The whole debate over putting in turnstiles on SkyTrain has been boiling along for a couple of years now, with TransLink insisting for the most part that it’s not cost-effective (it would be more expensive to put them in and maintain them than the fares you recover) and the public + former minister Kevin Falcon, who just couldn’t stand the idea that punks were getting away with not paying their $2.50. (And it appeared to me that Vancouver was in the unfortunate position of being a middle-sized city, with no clearcut model on whether it should have turnstiles or not. Smaller cities almost never do, not worth the money. Big big cities always do, definitely worth the money. Vancouver stuck in the middle.)
I had a hard time keeping track of what was actually happening, but it appears from this morning’s announcement as though things really are moving along in that direction. News releases not my preferred mode of communication, but I know the transit junkies will love this.
TransLink selects companies to propose Smart Card / Faregate
system for transit
Three consortia that supply smart card electronic fare payment systems and faregates to some of the biggest transit operations in the world have qualified to submit proposals to supply a Smart Card and Faregate system for TransLink, to be in operation by the target date of first quarter of 2013. The three groups are:
Thales/Octopus International Projects – creator of the ‘Octopus Card’ used on Hong Kong’s transit service and supplier of similar systems in the Netherlands, Norway and Dubai.
Serco/Parkeon – who introduced a complete smart card program for Perth, Australia and have provided related systems to transit operations in Belgium, England and Dubai, as well as to the French national rail system, SNCF.
Cubic/IBM – whose systems include London’s ‘Oyster Card’ and systems for US transit agencies in Los Angeles, Atlanta, Miami-Dade, San Francisco plus Brisbane in Australia.
The three groups were among 10 that responded to TransLink’s ‘Request for Qualifications,’ a process that identifies suppliers with the technology and the track record to provide the systems and services needed. The next stage in the process will launch in June when these groups will be asked to develop formal proposals based on TransLink’s specific requirements.
The proposals received will be evaluated against qualifications, technical and financial criteria to identify the most cost and technically effective system for TransLink. A contract, that will include operations and maintenance of the system for 10 years, could be awarded later this year with work beginning in 2011.
Funding for the Smart Card / Faregate project includes $40 million from the provincial government and $30 million from the federal government’s Build Canada Fund. TransLink will cover the remaining costs.
TransLink CEO Ian Jarvis says, “Smart Cards will make our transit system easier to use for the customers and provide invaluable information that will help us maximize the efficiency and productivity of our fleets. Faregates will address the public’s long-standing concern with fare evasion on SkyTrain and will promote a greater sense of security,” he says.
TransLink’s smart card will be modeled after electronic fare payment systems in use around the world. Transit customers use a card with an electronic chip that they ‘load’ with funds to pay for their transit trips. In many of the world’s leading systems, customers tap their cards on special readers when they enter a transit vehicle or station and some systems also have customers ‘tag-off’ as they exit. The fare charged to their card can be based on the distance they travel, the time of day, the specific route or other factors.
In fact, smart cards will give TransLink more flexibility to structure the transit fare system to achieve a number of goals including increases in efficiency and ridership. In addition, smart cards generate a significant amount of valuable data on how customers use the transit network – information that TransLink will use to refine routes and schedules, or even to help determine the size of the buses needed at various places and times.
The introduction of an electronic fare payment system provides the opportunity to install Faregates in SkyTrain and SeaBus stations. Adding a gate or barrier to a Smart Card process is relatively simple and, in fact, the two systems complement each other. However, because most of the original Expo Line SkyTrain stations were never designed with the necessary space for Faregates, the overall project includes station modifications that will begin next year.
CEO Ian Jarvis says it was particularly gratifying to have all of the world leaders in Smart Card and Faregate technology express interest in putting TransLink’s new system in place. He adds, “We’re especially grateful to yet again have the financial support of the provincial government and the federal government in a project that will contribute so much to our ongoing drive to deliver efficiency, effectiveness and greater customer benefits.”
48 responses so far ↓
1 mezzanine // May 28, 2010 at 12:25 pm
Great news!
It will be interesting to see what happens to fares with smart cards. It makes no sense to pay a 2 zone fare if you are going from Joyce to Metrotown.
the faregates? well, its pros/cons are a whole other debate. when you think about it, the M-line and C-lines have been desinged to install the gates. so this has been on TL’s mind for some time now. at the very least, it will ensure we do get accurate trip counting and route data from the cards.
2 Chris // May 28, 2010 at 12:35 pm
I’m looking forward to smart cards – it will be convenient to load money onto a single card and not have to worry about bus tickets.
I just wish they would give up on the barrier idea. The province is catering to people who don’t understand basic math and who’s perception of fare evasion is much higher then reality. The economics of it are terrible and will only suck money out of the transit system.
Why aren’t we looking at the London DLR, which uses Oyster cards and the same Bombardier technology as SkyTrain with no faregates. Just terminals where you swipe in and out.
3 norm // May 28, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Octopus Card works like a charm
arrive at the airport or any station and buy a card. When you go home turn it in for a refund at the airport… if you keep it about a week everything is refunded… if you don’t there is a nominal charge… no ID, easy to “top up” and return when you leave the city, all in all very impressed…
Faregates…. Hong Kong has them…. Toky has them… New York has them… lets join the bigs…
4 Paul C // May 28, 2010 at 1:22 pm
I’m sitting on the fence in regards to fare gate.
But with smart cards I’m fully behind the idea and can’t wait to have them by yesterday.
5 Keith // May 28, 2010 at 1:58 pm
I hope the smart cards will charge for distance traveled, rather than zones. I would use transit more often if it did not cost so much to travel short distances.
Translink should also get rid of the monthly passes, which in my opinion are money losers.
6 Neil // May 28, 2010 at 2:08 pm
Another vote against gates, but totally in favour of smartcards. It surprised me when I moved here from London that this self-proclaimed ‘green capital of the world’ still used paper tickets.
Presumably Cubic/IBM will win this fake competition, since they designed the current ticketing system. Seems odd RFID cards weren’t built into the Canada Line in the first place.
7 jesse // May 28, 2010 at 3:14 pm
Smartcards are a great idea. Singapore is a great example of this working well. I’m biased because my commute is relatively short.
8 Denis // May 28, 2010 at 3:45 pm
When we lived in the outskirts of Montreal around 50 years ago the way you got over the bridge was to hand some money to a guy. We soon learned to simply give him something , always less than the official fare, and move along. They finally got a bit smarter and the money went into a basket not the guys pocket. Revenue went way up. The story was people actually paid to get the job prior to the basket. Nobody should be scamming a transit system and the clown who brought in sky train should have known better that to go cheap and hope the honor system would work, Now to sort out the mess, will cost more. But get it done. The British PM’s wife, an acting judge was caught jumping over the turnstile in London as she had no change. Great international story for sure.
9 Ian // May 28, 2010 at 8:54 pm
I’m betting on Cubic as well. With Dobell doing their lobbying plus their Liberal campaign donations they should be the favourites.
10 amazed // May 28, 2010 at 11:21 pm
uhhm a lot of the Toronto big city stations have walk on with no need to show a ticket etc. Just to clarify on Frances statement that big cities always put in pay barriers.
unless something has changed since 2003 there
11 voony // May 29, 2010 at 12:49 am
smartcard is certainly good, but doesn’t need to come with faregate which is bad (but could be nevertheless justified by distance based pricing)
here is in a picture what the former french head of state think of turnstiles:
http://voony.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/turnstile-the-french-take/
12 Norman // May 29, 2010 at 8:40 am
Good news. I am sick of putting up with bad behaviour on transit from people who walk on without paying. You would think they’d be grateful for a free ride and keep quiet, but no, it’s an opportunity to have a captive audience. At least this way, they’ll have to pay admission to their own show.
13 AnnetteF // May 29, 2010 at 9:10 am
I seem to remeber hearing in previous discussions on this issue that fare gates are not expected to be cost-effective from the point of catching those who do not pay, but are expected to reduce crime in and around skytrain stations. The theory being that those who commit petty and perhaps not so petty crimes in around the stations and then hop the train to get away, may be less likely to do so.
14 Michael Geller // May 29, 2010 at 2:35 pm
I didn’t see any reference to the potential use of the ‘smart cards’ on buses and taxis. Hopefully that will be part of the plan since it sure works well here in Shanghai. Other cities also have similar systems.
If we really are going to be the greenest……it’s time for us to start thinking about taxis as part of the transportation network. I would like to see the increased attention that’s been given to improving SkyTrain and the bicycle network to to improving the taxi system in Metro. I say Metro since as long as a taxi licensed in Vancouver has to drive back empty from Surrey, and vice-versa, we are not being very sustainable, or smart.
We also have to instill a ‘taxi culture’ in our city. Allowing the use of the smart cards in taxis is one way of starting to do this.
As for barriers or no barriers, there’s no question which way to go, based on the experiences of London, Singapore, Hong Kong and Shanghai……
15 voony // May 29, 2010 at 8:46 pm
Michael,
does is the experience of London, Singapore, Hong Kong and Shanghai……
is to have the barriers to be funded by the taxpayer?
16 Jon Petrie // May 29, 2010 at 11:53 pm
Smart cards on buses will hopefully speed up loading and thus shorten trips … swipe and go rather than wait for a mechanical swallow and spit up of a paper ticket.
And maybe the same smart card could be used to pay for parking, telephone calls from public phones (a diminishing important social resource) in transit facilities …
17 Michael Geller // May 30, 2010 at 7:16 am
Voony, I’m told that the experience of these cities is that barriers are absolutely necessary, and that over the longer term, the cost is more than offset by the increased revenues.
18 voony // May 30, 2010 at 9:49 am
“the cost is more than offset by the increased revenues”.
If so, why Vancouver need taxpayer money to install it ?
19 Chris // May 30, 2010 at 10:02 am
Michael – you’re smarter then that. The math just doesn’t add up. If you had a problem with someone stealing your newspaper in the morning, you wouldn’t pay someone $10/day watch it. The increased operating costs of barriers will be higher then any offsets from increased revenue, and that’s ignoring the initial capital costs.
Please stop using London as a reason for installing barriers here. The newest part of London’s transport system, the Docklands Light Rail, which uses SkyTrain technology and will serve most of the 2012 Olympic sites, is barrier free. And there is no plan to install barriers on it.
20 mezzanine // May 30, 2010 at 11:28 am
@ Chris, but Docklands LR is a separate system from the underground and has a daily ridership of only 100,000. DLR also serves the area between the city(financial centre) and Canary Wharf, serving a predominantly gentrified area of financial workers. [1] Faregates may not be the best choice for enforcement in that context.
I’m with AnnettteF and Geller on this one. Now that drivers no longer enforce fares, I think that fare evasion demographics and patterns have changed. Anecdotally, I see a lot more people not paying the paying the fare on the bus (I take the #501 and #375 in Surrey/langley).
The deterrent aspect is also not mentioned. 12 skytrain attendants were assaulted last year [2](the ones that are unarmed and cannot arrest). Gates may prevent this from happening, and at the very least, provide a highly visible and enforceable check point for skytrain staff.
21 mezzanine // May 30, 2010 at 12:28 pm
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docklands_Light_Railway
[2] http://www.bclocalnews.com/surrey_area/cloverdalereporter/news/80648252.html
22 Chris // May 30, 2010 at 2:11 pm
@Mezzanie
Other then Canary Wharf, I wouldn’t call much of east London “gentrified”. I worked in Canary Wharf for 4 months and the area serviced by the DLR was grittier then the Brixton borough I lived in.
It’s anecdotal evidence like Mezzanie’s that is the root problem here. Many people think fare evasion is worse then it is. No one wants to think they’re the only one paying their fare share, but every comprehensive study has shown fare evasion to be a small problem. It’s a lot like the province going after welfare cheats. Good optics, bad economics. What angers me is that is wasting limited money that could be spent increasing service.
23 mezzanine // May 30, 2010 at 2:51 pm
@ Chris, my bad as I personally never rode DLR, I can only go by what wikipedia says:
“However, Docklands was close to the City of London and this made it an attractive secondary office location as well as a possible site for riverside residential development to accommodate the phenomenon of yuppies, the young high income single person households created by new jobs in the financial services industry. ”
But you are right about ppl’s perception of fare evansion on skytrain. there is a fair number of people who believe that faregates will make a large impact on evasion, no matter what study you show them. And their support region wide is important for further transit expansion thru-out the GVRD.
From Tom Prendergast, former TL CEO:
“The public firmly believes that fare evasion on SkyTrain is higher than has been measured in past audits. The belief that the system is losing revenue due to fare evasion is very often cited as a reason not to support additional revenue measures needed to sustain and expand the transportation system.
The decision by the federal and provincial governments to fund fare gates on SkyTrain will assure the public that revenue losses will be minimized in the future. In addition, people will have confidence that their current and future contributions through fares and taxes will generate the maximum in service and improvements.”
http://www.translink.ca/en/About-TransLink/Media/2009/April/Timing-is-right-for-fare-gates-on-SkyTrain.aspx
24 Chris Keam // May 30, 2010 at 3:16 pm
There’s all-door boarding on the 99-B, so clearly Translink isn’t THAT worried about fare evasion.
For the price of fare gates one could hire James Earl Jones to narrate a Scorcese-directed advert written by Steven Spielberg to explain that fare evasion is the least of the system’s faults and put it in high rotation in prime time for the next decade. And then we wouldn’t have to spend even more dollars ripping them out when we realize that transit might as well be free and turnstiles just slow down entry and exit into stations.
Jeezus, are we really spending money to reinforce erroneous impression by an uniformed populace? Talk about a non-solution!
25 Chris Keam // May 30, 2010 at 3:16 pm
should read ‘impressions’.
26 voony // May 30, 2010 at 4:58 pm
~100,000…what is more or less on average what carries a line of the skytrain system
there is effectively no barrier on the DLR as on most of the lines carrying similar number of people obeying to economic rational rather to populist politicians:
““The public firmly believes that fare evasion on SkyTrain is higher than has been measured in past audits.” so -we satisfy the public- is definition of demagogy.
at the end, as I mention in my blog (updated), there is no clear evidence that barriers drastically reduce the fare evasion and no evidence that it increase security.
27 Michael Geller // May 30, 2010 at 5:11 pm
“The increased operating costs of barriers will be higher then any offsets from increased revenue, and that’s ignoring the initial capital costs”.
Chris, you may be an expert in transit operations…I’m not. That’s why I referenced other people in Hong Kong, Singapore and London who advised me the system was dependent on a gated network of stops.
I have been using a system with barriers everyday for the past week, and I don’t see any significant operating costs associated with the barriers. There is an attendant you go to if you have a problem, and need to purchase additional distance…that’s all.
Yesterday I was in Nanjing, and not having a smart card there, I experienced their system. You put cash in a machine based on the number of stops, and the machine dispensed a plastic token, like a casino chip. When you exited, you deposited the token and the gate opened. Again, if you didn’t pay enough, you went to the ‘extra fare’ attendant.
I don’t know why there is so much commotion over the installation of a gated system. Without the gates, I just don’t see how the system will work.
What I think is a real shame and waste of money is that you have to put any bags or knapsacks through a security screen before going through the gates. Apparently this is a new measure associated with the EXPO. Pity.
The other topic worthy of discussion is whether it’s necessary or appropriate to install a glass wall with sliding door openings along all the platforms. I saw this in Hong Kong and Singapore and they have such a system in Shanghai. Not in Nanjing, at least the two stations I used…but throughout the 11 lines in Shanghai. The gate system is made by Westinghouse. Do any American systems have this…does anybody know?
While it certainly adds to a sense of security on the platform, I don’t think this a necessary expense for Vancouver.
One final anecdote. When I was preparing for my interview as a potentialTranslink director in fall 2007, I asked my daughters and wife what they thought I should discuss at the interview. My eldest daughter suggested that I ask them why they don’t charge people to use the SkyTrain. When I told her they do charge, she responded that neither she nor any of her friends ever paid to use the system.
Perhaps those of you who think there is only nominal fare evasion should ask your children whether they pay to use SkyTrain.
I don’t know how many of you have actually used a ‘smart card’ system, but it’s entire operation is dependent on going through a gate to get on, at which time you swipe a card, and going through a gate when you get off, at which time you swipe your card.
The distance charged is calculated accordingly, and as noted, you no longer have the proplem of going one stop from Zone 1 to Zone 2 and having to pay a two zone fare etc.
28 Chris // May 30, 2010 at 5:26 pm
I’m no expert. But Stephen Rees is http://stephenrees.wordpress.com/
29 Chris // May 30, 2010 at 5:34 pm
Michael, your daughter’s experience is just another anecdote. Find me a single study that shows money would be saved by installing barriers.
You can have smart cards and distance-based charges without gates. In London, with the Oyster system you swipe when you enter and exit each station. If you forget to swipe out you get charged for the longest possible fare. If you use the system multiple times a day, it charges you for a day pass if that is cheaper. None of that requires barriers. When I lived in London, few stations outside of Zone 2 and none of the DLR stations had barriers and the system worked fine.
30 Chris Keam // May 30, 2010 at 5:41 pm
“My eldest daughter suggested that I ask them why they don’t charge people to use the SkyTrain. When I told her they do charge, she responded that neither she nor any of her friends ever paid to use the system.”
Pretty hard to miss the ‘fare paid zone’ signs and ticket machines at every Skytrain station.
31 voony // May 30, 2010 at 5:44 pm
Michael,
I have explicitly illustrated my blog with a subway using smart card with no barrier. DLR is of this sort too…and well most of the regional train systems in France are slowly converting to smart card (distance pricing), and you will barely see gate there: so no barrier is the norm not the reverse.
So I recommend for your next trip to go sip a glass of wine in the Provinces of France, since I am afraid that your experience seems based on tourist impression of some world class city, and other urban legend (may be lot of teenager cheat, and turnstile will change absolutely nothing to it, believe me, I have been one in Paris
…and anyway teenager doesn’t constitute the bulk of rider) not necessarily real life observation (if it was you could have also venture outside central London, and see here that faregate are/were not at the least busy station)
Bottom line: If it was a business case for fare gate (fare evasion like you believe it is): it could be no need for tax payer money to be funded!
It is obviously not the case and that is the problem.
Now you mention the platform gate: it is widespread on all system in Asia (good also for air conditioning , especially in place like Singapore) as well as continental Europe:
That is expensive sure, but that could have prevented the 40+ suicide since 85 on the skytrain track, and all associated psychological consequence for people witnessing those event (that has a real social cost and it is not pretty: usually subway driver never drive again after have been involved in such accident).
To speak the less, It is very unfortunate to see people outraged by a $2.50 cheating teenager, but find nothing wrong with human meat on the track!
That is even a bigger problem
32 Jon Petrie // May 30, 2010 at 5:57 pm
Discussion of fare evasion in NYC with comments referencing practices in non-American cities at http://secondavenuesagas.com/2010/04/06/fare-evasion-a-select-bus-service-problem/
And it seems to me a large part of the problem in Vancouver is the lack of a substantial penalty for getting caught … Perhaps photos of two time cheaters accessible on the web and perhaps the real possibility that two timers names will be passed onto revenue Canada etc — cheating on transit presumably does suggest a willingness to cheat public institutions in general.
33 mezzanine // May 30, 2010 at 6:23 pm
@ Voony, E and M line ridership averaged ~200000 per day in 2009, but that includes the more intensely used combined section from waterfront to columbia (ie, IMO those stations would see ++ useage compared to a typical DLR station, and would be harder to check fares manually). And don’t forget, we can expect this to grow in the next few decades, even without building evergreen and broadway.
@ Chris, a small discussion on turnstiles can be found on a post at Transport Politic. According to his calcs, gates in vancouver can recoup capital costs in 9 years, but a major factor he left out are maintenece costs. [1]
At the very least, trip data will be much more accurate with station gates, which IMO is very significant. Will gates recoup costs? I personally think it would be negligible. Maybe we will to a small degree, maybe it will be a net expense to the system. Will they effect crime and safety? IMO, I think we’ll be surprised of the results.
I’ll end with a quote from Angus McIntyre, retiring after 40 years from driving with the buses:
“Why has society changed to the point where 50 people a shift walk on the bus without paying? And we just push a button and continue on. That would have been unthinkable 40 years ago. The bus would have been parked and the police would have been there. Supervisors. Because society then, it wasn’t in their makeup to walk on without paying.
That’s been a little harder for me than for the newer drivers because I just find it hard to sit there and let this all happen. I usually say something as they get on: I’m logging them on as an unpaid fare, and this sort of thing. But you know. ” [2]
34 mezzanine // May 30, 2010 at 6:24 pm
[1] http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/08/17/are-turnstiles-worth-their-cost/
[2] http://buzzer.translink.ca/index.php/2010/05/angus-mcintyre-retires-after-40-years-behind-the-wheel/#more-9671
35 Phil // May 30, 2010 at 9:38 pm
“…turnstiles just slow down entry and exit into stations.”
Fare gates and turnstiles are totally different. You only make physical contact with a fare gate if the card you have swiped does not contain enough credit, in which case the plastic gates flap shut. I assume translink will go with fare gates.
36 Jean // May 30, 2010 at 10:04 pm
Sorry, I support a fare turnstile/gate system for transit stations. It’s business reality for a transit authority to manage their revenues. Or some sort of smart card system.
Lived and worked in Toronto for over 20 yrs. They move lots more people daily. And I worked in downtown Toronto for several years to experience the daily commuter crush at TTC stations.
Of course, this is during winter when I wasn’t cycling to work from Scarborough.
Frankly I find people in Vancouver move too SLOWLY in and out of the our commuter trains.
37 Jean // May 30, 2010 at 10:09 pm
I support fare gates/turnstiles. Smart card too.
In Toronto if you buy a monthly pass or day pass, you can swipe through the card through turnstile and get through fast.
I lived and worked in Toronto for 20 yrs. –including several years in the downtown core and experienced the peak transit rider volumes. It’s not that awful as people make it out to be.
We can think of many justifications for not having mechanisms to ensure people pay..but it works in many other cities. Toronto moves hundreds of thousands more people by transit subway daily.
38 Michael Geller // May 30, 2010 at 10:47 pm
Chris Keam…she knew she had to pay….she was just being cute about it….and let me add, I’m not proud of her past behaviour. Now she has a transit pass.
Voony, Jon and Chris…fair comments…Like so many issues, there are valid conflicting views.
I’m not going to France for a while, but I’m soon off to Spain for a month and we’ll see how they manage in Barcelona and Madrid.
By the way, if you come to EXPO, don’t miss the Spanish Pavilion. It’s the best I have seen to date.
39 mezzanine // May 30, 2010 at 11:10 pm
@Chris and jon Petrie, doing a quick google search produced an interesting research paper from Edmonton:
http://www.palgrave-journals.com/sj/journal/v23/n1/full/sj200915a.html
Their study tried to see if there was a change in fare evasion patterns if they reduced the amount of staff fare checks but issued more fines instead of just warnings (stiffer penalties as discussed by Jon Petrie). there was no change in fare evasion levels and people did notice the change in enforcement strategy. This seemed to flummox the authors as it seemed to contradict most studies on situational behaviour and fare evasion.
“According to the theory of situational prevention and, indeed, most of the literature on deterrence, potential offenders pay greater attention to the certainty of being caught than to the severity of the punishment if caught.”
The discussion of the study is more interesting, and unfortunately, a lot of their links are to private journal sites that are inaccessible. But the authors also agree that public perception is important.
“However, public transport is an important societal resource, generally subsidized from local taxes, and managers are under constant pressure to safeguard its financial viability. In addition, as mentioned above, fare evasion has other detrimental effects on public transit, including the failure to exclude ‘undesirables’ and the loss of public support for the system.”
And they also agree that with technological advances, Edmonton is also thinking longer term to faregates:
“Despite the many advantages of honor systems, it seems likely that transit systems will increasingly move to fare collection by machines. This is the solution that the Edmonton LRT is likely to adopt and it is made more attractive by advances in fare collection equipment, which have reduced the costs of the equipment and increased its reliability.”
40 mezzanine // May 30, 2010 at 11:36 pm
This is another article from ~ 1992 reviewing the transition to automatic gates in London’s Underground.
http://www.popcenter.org/library/crimeprevention/volume_01/07clarke.pdf
“The results of before-and-after surveys undertaken by the management of the Underground suggest that fare evasion has been cut by two-thirds and that the additional revenues generated should soon pay for the cost of installing the automatic gates.”
Of note, at the time, gates were installed in 63 central stations, not in lesser-used suburban stations.
41 mezzanine // May 30, 2010 at 11:42 pm
And why not make transit free, as mentioned above? This is from all places, the tyee….
“Austin, Texas, was the last American city to try ditching fares; they pulled out their fare-boxes between 1989-1990, something Joel Volinski says lead to “chaos.”
Rowdy young passengers vandalized vehicles and scared off “core riders,” said Volinski, who authored a major U.S. study in 2002 that concluded that citywide fare-free policies were a bad idea.
After one year, Austin bus drivers themselves rallied and had the program shut down.
Volinski saw a similar experiment fail when he was a director of a smaller transit system near Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Ridership soared when that system went fare-free, but it was soon carpe diem for hooligans there too.
“They’d jump on the bus, raise holy hell, then jump off two blocks later. They got a big kick out of that.”"
http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/07/30/FareFree6/
42 mezzanine // May 30, 2010 at 11:46 pm
^that’s not to say that we shouldn’t keep fares low, for everyone access transit.
Ok, that’s it for now, really…:-)
43 Chris Keam // May 31, 2010 at 9:18 am
“Rowdy young passengers vandalized vehicles and scared off “core riders,” said Volinski, who authored a major U.S. study in 2002 that concluded that citywide fare-free policies were a bad idea. ”
I would argue that this problem is better solved by creating jobs and helping the local economy by putting conductors/police on the buses rather than injecting millions of dollars into some other jurisdiction’s manufacturing sector. Actual human beings can perform a number of roles within the system, from assisting lost travellers to enforcing a more civil atmosphere aboard the buses/trains. Fare gates are a single-purpose mechanism.
44 Bill Lee // Jun 1, 2010 at 11:01 am
Just as the Post Office makes millions with unused stamps, so Translink will make millions with pre-paid smart cards that leak information.
In a town where there are so many compromised satellite receivers, and DVD’s regional locks overcome and there is open advertising of unlocking mobile phones, you don’t think that this will become the next “counterfeiting” scam?
Will we see the joy of:
25 Unstarted journey
26 Entry and exit at same station
…
41 Zig zag through gates
and my favourite
82 Illogical use of ticket
http://www.cryptart.com/oyster/
45 Dan Cooper // Jun 1, 2010 at 1:00 pm
Several commenters feel that pay-by-distance billing will save them money. I strongly doubt that will be the case for most riders, other than in the few situations where someone currently goes just one stop and it happens to be across a zone boundary. Far more likely: one stop will be the current one-zone fare (“x”), two stops 1.25x, three stops 1.5x, and so on. If you go just five or six stops you will already be paying more than the current two zone fare, and almost every trip will be more than it is currently. A great way for Translink to increase revenue, no? And revenue is their big problem at present.
Having travelled on many a metro around the world, the most effective enforcement I’ve seen anywhere was in Prague. In the course of four days, my fare was checked three times. Notably, the fare checkers were unarmed civilians working alone, not the multi-weapon-toting, high-salary police who currently patrol Skytrain in pairs, and who have checked my fare a grand total of once in three years.
46 mezzanine // Jun 1, 2010 at 2:30 pm
@ Dan Cooper, the biggest cost driver for transit authorities in North America is salaries.
One link on a quick google search states that the average *annual* salary in the Czech Republic is $13000 USD in 2005.
http://www.worldsalaries.org/czechrepublic.shtml
WRT fare pricing, I think (hope) they will follow the practice of Oyster’s farecapping. That for small trips (eg, within downtown) fares may be less than a $2.5 to encourage transit use for small trips that is not cost-effective currently, and capped so that a comparable distance to 1 zone won’t cost more.
47 Dan Cooper // Jun 2, 2010 at 10:07 am
Hello Mezzanine,
We can only hope for a cap on short-distance fares. However, based on the recent history of repeated fare increases, and Translink’s desparation for funds, I’m not holding my breath.
On the other point, it’s true that labour costs in Prague are less than those in Vancouver. However, that applies to all jobs equally; my point was that I believe a meaningfully larger number of civilian fare checkers, who could work independently and so cover more ground, could be hired (in Vancouver) for the same cost (in Vancouver) as the sworn, armed police who are currently used to check fares, and who go around in pairs.
City of Vancouver On-Call Parking Enforcement Officer – $22.12/hour to start ($46,009/year at 40 hours/week): https://www.workablesolutionsbc.ca/seeker/job_search_detail.asp?job_id=3023&return_page=aurora_results
Vancouver Police Probationary Constable [as I couldn't find Translink specific figures]: $54,336/year to start, increasing to First Class Constable, $77,616/year, after four years. http://vancouver.ca/police/recruiting/police-officers/salary-benefits.html
48 mezzanine // Jun 2, 2010 at 12:59 pm
@ Dan Cooper, it’s a good idea, but I am unsure how it can be implemented in real life. Skytrain already has the ‘blue coats’ that are unarmed and do provide some checking service, in addition to other duites like being able to drive trains if needed. If you are suggestion a separate job description of people who just check fares, and just hire more of them, again this raises questions.
-When I get checked currently, they just see if I have a ticket, they never check if it is the right zone or if the fare is expired, unlike gates.
-how would we deploy them in the most efficient way? Currently checking everyone mannually on a full train or a busy station at rush hour may be difficult.
-how effective will they be at issuing tickets? Will they be safe doing so? 12 ‘blue coats’ were assualted last year from a link above.
-why not just hire more blue coats? if it were as straightforward as doing that, why hasn’t it been done before?
-Edmonton has a 25% non-payment rate of tickets from the link above, I am unsure of the rate here. Some might argue that ticketing fare dodgers may be as useful as ticketing the homeless.
If anything, IMO salary costs would be the big limiting factor, but there are other issues even if we are able to get staffing.
Leave a Comment