I visited it its a good approach! same like http://www.goldparking.co.uk

Distortion indeed I completely agree – if we think about how funding is cut, it is likely to come through lower frequency, a lower frequency which I know would induce a change in my transport habits (although I always take the bus, it would definitely be a cost). So this is cool.

But this is not what I’d normally define as lower “choice” – which pertains to a situation where government directly does something to stop someone doing something. In the case we are looking at, the fact that fewer people are using the bus and that a govt will then want to reduce funding to meet that is a response to choices by people given the distortion. So this tells us that the responsiveness of public transport numbers to subsidies and taxes may be higher than we expect – which is useful.

The main reason I state we should be careful, is because if we start calling it choice, we start going on about rights based arguments for the avaliability of a service – while these are true, it is actually a separate argument, and mixing the two can get things confused 🙂

Could it be both? Making it easier to drive and harder to do otherwise results in fewer people using public transport, which leads to service cuts in both frequency and operating hours, further reducing both the attractiveness and availability of PT as a choice of those that were still using it, which results in further distortion the choice in favour of driving.

Just that we need to be a bit careful calling it a cut in choice! If the govt is cutting funding solely on the basis that people are not using the buses, when any “externalities” are already being funded, the cut in funding isn’t reducing choice … tis a result of the distortion!

Actually refining my point a bit, I’d say that it’s urban design policies like Minimum Parking Requirements (MPRs) and zoning – both also bureaucratic decisions – that produce neighbourhoods and destinations (ie shopping precincts) that are built in such a way that make it difficult people to realistically choose transport methods other than driving – contrast Botany and other outer suburbs with Auckland’s “streetcar” suburbs (where most developments pre-date both zones and MPRs) for the likelihood that a walk to the local shops or to the local bus route would be convenient or appealing, or even possible.
A circuituous and difficult-to-access bus such as those that serve Howick or Westgate will never be as frequent, therefore as available to choose, as a highly accessible bus such as those on Mt Eden or Dominion Rds.

Sorry I don’t understand what you’re telling me that I’m essentially saying – can you clarify?