|
Post by nickv on Aug 28, 2008 23:02:14 GMT -8
From what I heard from newspapers, the trains are packed (sometimes SRO) during rush hours and on hot weekends. A good percentage of riders are also students. Ridership should grow once the housing economy recovers and TOD developers come back and build around the station stops.
One of the reasons that NCTD is in such a money jam is that the agency is very dependent (and I mean very dependent) on state funding and sales taxes; both have seen a decline. I have already suggested to NCTD to lobby for more local funding from developer fees, private/public partnerships, city support, and parking toll revenue.
|
|
|
Post by wad on Aug 29, 2008 4:25:14 GMT -8
From what I heard from newspapers, the trains are packed (sometimes SRO) during rush hours and on hot weekends. A good percentage of riders are also students. Ridership should grow once the housing economy recovers and TOD developers come back and build around the station stops. Ridership is what now, about 6,000? Granted, Line 320 never looked this full, but Line 302 did when it ran from Oceanside to Escondido. Also, the problem with "transit oriented development" is that San Diego County did too good of a job. Those transit centers are in great locations, and they were developed when they were just bus hubs. That hand's been played. Oceanside is in a great spot near the ocean. Vista has a big shopping center. San Marcos has Palomar College, and Escondido is west of its downtown, which looks rather similar to Uptown Whittier. The stops named for streets could use some help, though. They only seem like places to transfer to a bus and not much else.
|
|
|
Post by wad on Aug 29, 2008 4:35:57 GMT -8
The Sprinter debacle is so fun to watch. A fat officer telling people not to take pictures is just the icing on the cake. It was a non-event, really. I only had a problem with one officer. To put it in contrast, I was also taking photos at Oceanside, which is heavily policed. The only thing an officer told me was that I could not step down on the road where buses turned to get a better shot. And remember, civilians could ride through Camp Pendleton on a bus. I have a photo of a sign warning that civvies must have ID if the bus crosses a checkpoint. Also, no other transit employee, or San Diego Police Department officers, cared that I was taking photos.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Aug 29, 2008 11:51:16 GMT -8
Volunteering sounds cool, but at this point in my life I'd only do it if there's an opportunity for it to lead to a real job with the transit agency. For example, I would volunteer with Metrolink while I'm working on my BA. Once I finish school and apply for a job at Metrolink, I would hope they would look at me more favorably for volunteering with them. I would hope other transit agencies and companies that work in transportation would look at me more favorably as well, for my volunteer work would show how dedicated I am to transit. You know, like an internship or something. and suspect photography (ie. taking pictures of the security cameras, under the trains, staff, etc) is not permitted at all. It's all part of security theater. Can't take a picture of the underside of the train? But I'm into mechanical stuff and things of that nature and yet I'm the suspect. I want to see what's doing down there.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Aug 29, 2008 17:44:03 GMT -8
Unless there is a municipal code that outlaws photography it's not illegal. They also don't have anything on their website about photography being prohibited.
I'm not certain that transit agencies can stop people that use transit from engaging in legal behavior. There are actually laws that prevent things like smoking, skateboarding, eating, fare evasion, etc. There is no law against photography. But I guess that if they did make a big deal about it I wouldn't have a problem taking pictures from public property. Like the sidewalk.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Aug 30, 2008 0:34:04 GMT -8
The subject of various flavors of "security personnel" hassling photographers has been aired on the Trainorders.com website ad infinitem. If a person is on "company property", which usually includes stations, platforms, rail rights-of-way, etc., he or she can be challenged by officers or even operating personnel. Taking photos from public sidewalks, streets (and presumably unrelated property, such as shopping centers) is beyond the transit agency or railway's control, and there's not much they can do about it. Taking closeups of equipment could be prohibited--security and even industrial espionage issues come into play. Concern and even hostility about photography is nothing new--back in the 1980's I was in San Jose taking photos of the light rail construction, and a guy in PG&E hard hat gave me some static about photographing a utility relocation job in the middle of 1st St.--right in front of the Court House, no less! What was even more interesting was that I worked for So. Calif. Edison at the time, and was tempted to say, "I'm from SCE, and we're proud of what we do!" Back during World War II, some railfans were taking photos of an old interurban carbarn--and found themselves talking to the police chief or the justice of the peace trying to convince them that they weren't enemy spies.
|
|
|
Post by wad on Aug 30, 2008 3:12:01 GMT -8
Spokker, Metro and OCTA are agencies that do internships.
I'm not sure whether they are paid, but even the internships are treated through the competitive civil service channels. You have to test for the internships.
I think Metro gives employment credit for internships if applying for the job, but the problem is that most of the office jobs you've interned for are journey level. You'd have to learn the ropes at a contractor, for instance.
You could get work with First Transit or Veolia, both of which have several Southern California contracts. The downside is that when a contract changes hands, you'd have to reapply for your job and start at the bottom.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Aug 30, 2008 8:04:35 GMT -8
Bob,
Just from non-transit general photography I know that there are an awful lot of people that are under the mistaken impression that they have to give their permission to be photographed in public. Not that I have any interest in photographing people that don't want to be, but the law is that when you are in public you have no expectation of privacy. Logically there are many security personnel that operate under this same mistaken impression. Very occasionally security guards will tell me that photography isn't allowed on LACMTA property, but it's been a couple of years since a LASD or Metro employee has said anything. And I take pictures in plain view, right in front of LASD and employees.
I did have a major incident 2 years ago where a Sheriff's deputy went so far as to handcuff me and illegally search me at 7th/metro after telling me that pictures weren't allowed. He also gave me an $800 ticket that was a huge PITA even though it was eventually dismissed when he didn't show up for the trial.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Aug 30, 2008 9:49:59 GMT -8
Spokker, Metro and OCTA are agencies that do internships. Thanks. I've looked into it before and I'm planning on doing one next semester.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Dec 30, 2010 20:55:42 GMT -8
I'm not quite sure if the rules changed, but I was informed back in January that family or "fun" picture taking of the Sprinter or at Stations is okay, commercial photography required a permit, and suspect photography (ie. taking pictures of the security cameras, under the trains, staff, etc) is not permitted at all. I know this is an old thread and NCTD has absolutely nothing on their web site about photography, so if this is indeed the rule, riders can't even find out about it. Even the ordinance says nothing about photography. gonctd.com/pdf_ordinances/Ordinance%203%20-%20Rules%20and%20Regs%20Arrest%20Citations.pdf
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Dec 31, 2010 15:21:42 GMT -8
If not having a rule means that the rule is whatever the police officer/ security officer/ law enforcement says it is, then obviously a rule needs to be put into place.
The U.S. Constitution did not include a right to free speech UNTIL people pointed out that one was probably needed.
I'm no lawyer, but I would imagine such a rule would need to say something like "Photography is allowed, unless it violates any of the other security measures." I never try to make a nuisance of myself when I'm photographing, and always try to obey the rules to the best of my knowledge.
Certainly, this problem of overzealous cops is not limited to the Sprinter. I'm thinking something like Sprinter could be useful at some Cal HSR stops.
|
|