Opinion

A Tyee Series

No Hassle Transit? Try Hasselt

Belgian city offers BC a workable, fare-free model.

By Dave Olsen, 9 Jul 2007, TheTyee.ca

No Fares 2

[Editor's note: This is the third in a five-part series funded by you, the readers who donated to a Tyee Fellowship for Solutions-oriented Reporting. To find out more about Tyee Fellowships, click here. To learn more about the series' author, Dave Olsen, go here. Or listen to the audio interview with Olsen by Katherine Gretsinger.]

Ten years ago the people of Hasselt, Belgium embarked upon a bold experiment: no more charging for bus rides. Ever since, they've been proving the idea can work wonderfully.

This city of 70,000 residents, with 300,000 commuters from the surrounding area, has made traveling by bus easy, affordable, and efficient. Now, people in Hasselt often speak of "their" bus system, and with good reason. The Boulevard Shuttle leaves you waiting for at most five minutes, the Central Shuttle has a 10 minute frequency, and system-wide you never have to wait more than a half an hour.

Just like the Whidbey Island, Washington, system we visited Friday, in Hasselt wheelchair users not only have access to the entire fleet of buses, they can reserve a spot by calling the "Belbus" line an hour in advance. According to the City of Hasselt's website, the driver will help the wheelchair user get aboard, "even giving a push, if desired," and help with unloading, too.

A prime lesson offered by Hasselt is the fact that they radically improved the bus system as well as their walking and cycling infrastructure before they removed the fare boxes. In 1996, there were only three bus routes with about 18,000 service hours/year. Today, there are 11 routes with more than 95,000 service hours/year.

  Hasselt, Belgium Nanaimo
Service Population 70,000 92,300
Ridership 3,706,638 (in 2001) 2,317,763
Service Kilometres 1,624,000 2,263,992
Service Hours 95,000 94,333
Vehicles in Service 40 Buses 31 buses
Operating Budget 5,119,968 € (~CA$7,850,000, all from taxes, both municipal and national) $6,906,910 ($3,065,488 from fares)


The transit system in Hasselt cost taxpayers approximately $1.9 million in 2006. This amounts to one per cent of their municipal budget and makes up about 26 per cent of the total operating cost of the transit system. The Flemish national government covered the rest (approximately $5.4 million) under a long-term agreement.

For comparison, one per cent of the City of Vancouver's municipal budget for 2007 is about $8.5 million.

Making it go

So how did Hasselt make it happen?

On January 1, 1991, the Flemish Authority brought together three public transport companies and joined them into one autonomously operating state company. This company's raison d'etre is to provide transport for the whole of Flanders. That was the beginning of the Flemish Transport Company, since then generally known under the name "De Lijn." This structure allows them to buy buses more cheaply and they can even share buses among the different city and regional systems, whenever needed.

By contrast, BC Transit doesn't seem to purchase enough buses to offer similar benefits and they don't operate any systems outside Victoria any longer so sharing isn't possible. BC Transit's main role for smaller transit systems in B.C. seems to be providing pre-paid media (tickets and passes), which obviously isn't needed for fare-free systems like Hasselt.

Jean Vandeputte, the chief engineer-director for the City of Hasselt, shared by e-mail these thoughts about converting existing transit systems in B.C. to fare-free systems:

"To be successful, I think that the public transport system must not be crowded at the start. Our project was originally organized to attract more passengers and to have less cars in the city centre. The buses also need separate lanes, because travelling by bus has to be faster than by car, so the infrastructure of intersections and streets has to be adapted. The buses have to be modern, clean ... you need to have more bus stops. And the shelters must be attractive."

Ridership zooms

Hasselt City Council's principal aim in introducing free public transport was to promote the new bus system to such a degree that it would catch on and become the natural option for getting around. And it did -- immediately. On the first day, bus ridership increased 783 per cent! The first full year of free-fare transit saw an increase of 900 per cent over the previous year; by 2001, the increase was up to 1,223 per cent and ridership continues to go up every day.

By making public transport free of charge it became possible to guarantee the right to mobility for all residents in Hasselt. Their position was that an improved public transport system simply means a better use of the public space that will not only improve the quality of traffic, but the quality of life in general.

Why isn't this our position as well? Isn't it worth trying a similar experiment at least somewhere in B.C.?

The Hasselt experience before 1997 was not much different than anywhere else in the western world. Car ownership in Hasselt rose by 25 per cent from 1987 to 1999, while the population increased by only 3.3 per cent during this same period. Although Hasselt is the fourth largest city in Belgium, it ranked first in car ownership during those years.

After implementing fare-free transit, over 40 per cent of the people visiting hospitals switched from a car to the bus. Over 32 per cent of the people "going to market" switched from using cars to buses. Overall, in November 1997, 16 per cent of all bus riders studied previously drove a car. It is important to understand that this was achieved by both the elimination of fares as well as the implementation of bus priority measures such as bus lanes.

Careful planning is key

Karl Storchmann, a researcher at Yale University, has documented that even the 12 per cent of bus riders that were previously cyclists, as well as the 9 per cent that switched from walking to the bus in Hasselt, will produce a net positive change for society, since pedestrians and cyclists "belong to the most endangered road users, [and] every decrease in these modes will lead to a reduction of automobile-caused costs [i.e., deaths and injuries]."

The primary difference between Hasselt and most other places since 1997 is the creation and implementation of an integrated policy Hasselt calls "Working Together on a New Form of Mobility" ("Samen Anders Mobiel" for you Flemish speakers).

Tyee Interview

Listen to audio: Kathryn Gretsinger interviews Dave Olsen about the reasons for making transit free.

Within this sustainable mobility policy, there are two traffic policies: a Large Traffic Policy and a Small Traffic Policy.

The Large Traffic Policy includes the public transport policy (fare-free transit with appropriate service levels), a Mobility Plan, Cycle Policy Plan, Parking Policy Plan, Programme of Thoroughfares, Green Boulevard, an Outer Ring Road Plan, and a plan to reconstruct the area surrounding the main train station.

The Small Traffic Policy offers quicker solutions to local residents like "no parking" signs, speed humps (sleeping policemen that prohibit speeding), raised crosswalks, street narrowings (corner and mid-block bulges), and many others.

The Mobility Plan included targeted campaigns to help make residents aware of the policy and plans. These campaigns included car-free days (similar to East Vancouver's Car-Free Commercial Drive Festival), shop-by-bike, bike pools (primarily for school children in Grades 1 to 5), and more.

A 'mobility plan' for all

Because Hasselt's policy makers understand that bikes are the most sustainable form of transport, today in Hasselt one can borrow a bicycle, tandem, scooter or wheelchair bike free of charge. On the Groenplein (behind the town hall) you can also borrow a stroller free of charge for your little one (as their website states, "Handy when your toddler can't make the distance"). And two wheelchairs are available for free loan from the tourism bureau. This is one mobility plan that includes both families and people with physical challenges.

The Mobility Plan notes that in the city centre, "you will find a network of pedestrian shopping streets, where as a pedestrian you can breathe easily and move freely as the imminent danger created by traffic has been removed." In these car-free areas, there are free guarded bike racks (similar to the bike valet system that the Vancouver Parks Board recently voted against) and luggage guard services. Again, this plan is not just for commuters and younger folks.

The businesses in Hasselt know very well that restricting cars can dramatically increase the numbers of people visiting them (the Vancouver Folk Music Festival has learned this, as well). In Hasselt, they've taken the next step and made it easy for people to shop as much as they want -- without a car. Elsewhere in the city, there are practical and pleasant "short-cuts" pedestrians can take to make it easier to walk than to drive.

The "Green Boulevard," formerly the inner ring road, was a traffic nightmare in the 1960s. Starting in 1997 and finishing in 2000, it has been transformed into a multi-use transportation dream: a nine-metre wide pedestrian area (Vancouver's standard sidewalk width is less than two metres), separate bike paths, separate lanes for transit, and roads that are engineered to ensure that cars drive at a maximum of 30 kilometres an hour. Although there are only two lanes for cars, there is rarely any congestion.

Money saved

The Mobility Plan has saved the City of Hasselt millions of Euros on transportation infrastructure costs and has eliminated the previously perceived need of a third ring road. Overall, taxes have decreased because the city spends less money on transportation with the new Mobility Plan, despite the huge increase in pedestrian, cycling, and transit infrastructure and services.

The Hasselt website also describes the "Women's Promenade" running through the city centre: "All kinds of women who over the years have made their mark on the city have been literally placed on a pedestal." The promenade shows off famous art and comic strips featuring women, as well as displays ranging from "the nuns' convent and witches' coven, to a club of cigar smoking ladies from Hasselt."

Clearly the city isn't afraid to innovate. As Hasselt Mayor Steve Stevaert declares, "We don't need any more new roads, but new thought highways!"

"You have to improve the existing system before changing the bus fares."

--Jean Vandeputte, chief engineer-director for the City of Hasselt, Belgium.

Are you listening, Kevin Falcon?

Contrast Hasselt's forward thinking with the recent manoeuvre by B.C. Minister of Transportation Kevin Falcon and the provincial government to change TransLink's governance structure. It's the latest attempt to further privatize public transit in the region.

Who is accountable?

The proposal creates an appointed 11-member board to oversee day-to-day operations. This board would be "made up of professionals," which clearly means that we will be paying private sector folks to run our public transit system. The existing board is made up of mayors and councillors elected throughout the GVRD. The current structure has been criticized for not being democratic enough, but if Falcon has his way, his government's hand-picked officials won't be accessible to any voters, anywhere.

This kind of top-down politics in service of privatization has already given us the RAV/Canada Line, a public-private partnership (P3) that guarantees the private contractor who builds and operates this automated light rail line will receive a hefty profit every year for 35 years, regardless of ridership. They also get the lion's share of the $2.5 billion of our taxes spent on the project, while hiring non-union imported labour to build it. And when they borrow more money from private sources at interest rates higher than government would pay, we the taxpayers pay for that, too.

A TransLink board stripped of democratic accountability will also make it easier for Falcon's ministry to push through mega-projects like Gateway (which includes the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge), with further subsidies to privately-owned automobiles -- the major producers of greenhouse gases and toxic pollution in our region.

When this series resumes, we'll look at ways to get the "public" back in public transportation. We'll examine the costs of collecting transit fares and sustainable, long term funding strategies used around the world.

Related Tyee stories:

 [Tyee]

16  Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • socialscientist

    5 years ago

    taxes have decreased...

    I think Hasselt has demolished the "who will pay for free transit" worry. It clearly pays for itself. Plus a side benefit - survival of the human species.

    http://www.freepublictransit.org

  • rockyvoids

    5 years ago

    Whoa!

    Whoa! Just hold on there. Some parasite on this side of the Atlantic would probably sue for loss of "profitability."
    Some entity is profiting from the Whidbey Is. system, for sure.
    As long as it is taxpayer funded, and not a crown corp., money is going into private pockets.

  • Grumpy

    5 years ago

    Interesting

    Never heard of Hasselt or its free transit system. Me thinks there is more to Hasselt than is being reported.

    I'm afraid when we get stories from those who are not real transit experts (no university degrees are offered on public transport or transportation in Canada) who take very simplistic views on public transport, one must take it with a grain of salt.

    Hopefully, my contacts in Europe can fill me in on Hasselt and its transit system.

  • rac

    5 years ago

    Article on Free Transit in the PI

    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/322858_freebus07.html

    Regarding Whidbey, the article reports:
    "In a largely rural county of 77,000 people, those riders are part of the 3 percent of commuters using public transportation. That number is below the state average but has grown, according to census data."

    Not exactly a ringing endorsement of free transit.

    Hasselt sounds interesting. I looks like they have done far more than free fares. Many of the other ideas would likely be as or more effective in improving transit here than free fares.

    As well, please avoid arguments such as this one:
    "Karl Storchmann, a researcher at Yale University, has documented that even the 12 per cent of bus riders that were previously cyclists, as well as the 9 per cent that switched from walking to the bus in Hasselt, will produce a net positive change for society, since pedestrians and cyclists "belong to the most endangered road users, [and] every decrease in these modes will lead to a reduction of automobile-caused costs [i.e., deaths and injuries]"

    Improvements in health due to physical active likely more of a positive benefit to society than the so called benefit from reduced ped and cyclists injuries. Reductions in ped and cyclist injuries are better accomplished through improvements in infrastructure and reduction in motor vehicle speeds.

  • skeptikool

    5 years ago

    A dream whose time has come

    One could almost believe that use of public transit in the Lower Mainland has been actively discouraged.

    Arriving at the Peace Arch crossing on a Reno-bound bus. I found that I was without my proof of citizenship and without any money, but a few coins, since I'd neglected to pocket my wallet on departure.

    It was a long walk to the nearest bus stop. There was no shelter and it was windy and bitterly cold. I'd might as well have been standing in the middle of a field.

    A fully subsidized, fare-free, public transit system certainly has my vote. I believe it would result in a phenomenal reduction in car use - even to the extent of having many owners selling their vehicles.

    Perhaps this latter will be a factor in having such a system remain a dream. Addiction to fuel taxes can be extremely difficult to overcome - if the desire is even there.

  • Frank

    5 years ago

    Free tranist

    I'm all for it, not that I've used it since university days (except for getting to Canuck games). Even if it was free I still wouldn't use it because the bus goes by the corner 2 blocks over only twice an hour and it takes a half-hour ride just to get to the exchange where one can catch a bus that actually goes to anywhere I'd be interested in. So I'll be driving my car/truck for the forseeable future.

    However, when I actually lived in Vancouver it was a different kettle of fish. The bus went by at least 4 times per hour and it went to where I wanted to go.

    Mass transit should be free. But whether its free or not shouldn't mean car drivers continue to get a free ride. Perhaps the gov't should do an odometer check on us every year and tell us how much we owe based on how much we used the roads. That would drive people into the arms of public transit faster than free fares.

  • JP

    5 years ago

    I thought this was an article about Hasselt

    But it just turns into another bashing of Kevin Falcon and his recent policies. Those comments could have been saved for a different article, rather than burying the part about free transit. The new Translink structure might end up working out in the end, if it is truely arms-length from the provincial goverment, and follows the same criteria for development as the city of Vancouver: pedestrians, transit, bicycles, transport of goods, then the car. It would allow it to proceed with controversial policies such as congestion taxing, parking taxes and be able to weather the nimbys.

    The Hasselt experiment shows that free transit can work, but only when other factors and decisions are added in. Sprawl tends to be workable for transit, the use of cul-de-sacs is limited, and people tend to live on smaller footprints.

    The comparison to Nanaimo isn't exactly fair. First off, there is little in the way of regional commuters in Nanaimo. Also getting around the city is a pain, even by car. Let alone by transit or bike. The bypass crosses Jingle Pot road 3 times. Yet Nanaimo manages to cover more miles with its transit for less money.

  • Grumpy

    5 years ago

    Hasselt - insignifigant

    It seems Hasselt is insignificant, an historical anomaly. Sad to say, the free-fare issue is the pipe dream, of someone with too much time on their hands.

  • Grumpy

    5 years ago

    By the looks of it........

    Me thinks that the excitement over 'free' fares on buses has ebbed.

    I am not fibbing, my correspondents overseas tell me Hasselt is an anomaly in Europe, where local circumstances and a rather poor bus service, encouraged the politicians to go free. The same could be said for the community buses in South Delta, at best carry upwards of 10 passengers a day on two hourly routes!

    TransLink could operate the two services for free, with little loss of revenue and if ridership increases to 50 passengers a day, then TransLink can boast a 500% increase!

    Please do not get me wrong, the region desperately needs better transit, unfortunately 'free' fares is not the way to go - except in special circumstances!

  • Grumpy

    5 years ago

    RAV is no P-3

    "This kind of top-down politics in service of privatization has already given us the RAV/Canada Line, a public-private partnership (P3) that guarantees the private contractor who builds and operates this automated light rail line will receive a hefty profit every year for 35 years, regardless of ridership."

    Just to make a point, RAV is no P-3 project, it is nothing more than 'smoke and mirrors', emulating the past Bre-X scandal.

  • Just me

    5 years ago

    Let them drive cars

    Why do militant car drivers hate public transit? Because gasoline taxes subsidize it? Wrong thinking! An efficient, cost-effective (not to say free) transit system would be the best way to get all but the most deserving drivers off the road, freeing up boundless miles of streets and highways to those who are truly entitled to them -- the rich. Why haven't they figured out that free transit is their best option to get the riffraff off the road so they can really put their pedals to the medal and have put the fun back into driving their Hummers and Beamers etc.?

  • Bobby Peru

    5 years ago

    Puny thinkers

    This article is typical fodder from BC's fringe left. They always counter sensible development by citing some insignificant project done in some insignificant European country that has no relevance to BC's situation. BC needs a road solution now because of all the delays in the past due to political infighting, nimbyism and cowardice. None of the writer's solutions are workable for BC and the Lower Mainland and would be a disaster.

    None of these European countries is part of the vast US-Canada trade and transport network. It's time to stop trying to change the way people live here and force them onto buses. Our weather and geography mean that the car will always be the favoured mode of transport. Stop with these silly granola dreams that we will live like they do in Europe. BC society is more American and than European.

  • Frank

    5 years ago

    Bobby Peru

    Give it a rest BP. You've never written anything on this forum without calling those you disagree with the "fringe left" or worse.

    As for BC's "bad road system" it was right-wing governments in charge most of the time and you probably voted for them all and called every decision they made brilliant. If you now declare that you don't like the road system you know where to lay the blame.

    So after almost 100 years of cars being on BC roads and using up a huge chunk of the land base in the lower mainland some people say why don't we try free transit because we have to try something in order stop spending billions on new roads and their maintenance and your answer is no, that we need more of those new roads.

    That's been the thinking for most of the last century and it hasn't worked. As your hero Michael Campbell would tell you, if you keep trying the same solution why would you expect different results?

    How much more should we allocate of our land to roads here in the lower mainland? What would satisfy you? 40%? 50%? Perhaps we should get rid of all the houses, put everyone in condos and use the newly available land for more of your roads?

    The problem Bobby is you and your right-wing compatriots live in a world where resources are infinite and change never happens. Unfortunately the rest of us live in the real one.

  • jhudgina

    5 years ago

    No Transit Fares

    Has anyone worked out what this would cost the taxpayer? The concept has many redeeming features if the cost is reasonable and the community is willing to pay for it.

  • kenhagen

    5 years ago

    No Transit Fares

    I think that the first item on the agenda for transit planners in the Lower Mainland would be to determine who wants to go from where to where and when. The system already works if you work downtown 9-5 Mon. to Fri.

    Try getting from Surrey to the Airport for 6:20 AM Fri. through Mon. (Any day of the week actually). Try from Langley to Scottsdale.... Try from anywhere South of the Fraser to anywhere other than downtown 9-5 Mon-Fri.

    The system has to be useful before it will be used.

  • Nikkal

    5 years ago

    please compare apples to apples

    comparing Hasselt, Belgium to Nanaimo is silly.

    transit ridership is determined, in large part, by distance & area served...because those factors, in part, determine speed of commute, convenience/availability of transit, etc.

    Nanaimo has 2.2M km of service km compared with 1.6M km in Hasselt, according to the comparison above. That is a significant difference in terms of operating costs. It doesn't require a degree in urban planning to recognize that it costs more to drive any vehicle for 220 km than it does for 160 km.

    And in addition to costs, greater service area means that the same number of busses would be spread out more, resulting in less frequency and/or convenience.

    But the stats above show that there are FEWER busses in Nanaimo, which further decreases frequency, convenience and availabilty.

    I don't know Hasselt, Belgium but I'd also be willing to speculate that like many European cities, it has a fairly well defined business centre, with a residential base spread around it fairly evenly. Nanaimo doesn't have that - between new residential and commercial development, there is a definite increase in sprawl (nowhere near what we have in Vancouver, where our primary commercial centre isn't in the centre at all, but...).

    I'm not anti-transit - to the contrary, I believe a well functioning transit system is key to maintaining a city's overall health.

    But trying to create a case for a fare-free system by using poor comparisons and case studies (let's not even address why a comparison between Vancouver and Whidbey Island is even less useful) isn't going to get people out of their cars.

    Not unless they have a relatively speedy bus line within a few blocks from their home.

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.