San Francisco”, Working Paper No. 171. Berkeley: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California.Google Scholar
  4. Lee, D. B., Jr. (1972b). “Consequences of Service Reduction in Municipal Transit: San Francisco’s Muni”, Working Paper No. 193. Berkeley: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California.Google Scholar
  5. Meyer, J. R., Kain, J. F. and Wohl, M. (1967). The Urban Transportation Problem. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Moses, L. N., and Williamson, H. F., Jr. (1963). “Value of Time, Choice of Mode, and the Subsidy Issue in Urban Transportation”, Journal of Political Economy, 71 (3): 247–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Solomon, R. J. and Saltzman, A. (1971). “History of Transit and Innovative Systems”, USL TR-70-20. Cambridge: Urban Systems Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company 1973

Authors and Affiliations

  • Douglass B. LeeJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of City and Regional PlanningUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeley

Personalised recommendations