|
Oh, no!
Nov 25, 2008 23:54:21 GMT -8
Post by spokker on Nov 25, 2008 23:54:21 GMT -8
What do you mean by overbuilt portals?
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 26, 2008 15:10:06 GMT -8
Post by James Fujita on Nov 26, 2008 15:10:06 GMT -8
What do you mean by overbuilt portals? He's probably refering to the fact that in a lot of cities, a portal can be as simple as a set of stairs or an escalator on the sidewalk, leading in and out of a pedestrian tunnel. the advantage of this is that you can have dozens of portals for each station, each one leading to a different destination (and still have the elevators for the disabled, of course). there's nothing wrong with the grand entrances that L.A's Metro has, but there's something to be said for simpler, more utilitarian entrances that might serve more pedestrians better. (such as the one that I use for an icon) in some cases, the pedestrian tunnels don't necessarily even have to lead to a subway station, they may be convenient underpasses for crowded streets.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 26, 2008 16:00:57 GMT -8
Post by metrocenter on Nov 26, 2008 16:00:57 GMT -8
^ Oh it's just one things I tend to rant about. I'm talking about the huge subway entrances in L.A., like at North Hollywood and at Santa Monica/Vermont and at MacArthur Park. They're very wasteful from a space perspective: that take up so much space that there's really no space for anything else. I've seen subway entrances in lots of other cities, and they seem to be more compact and well-integrated into the neighborhoods. And it just makes me wonder why ours have to be so doggone huge! I think we'd be better served having several smaller, conveniently located entrances than one massive one.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 26, 2008 16:06:38 GMT -8
Post by JerardWright on Nov 26, 2008 16:06:38 GMT -8
There are advantages of having a large plaza site like that, one is for staging major construction activities.
The other most important advantage to all that space is the developments can be located there and then integrate themselves with the subway entrances and even have the development act as smaller entrances feeding a bigger entrance. Not too long ago, Wilshire/Vermont and Hollywood/Highland were those big empty plaza entryways and since then development has been added.
The same holds true at Wilshire/Western, Hollywood/Vine, soon to be North Hollywood and Westlake/MacArthur Park stations Joint developments are either under construction or ready for construction. With our weather we should try to get more people onto the sidewalks and walk towards the development/stations which can improve the entire streetscape.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 26, 2008 16:38:05 GMT -8
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 26, 2008 16:38:05 GMT -8
I think we'd be better served having several smaller, conveniently located entrances than one massive one. For example..the 7th street portals are excellent. All three; on Hope, Flower, and Figueroa. Simple, and yet, very effective.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 26, 2008 18:20:31 GMT -8
Post by antonio on Nov 26, 2008 18:20:31 GMT -8
Jerard, I definitely understand the purpose of having those large plaza entrances, but there is also something to be said for having multiple entrances to attract pedestrians from several approaches. I understand it isn't always feasible, but for the Wilshire extension we should definitely focus on multiple entrances since activity on Wilshire isn't always at the major intersections but all along the street, the most obvious and important example of which is the Miracle Mile. It would also be useful at La Cienega so as to have access to both La Cienega and San Vicente.
P.S. I also love the Metro Center portals
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 26, 2008 19:13:30 GMT -8
Post by JerardWright on Nov 26, 2008 19:13:30 GMT -8
I understand that as well. But the only cases that works is in an already dense pedestrian environments where people are coming from many different directions. 7th Street Metro Center, Pershing Square, Vermont/Santa Monica there's more than one portal entrance because of the nature of the station and it's surroundings. Wilshire/Normandie is a good example of a very simple space efficient plaza entrance in the urban environment.
The future Wilshire extension past Fairfax, I can see the compact multiple entrance style due to the density of the environment, I can't see one location in which one large portal plaza can be identified at Wilshire/Beverly Dr or at Century City. At Westwood, I could see the one large entry plaza (Located on Wilshire between Gayley and Veteran for the UCLA and Westwood Village) and smaller portal entrances with simple staircases/escalators east of Westwood Blvd and on the Federal Bldg lot due to the high pedestrian traffic and large bus transfers.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 26, 2008 19:23:51 GMT -8
Post by spokker on Nov 26, 2008 19:23:51 GMT -8
I prefer overbuilt portals to fare gates.
The North Hollywood station is one of my favorites.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 27, 2008 1:38:05 GMT -8
Post by crzwdjk on Nov 27, 2008 1:38:05 GMT -8
I prefer fare gates to bored sheriffs deputies for fare checking. Fare gates are completely objective and don't discriminate or profile or harass. And you can have a system with faregates and no station staff: PATH is one such system, PATCO is another. If you have a problem with the faregates or ticket machines, you can call a customer service agent on the provided phone, and they can do things like watch you on cameras and open a faregate for you.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 27, 2008 12:51:48 GMT -8
Post by spokker on Nov 27, 2008 12:51:48 GMT -8
If you have a problem with the faregates or ticket machines, you can call a customer service agent on the provided phone, and they can do things like watch you on cameras and open a faregate for you. How convenient So is there any evidence that Metro discriminate, profile people, or do anything but be bored? I see them at Wilshire/Western all the time and they aren't checking tickets anyway. But having them there is better than a freakin' fare gate, which isn't going to help wrestle a guy off you when he goes insane and starts beating to hell out of you or tries to steal your wallet. If fare gates are installed and the officers on patrol taken out of the subway, I will feel much less safe.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 27, 2008 16:50:53 GMT -8
Post by whitmanlam on Nov 27, 2008 16:50:53 GMT -8
The fare gates are being installed to trim the budget for fare inspectors. Thinking they will save millions each year in labor costs .... Metro wants to plunk down a one time $$$ cost for fare gates, rather than the recurring cost for security personnel.
Sacrificing safety to save a few million $$$. And in the process, leave the passengers to deal with, panhandlers, vandals, thieves, crazy people, and suspicious packages that might EXPLODE.
We are literally a ticking time bomb away from another train disaster. But Hey, we saved a couple million $$$.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 28, 2008 22:35:41 GMT -8
Post by Jason Saunders on Nov 28, 2008 22:35:41 GMT -8
www.metro.net/news_info/press/metro_013.htmFrom the Metro Press release dated in Feb of this year. Metro Board Approves Installation of Barrier Gates for L.A. County Subway System And Selected Light Rail Stations The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Board today approved a 10-year, $46 million lease contract with Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc. to install barrier gates on the Metro Red Line, Metro Purple Line and selected light rail stations in efforts to prevent fare evasion, provide for seamless travel and improve transit station security. The Metro Board also approved existing Cubic contract amendments for $12 million over a 10-year period for system maintenance, and $10 million for station modifications needed to relocate existing stand-alone ticket validators and civil work for gating Metro Rail stations. Installation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant system should take 18 to 24 months to complete. At the direction of the Board, Metro also will seek ways to offset gating costs through various state bond monies and Department of Homeland Security funding, and will provide monthly committee reports to regularly track project timelines and costs. Currently, Metro operates a barrier-free “honor system.” The agency loses $5.5 million per year due to fare evasion. Overall, Metro has found a 5 percent fare evasion rate across all of its rail lines. The new gating system could recover $3-6 million annually to offset these losses as well as realize significant annual savings on fare inspector costs. Based on current forecasts, the savings enabled by the system will begin to pay for itself in the fourth year of full system operation. Barrier gates are also a key component of Metro’s emerging regional Transit Access Pass, or TAP program. TAP is an automated, electronic regional fare collection system that will create a multi-modal, multi-operator fare system for L.A. County transit riders. Metro and municipal operators are installing new equipment on both buses and in rail stations to prepare for TAP. In addition to Metro, Culver CityBus became the first regional operator to enable “seamless travel” on TAP this week. CityBus riders can use the TAP pass to transfer seamlessly to Metro using the debit card feature. Patrons riding additional municipal operators will also soon be able to easily “tap” the fare box or validator with their TAP “smart” card to pay their fares. The system will create more seamless travel for Metro and municipal patrons by allowing them to transfer from one operator to the next, and between transit modes. Metro’s customer centers have been outfitted to accommodate the sale of Metro monthly and weekly TAP passes. Also selling these Metro products are Foothill Transit and LADOT Stores to support getting TAP into the hands of Metro pass riders. “Gates are a natural evolution of Los Angeles County’s maturing Metro Rail system,” said Pam O’Connor, Santa Monica City Councilmember and Metro Board Chair. “They will help us keep pace with the demands of our fast growing rail ridership while ushering in the newest improvements in universal fare technology to streamline travel for our customers.” A total of 379 fare gates will be installed on all subway and selected light rail stations, including the yet-to-be-completed Mariachi, Soto and Atlantic stations on the Metro Gold Line Eastside extension. “Metro remains the only subway operator in the country to operate a barrier-free system,” said Yvonne B. Burke, Los Angeles County Supervisor and Metro Board member. “That freedom has come at a significant cost to the agency’s bottom line as a result of fare scofflaws. This initiative will pay for itself, makes TAP possible, and further hardens our system to potential security threats.” Security at stations will be augmented as part of the program. Additional video surveillance cameras will be installed at all gate entrances, and attendants will be on-hand to respond to situations or assist patrons where needed. The TAP barrier gates will enable Metro to obtain more reliable and accurate information about ridership trends on its rail lines. Gross trip counts, point-to-point ridership and time of day information will help the agency more effectively manage ridership peaks throughout the rail system. Once in place, the gates are expected to reduce the need for civilian fare inspectors, allowing the agency to flexibly make needed personnel redeployments when and where necessary. Metro could potentially save as much as $7 million per year in contracted fare inspector costs replaced in part with more cost-effective Metro Transit Security personnel. Sworn law enforcement would also be freed of fare checking responsibilities at gated stations, allowing them to focus primarily on station security. Gates will accommodate disabled patrons, children and patron-operated devices such as wheelchairs, strollers, walkers and bicycles, as well as emergency egress and access for fire-life safety devices. Gates will also provide for better control of station entry and egress, avoiding confusion and chaos to patrons as new rail lines open and bus and rail service in the region increases ridership. Lastly, gates promote new and innovative ways to consider potential revenue generation with bank cards and issuers as well as offers opportunities for different fare policies For additional Metro information and online transit trip planning, visit WWW.METRO.NET. For transit trip planning assistance over the phone, call 1-800-COMMUTE.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 30, 2008 12:00:14 GMT -8
Post by James Fujita on Nov 30, 2008 12:00:14 GMT -8
www.metro.net/news_info/press/metro_013.htmBarrier gates are also a key component of Metro’s emerging regional Transit Access Pass, or TAP program. TAP is an automated, electronic regional fare collection system that will create a multi-modal, multi-operator fare system for L.A. County transit riders. Metro and municipal operators are installing new equipment on both buses and in rail stations to prepare for TAP. In addition to Metro, Culver CityBus became the first regional operator to enable “seamless travel” on TAP this week. CityBus riders can use the TAP pass to transfer seamlessly to Metro using the debit card feature. this argument actually makes a lot more sense than the "barriers will prevent crime" (only if you still have law enforcement of some sort patrolling the trains, kthnx) and the "barriers will prevent fare evasion" (probably, but at what total cost to the taxpayer?). or rather, it would make more sense IF the MTA had a robust "smart card" such as the Suica. using your cell phone to pay fares? using the card on subways, commuter trains, buses, regional trains, even high-speed rail (assuming it existed in California)? using a TAP card to pay for items at a convenience store? yes, please! maybe this is a "chicken-and-egg" scenario and the MTA will eventually roll out more features on its TAP after it gets the barriers in place. but I'd feel better if the TAP cards that existed were more usable and more widespread before they rolled out the gates.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 30, 2008 13:32:45 GMT -8
Post by Justin Walker on Nov 30, 2008 13:32:45 GMT -8
The TAP system will make more sense when Metro implements stored-value cards like Culver City currently uses. Using passes on TAP cards is needlessly inconvenient. Metro doesn't intend to implement stored-value cards until after the fare gates are all in, however.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 30, 2008 14:56:03 GMT -8
Post by James Fujita on Nov 30, 2008 14:56:03 GMT -8
The TAP system will make more sense when Metro implements stored-value cards like Culver City currently uses. Using passes on TAP cards is needlessly inconvenient. Metro doesn't intend to implement stored-value cards until after the fare gates are all in, however. it's good to know that Metro will eventually implement stored-value cards, because it is the rechargable stored-value part that really makes TAP a worthwhile investment. the concept works for my apartment's laundry room, it works for Kinko's (and those examples aren't even contactless cards, you have to feed them into the reader), it ought to work for transit. at the very least, it would cut down on the number of people who get flummoxed or intimidated by ticket machines -and we don't even have that many options on Metro.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 30, 2008 15:47:29 GMT -8
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 30, 2008 15:47:29 GMT -8
Metro is also doing something with Visa regarding the TAP cards. I suspect that it will be similar to what James is describing. TAP-Visa
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Nov 30, 2008 17:17:39 GMT -8
Post by tonyw79sfv on Nov 30, 2008 17:17:39 GMT -8
Metro is also doing something with Visa regarding the TAP cards. I suspect that it will be similar to what James is describing. TAP-VisaIt's nice to see transit and commerce being integrated here. MTA New York City is doing the same thing with MasterCard for the 4/5/6 Lexington Line. Down south, OC's FasTrak transponder is used as payment at participating McDonald's.
|
|
|
Post by mattapoisett on Dec 1, 2008 0:13:51 GMT -8
The TAP system will make more sense when Metro implements stored-value cards like Culver City currently uses. Using passes on TAP cards is needlessly inconvenient. Metro doesn't intend to implement stored-value cards until after the fare gates are all in, however. Well you can get a card from Culver City and use it on Metro mostly without a problem. Every time I tap, $1.25 is deducted from the card most of the problems I've had were on Culver City busses but I think it has issues on metro when you are in a multiple zone fare as with the El Monte Busway. The other issue is the only place to reload it is in Culver City.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Dec 1, 2008 3:31:32 GMT -8
Metro is also doing something with Visa regarding the TAP cards. I suspect that it will be similar to what James is describing. TAP-Visait's hard to tell from just one document, but it certainly sounds like this pilot program would include much of what I would consider to be necessary for a rechargable TAP card program. given the MTA's financial situation, a public-private partnership makes sense. and I like that this card will be able to be used in many places, besides transit. the more places it can be used, the more people will want to use it. and the "payWAVE" name would certainly be appropriate for oceanside Southern California.
|
|
|
Post by wad on Dec 1, 2008 5:38:22 GMT -8
Metro is also doing something with Visa regarding the TAP cards. I suspect that it will be similar to what James is describing. TAP-VisaThis actually makes a lot of sense. One of my objections -- and I am sure it's shared by many riders -- is that converting cash to stored-value cards makes no sense unless there is a carrot (financial incentive) or stick (no longer taking cash on buses, for instance) to do so. This would eliminate those disadvantages.
|
|
|
Oh, no!
Dec 1, 2008 10:53:32 GMT -8
Post by Jason Saunders on Dec 1, 2008 10:53:32 GMT -8
A nice benefit would be that employers could offer it as a perk or to people who give up their parking spot. The employer's HR/Payroll dept could automatically add value to the card at regular intervals just like auto deposit.
In regards to Visa, I could see Visa offering some kind of "rewards" promotion where every time you use the card a percentage of the purchase price is added to the card. It simultaneously encourages public transit use and the use of Visa.
|
|