• Gov't Center Closure 2014 Discussion

  • Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.
Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

  • 268 posts
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 18
  by sery2831
 
It's the people that created the FVMs and Gates. The T is not on good terms with them. They will have to negotiate a new update and right now that's not on the table.
  by diburning
 
saulblum wrote:
sery2831 wrote:This is true. The current set does not allow for it... And if you have not noticed the only thing the T can change is the fare price in the system. And that's all they will be able to change for sometime.
I have a hard time buying this argument. The card already stores the mode of the most recent trip, which the fare gate is reading, to determine whether the rider is transferring from a bus, and to therefore deduct a smaller amount. What is the software impediment to changing the software of the gates at the relevant stations to see whether the rider is coming from a subway stop, and if so, to not deduct a fare and not cancel out a possible bus transfer the rider might then make?

Is it truly a software limitation, or a matter of no one at the T knowing how to reprogram the gates and having to contract the work to Cubic?
I don't think it actually stores the mode last used because the fareboxes are set up to deduct a value, not a type of fare. To the card, it's all a different value of "SV ADULT". I think it stores the last tapped value and time. From my terminal at work, that's all it tells me. It says TRANSFER - $2.00 EXPIRATION [current date]. It doesn't tell me the time although it IS recorded (and this is based on the time on the farebox. I've had numerous times where the farebox gave me free transfers because it was a day behind, or charged me twice because the day was incorrect and it charged me a full fare instead of a transfer).

On weekly passes, the expiration does not change, and another pass cannot be loaded onto it until it expires. If I try to add another pass to a card that already has a valid weekly pass that has not expired yet (even if it expires on the same day), I would get one of two red screens of death. The first one is "This card has been pre-initialized" which is the same screen that I would get if someone tried to load something onto a disabled card (cards can be disabled due to expiration or if registered and reported lost). The other red screen of death that I can get is "Pass already stored on card" which is what happens if you try to load a duplicate identical monthly pass onto a card. This is only for the weekly though. The cards can store two monthly passes; one for the current month, and one for the next month. This way, people who buy next month's pass as soon as it goes on sale can continue to use this month's pass.
  by sery2831
 
Alright we are totally off topic... Anymore Charlie discussion, including transfers should be done in the Charlie thread.

Now back on topic. Did they mention if the loop at Gov't Center will be closed? They could turn D trains at Park but run to Gov't Center and loop there. Leaving the B Line to loop at Park St. This would also allow for berth assignments at Park St to stay the same.
  by SM89
 
sery2831 wrote:Now back on topic. Did they mention if the loop at Gov't Center will be closed? They could turn D trains at Park but run to Gov't Center and loop there. Leaving the B Line to loop at Park St. This would also allow for berth assignments at Park St to stay the same.
They just said B and D to park during rush hour. They didn't say whether they would actually turn there or not.
  by CircusFreakGRITZ
 
So no add'l Lechmere service? What a surprise...but I am excited about off-peak D service to NS.
  by Adams_Umass_Boston
 
jamesinclair wrote:
Just like not building a blue line entrance. Theyre seriously going to close the station for two years, and not use the oppertunity to build the long planned second entrance?

And yet the scope of the work invovles using transit money to completely rebuild cambridge ave?

Amazing. Just amazing.
They are going to rebuild the the other entrance. It will even have a head house of it's own. However, It will be emergency only. They claim that there is no money to turn that into a daily exit.
  by BigUglyCat
 
Adams_Umass_Boston wrote:
jamesinclair wrote:
Just like not building a blue line entrance. Theyre seriously going to close the station for two years, and not use the oppertunity to build the long planned second entrance?

And yet the scope of the work invovles using transit money to completely rebuild cambridge ave?

Amazing. Just amazing.
They are going to rebuild the the other entrance. It will even have a head house of it's own. However, It will be emergency only. They claim that there is no money to turn that into a daily exit.
The provision for the head house may indicate that the T is looking ahead to a time of more ridership and better economics, when the other entrance could be opened. I'm hoping they're hedging their bet against a brighter future. I really hope so; I also was disappointed by this step backward in the plans.
  by SM89
 
novitiate wrote:I'm guessing making it an actual entrance would require ADA elevators and such? Maybe that's the issue.
My guess is that the T has no problem making it a blue line entrance, just that it would cost a ton to make it accessible. However, it isn't clear whether the ADA says that all entrances must be accessible or that just a convenient accessible entrance must be provided. That's one of the things I hate about the ADA. It inconveniences the masses even when those with disabilities have already been addressed.
  by jamesinclair
 
SM89 wrote:
novitiate wrote:I'm guessing making it an actual entrance would require ADA elevators and such? Maybe that's the issue.
My guess is that the T has no problem making it a blue line entrance, just that it would cost a ton to make it accessible. However, it isn't clear whether the ADA says that all entrances must be accessible or that just a convenient accessible entrance must be provided. That's one of the things I hate about the ADA. It inconveniences the masses even when those with disabilities have already been addressed.
The ADA does not require elevators anywhere and everywhere. The ADA does not say that everywhere with stairs much have ramps or elevators.

Look at a stadium for example. Acres of stairs. What ADA requires is that wheelchair areas must exist, and they must be of good quality. It doesnt require that every seat be accessible.

Equal access means being able to reach the blue line by elevator, and in a ways that isnt discriminatory (discriminatory would be having to go an unreasonable distance out of the way).

"It inconveniences the masses even when those with disabilities have already been "

False. People love to blame the ADA for stuff when they have no idea what the law says and use it as a scapegoat.

Look at the new Fairmount stations, which lack stairs. ADA does NOT ban stairs, but they used that as a terrible excuse, and were immediately pointed out as being wrong.

Another example is MBTA saying they cant put the bus stop number (ie, nextbus #2445) on signs because its not ADA. Biggest load of bull on the planet, especially when it only takes two seconds to realize the rest of the sign (with the route number) isnt accessible to the blind either.

MBTA loves using ADA as a reason not to do stuff, and hopes people buy it, shrug their shoulders, and blame the feds.
  by jamesinclair
 
BostonUrbEx wrote:I'm surprised it isn't required to place a tactile paving tile everywhere there is a bus stop. Perhaps I should zip my lips before that's next...
Actually, it might by, although to be honest I dont fully know. This new station, being built in Maryland, does.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/beyonddc/8 ... hotostream

Tactile pavement is a complicated ADA issue because its been changed various times.

But it does serve a very real and valuable purpose. Problem is, the ADA doesnt go far enough, and the tactile edges exist in isolation, theres no additional guidance for the blind.

http://createeducatedeviate.files.wordp ... g_7602.jpg

See that blue line on the floor? Thats to guide the blind from the boarding to the station exits. The third world is leaving the US behind when it comes to accessibility.
  by wicked
 
Your flickr photo is from Virginia, not Maryland, although your overall point remains.
  by boblothrope
 
saulblum wrote:And if that's too much work, then implement some sort of paper transfer that you hand to a station agent.
It turns out the T *does* still have a paper transfer machine in service!

The Radford Lane exit at Ashmont is on the inbound platform, which is a fare-paid zone. But arriving southbound trains dump everyone onto the outbound platform, which is outside the paid zone.

So riders who boarded at Ashmont earlier in the day can get a timestamped Radford Lane exit ticket from a machine on the inbound platform. Then when they return to Ashmont, they can give the ticket to the CSA at the south entrance, to get into the inbound platform and to the exit.

Of course when I was there, the south entrance CSA booth was vacant, so this wouldn't have worked. And it doesn't help people who didn't board at Ashmont earlier in the day. But it does show that the T has a theoretical out-of-system "transfer" today.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 18