Cover Image

Not for Sale

View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 19

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 18
8 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF FUTURE ANTICIPATED USE OF POP FARE COLLECTION Regarding PoP in the Future Use PoP Now Never Used Not Considering Considering Considering/ Considering on Any Significant Adding More Planning Its One or More Not Operator Change Routes Elimination Routes Considering Baltimore--Maryland Mass Transit Administration 1 Buffalo--Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority 1 Calgary Transit 1 - Charlotte Area Transit System 1 Cleveland--Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority 1 - Dallas Area Rapid Transit 1 - Denver--Regional Transit District 1 Edmonton Transit System 1 - Eugene--Lane Transit District 1 Everett--Community Transit 1 Honolulu DTS Rapid Transit Division - 1 Houston--Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County 1 Las Vegas--Regional Transit Commission of Southern 1 Nevada Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 1 Memphis Area Transit Authority 1 MinneapolisSt. Paul--Metro Transit 1 Newark--NJ Transit 1 New York City--MTANew York City Transit 1 Oceanside--North San Diego County Transit District 1 Ottawa Regional Transit Commission 1 Phoenix--METRO Light Rail 1 Pittsburgh--Port Authority of Allegheny County 1 Portland--Tri-County Metropolitan District of Oregon 1 Sacramento Regional Transit District 1 Salt Lake City--Utah Transit Authority 1 - San Diego Metropolitan Transit System 1 - San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency 1 San JoseSanta Clara Valley Transportation Authority 1 Seattle--Sound Transit 1 St. Louis--Bi-State Development Agency 1 Toronto Transit Commission 1 Vancouver TransLink/SkyTrain 1 York Region Transit/Viva 1 Total 17 12 1 2 1 REPORT ORGANIZATION Chapter two covers a literature review with a focus on TCRP Report 80: A Toolkit for Self-Service, Barrier-Free Fare The synthesis is organized as a summary of each of the fol- Collection. TCRP Report 80 was the most thorough research lowing three main tasks in chapters two, three, and four, effort on the subject of PoP fare collection when published respectively. The last chapter presents a summary and con- in 2002. Some of its relevance may be diminished not only clusions, followed by appendixes. because of the time that has passed but the breadth and inten-

OCR for page 18
9 sity of experiences that have been accumulated with the U.S. MinneapolisSt. Paul, Minnesota--Metro Transit; and Canadian transit operators that employ PoP fare collec- New York City, New York--Metropolitan Transportation tion. In addition, this chapter summarizes significant findings Authority (MTA)New York City Transit (NYCT); from current research on the subject of PoP fare collection. Phoenix, Arizona--Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (METRO Light Rail); and Related to the literature search, in the report contains San Francisco, California--San Francisco Municipal a bibliography that includes an annotated portion of refer- Transportation Agency (SFMTA, Muni). ences plus a section where special resources collected from participating transit operators are listed and made available Chapter five is a summary of the conclusions reached on the TRB website. from the prior three chapters. These include conclusions reached about the current state of the practice, trends related Chapter three provides a summary of a survey of North to how the PoP function is carried out among the transit American transit operators employing off-board PoP fare col- operators, and gaps in available data and information that lection. Introduced above, the survey was sent to 33 North suggest the need for additional study. American operators. Responses were tabulated, and the chap- ter comprises 32 tables to display resulting summaries of key The five chapters comprise the body of the report. However, statistics, relationships, and findings from the surveys. significant information is included in appendixes to the report: Chapter four presents in-depth summaries of what is hap- Appendix A: Survey Instrument pening with seven transit operators that use PoP for one or more routes in their respective systems. These seven cases Appendix B: Participating Agencies were selected to represent a sampling of regions having a diverse range of conditions with PoP fare collection experi- Appendix C: Example of Statutory Provisions Concern- ences to include bus and rail modes, differing geographical ing Fare Evasion Enforcement areas of North America, and a range in the length of time PoP has been in operation. They are as follows: Appendix D: Example Performance Report Buffalo, New York--Niagara Frontier Transportation Appendix E: Example Manual and Standard Operating Authority (NFTA); Procedures (SOPs) Dallas, Texas--Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART); Los Angeles, California--Los Angeles County Metro Appendix F: Example Enforcement/Inspector Job politan Transportation Authority (LA Metro); Description