Zone fare for River Line

[fishball]

It’s time to change fares on NJ Transit’s River Line
https://transitism.wordpress.com/2015/0 ... iver-line/

The River Line also receives disproportionate subsidies. As a whole, NJ Transit’s system operates at a a farebox recovery rate of about 43%, meaning that for every dollar spent on transit service, the agency receives ¢43 cents in fares.

As of 2013, the River line cost $33,542,255 to operate, but only took in $2,399,152 in fare revenue. This works out to a farebox recovery rate of just 7% .

Adopting a zone-based fare system on the River Line could bring up the farebox recovery rate, and still be fare to short-distance riders. Zone fares are already in use on the NJ Transit commuter rail and bus systems. River Line stations sell tickets with Ticket Vending Machines (TVMs) on the platform, like the commuter rail system. Passengers could buy tickets from these machines, but pay with a zone system similar to bus fares.

I'd agree, but would South Jersey politicians allow it?

[kilroy]

No.

[tdoran1951]

They may have to go to zone fare, especially if the full 49 CFR Class III RR regulations are enforced, and where on NJT Commuter can one ride 30-miles for a $ 1.50 (end to end, 32-miles - 30ST – TRENTON is $ 9.00 on SEPTA, RL should be about $ 6.75 [$ 0.2109/MI] with free transfer to PATCO)?:

Full 49 CFR Class III RR regulation seem to be coming, PTC has to be installed, have to use NORAC rulebook, and the conductor / engineer will have to FRA certified after 2018 wavier expiration, plus more. . . And the FRA seems now in light of PTC, RRPSA, number of accidents, not to be favoring, and no longer wavering Stadler that are in several cities once existing waivers expire.

The 20 Stadler GTW 2/6 DMU (diesel multiple unit) rail vehicles do not meet the RR Passenger Safety Act of 2008, as far as crushability and survivability, and more not being met, as well as not meeting the needed EPA Tier 4 emissions standards.

The new Stadler’s from 3Q last year onward are compliant with the RRPSA, and most FRA Class III requirements.

Could always order some more SL V’s, and dump the Camden portion that is street running. . . And then they could also go in to Trenton Lower Level or 30 ST via bridge.

[jackintosh11]

The line isn't electrified and the platforms are lower than standard high levels.

[nomis]

Riverline operators are already under the FRA Jurisdiction for their temporal-separation running, and follow a RR rule-book and certifications ...

[tdoran1951]

Riverline operators are already under the FRA Jurisdiction for their temporal-separation running, and follow a RR rule-book and certifications ...

Never said that they were not under FRA jurisdiction, just not compliant with most FRA CLASS III railroads, and other local railroads including SPAX, CRCX, NJTR, AMTK etc., Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA) mandates, as well as a lot of 49 CFR Chapter II - Federal Railroad Administration, Department of Transportation requirements. Nor following the complete current NORAC rule book, a subset there of.

Some waivers were not granted include 49 CFR Part 236, Subpart I - Positive Train Control Systems, and therefore must be made compliant within the deadline that is 12/31/2015.

FRA DOCKET 1999-6135 waivers part or completely, 49 CFR Parts 221, 223, 229, 231, 236, 238, 239, 240, 242 and more.

Too many of these waivers are “safety related”, such as lack of certified, credentialed, and vetted engineer, wavier for no conductor operation, reduce horn output volume and more.

Not EPA Tier 4 emission compliant.

[F40]

Riverline operators are already under the FRA Jurisdiction for their temporal-separation running, and follow a RR rule-book and certifications ...

Not EPA Tier 4 emission compliant.

As a general rule when administering new laws, there is always a grandfather clause which allows older entities (cars built with old EPA standards, buildings/stations built pre-ADA, and even certain drugs on the market before FDA was created) to not be subject to the new laws as long as they met the laws when produced in that time.

If anything, FRA should have no jurisdiction regarding EPA requirements. If they do, it makes zero sense. "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's."

[DianaOfBurlington]

In practice, the RiverLine is already understaffed. 'Conductors' (fare checkers) are rare and essentially ineffective; therefore fare-jumpers are common. The $1.50 fare, in place about ten years now, was instituted as an 'introductory' rate to drum up business. The RL has received mostly bad vibes from local property-owners (NIMBYs) along the ROW; it's been renters and commuting workers (such as people living in Camden and working in Edgewater) who have used it most. But this was the intention: to help redevelop underused residential and industrial communities amongst the brownfields of Cinnaminson, Riverside, Florence, and Pennsauken, and this has happened. So the state (taxpayers) doesn't necessarily have reason to complain.

No one ever made money on a purely-passenger line. That said, NS runs two trains every day (night) on this line, rarely with less than 11 cars. There is-- apparently-- serious freight business on this line, between Camden and Bordentown; and undoubtedly that's what's paying for the line. RiverLine is little more than an oversized bus (as is apparent by driver training, fare level, use of light rail, etc.). As one who uses it regularly, I say it's small price to pay to provide a valuable service that, in time, has developed into a beloved institution in this area.