# Fare Deadbeats Over 25% Of L.A. Orange Line Riders



## WhoozOn1st (Jan 30, 2014)

L.A. Metro's Orange Line has a color name like the rail lines, but it's a rapid bus that spans much of the San Fernando Valley. It has grade crossings and gates like a rail line, but is just a stinking bus. And now it turns out that a huge chunk of its passengers stink at paying their fares; four times as many fare evaders as estimated for the rest of the system. L.A. Metro officials say they're surprised. Certainly they're not amused.

"More than a fourth of Orange Line passengers ride for free, study finds" - http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-fare-evasion-20140130,0,4963292.story#axzz2rrbGiJ8x

"About 30,000 people each day use the Orange Line, which connects commuters in Chatsworth and Woodland Hills with the Red Line subway's northern terminus in North Hollywood.

"Passengers boarding Orange Line buses are supposed to touch their plastic TAP cards to a waist-height pillar that automatically deducts the fare from a pre-paid account. The platforms have no turnstiles to prevent passengers from boarding without paying, and the buses do not have fare boxes."


----------



## Anderson (Jan 30, 2014)

It sounds like it's half-and-half between intentional non-payment and folks who're confused. The Orange Line is _just_ different enough from the rest of the buses to throw folks for a loop, I suspect.


----------



## caravanman (Jan 30, 2014)

I wonder what the correct fare is, even at $1, a quarter of riders would pay $7,500 a day... Seems worth employing a few fare inspectors, funded from the recovered fares?

If this is a commuter line, I guess most riders are pretty regular riders and know the fare system...

Ed


----------



## The Davy Crockett (Jan 30, 2014)

It is a _*bus*_. Need I say more? :giggle:


----------



## TinCan782 (Jan 30, 2014)

The Orange Line has "grade crossings" but, NO crossing gates...just complicated traffic light arrangements at all the intersections. The Orange Line was built on the former Southern Pacific Burbank Branch right-of-way. It became a busway because the NIMBYS here in the Valley didn't want light rail. There is still at least one councilperson who would like to see it converted to light rail.


----------



## Anderson (Jan 30, 2014)

FrensicPic said:


> The Orange Line has "grade crossings" but, NO crossing gates...just complicated traffic light arrangements at all the intersections. The Orange Line was built on the former Southern Pacific Burbank Branch right-of-way. It became a busway because the NIMBYS here in the Valley didn't want light rail. There is still at least one councilperson who would like to see it converted to light rail.


My understanding is that there's a non-trivial risk that the Orange Line will slam into capacity constraints in the next few years, and that it might in some manner get "forced" to a rail option (at least, if they can't work out a way to do something like bus convoys).


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Jan 30, 2014)

FrensicPic said:


> The Orange Line has "grade crossings" but, NO crossing gates...just complicated traffic light arrangements at all the intersections.


My idea about gates is likely a misremembrance of the early days of the line, when collisions at grade crossings made safety more of a concern and there was talk of installing gates.




The connecting line at right is the Metro Red Line subway to Union Station. Ventura County Line connection at top is to Metrolink and Amtrak Pacific Surfliners.​


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Jan 30, 2014)

While I have used TAP and think it is a great easy to use system I have wondered how Fare Inspectors verify you indeed "tapped" your card for that particular ride. Timestamp that can be read perhaps?


----------



## jimhudson (Jan 30, 2014)

I'm Shocked! Shocked! along with the Suits that the good folks from the Valley cheat when it comes to riding Commuter Transportation whether it be Rail or Bus! Of course this never happens in any other City! <_<


----------



## MikefromCrete (Jan 30, 2014)

If you make it easy for people to cheat, they will.


----------



## leemell (Jan 30, 2014)

Actually the MTA ran out of money for rail and opted for a busway. The NIMBYs tried to stop the busway. When the busway was built it was built in a way that allowed rail to be installed without completely rebuilding it. They are considering bus convoys and longer buses. The longer buses would require a legislature exemption as they do run on city streets. There is talk about converting to rail and at least on county board Supervisor actively favors it. About 30,000+ people ride it, when opened, they were hoping for 20,000. These passengers are probably about 90% commuters, they know what they are doing. The Sheriff's Dept. patrol and enforces on all of MTA and Metrolink trains and buses. The Sheriff is adding a number of new deputies to the Orange line right now. Putting limited access on these stops would be pretty expensive as they are mostly wide open.


----------



## TinCan782 (Jan 30, 2014)

OlympianHiawatha said:


> While I have used TAP and think it is a great easy to use system I have wondered how Fare Inspectors verify you indeed "tapped" your card for that particular ride. Timestamp that can be read perhaps?


If I understand TAP correctly, for the Orange LIne, you have to tap your card at the station not on the bus. On regular buses, you tap on the bus. That's what I do on the Silver Line. I don't use the Orange (or Red) lines...Metrolink instead to get to Union Station. That "where to tap" confusion may be responsible for some of the lost fares. Why the difference?


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jan 30, 2014)

This one shouldn't be called the Orange Line, it should be called Metro Rapid, since it's basically the same thing (NABI 60-BRT). It's not a rail route, it's a bus route. Nothing wrong with a bus route itself but it's just a bus route, so it should operate as a bus route, not as a rail route.

Frankly, by now BRT seems really stupid to me, the bus is much more flexible than rail but BRT negates that flexibility. Meanwhile, a bus cannot come close to rail on capacity. Instead, I support use of busways to bypass congested areas, while individual buses come on and off from the streets, just like in Pittsburgh.

Passengers on San Francisco Muni buses ride for free all the time, I see it so often it might as well be 50% of ridership lost.


----------



## Anderson (Jan 31, 2014)

FrensicPic said:


> OlympianHiawatha said:
> 
> 
> > While I have used TAP and think it is a great easy to use system I have wondered how Fare Inspectors verify you indeed "tapped" your card for that particular ride. Timestamp that can be read perhaps?
> ...


I suspect it was to speed loading/unloading. Having fumbled with a similar card system in DC, it only takes one person whose card is a bit of a dud (and takes 3-4 taps to process) to slow things down.

And that difference would account for the issues, honestly, since you probably get a lot of folks who "autopilot" onto the bus and who are then confused at the lack of anywhere to tap onboard.


----------



## trainman74 (Jan 31, 2014)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> This one shouldn't be called the Orange Line, it should be called Metro Rapid, since it's basically the same thing (NABI 60-BRT). It's not a rail route, it's a bus route. Nothing wrong with a bus route itself but it's just a bus route, so it should operate as a bus route, not as a rail route.


The "Orange Line" branding is because they want to emphasize that most of its route is on a private right-of-way, rather than entirely on city streets as the Metro Rapid lines are.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jan 31, 2014)

trainman74 said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > This one shouldn't be called the Orange Line, it should be called Metro Rapid, since it's basically the same thing (NABI 60-BRT). It's not a rail route, it's a bus route. Nothing wrong with a bus route itself but it's just a bus route, so it should operate as a bus route, not as a rail route.
> ...


Well, they could've called it Metro Liner or some other branding. The problem isn't exactly the branding, it's the concept of operating a bus like a rail service. It just don't work that way. Obviously fare evasion is rampant, but SF Muni probably has more because their drivers keep opening the rear door to load. A bus with one driver should only load for the front door, otherwise you're gonna have 50% or more fare evaders.


----------



## AlanB (Feb 1, 2014)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> A bus with one driver should only load for the front door, otherwise you're gonna have 50% or more fare evaders.


If the Orange line were to operate like that, you would severely impact its capacity. Those buses just load & go and any attempt to board everyone through the front door, make them tap, would probably halve the capacity of that line. And that line already needs more capacity; not less. But they can't run the buses more closely together than they do now, which is why they'll probably eventually have to convert to LRT.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Feb 1, 2014)

Yeah, they'll have to extend the Red Line or convert to light rail. The buses are the same model as Metro Rapid's artics, they were only designed to be loaded through one door or else you would need two people to operate. No good solution here, even light rail has lots of fare evasion, the Red Line extension might be a better idea.


----------



## rickycourtney (Feb 2, 2014)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> Well, they could've called it Metro Liner or some other branding.


They do call it Metro Liner. It's listed as the Metro Liner Orange Line on maps. The buses are painted to look like Metro Rail trains except with "Metro Liner" painted on the side.


Swadian Hardcore said:


> The problem isn't exactly the branding, it's the concept of operating a bus like a rail service. It just don't work that way.


I respectfully disagree and point to success stories like the BRT system in Curitiba, Brazil.


Swadian Hardcore said:


> Obviously fare evasion is rampant, but SF Muni probably has more because their drivers keep opening the rear door to load.


SF Muni is a proof of payment system. Passengers with Clipper cards are *encouraged* to board through rear doors and use the validator located by the rear door.


Swadian Hardcore said:


> A bus with one driver should only load for the front door, otherwise you're gonna have 50% or more fare evaders.


The Metro Orange Line was never designed to operate like that. The coaches never had fare boxes installed. Passengers are expected to have a TAP card and tap it on one of the validators located at the entrance to the station. It's the same system that's used at most stations on the Blue and Gold Lines.

It's also important to note that many of the violators *improperly* used their TAP card. That means they *paid* and had a *valid* monthly, weekly or day pass on their card but neglected to tap as they entered the station (which is frankly a stupid rule.)

What the Orange Line needs is more fare enforcement officers... who give out very expensive tickets. Metro should also make the "virtual faregate" validators harder to miss including putting signs at eye level and placing machines in the middle of the walkway (if ADA allows.)


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Feb 2, 2014)

What if you want to pay with cash? Or what if you have a day pass? I've never used a tap card anywhere so understandably I don't see the core of the problem.

As for Curitiba, I would like to point out:

1. Curitiba isn't as big as Los Angeles, the BRT system is intended as improved bus service, not a substitution for rail.

2. Curitiba's BRT system uses specially-designed vehicles, not regular artics like the NABI 60-BRT's in Los Angeles. Even though the 60-BRT is called "BRT", it's not really a BRT vehicle, just a 60-LFW with rounded styling.

3. Curitiba's BRT system is reported to be getting slower and slower.

4. Curitiba's Marcopolo vehicles are reputed to be "junk", so mechanical problems may become a bigger and bigger problem in the future.


----------



## rickycourtney (Feb 3, 2014)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> What if you want to pay with cash? Or what if you have a day pass? I've never used a tap card anywhere so understandably I don't see the core of the problem.


You can buy a TAP card and load with cash or a pass from the ticket vending machines located at every station (and they were built to the same standards as the light rail stations on the Blue and Gold lines.) Once you have a TAP card you tap it on the validators you pass by as you walk from the TVM to the boarding area.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Feb 3, 2014)

rickycourtney said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > What if you want to pay with cash? Or what if you have a day pass? I've never used a tap card anywhere so understandably I don't see the core of the problem.
> ...


Ah, thanks for explaining. Now I get what's going on.


----------



## afigg (Feb 4, 2014)

Saw this news story link on skyscraper.com about the LA Metro Orange line: Repeal of Orange Line Rail Ban Clears State Assembly. Perhaps in 10 or 15 years, the Orange Line will be light rail instead of a bus line. The repeal still has to get through the state Senate, so who knows.


----------



## rickycourtney (Feb 5, 2014)

I wonder if Metro has thought about using bi-articulated buses (80 feet long with two trailers) on the Orange Line. That could allow them to increase capacity without the cost of hiring extra drivers to "pod" buses.

I know that there's a law that doesn't allow buses longer than 60 feet on California streets (Metro had to get an exemption to do trials on a 65 foot bus) but these buses run almost entirely on a private busway road. The only exception is the loop the buses make from the Canoga station to the stop at Warner Center... that's about two miles in mixed traffic.

It seems with some mitigation... it could be a good way to increase capacity.


----------



## leemell (Feb 5, 2014)

rickycourtney said:


> I wonder if Metro has thought about using bi-articulated buses (80 feet long with two trailers) on the Orange Line. That could allow them to increase capacity without the cost of hiring extra drivers to "pod" buses.
> 
> I know that there's a law that doesn't allow buses longer than 60 feet on California streets (Metro had to get an exemption to do trials on a 65 foot bus) but these buses run almost entirely on a private busway road. The only exception is the loop the buses make from the Canoga station to the stop at Warner Center... that's about two miles in mixed traffic.
> 
> It seems with some mitigation... it could be a good way to increase capacity.


Yes they have. They still must get the law changed or an exemption. At last check they didn't think the chances were very good.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Feb 5, 2014)

rickycourtney said:


> I wonder if Metro has thought about using bi-articulated buses (80 feet long with two trailers) on the Orange Line. That could allow them to increase capacity without the cost of hiring extra drivers to "pod" buses.
> 
> I know that there's a law that doesn't allow buses longer than 60 feet on California streets (Metro had to get an exemption to do trials on a 65 foot bus) but these buses run almost entirely on a private busway road. The only exception is the loop the buses make from the Canoga station to the stop at Warner Center... that's about two miles in mixed traffic.
> 
> It seems with some mitigation... it could be a good way to increase capacity.


Who's gonna built them? LACMTA seems partial to NABI but their biggest production model is the 60-BRT. Same with New Flyer and Novabus. If anybody can pull this off with a reliable design, it would be New Flyer building a D80LFR, though Nova has a chance. NABI's poor reputation and increasing flawed designs aren't gonna do it.


----------



## TinCan782 (Feb 5, 2014)

rickycourtney said:


> I wonder if Metro has thought about using bi-articulated buses (80 feet long with two trailers) on the Orange Line. That could allow them to increase capacity without the cost of hiring extra drivers to "pod" buses.
> 
> I know that there's a law that doesn't allow buses longer than 60 feet on California streets (Metro had to get an exemption to do trials on a 65 foot bus) but these buses run almost entirely on a private busway road. The only exception is the loop the buses make from the Canoga station to the stop at Warner Center... that's about two miles in mixed traffic.
> 
> It seems with some mitigation... it could be a good way to increase capacity.


I thought the Orange Line buses were articulated...including the portion along Canoga Avenue which is dedicated busway as is the rest of the Orange Line east to North Hollywood.


----------



## Trogdor (Feb 5, 2014)

FrensicPic said:


> I thought the Orange Line buses were articulated...including the portion along Canoga Avenue which is dedicated busway as is the rest of the Orange Line east to North Hollywood.


They are. But they aren't 80 feet long, which is the size folks are discussing.


----------

