POP SEPTA

Based on an argument I was forming on the NJT Light Rail forum, I began arguing for SEPTA to utilize POP, at least on it's Subway Surface, Surface LRV (if they ever come back), and possibly bus lines. I think it'd be much more effective for SEPTA to switch to a POP system modeled on SF Muni's example. We could retain fareboxes on the LRVs, and people could buy when boarding, but daily, weekly, and monthly pass holders could board at rear doors, thereby greatly speeding the process. When paying at the door you'd receive a ticket good for 2 hours or so, and good on all lines, either punched like a Daypass, or magnetically swiped to ensure it is valid. I think the Subway Surface is an excellent subject for POP since it's stations are already mostly open, only 30th, 15th and 13th are clogged by faregates. Of course the surface LRVs would also be a good subject for POP. We could at last get low floor, multi-door LRVs and utilize their boarding capacity to the fullest, especially on lines like the 15 or 56 where islands provide places where small TVMs could be placed (perhaps only taking cash, credit or debit, and dispensing only 2 hour or day-long tickets). Buses would also work with POP, especially the low floor D40LFs, they have a large area where a on-board TVM could fit over the wheel well.

Really the only sticking points I can think of are the fare gates currently restricting 13th, 15th and 30th. I'd think 15th would be easy to remedy, just remove the iron-maiden type turnstyles that block each entrance to the line and install another fare gate at the stop of the stairs to board a MFL train or walk to a BSS train. 13th and 30th would be harder to do since you have to walk through the fare-controlled area to reach the subway-surface platforms. One possible solution would be to just leave everything as is, and have the POP ticket be accepted by the faregate at the station as a proper fare. I suppose if the POP ticket is a cross between a standard POP ticket and a NYC 2 hour single use metrocard, all transfers would be free for 2 hours, and it'd have a time and date stamped on it for the fare inspectors.

I think this would be a good way for SEPTA to increase ridership.

Please complete the following sentence: POP stands for ___ ___ ___.

Proof Of Payment.

Just how does POP increase ridership? Answer: It does not. Unless you are more concerned with ridership than revenue.

And what does the phrase "clogged by fare gates" mean? Fare turnstiles are the most effective way of collecting revenue, and they are not conducive to crowding in stations nor increasing station dwell times.

Irish Chieftain wrote:Just how does POP increase ridership? Answer: It does not. Unless you are more concerned with ridership than revenue.

POP can increase ridership by speeding up service and making boarding more convenient. It also can make the fare structure more user-friendly, by eliminating transfer charges (your fare receipt is good for travel on the vehicle) and permitting round-tripping on short rides (POP receipts are typically good for 2 hours or so)

And what does the phrase "clogged by fare gates" mean? Fare turnstiles are the most effective way of collecting revenue, and they are not conducive to crowding in stations nor increasing station dwell times.

If you've ever been to the Washington Metro in rush hour, you'll understand "clogged by fare gates." Turnstiles may appear to be a bar to fare evasion (if that's what you mean by "most effective way of collecting revenue"), but believe me, fare evasion persists on the SEPTA system.

Now if you're talking about efficiency in fare collection, everything in a turnstile except the slot where you drop your token is superfluous. Ideally, all you'd have is a box for people to put their money--the rest of the system exists to prevent the money from being stolen and to keep people from riding without having paid. POP eliminates the barriers and other hardware of the latter (and personnel whose job it is to collect transfers at stations), and replaces it with security personnel making spot checks of people's passes or fare receipts. It trades one cost for another, and hopefully makes the system more convenient to use.

I'm quite familiar with POP. Unless you have constant "security", you will have extensive fare evasion.

Not to mention that attracting the unsavory elements is not conducive to increased ridership by people who err on the side of honesty. That is why I mentioned being more concerned with ridership than revenue collection. Now let's say the unsavory element snowballs and now you have them attacking your security personnel? How much additional security is then required to fend them off? You are now barrelling towards a police state.

If the WMATA Metro system is experiencing clogging at its turnstiles, then there must have been a severe underestimation of ridership numbers. Replacing the system with POP would not make things easier.

Irish Chieftain wrote:I'm quite familiar with POP. Unless you have constant "security", you will have extensive fare evasion.

Not to mention that attracting the unsavory elements is not conducive to increased ridership by people who err on the side of honesty. That is why I mentioned being more concerned with ridership than revenue collection. Now let's say the unsavory element snowballs and now you have them attacking your security personnel? How much additional security is then required to fend them off? You are now barrelling towards a police state.

Where is there anything approaching that extreme???

Obviously there's going to be problems if enforcement is lacking to the point people think they can ride for free, and I can cite a concrete example: MARTA many years ago after their referendum passed and they made the service free (or was it 25c?...). All of a sudden kids started using MARTA stations as a place to hang out, and there was the expected increase in trouble. MARTA reinstated fares, the kids went elsewhere, and the problems went away.

The argument you make has been made many times before in other cities considering POP: they say their city is too disorderly for it to work, there's going to be rampant fare evasion, and the sky is gonna fall too.

But that makes the assumption there isn't fare evasion going on now (there is--it's just that nobody talks about it), and it assumes you can't set up an effective enforcement system (you can, if the will to change is there). For heavens's sake, the system works in South Central LA, and it brings the unexpected benefit of making the Blue Line one of the few gang-free zones in the area, because LAMATA used sheriff's deputies for its enforcement personnel, and as a result the system was crawling with cops.

So think about the effect on security if you replace the drones hiding in darkened cashiers' booths with their microphones turned off with an equal number of security personnel out and about in stations and on trains.

If the WMATA Metro system is experiencing clogging at its turnstiles, then there must have been a severe underestimation of ridership numbers. Replacing the system with POP would not make things easier.

No there wasn't an underestimation--it's just that passengers come in bunches rather than in a smooth flow, so there is queuing at the faregates, especially when people get off the train downtown. Replace the system with POP and not only do they not have to queue up to feed their tickets and go through the gates one at a time, they can also use more direct routes between the train and the street (not so big a deal in DC, which was designed for their system, but a big one in Philadelphia--take those Broad Street stations between two cross streets: you have to walk half a block between the stairway and the turnstile because SEPTA wants to have only one cashier booth and set of turnstiles on each side.[/list]

No there wasn't an underestimation--it's just that passengers come in bunches rather than in a smooth flow, so there is queuing at the faregates, especially when people get off the train downtown. Replace the system with POP and not only do they not have to queue up to feed their tickets and go through the gates one at a time

But they still have to queue up to buy the tickets, not to mention validate them in a separate machine.

the system works in South Central LA, and it brings the unexpected benefit of making the Blue Line one of the few gang-free zones in the area, because LAMATA used sheriff's deputies for its enforcement personnel, and as a result the system was crawling with cops

Yeah, it kinda makes my point, but in the case of SCLA, that's desirable. :-\

Where is there anything approaching that extreme

Well, if two people who posted on this thread in the NJT Light Rail forum are to have their anecdotal reports taken at face value, then it happens in Germany and Hungary. The screen names are "sodusbay" and "kolassa"; you can PM them to verify their stories.

Having the driver collecting fares wastes a lot of time on most SEPTA routes (turnstiles aren't really a problem). However, since the streetcars operate like buses on the surface, stopping every block, it is unclear how passengers would purchase tickets otherwise.

I spent a summer in Prague a few years back. The entire Prague system: metro, streetcar, bus, was all POP. And it was grand, just grand. You purchased tickets in booklets, or a monthly ticket, and each surface vehicle had a validator at the door. The metro had validators at the gates. If you were caught without a ticket, you paid a fine, which wasn't that much back then, but is probably more now.

Prague depends on the tram network, which uses the Czech PCC cars. It just wouldn't work without POP because the load is so heavy, unless you had a conductor on every car, which would increase costs a lot.

adamkrom wrote:Having the driver collecting fares wastes a lot of time on most SEPTA routes (turnstiles aren't really a problem). However, since the streetcars operate like buses on the surface, stopping every block, it is unclear how passengers would purchase tickets otherwise.

What you do typically is sell those fares on board. Passenger puts cash or token in the farebox and gets a receipt, which they show in case of a fare inspection. The receipt also can function as a transfer. You don't get the full benefit in terms of time savings, but you get some benefit. Passengers with passes, transfers, and senior citizen cards can walk past the farebox without having to have their fare instrument inspected, or board at the rear.

I've been on many proof-of-payment systems in Europe and in the US, and I think it's a much better system than faregates and turnstiles everywhere. The savings come from not having to buy all that fare-control equipment in the first place. It also makes fare zones easier to implement. You just buy a ticket for your zone, instead of having to pay a zone surcharge separately for each zone.

I've been on the SF MUNI recently and think it's great. I don't understand what people have against the system.

My experience with POP was in Portland. I found the instructions to be quite clear. We rode around Portland most of the day without buying _any_ tickets because we spent a lot of time in the FAIRLESS SQUARE. I started imagining philadelphia with a fareless zone (say between the rivers and from Race to Spruce Sts) and frequent trams in their own lanes WHICH OTHER DRIVERS RESPECTED!!!! Wonderful. We bought a ticket to travel to the SE part of the city on a bus where we were staying and then bought more tickets the next day at a MAX stop that was outside the fareless square. We met one polite ticket inspector who observed that our tickets were good and he wondered through the car quickly and encountered nobody without a valid ticket. Trams had a rack for bikes near the doors and many of them were used. I didn't see anything that was going on that would be impossible to implement in Philadelphia with a small amount of will on the part of SEPTA.

Lucius Kwok wrote:I've been on the SF MUNI recently and think it's great. I don't understand what people have against the system.

What people have against the system is fear of the unfamiliar. They assume fare evasion will be rampant.

There is also resistance from labor unions, politicians, and others who don't want changes in how many workers a transit agency employs and how those workers are deployed.