|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jul 1, 2007 17:48:20 GMT -8
Study here.Obviously the MTA has every intention of installing fare gates on the red line. Most likely on the green line and potentially on the other light rail lines if they can figure a way to do so. Equally obvious is their desire to go to distance based fares. Somehow the MTA is convinced that fare gates will make our system safer. There was a lot of talk about fare gates when we had that mercury spill at Pershing Square and much of the rhetoric concerned the potential for terrorist attacks with our system being so accessible. It is evidently widely accepted within the MTA that fare gates act as kryptonite and that terrorists with all of their diabolical plots have yet to figure out how to purchase a fare card and swipe it at a turnstile. Fare gates seem like a big waste of money, but I'm more disappointed with the idea of distance based fares. Especially if they incorporate that idea with distance based fares on buses as they are considering.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jul 1, 2007 18:21:46 GMT -8
I would hope that they do a distance based fare for rail. It only seems fair that those who travel farther pay more.
A turnstile would also get more revenue by almost eliminating fare evasion, as long as there are police at each station to see that no one goes through. It's completely worthless in Las Vegas. They have the turnstiles, but if you go past it, it only makes a sound, and no one cares. Metro has to keep that in mind if they implement gates.
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Jul 1, 2007 20:41:06 GMT -8
Fare gates... Tony has a good point about people evading fares by jumping over the turnstile. If there's no police present, how's the system going to work? The alternative to police presence is an expensive security system with photo cameras. With so many Metro stations in LA, the system will be expensive to build and maintain. Not to mention, I've seen people solicit used Metro Day Passes in the Red line stations near the TVM's...
If gates do go up, they have to have a good design appearance to match the theme of each Metro station; otherwise the stations will end up looking very ugly, which may have a negative impact on TOD near the station or even ridership.
The 7th Street Metro Station is a challenge in itself. If you're not familiar of this station, the 7th Street Metro Station is a bilevel underground Metro station. Bus lines serve the street level. From the street level, multiple set of entrances go underground (the gates can't go there because it's a transfer station and Metro doesn't offer free one way transfers). The first underground level is the Blue line platform. The second underground level is the Red Line platform, accessable by a few sets of escalators and elevators from the Blue Line level. Fare gates for the Blue line aren't too bad since the rail line itself is in the center of the station. Here's the problem: If a Blue Line Rider wants to transfer to the Red Line, where should the Red Line gates go? Perhaps at the top of the "down" escalators/stairs, but what about enforcing the elevators without disrupting people going "up"? Anybody have any opinion on this? Also, how would distance-based fares be enforced? Would you validate your ticket at the exit gates too???
Perhaps Metro should test run of this proposal to see if it will work systemwide.
What about the police? Although its true that Metro can staff each and every station with police to watch the gates, just the presence of the police places us back to the current honor system.
Not too long ago, I boarded the Metro Red Line at Pershing Square and officers were checking tickets as people entered the "Ticket Required" zone near the TAP validators. The need for gates were pointless since 4 officers were waiting at the entrance to check tickets. When I transferred to the Blue Line, a whole fleet of officers boarded the train to inspect tickets at the Watts Station. At least half a dozen were detrained at Watts and were busted for fare envasion. Back at Union Station, while I was transferring from the Red Line to Metrolink, Union Station security guards did ticket checks in the station.
Perhaps a better idea is to budget more police ticket checkpoints for each line (police wait on the platform and check each train that enters) and police staffed at the entrances/exits of select stations as the "living" gates.
Distance Fares... If Metro does distance based fares, I think it should be like the San Diego Trolley's fare policy. The trolley's one way fare is based on the number stations the passenger passes through from the orgin station ranging from $1.25-$3.00, yet passholders (Day, Monthly, Coaster train, etc) can ride the entire system all day long. San Diego's MTS Day Pass costs $5.00. Since the Metro Day Pass is $5.00 ($6.00 in 2 years), I think that is fair. To enforce this, I think the honor system would work better than the gates.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jul 1, 2007 21:02:53 GMT -8
BART has turnstiles and distance based fairs. With those card readers, it actually works pretty well. I think DC has the same thing. Think about this, instead of having a whole group of police officers with no turnstiles, you can have just 1 at each station, and then have those left over to go on the trains. The number of required police officers would go down so that more could go to the streets, and Metro would save money. Seems like a win win to me.
This study just needs to determine whether or not the turnstiles and distance based fairs will lose Metro money or help them get more money. Most likely the turnstiles will go in, I don't see how you can lose money on that. The distance based fare, though, is another story.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Jul 1, 2007 23:12:45 GMT -8
"Perhaps a better idea is to budget more police ticket checkpoints for each line (police wait on the platform and check each train that enters) and police staffed at the entrances/exits of select stations as the "living" gates."
Nick, I couldn't agree more. Between homeland security and fare-checking, a solid police presence probably makes for the best and most secure system.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Jul 2, 2007 7:35:11 GMT -8
A distance based fare system would work nicely considering that the Foothill Gold Line may be built that will have some riders travelling 30 miles + one-way. San Diego's distance based honor fare system is the way to go for LA because of it's simplicity and that it doesn't require as much infrastructure as the gates.
But in addition to that our rail system should allow free transfers between lines so that this would eliminate the guessing as to where to place the gates.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jul 2, 2007 10:43:59 GMT -8
The thing that works so great about having gates and a distance based fare is that it is so simple. All we need is a card that you put a certain amount of money on. You then go to where you want to go, and if there isn't enough there, just load more onto the card. This kind of system would work great with TAP, if Metro is serious about using that.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jul 2, 2007 15:14:12 GMT -8
Distance based fares are nothing new--Pacific Electric used them, but they had conductors to collect fares and tickets on their suburban and interurban trains. The old RTD used them in the 60's on many of the bus lines. It's not a new concept. It does make bus or train travel a bit more complicated--right now one just buys an all-day pass and it's good everywhere. If fare zones are going to be used for rail service only, it just means reprogramming the ticket machines. If zone fares will also apply to buses, it can slow down service when the operators have to explain to visitors and infrequent transit riders how much it will cost to get where they want to go, and then the passenger has to pull out the appropriate exact fare. One of the things that makes automobile drivers stay in their cars and not try transit is the attitude of "I don't want to feel ignorant or stupid when I pay the fare."
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jul 2, 2007 18:54:11 GMT -8
The thing that works so great about having gates and a distance based fare is that it is so simple. All we need is a card that you put a certain amount of money on. You then go to where you want to go, and if there isn't enough there, just load more onto the card. This kind of system would work great with TAP, if Metro is serious about using that. I don't see it as simple. How is it simple to install fare gates on the street running light rail stations? And if they don't install the gates there - and considering that we won't have the presence of fare inspectors because we're relying on the gates - do the people boarding at these stations just get a free ride? What about fare gates on the gold and blue lines? The elevated, freeway, and subway stations are easy, but what about regular stations like Highland Park? Compton? I guess that they can build a fence along the platform, but it's not entirely easy. As for the fares, Metro and other municipal agencies have spent lots of time, effort, and money into making transitions between various agencies as seemless as possible. Like TAP and the EZPass. How do you coordinate inter-agency distance based fares? If Foothill Transit decides against distance based fares are their passengers not allowed to transfer to Metro? How do distance based fares on buses, subways, and buses+subways even work? Maybe there's a max. amount? I have so many questions...
|
|
|
Post by whitmanlam on Jul 2, 2007 19:36:35 GMT -8
I think Nick has a point. The Metro budget as stretched thin as it is, needs to spend more money on Security.
That money should be spent on more Surveillance cameras, bomb sniffing dogs, anti crime, and anti terror officers
..... not fare evasion enforcement.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jul 2, 2007 20:55:13 GMT -8
The thing that works so great about having gates and a distance based fare is that it is so simple. All we need is a card that you put a certain amount of money on. You then go to where you want to go, and if there isn't enough there, just load more onto the card. This kind of system would work great with TAP, if Metro is serious about using that. I don't see it as simple. How is it simple to install fare gates on the street running light rail stations? And if they don't install the gates there - and considering that we won't have the presence of fare inspectors because we're relying on the gates - do the people boarding at these stations just get a free ride? What about fare gates on the gold and blue lines? The elevated, freeway, and subway stations are easy, but what about regular stations like Highland Park? Compton? I guess that they can build a fence along the platform, but it's not entirely easy. As for the fares, Metro and other municipal agencies have spent lots of time, effort, and money into making transitions between various agencies as seemless as possible. Like TAP and the EZPass. How do you coordinate inter-agency distance based fares? If Foothill Transit decides against distance based fares are their passengers not allowed to transfer to Metro? How do distance based fares on buses, subways, and buses+subways even work? Maybe there's a max. amount? I have so many questions... I meant that it would be easy for the Red Line. Of course it would be hard for the light rail lines, but it could be done if they wanted to. I think that the study will find that distance based fares will only work for rail. It's just too hard to do with bus.
|
|
|
Post by Elson on Jul 3, 2007 2:27:06 GMT -8
Not necessarily an endorsement of distance-based fares, but something to think about: Our Metro Rail system today is slightly larger than BART was when our Metro Rail system first broke ground in the mid 1980s.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jul 3, 2007 8:29:25 GMT -8
Not necessarily an endorsement of distance-based fares, but something to think about: Our Metro Rail system today is slightly larger than BART was when our Metro Rail system first broke ground in the mid 1980s. BART is much more commuter railish than our system. I hope that's not where we're headed.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jul 3, 2007 8:41:53 GMT -8
I don't see it as simple. How is it simple to install fare gates on the street running light rail stations? And if they don't install the gates there - and considering that we won't have the presence of fare inspectors because we're relying on the gates - do the people boarding at these stations just get a free ride? What about fare gates on the gold and blue lines? The elevated, freeway, and subway stations are easy, but what about regular stations like Highland Park? Compton? I guess that they can build a fence along the platform, but it's not entirely easy. As for the fares, Metro and other municipal agencies have spent lots of time, effort, and money into making transitions between various agencies as seemless as possible. Like TAP and the EZPass. How do you coordinate inter-agency distance based fares? If Foothill Transit decides against distance based fares are their passengers not allowed to transfer to Metro? How do distance based fares on buses, subways, and buses+subways even work? Maybe there's a max. amount? I have so many questions... I meant that it would be easy for the Red Line. Of course it would be hard for the light rail lines, but it could be done if they wanted to. I think that the study will find that distance based fares will only work for rail. It's just too hard to do with bus. Okay, but what good would it do to just do the red line if you can transfer from the blue/gold/expo lines without passing through fare control? I agree that just using distance based fares on rail would be easier, but that goes against everything that we have been trying to accomplish up to this point with integration of MTA rail, bus and muni bus lines. It seems like it will be complicated, but maybe not. We'll have to see what comes out of the study. The study will also evaluate putting fare gates on the Orange and Silver bus lines in case anyone missed that.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Jul 3, 2007 9:40:04 GMT -8
I meant that it would be easy for the Red Line. Of course it would be hard for the light rail lines, but it could be done if they wanted to. I think that the study will find that distance based fares will only work for rail. It's just too hard to do with bus. Okay, but what good would it do to just do the red line if you can transfer from the blue/gold/expo lines without passing through fare control? I agree that just using distance based fares on rail would be easier, but that goes against everything that we have been trying to accomplish up to this point with integration of MTA rail, bus and muni bus lines. It seems like it will be complicated, but maybe not. We'll have to see what comes out of the study. The study will also evaluate putting fare gates on the Orange and Silver bus lines in case anyone missed that. With Honor based systems and the upcoming integration of the Tap Cards the machines could be programmed where all the rider needs to input is their starting point and destination station (just like Metrolink) and their ticket/ receipt prints out. Same thing can be done with the tap cards. With this set-up more simpler yet distinct station naming convention should be looked at. To eliminate having Two stations named Crenshaw when Expo is built. In terms of a distance based fare, In my mind, a simple 2 or 3 zone set-up for rail is all that maybe needed. A base fare within a 7 mile distance. Express Zone 1" fare for between 7 to 15 mile trip. Anything above 15 miles that could be a "Express Zone 2" or introduce a Zone 3 for longer routes over 25 miles.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jul 3, 2007 10:43:16 GMT -8
How about this. Distance based fares on all rail lines because people go furthest on those and usually not buses. Fare gates on the Red Line only because it is easy to implement and it gets the highest numbers. Bus fares will remain the same, and monthly passes will work everywhere.
But if Metro wants simplicity, then it will not make any changes. Right now, I thin they're looking for more revenue and wouldn't mind losing a little bit of simplicity.
|
|
|
Post by whitmanlam on Jul 3, 2007 11:13:59 GMT -8
What about Rapid Buses ? Shouldn't distance based fares be implemented on those ? I've seen people travel very far on the Wilshire Rapid bus 720.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jul 3, 2007 11:27:21 GMT -8
How would it be implemented? It already takes long enough to get people onto those crowded buses, do we have to slow them down even more?
|
|
|
Post by erict on Jul 3, 2007 11:45:18 GMT -8
and downtown should be free in this zone system.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Jul 3, 2007 13:49:47 GMT -8
How would it be implemented? It already takes long enough to get people onto those crowded buses, do we have to slow them down even more? For Rapid Buses the only thing that will work is have pre-paid fare machines at each Rapid Stop and or integrate Fare machines into local establishments (Transit Centers, Newsstands, Coffee Shops, Supermarkets) But for Rapid Buses that will be more cumbersome than it's worth. It's easier on Express Buses and Rail because there is a speed and convenience factor involved that can be marketed. Right now they currently have Express zone fares on the El Monte and Harbor Transitways. The driver issues the zone checks and collect them major points. This process can be streamlined a little bit with the Busways by having roving fare checkers on these transitways checking at various points inside the bus and or inside the bus station. When still they can double Metro Information guides and can possibly help with rider/fare/navigation information.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jul 14, 2007 16:54:36 GMT -8
I don't have a link, but according to Kymberleigh Richards of SOCATA this study was voted down by the board by one vote. According to her for the moment fare gates and distance based fares are a dead issue.
HOORAY!! W00T!!11!
|
|
|
Post by dasubergeek on Jul 15, 2007 20:04:17 GMT -8
I'm glad. BART pisses me off with its 70s fare gates and the tickets that have to be printed, can't be loaded on an RFID card. Fare gates are expensive -- use that money, particularly on the Ghetto Blue, for more police. I've been on the Blue Line four times, and twice seen crimes committed in the car I was riding in.
Ah, for a comprehensive transit system with an RFID system, like the Octopus in Hong Kong... or the Oyster in London.
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Jul 15, 2007 20:43:46 GMT -8
I agree. People were frowning me when I informed them that I rode the Red Line from North Hollywood to Union Station after dark on a Saturday. I think they're watching too much television, but I do agree the rail lines need increased police security. The cameras on the trains, I think, have helped me feel more secure when riding the rails, especially at night, but I think a better police presence would help greatly. Anyone who has waited for a train in the Union Station wait room recently, probably has been asked to show their ticket by security. That wouldn't hurt if LA's rail stations offered the same security.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jul 15, 2007 21:24:20 GMT -8
...use that money, particularly on the Ghetto Blue, for more police. I've been on the Blue Line four times, and twice seen crimes committed in the car I was riding in. I've ridden the blue line hundreds of times and if I've seen even one crime I don't recall it. Of course I've seen fare evaders, graffiti, and even fights, but I've never seen someone getting robbed or anything like that. You do sometimes see a group of gang bangers get on and that can be a little unnerving, but it's far and away mostly just working people going back and forth to work.
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 5, 2007 22:42:38 GMT -8
Yeah, it was for the moment...now... .......................................... Metro Reconsiders Fare Gates at StationsThe Metro Board reintroduced a proposal to install gating at Metro Rail stations, hired a new rail general manager, approved a new round of advertising to appear on buses and trains, and voted for Metro Freeway Patrol Service at its July 26 meeting. Board member Ara Najarian introduced a request to bring back a gating feasibility analysis that was rejected by the Board in June. However, Najarian believed that Metro staff “presented a compelling argument” why the matter should be reconsidered. Regardless, the Board voted to spend nearly $1 million for a barrier gate analysis that would employ TAP technology and the upcoming Universal Fare Structure. Source: TTC Newsletter 8/2007 www.thetransitcoalition.us/NewsLetterPaper/NL200708v10a.pdf........................... As I posted earlier, I favor a stronger honor system than fare gates and believe that officers posted at stations should be charged to not only check tickets, but to keep the system safe from terrorism. Union Station has a strong system going now with crosstrained security guards making sure everybody waiting in the station are ticketed passengers. As I said, if gates do go up, they have to have a good design appearance to match the theme of each Metro station; otherwise the stations may end up looking very ugly or too jail-ish, which may have a negative impact on the community. For example, the Hollywood/Vine Station with its film-themed station should have a barrier appearance that relates to film. This can be as simple as having regular gates with decorative clapboards attached to them.
|
|
|
Post by Elson on Aug 16, 2007 13:45:47 GMT -8
You do sometimes see a group of gang bangers get on and that can be a little unnerving, but it's far and away mostly just working people going back and forth to work. Gang bangers would rather drive
|
|
|
Post by nicksantangelo on Aug 16, 2007 16:59:41 GMT -8
I agree with Elson.Took the Blue Line for two years and never one incident, aside from the odd fare evader. Fell asleep a few times- my head landed on the shoulder of the person next to me- embarrassing for me but they didn't seem scared, just amused.
That said, I have taken the Red Line from The Pig and Whistle (Highland) home to Mt Wash a few times late at night (midnight or so). Let's just say my fellow commuters are a diverse, eclectic lot, not dangerous but not shrinking violets either. Hey, that's the Hollywood gig. Then again, those are my experiences.
|
|
|
Post by rennagata92 on Aug 30, 2007 13:29:59 GMT -8
everybodies talking about terrorism but its not going to make the sligtest difference i think osama bin laden wouldnt mind paying $1.25 to blow LA up
|
|
|
Post by Elson on Aug 30, 2007 23:35:27 GMT -8
everybodies talking about terrorism but its not going to make the sligtest difference i think osama bin laden wouldnt mind paying $1.25 to blow LA up LOL, Osama would rather blow up a few freeway interchanges.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Dec 1, 2007 8:44:46 GMT -8
Looks like it's back on. I still think that this is a big waste of money. It likely won't add any revenue and will be very expensive. MTA vote to install gates targets railway fare cheats By Jason Song, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
November 30, 2007
Jake Varghese bought his $5 day pass yesterday even though he knows many of his fellow passengers take advantage of the honor code on Los Angeles' subway system and ride illegally for free.
"I see it all the time. My thinking is they'll eventually get caught," said Varghese, 32, who commutes on the Red Line from his downtown home to his job in Hollywood several times a week. Varghese may soon have more company at the ticketing booth. Metropolitan Transportation Authority board members voted 11-1 Thursday to take the first step toward installing 275 gates on the Red and Green lines and at strategic light rail stations.
The move would be a major cultural shift for L.A.'s rail system, which was designed to have a more open feel than those in eastern cities, with their gates, turnstiles and barriers.
But the freedom has come at a price for MTA's coffers. About 5% of weekday passengers on city subways, light rail lines and Orange Line buses ride without paying, costing the city about $5.5 million annually, according to a recent MTA report.
The proposed plan could bring an extra $6.77 million annually in recovered fares and savings, according to a study.
Richard Katz was the only board member who voted against the measure. He questioned the study's findings and worried that the cost of implementing the program could outweigh the benefits.
"This is a great boondoggle waiting to cost us a ton of money down the road," he said.
Los Angeles is one of the only cities in the nation to run an honor system for transit fares. While they are not required to pass through turnstiles, riders must show a valid ticket if they are approached by a sheriff's deputy.
But that doesn't often happen.
"You see people do it all the time," said Vincent Ravel, a 30-year-old courier who uses the Red Line every day.
Ravel admits he took the subway without paying several times, until he got caught several months ago and had to pay a $250 fine.
"I pay every time now," he said.
Planners did not originally install turnstiles because they wanted to encourage ridership and reduce operating costs.
But as ridership has climbed -- about 7.5 million people used the Metro rail system or Orange Line busway last month -- financial losses have mounted.
Passengers buy one-way passes, daylong tickets or monthly passes. Using the latter two, riders can travel as far as they want. MTA officials also want to explore charging distance-based rates, which is nearly impossible to do without a turnstile system.
Turnstiles could also cut down on the number of sheriff's deputies needed to patrol the stations and lines, officials said.
The system would cost up to $30 million to install and about $1 million a year to maintain. The gates would be installed at the stations requiring minimum renovations, and would be based on smart-card technology that would check 84% of passengers, according to the report.
The plan approved Thursday calls on transit officials to develop a plan for installing gates, which the board would consider in January.
"While it was conceivable that an 'honor system' was effective to control crowds, ensure public safety and security plus successfully enforce fare payment 20 years ago, such a system is simply inapplicable in Los Angeles County today," wrote directors Yvonne B. Burke and John Fasana in their motion.
The Green Line, which runs between Norwalk and Redondo Beach, has the highest percentage of scofflaws, nearly 6% on weekdays and 8% on Sundays, according to an October MTA study.
Nearly 4.5% of riders on the Red Line, which runs between Union Station downtown and North Hollywood, did not pay or paid the incorrect amount on weekdays; between 6% and 7% did so on weekends.
Passengers seem to agree that fees need to be enforced, especially since prices rose in May. Passengers pay $5 for a day pass and $1.25 for a one-way ticket.
Some passengers said they enjoy the honor system and don't want to negotiate turnstiles, but see no other alternative.
"I think it would be a pain to get to work, but if that's what it takes to have the system work, it's unfortunate" but necessary, Varghese said.
Some riders said they didn't see a need for more enforcement.
"It's never been a problem, I always see people paying" for their tickets, said Jennifer Yang as she took the Gold Line to downtown Thursday from her Pasadena home.
The Gold Line has the lowest rate of fare evasion, with only 3% during the week, according to the study.
Link
|
|