Some gentle suggestions for Metro and a poll: how do you feel about those rail and bus seats?

Posted by

Good post on Brigham Yen’s blog today about a visitor from San Francisco getting his first taste of the Metro system.

Metro's sharp-looking seats -- in my view! Photo by Brigham Yen.

The visitor has mostly positive things to say, but was puzzled by the unlocked turnstiles (join the crowd!) and had mild complaints about lighting in the subway cars and the material used on subway seats.

Brigham echoes a few of those points. My one counterpoint: I like the materials used on seats on Metro’s buses and trains, which I think adds a nice splash of  color and makes the buses and trains more welcoming.

Brigham, of course, includes a photo of a big ol’ splotch of nasty used gum on one of the seats. Good eye! :)

Your thoughts? Take the poll!

 

34 thoughts on “Some gentle suggestions for Metro and a poll: how do you feel about those rail and bus seats?”

  1. Interesting story. The one thing I think worth remembering is that we all come into contact on a frequent basis with all sorts of things in public that could be harboring germs.

    Steve Hymon
    Editor, The Source

  2. Hi Steve,

    I was basing on wikipedia’s information on LACMTA’s funding resources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_County_Metropolitan_Transportation_Authority#Funding

    Granted since there’s no source on that link, but it’s the only data that I can work off of to see what the tax-to-farebox revenue is to keep LACMTA running.

    Using the data shown there, Metro’s funding is mainly 86% taxes and 4% from other revenue (I presume, ads and TransitTV and the like), and less than 10% from the fare box.

    Fares alone hardly make up the total cost of running LA Metro. With tax dependency brunting such a high percentage of operational costs of Metro, it affects things like comfy seats. And with increased Congressional budget cuts who knows what’ll be cut next.

  4. Thanks Steve.

    According to FY2011 budget page 22, fares only cover 8.8% of the budget resources. That’s seems awfully pitiful compared to London whose fares make up close to 50% of its budgetary resources on a zone based model.

    Sure going to distance fares isn’t cheap, but it’s definitely something LA Metro needs to study closely on.

    We cannot continue to be dependent on grants, subsidies, federal, state and local taxes forever.

  5. @ Frank M

    You also have to look at the expenditures as well

    10% of Metros budget is dedicated for Highway and Street Projects, another 10% percent is directed for Regional Transit Assistance like support for the other Municipal operators and 18% for The Building of the new rail projects. If you just looked at the expeditures to keep the transit system in a state of good repair the farebox covers a value close to what Steve mentioned.

  6. The Red Line seat cushions do add a nice touch of color, but a close look at any of them reveals quite a bit of wear and tear which is unsightly to say the least. I’m surely not the only one who has come across a few severely hygeine-challenged riders on metro trains, which definitely gives me second thoughts about sitting down on any of those seats.

  7. @Mospaeda

    Even if you consider the expenditure view, which is quite absurd anyway as LA is not the only city in the world that has outside expenditures or an expanding transit system and projects going on, 30% is still quite low end compared to other world standards.

    The top five transit agencies in the world (Tokyo Metro, Hong Kong MTR, Taipei MTR, Osaka Metro) all have a farebox recovery ratio over 100% all share the same thing in common in that they all run on distance fares.

    The top three US cities that have farebox ratios over 60% also have form of zone/distance fare system: Philly’s PATCO, SF’s BART, and the DC Metro.

    It doesn’t take an analyst to see which ones are able to recuperate their operational costs more (distance fares) as opposes to tax dependency (flat fares).

  8. I think everyone at Metro would like to see an improved farebox ratio. But the ratio here is actually in the ballpark with other large transit agencies, albeit lower than many. One reason worth considering is that as a large agency, Metro is a “safety net” provider for many low-income riders and the agency offers passes that I think can fairly be described as very reasonable to very low priced in some circumstances. I don’t mean that as an excuse and I think Frank raises good points. But it should be part of the conversation.

    Steve Hymon
    Editor, The Source

  10. I don’t know what sort of budget Metro puts into upkeep on the fabric, but I’m going to vote for plastic. Easier to clean = better user experience.

Comments are closed.