Route 15

Hey, I'm all for lobbying for better transit, streetcars, expanded rail network and more frequent service. Sign me up. Oh wait, we don't have any real lobbies do we? I guess DVARP is one, but we still get roadblocked everytime we go up against SEPTA. They listen to an extent, then when it comes time to do things we always come up short.

We have alot of great ideas and points here, but it doesen't mean much if we all don't get up from our computers and do something. Unfortunately in this day and age it seems like no matter what the issue, no one has the time, motivation or money to get involved in issues and make a difference. If any of you have seen Farenheit 911 yet, you know the feeling you get about Bush after you leave the theater. Yet there are no mass demonstrations or calls for impeachment or criminal prosecution against this idiot. Same thing with SEPTA.

Irish Chieftain wrote:Let me remind everyone that POP requires TVMs all over the system.

No it doesn't. You can use ordinary paper transfers as fare receipts, and ordinary fareboxes for surface vehicles. Passengers with a pass or transfer may board either at front or rear doors, while those with tokens or cash board at the front and deposit their fare as usual. They get a receipt which they must hold on to for inspection.

That's not how POP works. No POP system operates with fareboxes.

You do need TVMs all over the system, because not all passengers are transfer passengers.

Irish Chieftain wrote:That's not how POP works. No POP system operates with fareboxes.

You do need TVMs all over the system, because not all passengers are transfer passengers.

It's not that all passengers are transfer passengers. I think what he is proposing is a hybrid fare collection system between standard and POP. People with passes or transfers from another vehicle board via either door but don't need to show their pass unless requested by an inspection agent. People who need to pay by cash enter in the front door and pay into the farebox where it issues automatically (or the operator issues) a fare receipt <i>good for that vehicle only</i> which can be produced to an inspection agent making rounds once that passenger is seated. If the person pays for a transfer, then the fare receipt can have that printed on it as well. Basically, the idea is not having a farebox so much as having an "onboard TVM" as weird as it sounds, the theory behind it does work.

I'm not aware of any system that uses this type of fare collection though; are there any?

-asg

amusing erudition wrote:

Irish Chieftain wrote:That's not how POP works. No POP system operates with fareboxes.

You do need TVMs all over the system, because not all passengers are transfer passengers.

It's not that all passengers are transfer passengers. I think what he is proposing is a hybrid fare collection system between standard and POP. People with passes or transfers from another vehicle board via either door but don't need to show their pass unless requested by an inspection agent. People who need to pay by cash enter in the front door and pay into the farebox where it issues automatically (or the operator issues) a fare receipt <i>good for that vehicle only</i> which can be produced to an inspection agent making rounds once that passenger is seated. If the person pays for a transfer, then the fare receipt can have that printed on it as well. Basically, the idea is not having a farebox so much as having an "onboard TVM" as weird as it sounds, the theory behind it does work.

I'm not aware of any system that uses this type of fare collection though; are there any?

It's done this way in Europe and elsewhere. Closest example I've seen is Ottawa. And Amusing has described it pretty well. If you care to localize the concept further, imagine that the farebox on the vehicle will issue you a ticket/receipt for $2.00 cash or a token, while the fixed TVMs will issue you one for $1.30 cash or a token.

The system also makes the fare structure a little more user-friendly in several ways. One, you can allow free transfers up to the time limit on the receipt (typically two hours), so it encourages more efficient use of the system (with the current 60c transfer, passengers typically take long bus rides for one token rather than switching to more efficient rail for the trunk haul. Two, you can allow and even encourage round-tripping for short trips (i.e. going there and back on one fare). Presently, charging two full fares for such trips discourages ridership. And three, you reduce the need for exact change for zone fares, since you can pay it all up front and obtain a receipt good for the necessary zones.

POP speeds up surface service because passengers can be loaded and unloaded faster. And it's convenient for subway riders because you can open up the stations and let passengers access the platform at either end where stairways to the surface are, rather than making everyone walk to the turnstiles at the middle of the station.

Irish Chieftain wrote:That's not how POP works. No POP system operates with fareboxes.

You do need TVMs all over the system, because not all passengers are transfer passengers.

What about SF MUNI? On their light rail lines inbound, you pay at the farebox and get a transfer that works as a POP.

The MUNI system works like that in all modes of transportation, be it bus, light rail or historic street car. You may board at any door with a transfer/fare receipt. They also stipulate that with a cash fare you MUST take the transfer/fare receipt. No options.

But, unlike SEPTA, MUNI does not run the commuter trains. You can go from a bus to the light rail to the street car with any transfer or pass. The SEPTA situation changes a POP system that works elsewhere because you have the byzantine fare system with the trains, trollies, EL/BSL AND busses. MUNI doesn't run the subway (BART) or the train (CalTrain). So, they can have a much simpler POP stragegy.

SEPTA could make a POP work. BUT, it would require a total fare structure restructure. (Um, which needs to be done anyhow.)

... but, all this requires work and we all know how SPETA likes that...

queenlnr8 wrote:SEPTA could make a POP work. BUT, it would require a total fare structure restructure. (Um, which needs to be done anyhow.)

... but, all this requires work and we all know how SEPTA likes that...

Not to mention it would open up some inconvenient issues for management, like lowering the transfer charge (which has on several occasions been raised by large amounts so the politically-sensitive token and TransPass rates wouldn't have to be increased as much) and implementing a more consistent zone system (i.e. zone fares within the city).

Ok, back to talking about the 15, SEPTA had (3) trolley cars operate to Madison loop (Port Richmond) today, 7/1/04. (2) Kawasaki's and (1) PCC. Signs indicated operator training.

I spoke with a bus/trolley operator on the 15 today and he said that SEPTA won the court case to change the traffic on 59th Street, which should clear the way for operation sometime..........................soon. He was thinking September, but hopefully sooner. I hope my mentioning this doesen't further jinx the return of the trolley. Last time I released info on the startup the whole thing got pushed back.

jfrey40535 wrote:Hey, I'm all for lobbying for better transit, streetcars, expanded rail network and more frequent service. Sign me up. Oh wait, we don't have any real lobbies do we? I guess DVARP is one, but we still get roadblocked everytime we go up against SEPTA. They listen to an extent, then when it comes time to do things we always come up short.

Did you consider approaching the SEPTA Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC)?

jfreey; What time of the day was this ?

I think the CAC is useless....I don't think it would be effective unless we had alot of people complaining and asking for the same thing, like expanded service.

Kevikens---this was around 12:00pm when the trolleys were out. I live near Madison loop, and am in the neighborhood most of the day, and this was the 1st time I saw a running trolley on Richmond Street, so I don't think its something they do often.

Just an observation, but they should have put a turning arrow on that light at Richmond & Allegheny. Its going to be a mess there with the trolley. The trolley will have to wait for all the cars making a left to go to I-95, and the passengers boarding will have to dodge cars that are going around the trolley that aren't making that left-hand turn.

Does anyone know if the trolleys wil NOT stop at intersections on Girard between Montgomery and Broad St that do not have those islands built in?

jfrey40535 wrote:Oh wait, we don't have any real lobbies do we?

Does this mean you're going to wait for someone else to start one...?

SEPRA- South Eastern Pennsylvania Rider's Association

Well Irish, Yes. Do most of us have time to get involved? Goto mid-day meetings? Unfortunately no. I've tried the letter writing thing before to local and state officials, but all you get out of that is some textbook answer. I as an individual as most of us here aren't jumping to do something. Sure, we're all talking about it and I'm sure there are a few here who are active in making a difference. If we had some kind of organized presence that would be a completely different story....say 100 of us showed up at Richmond & Allegheny with signs and posters and blocked the buses from passing while we demand accountability from SEPTA on the 15 folley, that would be something. That would get on the news and get people's attention.

Going to a board meeting and making a statement to a half-asleep service planner with loads of job security just doesen't sound effective to me. My impression is those meetings are for show, not action.