DOCSLIB.ORG

Tcrp Report 94

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tcrp Report 94 TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH TCRP PROGRAM REPORT 94 Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration Fare Policies, Structures and Technologies: Update TCRP OVERSIGHT AND PROJECT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2003 (Membership as of March 2003) SELECTION COMMITTEE (as of October 2002) OFFICERS CHAIR Chair: Genevieve Giuliano, Director and Prof., School of Policy, Planning, and Development, USC, Los Angeles J. BARRY BARKER Vice Chair: Michael S. Townes, Exec. Dir., Transportation District Commission of Hampton Roads, Hampton, VA Transit Authority of River City Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS DANNY ALVAREZ MEMBERS Miami-Dade Transit Agency KAREN ANTION MICHAEL W. BEHRENS, Executive Director, Texas DOT Karen Antion Consulting JOSEPH H. BOARDMAN, Commissioner, New York State DOT GORDON AOYAGI SARAH C. CAMPBELL, President, TransManagement, Inc., Washington, DC Montgomery County Government E. DEAN CARLSON, Secretary of Transportation, Kansas DOT JEAN PAUL BAILLY JOANNE F. CASEY, President, Intermodal Association of North America Union Internationale des Transports Publics JAMES C. CODELL III, Secretary, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet RONALD L. BARNES JOHN L. CRAIG, Director, Nebraska Department of Roads Central Ohio Transit Authority BERNARD S. GROSECLOSE, JR., President and CEO, South Carolina State Ports Authority LINDA J. BOHLINGER SUSAN HANSON, Landry University Prof. of Geography, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University HNTB Corp. LESTER A. HOEL, L. A. Lacy Distinguished Professor, Depart. of Civil Engineering, University of Virginia ANDREW BONDS, JR. HENRY L. HUNGERBEELER, Director, Missouri DOT Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. JENNIFER L. DORN ADIB K. KANAFANI, Cahill Prof. and Chair, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of FTA California at Berkeley NATHANIEL P. FORD, SR. RONALD F. KIRBY, Director of Transportation Planning, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Metropolitan Atlanta RTA HERBERT S. LEVINSON, Principal, Herbert S. Levinson Transportation Consultant, New Haven, CT CONSTANCE GARBER MICHAEL D. MEYER, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of York County Community Action Corp. Technology FRED M. GILLIAM JEFF P. MORALES, Director of Transportation, California DOT Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority KAM MOVASSAGHI, Secretary of Transportation, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development KIM R. GREEN CAROL A. MURRAY, Commissioner, New Hampshire DOT GFI GENFARE DAVID PLAVIN, President, Airports Council International, Washington, DC SHARON GREENE JOHN REBENSDORF, Vice Pres., Network and Service Planning, Union Pacific Railroad Co., Omaha, NE Sharon Greene & Associates KATHERINE M. HUNTER-ZAWORSKI CATHERINE L. ROSS, Executive Director, Georgia Regional Transportation Agency Oregon State University JOHN M. SAMUELS, Sr. Vice Pres.-Operations Planning & Support, Norfolk Southern Corporation, ROBERT H. IRWIN Norfolk, VA British Columbia Transit PAUL P. SKOUTELAS, CEO, Port Authority of Allegheny County, Pittsburgh, PA CELIA G. KUPERSMITH MARTIN WACHS, Director, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California at Berkeley Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and MICHAEL W. WICKHAM, Chairman and CEO, Roadway Express, Inc., Akron, OH Transportation District PAUL J. LARROUSSE EX OFFICIO MEMBERS National Transit Institute DAVID A. LEE MIKE ACOTT, President, National Asphalt Pavement Association Connecticut Transit MARION C. BLAKEY, Federal Aviation Administrator, U.S.DOT CLARENCE W. MARSELLA REBECCA M. BREWSTER, President and CEO, American Transportation Research Institute, Atlanta, GA Denver Regional Transportation District THOMAS H. COLLINS (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard FAYE L. M. MOORE JENNIFER L. DORN, Federal Transit Administrator, U.S.DOT Southeastern Pennsylvania ELLEN G. ENGLEMAN, Research and Special Programs Administrator, U.S.DOT Transportation Authority ROBERT B. FLOWERS (Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commander, U.S. Army Corps of STEPHANIE L. PINSON Engineers Gilbert Tweed Associates, Inc. HAROLD K. FORSEN, Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering ROBERT H. PRINCE, JR. EDWARD R. HAMBERGER, President and CEO, Association of American Railroads DMJM+HARRIS JEFFERY M. ROSENBERG JOHN C. HORSLEY, Exec. Dir., American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Amalgamated Transit Union MICHAEL P. JACKSON, Deputy Secretary of Transportation, U.S.DOT RICHARD J. SIMONETTA ROGER L. KING, Chief Applications Technologist, National Aeronautics and Space Administration pbConsult ROBERT S. KIRK, Director, Office of Advanced Automotive Technologies, U.S. DOE PAUL P. SKOUTELAS RICK KOWALEWSKI, Acting Director, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S.DOT Port Authority of Allegheny County WILLIAM W. MILLAR, President, American Public Transportation Association LINDA S. WATSON MARY E. PETERS, Federal Highway Administrator, U.S.DOT Corpus Christi RTA SUZANNE RUDZINSKI, Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S. EPA JEFFREY W. RUNGE, National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT EX OFFICIO MEMBERS ALLAN RUTTER, Federal Railroad Administrator, U.S.DOT WILLIAM W. MILLAR APTA ANNETTE M. SANDBERG, Deputy Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S.DOT MARY E. PETERS WILLIAM G. SCHUBERT, Maritime Administrator, U.S.DOT FHWA JOHN C. HORSLEY TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM AASHTO Transportation Research Board Executive Committee Subcommittee for TCRP ROBERT E. SKINNER, JR. TRB GENEVIEVE GIULIANO, University of Southern California, Los Angeles (Chair) E. DEAN CARLSON, Kansas DOT TDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR JENNIFER L. DORN, Federal Transit Administration, U.S.DOT LOUIS F. SANDERS LESTER A. HOEL, University of Virginia APTA WILLIAM W. MILLAR, American Public Transportation Association SECRETARY ROBERT E. SKINNER, JR., Transportation Research Board ROBERT J. REILLY PAUL P. SKOUTELAS, Port Authority of Allegheny County, Pittsburgh, PA TRB MICHAEL S. TOWNES, Transportation District Commission of Hampton Roads, Hampton, VA TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM TCRP REPORT 94 Fare Policies, Structures and Technologies: Update MULTISYSTEMS, INC. Cambridge, MA With MUNDLE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Philadelphia, PA SIMON & SIMON RESEARCH AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Ellicott City, MD SUBJECT AREAS Public Transit Research Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration in Cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2003 www.TRB.org TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM TCRP REPORT 94 The nation’s growth and the need to meet mobility, Project A-25 FY’01 environmental, and energy objectives place demands on public ISSN 1073-4872 transit systems. Current systems, some of which are old and in need ISBN 0-309-08764-3 of upgrading, must expand service area, increase service frequency, Library of Congress Control Number 2003108814 and improve efficiency to serve these demands. Research is necessary to solve operating problems, to adapt appropriate new © 2003 Transportation Research Board technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into Price $27.00 the transit industry. The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the transit industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for TCRP was originally identified in TRB Special Report 213—Research for Public Transit: New Directions, published in 1987 and based on a study sponsored by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration—now the Federal Transit Admin- istration (FTA). A report by the American Public Transportation NOTICE Association (APTA), Transportation 2000, also recognized the need The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the Transit Cooperative for local, problem-solving research. TCRP, modeled after the Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the longstanding and successful National Cooperative Highway approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such Research Program, undertakes research and other technical activities approval reflects the Governing Board’s judgment that the project concerned is in response to the needs of transit service providers. The scope of appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National TCRP includes a variety of transit research fields including plan- Research Council. ning, service configuration, equipment, facilities, operations, human The members of the technical advisory panel selected to monitor this project and resources, maintenance, policy, and administrative practices. to review this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with TCRP was established under FTA sponsorship in July 1992. due consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The Proposed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, TCRP was opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency authorized as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation that performed the research, and while they have been accepted as appropriate Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). On May 13, 1992, a memorandum by the technical panel, they are not necessarily those of the Transportation agreement outlining TCRP operating procedures was executed by Research Board, the National Research Council, the Transit Development the three cooperating organizations:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TTF Smartcard Ticketing on Public Transport 2010
    Tourism & Transport Forum (TTF) Position Paper Smartcard ticketing on public transport July 2010 Tourism & Transport Forum (TTF) is a national, Member‐funded CEO forum, advocating the public policy interests of the 200 most prestigious corporations and institutions in the Australian tourism, transport, aviation & investment sectors. CONTENTS OVERVIEW 2 SMARTCARD TECHNOLOGY 3 ADVANTAGES OF SMARTCARD TICKETING 3 CHALLENGES FOR IMPLEMENTATION 6 SMARTCARD TICKETING IN AUSTRALIA 8 SMARTCARD TICKETING INTERNATIONALLY 10 INNOVATION IN SMARTCARD TECHNOLOGY 12 LOOKING AHEAD 14 CONCLUDING REMARKS 14 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT: CAROLINE WILKIE NATIONAL MANAGER, AVIATION & TRANSPORT TOURISM & TRANSPORT FORUM (TTF) P | 02 9240 2000 E | [email protected] www.ttf.org.au In short: 1. Smartcard ticketing provides convenience for commuters and efficiency gains for transport service providers. 2. Smartcard systems have been introduced in Australian cities with varying degrees of success. 3. International experience suggests that successful implementation may take many years, and difficulties are commonplace. 4. Overall, the benefits of smartcard ticketing overwhelmingly outweigh the costs and challenges that may arise in implementation. Overview Smartcard technology is being implemented around the world as a substitute for cash transactions in various capacities. When applied to public transport fare collection, smartcards eliminate the need for commuters to queue for tickets and reduce the burden on transport providers to process fare transactions. In recent years, benefits such as decreased travel times and general convenience to commuters have driven a shift towards smartcard ticketing systems on public transport systems in Australia and around the world. As well as providing more efficient transport services to commuters, smartcard ticketing systems enable service providers and transit authorities to collect comprehensive data on the travel behaviour of commuters.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategies for High Intensity Bus: Best Practices for Operating Buses in Managed Lanes Velyjah Southern, Et Al, Texas Southern University
    Texas Southern University From the SelectedWorks of Earthea Nance, PhD (Stanford University, 2004) 2017 Strategies for High Intensity Bus: Best Practices for Operating Buses in Managed Lanes Velyjah Southern, et al, Texas Southern University Available at: https://works.bepress.com/nanceea/25/ 1 Invited Student Paper: Strategies for High Intensity Bus: Best Practices for Operating 2 Buses in Managed Lanes 3 4 5 6 7 Velyjha Southern 8 Graduate Research Assistant 9 Texas Southern University 10 3100 Cleburne St. Houston, TX 77004 11 713-313-4365 (p) 713-313-4821 (f) 12 [email protected] 13 14 Earthea Nance, Ph.D. 15 Associate Professor 16 Texas Southern University 17 3100 Cleburne St. Houston, TX 77004 18 713-313-4854 (p) 713-313-7153 (f) 19 [email protected] 20 21 Carol Abel Lewis, Ph.D. 22 Professor and Director, CTTR 23 Texas Southern University 24 3100 Cleburne St. Houston, TX 77004 25 713-313-7924 (p) 713-313-4821 (f) 26 Jermaine Potts 27 Graduate Research Assistant 28 Texas Southern University 29 3100 Cleburne St. Houston, TX 77004 30 713-313-4365 (p) 713-313-4821 (f) 31 32 33 Prepared for consideration for 34 Presentation at the 96th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting 35 Washington D.C. January 2017 36 37 Word Count: 6,237 (Body) + 1,250 (Tables and Figures) = 7,487 38 References= 18 39 Submission date: November 14, 2016 40 41 42 Southern, Nance, Lewis, and Potts 2 1 2 3 4 5 ABSTRACT 6 This paper examines high intensity bus (HIB) service in managed lanes in the US.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017-2026 Samtrans Short Range Transit Plan
    SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT Short-Range Transit Plan Fiscal Years 2017 – 2026 May 3, 2017 Acknowledgements San Mateo County Transit District Board of Directors 2017 Rose Guilbault, Chair Charles Stone, Vice Chair Jeff Gee Carole Groom Zoe Kersteen-Tucker Karyl Matsumoto Dave Pine Josh Powell Peter Ratto Senior Staff Michelle Bouchard, Chief Operating Officer, Rail Michael Burns, Interim Chief Officer, Caltrain Planning / CalMod April Chan, Chief Officer, Planning, Grants, and Transportation Authority Jim Hartnett, General Manager/CEO Kathleen Kelly, Interim Chief Financial Officer / Treasurer Martha Martinez, Executive Officer, District Secretary, Executive Administration Seamus Murphy, Chief Communications Officer David Olmeda, Chief Operating Officer, Bus Mark Simon, Chief of Staff Short Range Transit Plan Project Staff and Contributors Douglas Kim, Director, Planning Lindsey Kiner, Senior Planner, Planning David Pape, Planner, Planning Margo Ross, Director of Transportation, Bus Transportation Karambir Cheema, Deputy Director ITS, Bus Transportation Ana Rivas, South Base Superintendent, Bus Transportation Ladi Millard, Director of Budgets, Finance Ryan Hinchman, Manager Financial Planning & Analysis, Finance Donald G. Esse, Senior Operations Financial Analyst, Bus Operations Leslie Fong, Senior Administrative Analyst, Grants Tina Dubost, Manager, Accessible Transit Services Natalie Chi, Bus Maintenance Contract Administrator, Bus Transportation Joan Cassman, Legal Counsel (Hanson Bridgett) Shayna M. van Hoften, Legal Counsel (Hanson
    [Show full text]
  • PDF of GGT TRANSIT GUIDE Effective Date
    goldengate.org/alerts GOLDEN Follow us: ® Social icon Circle Only use blue and/or white. For more details check out our Brand Guidelines. ® GATE TRANSIT GUIDE SCHEDULE INFORMATION JUNE 13 - SEPTEMBER 11 SUMMER 2021 CUSTOMER SERVICE Monday – Friday 7am – 6pm CLOSED weekends and the following holidays: New Year’s, Presidents’, Memorial, Independence, Labor, Thanksgiving, and Christmas days call 511 toll free TDD 711 (say “Golden Gate Transit,” then “operator”) Para obtener más información en español, vea la página 8. Other languages call: 415.455.2000 Welcome Welcome to Golden Gate Transit Bus Security Notice and Ferry System! Unattended items on buses, ferries or at ter- Golden Gate Transit has been operating bus and minals may be subject to immediate disposal. ferry service since 1970 as a service of the Golden Golden Gate Bus and Golden Gate Ferry are Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District not responsible for items left in terminals, (District), which also maintains and operates the aboard ferry vessels or buses. Golden Gate Bridge. Golden Gate Transit is subsi- dized by toll revenues from the Golden Gate Bridge, In Case of Emergency by collection of fares, and to the extent available, If an emergency occurs, GGT works closely federal and state grants. The District does not have with Bay Area media to provide up-to-date authority to levy a tax. service information. Tune radios to local news stations KCBS (740 AM) or KGO (810 AM). Bus operators may be authorized to announce Golden Gate Transit the status of GGT operations. is
    [Show full text]
  • Golden Gate Transit & Golden Gate Ferry
    Golden Gate Transit & Golden Gate Ferry 2013 Passenger Study Draft Methodology Report Conducted by: Redhill Group December 23, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT OVERVIEW ......................................................................................... 1 COMMUNICATIONS SUMMARY ......................................................................... 1 FIELD SURVEY OPERATIONS COMMUNICATIONS ...................................... 1 PHONE SURVEY COMMUNICATIONS ............................................................ 2 DETAILED SAMPLING PLAN ............................................................................. 3 GOLDEN GATE TRANSIT: ............................................................................... 3 GOLDEN GATE FERRY: ................................................................................. 13 SURVEY INSTRUMENTS .................................................................................. 20 FIELD SURVEY ............................................................................................... 20 TELEPHONE SURVEY ................................................................................... 21 DATA COLLECTION: FIELD SURVEYS ........................................................... 23 RECRUITMENT .............................................................................................. 23 TRAINING ....................................................................................................... 24 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE ..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • California State Rail Plan 2005-06 to 2015-16
    California State Rail Plan 2005-06 to 2015-16 December 2005 California Department of Transportation ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK, Secretary Business, Transportation and Housing Agency WILL KEMPTON, Director California Department of Transportation JOSEPH TAVAGLIONE, Chair STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER JEREMIAH F. HALLISEY, Vice Chair GOVERNOR BOB BALGENORTH MARIAN BERGESON JOHN CHALKER JAMES C. GHIELMETTI ALLEN M. LAWRENCE R. K. LINDSEY ESTEBAN E. TORRES SENATOR TOM TORLAKSON, Ex Officio ASSEMBLYMEMBER JENNY OROPEZA, Ex Officio JOHN BARNA, Executive Director CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1120 N STREET, MS-52 P. 0 . BOX 942873 SACRAMENTO, 94273-0001 FAX(916)653-2134 (916) 654-4245 http://www.catc.ca.gov December 29, 2005 Honorable Alan Lowenthal, Chairman Senate Transportation and Housing Committee State Capitol, Room 2209 Sacramento, CA 95814 Honorable Jenny Oropeza, Chair Assembly Transportation Committee 1020 N Street, Room 112 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear: Senator Lowenthal Assembly Member Oropeza: On behalf of the California Transportation Commission, I am transmitting to the Legislature the 10-year California State Rail Plan for FY 2005-06 through FY 2015-16 by the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) with the Commission's resolution (#G-05-11) giving advice and consent, as required by Section 14036 of the Government Code. The ten-year plan provides Caltrans' vision for intercity rail service. Caltrans'l0-year plan goals are to provide intercity rail as an alternative mode of transportation, promote congestion relief, improve air quality, better fuel efficiency, and improved land use practices. This year's Plan includes: standards for meeting those goals; sets priorities for increased revenues, increased capacity, reduced running times; and cost effectiveness.
    [Show full text]
  • Jo U Rn a L O F P U B Lic T Ransp O Rta Tio N
    Vo Volume 12, No. 3, 2009 lume 12, No. 3 Journal of Public Public of Journal Tr Brian Caulfield A Stated Preference Analysis of Real-Time ansp Margaret O’Mahony Public Transit Stop Information or Laura Eboli A New Customer Satisfaction Index for Gabriella Mazzulla Evaluating Transit Service Quality ta tion Ahmed M. El-Geneidy Bus Transit Service Planning and Operations in a John Hourdos Competitive Environment Jessica Horning Matthew H. Hardy Transit Response to Congestion Pricing Opportunities: Policy and Practice in the U.S. John Pucher Integrating Bicycling and Public Transport in North America Ralph Buehler Mario G. Beruvides The Concept of a Regional Maintenance Center James L. Simonton Natalie M. Waters Ean Ng Siva Chaivichitmalakul Cheng-Chu Chiu-Wei Pelin Z. Altintas Phil Nash 2009 Luis Barroso Paul Moon N C T R JOURNAL OF Public Transportation Volume 12, No. 3, 2009 ISSN 1077-291X TheJournal of Public Transportation is published quarterly by National Center for Transit Research Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida • College of Engineering 4202 East Fowler Avenue, CUT100 Tampa, Florida 33620-5375 Phone: (813) 974-3120 Fax: (813) 974-5168 Email: [email protected] Website: www.nctr.usf.edu/jpt/journal.htm © 2009 Center for Urban Transportation Research Volume 12, No. 3, 2009 ISSN 1077-291X CONTENTS A Stated Preference Analysis of Real-Time Public Transit Stop Information Brian Caulfield, Margaret O’Mahony ...............................................................................................1 A New Customer Satisfaction Index for Evaluating Transit Service Quality Laura Eboli, Gabriella Mazzulla ....................................................................................................... 21 Bus Transit Service Planning and Operations in a Competitive Environment Ahmed M.
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Card Readers 2021/S 093-245130 Contract Notice
    OJ/S S93 14/05/2021 1 / 4 245130-2021-EN This notice in TED website: https://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:245130-2021:TEXT:EN:HTML Finland-HSL: Smart card readers 2021/S 093-245130 Contract notice – utilities Supplies Legal Basis: Directive 2014/25/EU Section I: Contracting entity I.1) Name and addresses Official name: Helsingin Seudun Liikenne — kuntayhtymä National registration number: 2274586-3 Postal address: Opastinsilta 6A, PL 100 Town: HSL NUTS code: FI1B Helsinki-Uusimaa Postal code: 00077 Country: Finland E-mail: [email protected] Internet address(es): Main address: http://www.hsl.fi I.3) Communication The procurement documents are available for unrestricted and full direct access, free of charge, at: https:// tarjouspalvelu.fi/hsl?id=335313&tpk=3f2f9827-c11f-4bcc-b4f1-d3b63cdeef62 Additional information can be obtained from the abovementioned address Tenders or requests to participate must be submitted electronically via: https://tarjouspalvelu.fi/hsl? id=335313&tpk=3f2f9827-c11f-4bcc-b4f1-d3b63cdeef62 I.6) Main activity Urban railway, tramway, trolleybus or bus services Section II: Object II.1) Scope of the procurement II.1.1) Title: Contactless validator Reference number: 71/02.08.00/2021 II.1.2) Main CPV code 30233300 Smart card readers II.1.3) Type of contract Supplies II.1.4) Short description: Helsinki regional transport authority (HSL) is looking to procure contactless validators, which are capable of reading and updating ISO 14443 A/B contactless travel cards (such as currently used Mifare DESFire travel cards and Mifare Ultralight single charged cards), reading 1D/2D bar codes and QR codes from mobile applications and paper tickets, and reading contactless EMV cards and support pinless contactless payments 14/05/2021 S93 1 / 4 https://ted.europa.eu/TED OJ/S S93 14/05/2021 2 / 4 245130-2021-EN in transit (Visa and Mastercard MTT rules).
    [Show full text]
  • How to Use This Timetable: Locate the Time Point ( a ) on the Map Prior to Where You Want to Board the Bus
    ROUTE Downtown San Francisco Connect to 397 397 B A Muni, AC Transit & BART/Caltrain Connection Golden Gate Transit C B Effective 1/10/16rev A Main Southbound Beale 1 st passengers Fares Potrero boarding at B a Sunnydale/ y Local Out of SF s Market h o San Francisco r Bayshore only e Cash Cash C 9 th • Main/Folsom 10 pay the Local th Adult ...................... $2.25 $4.00 st Brisbane • Mission/1 11 Fare. Age 19 – 64 Old County MissionHoward th Brisbane Folsom • 11th/Market Potrero Youth ...................... $1.10 $1.10 D Park & Ride Age 18 and younger Brisbane Grand • Park & Ride Airport Baden E Eligible Discount .... $1.10 $1.10 Airport Age 65+, disabled & Medicare cardholder South San Francisco South San Francisco (proof of eligibility or identity required) San Francisco Int’l Airport San Francisco Millbrae Newbridge Children McDonnell F International Airport th Two children (age 4 and younger) ride free with each 5 Bay • Millbrae Transit Center G Millbrae Connect to K L adult or eligible discount farepaying passenger. Transit Center BART Middlefield Burlingame Millbrae Millbrae VA Medical Additional children subject to youth fare. N Center El Camino Real w H lo San Mateo il W E San Mateo y W ersit Local Day passes are available. iv • Hillsdale Caltrain n S Hillsdale U For more info, visit www.samtrans.com/daypass Burlingame Caltrain Station or call SamTrans at 1-800-660-4287 San Carlos Burlingame Webster I Lytton Tasso • Caltrain Alma Use Clipper® and receive a discount. Hillsdale San Carlos M High Legend Caltrain Station Redwood CIty Discounted tokens available for purchase.
    [Show full text]
  • Privatizing the Metro Card
    PRIVATIZING THE TRANSPORTATIONMETRO CARD: EQUITY IN AN OPEN-LOOP SMARTCARD FARE PAYMENT SYSTEM A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning & Preservation COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Urban Planning By DAVID PERLMUTTER May 15, 2015 Acknowledgments I would like to first thank my thesis advisor, Professor David King, for his ongoing support and helpful advice throughout the research process. Secondly, many thanks to Richard Barone of the Regional Plan Association for his invaluable insights as my thesis reader. I would also like to thank the following individuals for their assistance in shaping my research methodology and conclusions: Alexis Perrotta, PhD candidate at Columbia University GSAPP; Howard Permut, Senior Fellow of the Regional Plan Association; and Candace Brakewood, Professor of Civil Engineering at the City College of New York, To my partner, Matt Wallace, thank you for your continued encouragement and for enduring many sleepless nights. And finally, many thanks to my family for their love and support. 2 Privatizing the Metro Card | David Perlmutter | May 2015 Table of Contents Glossary 5 Abstract 7 Introduction 8 Literature Review 9 Transportation Equity and the Unbanked 9 Contactless Smartcard Implementation in the Transit Industry 12 Prepaid Debit Cards in an Open Payment System 16 The Case of Chicago’s Ventra 17 The MTA’s Contactless Metro Card 18 Methodology 19 Hypotheses 21 Data Sources 23 Survey Results 32 Case
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Fare Policy, Structure, and Technology
    Transit Fare PPolicy,olicy, Structure and Technology MIT – Trans iitt Mana g ement Course March 16, 2010 Dan Fleishman TranSystems Fare System Parameters Fare Policy Fare Collection Fare Structure & Technology Type of Collection/ Pricing Strategy Verification Payment Options Payment Media/Technology Pricing Levels Fare Policy, Structure and Technology 2 Fare System Parameters (cont.) Fare Policy Principles, goals and constraints that guide and restrict a transit agency in setting and collecting ffaresares Fare Structure Pricing Strateggyy: general approach (e.g., flat fare vs. fare differentials) Payment Options: forms of fare payment (e.g., cash, passes, multi-ride tickets, stored value) Transfer PPolicy:olicy: price and use parameters Pricing Levels: actual fare amounts for each payment option Fare Collection and Technology Type of Collection/Verification: how fares are paid and inspected (e.g., barrier, self-service/POP, pay on board) Payment Media/Technology: type of payment media and equipment (e.g., magnetic, smart card) Fare Policy, Structure and Technology 3 Importance of Fare Policy Fare policy affects all aspects of transit system Administration – fare changes tend to be publicly scrutinized & debated Finance – fares are important source of revenue Customer Service -- fare payment is first aspect of transit a customer encounters; complexity and ease of access to prepaid options important customer service factors Marketing – fares affectaffect perception ofof transittransit system in the ccommunity;ommunity; fare
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Reduced and Free Transit Fare Programs in California
    A Review of Reduced and Free Transit Fare Programs in California A Research Report from the University of California Institute of Transportation Studies Jean-Daniel Saphores, Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Department of Urban Planning and Public Policy, University of California, Irvine Deep Shah, Master’s Student, University of California, Irvine Farzana Khatun, Ph.D. Candidate, University of California, Irvine January 2020 Report No: UC-ITS-2019-55 | DOI: 10.7922/G2XP735Q Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. UC-ITS-2019-55 N/A N/A 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date A Review of Reduced and Free Transit Fare Programs in California January 2020 6. Performing Organization Code ITS-Irvine 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Jean-Daniel Saphores, Ph.D., https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9514-0994; Deep Shah; N/A and Farzana Khatun 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. Institute of Transportation Studies, Irvine N/A 4000 Anteater Instruction and Research Building 11. Contract or Grant No. Irvine, CA 92697 UC-ITS-2019-55 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered The University of California Institute of Transportation Studies Final Report (January 2019 - January www.ucits.org 2020) 14. Sponsoring Agency Code UC ITS 15. Supplementary Notes DOI:10.7922/G2XP735Q 16. Abstract To gain a better understanding of the current use and performance of free and reduced-fare transit pass programs, researchers at UC Irvine surveyed California transit agencies with a focus on members of the California Transit Association (CTA) during November and December 2019.
    [Show full text]