Fair Gates?
Some police and fire officials said the other day that the MTA's moves to cut booth employees from some stations and other moves toward automation (like getting rid of conductors and just having a driver on the train) would make the system less safe and harder to access in an emergency (like when the police had to borrow Metrocards from bystanders recently).
There are a couple different issues here: closing token booths at stations, and moving to more automation on the trains (starting with the L train). We know the MTA lacks money, and maybe cutting some employees can save them a few dollars. But it is definitely a bad thing if rescue personnel cannot get through the entry gates. As I understand the police and firemen have been given unlimited Metrocards, but I think maybe a bigger issue might be the MTA's design of their turnstiles and station facilities. You enter a New York City Subway like an animal entering a cage, and if you have a big bag or luggage or something you have to get buzzed through a special gated door if you can get the attention of the attendant. I guess the MTA is trying to prevent people from jumping the turnstile and skipping out on their fare, but is it really that big a problem? Maybe the siege mentality design of the turnstiles is an overhang from the city's crazier days gone by. Could they just forgo that small partial percentage of revenue and have entry gates that are much more open, show a bit of respect for the passenger (like BART), and allow emergency personnel to get through no matter what (if regular people could jump the turnstile, so could a cop or rescue worker)?
As for the second issue, I won't talk about train automation right now, maybe at some later date.
Oh yeah - hello, my name is Chris Andrichak, and I guess I am now live from the third rail. I live in New York City, and am finishing up a degree in urban planning, transportation planning specifically. Like most New Yorkers, I only travel by transit, and even when I lived out in San Francisco I generally roamed the Bay Area by transit. I have my own blog where I talk about all kinds of things. Thanks to the folks here for having me on board!
Post Author:
csa | 9:10 PM |
Link
|
TrackBacks
Re: farejumping -- Here in Atlanta, MARTA is busily switching to smart cards with new faregates that, like New York's, make it much more difficult to jump the gates.
Currently, you can walk right in by opening the handicapped/luggage gate.
They're estimating that perhaps 25 percent of total entries don't pay, and that the new system will result in around a 20 percent increase in faregate revenue (My guesstimate is that those numbers aren't wildly out of line).
Anyway, if the MTA is already hurting for revenue, greater faregate accessibility won't help.
As for emergency workers, there are a couple of possible solutions. The lowest tech would be to make sure they actually carry their farecards, since that's why they're provided. Next would be to coordinate with transit police whenever they respond to an incident in a station.
The highest tech would be to incorporate a smart card as part of the emergency personnel's ID, so they could swipe in, but I don't think the MTA is using smartcards yet.
Just a small correction: BART doesn't have any unattended fair gates. Its true that they are insanely easy to jump, but if the station is open, there is at least one agent in it, somewhere.
SF MUNI (and Portlands MAX system) both use a lot of honor system stops (although in principle there are inspectors going around checking for transfers. I've never seen one, but that's the rumor).
I could be completely wrong on the number of faregate jumpers that the MTA has to deal with, and it sounds like I probably am. Having a more humane and invitingly designed system might ultimately encourage more Ridership, but that is debatable.
My point with BART more has to do with the design of the Gates, when you enter the system you do not feel like you are walking into a cage.
