Charlotte's Light Rail: Lynx Blue Line

[monsoon]

^That seems like the wrong attitude towards enabling people to use transit. I would think the goal should be to give as many options as possible so they are encouraged to ride the train and not encouraged to drive because it is more convenient. While I agree about the $1.30 ride, how about someone that is paying for a group of people with round trip tickets? It quickly adds up. How about passes?

[orulz]

I'm not aware of the fee structure for AMEX cards, but it may very well be that this fee structure makes it uneconomical to support AMEX for small transactions like $1.30, while it makes more sense for $50 spent on gas, $20 purchases at Wal-Mart, or $15 spent on lunch. For example, if CATS only gets $.70 out of an AMEX transaction for a one way ticket, but gets $1.18 out of a Visa/MC transaction, then of course they would not accept AMEX. But this is pointless anyway as I'm just speculating. Anyone care to do some research and figure out AMEX's transaction fee structure? Not I.

It's true that it would then make sense for somebody buying a large group of passes, let's say 5 passes or more, but that adds another layer of complexity to the machines that would then have to be explained to users : "Visa/MC supported for all transactions; AMEX supported only for transactions > 5 passes"

[HopHead]

^That seems like the wrong attitude towards enabling people to use transit. I would think the goal should be to give as many options as possible so they are encouraged to ride the train and not encouraged to drive because it is more convenient. While I agree about the $1.30 ride, how about someone that is paying for a group of people with round trip tickets? It quickly adds up. How about passes?

I agree that there should be as many options as possible to encourage mass transit, so my post probably came across the wrong way. But Amex typically charges a higher transaction fee than Visa and Mastercard so it may not be worthwhile for CATS to pay that higher fee for what's usually a $1.30 transaction. For larger transactions like group round trip or a monthly pass, then it may make more sense for Amex. I guess I'm just used to having the dry cleaners only accept MC/Visa for my dress shirts

[monsoon]

.... But Amex typically charges a higher transaction fee than Visa and Mastercard so it may not be worthwhile for CATS to pay that higher fee for what's usually a $1.30 transaction. ....

You can use an Amex card in any USPS postal machine to send a letter, buy stamps, etc. Minimum purchase is $1 (if you use any credit card)

[Neo]

It may or may not be the reason but the chargeback policy from American Express doesn't favor the merchant at all. When a chargeback occurs, American Express sides with the American Express holder. It leads to a large amount of fraud since consumers can get away with purchasing an item and charging it back easily. The merchant is also stuck with the merchant fee as American Express doesn't refund them, which, by the way, only runs ~1% higher than Vista/Mastercard rates.

Siding with consumers is obviously a good thing, but most have the opinion that in the end it is very bad for Amex to simply default to siding with the end consumer since the merchant almost always loses out. Considering Amex simply isn't as widely used as Visa/Mastercard I can't see where it would benefit CATS to accept it.

[Raintree21]

The nation is taking notice of our success so far with Lynx. CATS hosted officials from the Atlanta Transit Planning Board yesterday who were interested in our leaps and bounds.

[Charlotte_native]

The nation is taking notice of our success so far with Lynx. CATS hosted officials from the Atlanta Transit Planning Board yesterday who were interested in our leaps and bounds.

And here is what they had to say...

http://www.communityinvestmentnetwork.org/...ba&type=123

[rooster8]

We'll be in Charlotte this weekend and I'd like to ride the trolley. Is it operating yet?

[tozmervo]

It was scheduled to resume in March, but I haven't even seen the trolleys on the tracks yet. I would have thought we'd seem them out testing on the weekends by now.

[Raintree21]

So the front page of the O today has a story on the lack of parking at some of the first light rail stops (485 and Sharon Road West). Says they are constantly full. Is it time to consider expansion or do we take a wait and see approach? The other lots still have plenty of room, but then, if you say just drive to the next lot, it approaches the point of why am I riding the train at all if I'm driving so close to downtown.

[Andyc545]

So the front page of the O today has a story on the lack of parking at some of the first light rail stops (485 and Sharon Road West). Says they are constantly full. Is it time to consider expansion or do we take a wait and see approach? The other lots still have plenty of room, but then, if you say just drive to the next lot, it approaches the point of why am I riding the train at all if I'm driving so close to downtown.

I'm glad Parker has the same view point as me- no they should not build another parking deck- yet. Money needs to continuously be invested into improvements, maintanance, and more public transportation. Building another deck is theoretically taking money out of where investments need to be made. I'd pave an overflow lot before building a deck.

[tozmervo]

The story may have been about parking, but this is the part that caught my eye:

Parker said he's also negotiating with the German firm Siemens to get more rail cars. CATS often alternates between one and two-car trains, and Parker said CATS needs more two-car trains.

"We run two-car trains as often as we can," Parker said. "We need three or four more vehicles to run two-car trains in all of rush hour."

I'm extremely glad to see that CATS is taking these steps. I was concerned that, without additional cars, LYNX would get pushed against its rush hour capacity too quickly and turn riders off.

[monsoon]

^That isn't new news. Siemens offered up another 12 cars, I believe, at discount if CATS bought them now. However I am pretty sure that a purchase such as this would require a vote from the MTC, unless the Charlotte city council wants to pay for the vehicles out of the standard city budget.

Remember that extra capital spending on the South LRT, reduces the amount of money available to build other projects.

....Is it time to consider expansion or do we take a wait and see approach? The other lots still have plenty of room, but then, if you say just drive to the next lot, it approaches the point of why am I riding the train at all if I'm driving so close to downtown.

The answer to this is easy. Start charging for parking at these stations.

[tozmervo]

^That isn't new news. Siemens offered up another 12 cars, I believe, at discount if CATS bought them now. However I am pretty sure that a purchase such as this would require a vote from the MTC, unless the Charlotte city council wants to pay for the vehicles out of the standard city budget.

Remember that extra capital spending on the South LRT, reduces the amount of money available to build other projects.

The answer to this is easy. Start charging for parking at these stations.

Right, but this was the first indication that CATS is persuing those new cars.

Also, Parker makes a good point in the article about charging for parking - especially in this case, it would just be another barrier to using mass transit. I could see implementing such a system after the system has matured and people aren't so danged afraid of the busses (I'm really curious to know how many people take 58/Pineville to that station).

[monsoon]

Right, but this was the first indication that CATS is persuing those new cars.

Maybe the first indication from the Observer, but this website and others have reported on this weeks ago. As I stated in the previous post, CATS can't just buy these vehicles as that is going to require a significant amount of money they have not been authorized to spend. What would be new news is if the Charlotte city council and/or the MTC said go buy more vehicles. That does not seem to have happened.

[Justadude]

Charging for parking, especially out in the suburbs where it's not common, is a sure way to scare off ridership. Part of the "sell" for the Blue line is its cost-efficiency compared to driving and parking uptown, so a parking fee would be a bad marketing move from that standpoint.

In a sense, it's better to have too few spaces than too many. As they say, "Americans love a winner". A lot of ego is wrapped up in transit choices, so it's important that CATS come across as a product that's in-demand. I'd rather have full trains and full lots, than empty trains and empty lots... even if it means circling for a parking space and having to stand in the aisle. The money is better spent maintaining the quality of the line and working on expansion.

[uptownliving]

Couple of things I noticed the other day while riding LYNX.

- The Ticket Checker was standing in the doorway of the train at the stops checking people's tickets as they got on. A couple of people noticed this and turned away before boarding the train and others were directed to the ticket machine on the platform. Most people however had their tickets. The train didn't wait for those that didnt have tickets. They were left on the platform to catch the next train.

- I rode the train with my bike for the first time and used the mounting device. It was easy to use and kept my bike out of the way of the other passengers.

- Noticed they have started putting Visitor Information leaflets in the plastic pockets mounted on the walls. It welcomes visitors to Charlotte and directs them to Info Charlotte downtown complete with a map.

[monsoon]

Charging for parking, especially out in the suburbs where it's not common, is a sure way to scare off ridership. ....

But isn't LRT, that is riding a train, not common in the suburbs either? I do know that other transit systems charge for parking at suburban park and ride stations. As long as the total cost is less than parking downtown, I am not convinced there would be a problem.

[uptownliving]

Maybe its time we look at makeing the 1/2 Cent Sales tax bumped up to 3/4 or a full cent. Construciton costs are not getting cheaper and a system that was suposed to be designed to last 25 years is already being overloaded in its first year of operation. With the increased tax we could expand the stations to 300 ft so they could accomidate 3 car trains, build a larger 485 deck, bump up the Streetcar and still build the North and NE Lines. Maybe we could even buy some new TVMs.

[monsoon]

^I actually think that is a good idea, but it would seem that it would also be very politically difficult to do.

[dubone]

I still don't support increasing the transit tax, but I think there might be a case for creating some additional parking where there is a charge. It seems like they can do Certificates of Participation or something and charge a modest amount for the added parking spaces. They don't need to make it high overhead, just those little stuff-the-cash-in-the-slot type places. It seems that the basic public infrastructure for parking is already provided, and that number of spaces is what was used for the pre-existing ridership projections. The extra parking could provide extra ridership that is bonus. It would act as overflow parking where people are being boxed out now by capacity.

I don't think the existing lots should be charged for, as that would create a disincentive for parking-and-riding at a time when we want and need them to get out of their cars.

[hinsp0]

But isn't LRT, that is riding a train, not common in the suburbs either? I do know that other transit systems charge for parking at suburban park and ride stations. As long as the total cost is less than parking downtown, I am not convinced there would be a problem.

I agree. Suburban commuters should pay for parking. The additional revenue may help CATS build more parking spaces, buy extra train cars in order to add more 2-car train service, buy more buses, or even to eventually lengthen platforms to allow for 3-car trains. If paying $1/day to park, for example, dissuades commuters from using LYNX, then so be it.

Parking at suburban DC metro stations is $4.25/day (recent cost increase). My office is on Pennsylvania Ave and parking beneath the building is $18/day. The vast majority of my colleagues who live in the burbs pay metro parking rather than fight traffic into downtown only to pay $18 when they arrive. When I lived outside the Beltway I always paid to park at the local metro and that wasn't a concern because the cost of driving downtown was exponentially more expensive, not to mention that the stress of the white-knuckle rush-hour driving experience can ruin your day.

[Andyc545]

Parking at suburban DC metro stations is $4.25/day (recent cost increase). My office is on Pennsylvania Ave and parking beneath the building is $18/day. The vast majority of my colleagues who live in the burbs pay metro parking rather than fight traffic into downtown only to pay $18 when they arrive. When I lived outside the Beltway I always paid to park at the local metro and that wasn't a concern because the cost of driving downtown was exponentially more expensive, not to mention that the stress of the white-knuckle rush-hour driving experience can ruin your day.

Well this may work with a system that has been around and well aware of for a while, as well as has been made as part of a lifestyle for most in DC, this wouldn't work in Charlotte for years. The system is barely a few months old, and people are still discovering uses for the LRT. If you implemented a parking charge, you will likely scare off many commuters as they see trends in paying and would rather just "screw it" and park uptown. This certainly would not help gain dedicated riders when we are currently pursuing two additional lines in the immediate timeframe, one which is on a balancing act with gaining federal funding based on ridership. You implement a charge on parking, that could be the difference in a drop of ridership on our current line, which could loose what we are trying to pursue with the fed govt. Another reason is, well we are trying to gain patronage to the line, one of its advertising features is its cost to ride and having free parking. Heck- there is a billboard on S. Blvd somewhere near where Silos is going that advertises that for using LYNX you don't have to pay for parking. Maybe in the future it would work once things are more "developed" but this would likely scare many away that are just getting to ride and learn about the light rail for the first time. Many people I talk to in the office and at school still haven't rode LYNX and ask me more information as "how much it costs" and "where it goes". I'm amazed that the public is still so lost as to this investment that has been one of Charlotte's largest additions and topics of conversation over the last few years.

An add'l tax increase sounds ideal, and I certainly would support it and it certainly would be the best way of implementing changes on a quicker time frame, as well as funding more needed projects. I don't know how the general public would perceive this, however, after just voting for a tax increase 4 months ago. I think a little more time buffer would have to be given, as well as see how gas prices fare over the summer and how willing people are to continue driving their vehicle, before even proposing the add'l tax.

[monsoon]

Well this may work with a system that has been around and well aware of for a while, as well as has been made as part of a lifestyle for most in DC, ....

Exactly what is different about suburban Virginia that is different about suburban Charlotte that would convince the commuter in DC to pay less money for a P&R lot and skip the hassle of driving into the city, that wouldn't apply to Charlotte commuters?

[Justadude]

^ The fact that it is 10 times as much hassle to navigate your way into central DC by car than it is to do so in Charlotte. 485 isn't even remotely comparable to the Beltway and Uptown is far behind the District in terms of driving difficulty.

Not to paint with too broad a brush, but I think the typical commuter will factor three things into his/her transit decision:

A) Speed

B) Cost

C) Ease/Comfort

During normal commuting hours, the Blue line is superior in A and B, and very competitive in C. Over time, the speed of the line will continue to be more appealing as 77 gets worse. I suppose C is a matter of how well-maintained the system is over the long haul and how good a job the city does of integrating it into development patterns.

But when you start chipping away at B, you're chipping away at a fundamental motivation for using the line at all. If I'm already paying for my ticket, and then you add a parking fee as well, the trade-off (not having full mobility vs. not having to navigate a car into uptown) starts to look a little weaker. The higher the parking fee rises, and we all know it's going to rise if it's instituted at all, the less appealing transit becomes. And this is especially the case with borderline transit users who are waiting for the system to "sell" itself before they will abandon the gas-guzzler and hop on the train. IMO, anything that makes such a decision more difficult for the consumer is a bad bet for CATS and not worth whatever marginal revenue it produces.

Edited April 3, 2008 by Justadude