[PotomacCyclist]

I’m still not reading all the responses in this thread, including from particular individuals.

Just noting that I’m fed up with the *&^!, so I’m out of here. Maybe I’ll check in on road and trail conditions next winter. Meanwhile, I no longer feel comfortable knowing that posting about Capital Bikeshare OR WHATEVER is causing certain individuals to simmer in their rage, and monitor how many times I post about CaBi or cycling, and leap onto any thread I start that is related to CaBi and turn it into a ridiculous circus.

I’m not getting paid to post here and frankly, the hostility, the tracking and the outright harassment is more than a waste of my time. (I’m sure this will lead to yet another explosion of rage, but not much I can do about that at this point.) So that’s it.

Some of it has been entertaining and informative but it’s too bad the nonsense (and worse) takes over at times. I’m done.

[PotomacCyclist]

Switching CaBi to SmarTrip would also be very expensive, requiring modifications or replacement of every CaBi kiosk. Unless an independent donor funds such a program, I don’t see how that would happen. You can claim that I’m making pronouncements, but this is based on the financial realities of CaBi and Metro. If a new kiosk were designed to use SmarTrip cards (or smartphones/chip cards), those could be added when the current kiosks are replaced. But systemwide replacement of stations isn’t going to happen for years.

http://wamu.org/news/16/02/03/metro_plans_for_modern_fare_payment_system_delayed_no_word_on_how_long

Even if the $184 million contract with Accenture had been on track, the transfer away from SmarTrip would not have completed until 2021. Now the process has been delayed because of the unsuccessful pilot. Based on the delays with most major projects, Metro and non-Metro, I would guess that even if Metro sticks to their plan, it won’t be finished until the mid 2020s at best.

The article does mention that Chicago’s new gate system resulted in glitches. Everyone has seen enough bugs in software overhauls to know that is a possibility. This is why I would be concerned that this could happen, even if a Metro/CaBi transfer program were added solely through software. I already mentioned this before. It’s a risk, and if it’s too great a risk, it would make this idea unwise.

But what is the risk? I don’t know but I don’t think others know either.

[PotomacCyclist]

Then don’t read. I already invited you to put me on ignore.

I did look at some of the other posts. Metro has considered moving to a new payment system, but I doubt that will happen in the foreseeable future. (Skip the rest of this post if you don’t want to read more than two sentences.)

Metro has been running a pilot program for the alternate payment system. Those are the silver gates present at many/most stations. The problem is that very few people have signed up for the pilot. Another problem is that even if a lot of people signed up, overhauling the payment/entry system would be very expensive. That would be a major capital project. As others have noted, Metro probably shouldn’t be focused on a major capital project at this time. THAT is why I posted about keeping the standard CaBi keys and SmarTrip cards already in use today.

[PotomacCyclist]

As for Metro rejecting the plan, well, both Metro and CaBi are funded/owned by the same groups, namely the local governments. There were problems with CaBi placing bike stations on Metro property, but that could have been due to exaggerated fears about bike stations interfering with bus or pedestrian traffic flows and safety around Metro stations. (I’m not saying those fears were reasonable, just that those attitudes might have led to all the delays and obstacles.) Or some of it was due to protecting Metro turf from the intrusion of the new Capital Bikeshare program.

There would be no physical transfer or use of Metro property with the discounted transfer program. It’s all software. (None of those paper transfer tickets like they used to use. Actually, some of the local bus systems still use paper transfers or tickets. I used one in Prince George’s County this past winter.)

Perhaps there has been reluctance to cooperate with CaBi because of concerns about CaBi eroding Metro revenue. I’ll admit that CaBi does appear to have had at least a small negative effect on Metro revenue. But a CaBi/Metro transfer program would not increase the decline of Metro revenue. It could encourage more people to use Metro, and perhaps it could encourage more people to sign up for the new monthly passes. Again, I do not think the CaBi/Metro transfer idea on its own would bring tens of millions of dollars into Metro coffers. But it doesn’t have to. Until someone tells me differently, I have to assume that this idea would cost much less than most Metro programs and additions. Nothing would need to be built. No new equipment would need to be designed or purchased whatsoever. No revolutionary leaps in software programming would need to be made, because these electronic transfers have already been built into the existing system. It’s already set up to detect the time gaps between leaving a Metro station or bus and entering a bus or Metro station, and then deducting the transfer discount automatically.

Likewise, the CaBi account system is already set up to detect and record fairly precise information. If you login to the CaBi site, you can see the precise times that you check out or check in a bike. You can see the bike stations used. (The distances for the trips are not accurately, because the system only measures the straight-line distance between stations, not the distance of the actual route taken.)

It would take some programming to link the CaBi system and the SmarTrip system. I’m not a programmer so I don’t know how complicated this would be. But I do know that all the precise info required for this idea is already being recorded and tracked for SmarTrip and CaBi today. The systems wouldn’t need to be overhauled.

I understand that whenever you try to fiddle around with a complicated network or software system, bugs arise. Maybe this idea would introduce too many bugs. But it seems that the software people should be able to work it out, since Metro is already running an electronic automated transfer discount system.

[PotomacCyclist]

I have also been thinking of the new proposals from the new Metro General Manager, to offer more practical and beneficial monthly passes for MetroRail riders. They only offer a slight discount over paying for rail trips individually. The benefit to Metro is that if someone buys a monthly pass, that provides a much more stable revenue stream for WMATA. If there is an outage, such as the one a couple weeks ago, that would not result in a large negative spike in revenue. The monthly passes would also encourage purchasers to take more weekend trips, even with the reduced train frequencies, because once you buy the monthly pass, there is no extra cost to taking multiple additional trips on the weekend (as long as you stay under the per-ride limit of the pass). I don’t recall the specifics, but the pass works something like this: You would pay for the cost of about 18 round trips at one of two levels, something like $2.15 or $3.25. (I don’t remember the exact numbers, but you get the idea.) Then that pass allows the purchaser to take unlimited trips of $2.15 or less (or $3.25 or less, or whatever the number is).

Metro is already running the relatively empty trains on the weekends. The track work has led to fewer weekend Metro trips overall. Perhaps more people would use Metro on the weekends if there was no additional per-trip cost. People (at least in DC, Arlington and other areas near Metro stations) would be more likely to go car-lite or car-free. Maybe this would increase total revenue for WMATA. I don’t know if it will or not. Neither does WMATA, so that is why they are only running a pilot program for the new monthly passes.

Why is this relevant here? Because this is partly why I thought of a CaBi/Metro transfer program. If someone can tie in CaBi with Metro, and connect it to a monthly Metro pass, the overall combination could attract more people to Metro than just the monthly passes would. I don’t have any solid evidence to back up this assertion, but that’s why I posted this here. To see what interested parties would have to say. Even such discussion would not prove anything, so a pilot program would also be a good idea, if this idea were accepted.

I tend to think that this idea would have a slight benefit for WMATA, especially in combination with the monthly passes. (The increased transit tax benefit will also help to boost Metro revenues, I think.) I do NOT think this idea would be a gamechanger for Metro. Never said it would be. However, I think the cost to institute this would be relatively small, which would make this a worthwhile program. It’s not as though I’m talking about constructing a new underground Metro line through downtown DC here. I may not know the exact cost of this idea, but certainly it is not a multi-billion dollar idea, the way that a separated Blue Line through downtown DC would be.

Compared to most other Metro-related plans and programs, this transfer idea would cost very little. So even if the benefits are only modest, that could easily make it worth pursuing. If someone can explain why it would not, I would be interested to hear the argument… AS LONG AS it has to do with facts, good-faith guesses, and opinions based on experience, studies, observations and thought experiments. Just saying “Metro sucks” or telling me to shut up about CaBi does not add anything to the discussion (and DISCUSSION is exactly the entire POINT of having this forum in the first place!).

[PotomacCyclist]

The idea I had is that no new equipment would be needed at all. If this proposal were ever instituted, it would be software-based only. The CaBi account and the SmarTrip account could be linked by the user. It would be optional. If someone is concerned about “the Government” tracking their every move, well, then don’t use CaBi or Metro, or at least don’t sync the two. Problem avoided.

For those who want the benefit of interconnection, they could opt in, through either the CaBi acct or on the Metro SmarTrip site. (People can already register their SmarTrip cards online. The benefit is that if you ever lose the card, you can retrieve the entire balance and transfer it to a new card, paying only the small fee for a new card. Some people store hundreds of dollars of value on their SmarTrip card, so losing it could be a big deal if it isn’t registered.) If everything were set up, then the user could simply check a box on either account page and possibly verify the selection by receiving an email link and confirming that the user wants to link the two accounts.

Once that’s done, the individual would use their CaBi key as before, and they would use their SmarTrip card as they do currently. The difference is that if the systems detect that the person has checked in a bike within a set distance from a Metro station, and then enters that Metro station within a set time period, then the discounted transfer would apply. They could use similar limits as the rail/bus or bus/rail transfers, with slight modification for bikeshare. Perhaps something like checking into a bike station 1/4 mile from a Metro station, then entering the Metro station within 30 minutes of docking the bike. (The exact numbers could be hashed out by others.) This isn’t new and it’s not revolutionary. These transfers have been part of the Metro system for years, maybe even decades. That’s why I don’t think it would be that novel to program the CaBi/Metro transfers, because this sort of thing has already been done before. It’s not new, except for the proposed addition of Capital Bikeshare.

I don’t know if Metro would have money to spend on studying the effect of this transfer system. But as I mentioned before, many private individuals have already been studying cycling and bikeshare data for years in the DC/Arlington area. This is not a new task either. It is already being done by many intelligent and motivated individuals. It’s really not that hard.

Will those studies be comprehensive and authoritative? Probably not, but most studies are not authoritative and 100% conclusive. They just try to narrow down the range of possibilities and probabilities. As people are pointing out, the user base of CaBi is relatively small, compared to that of Metro, so I don’t see this as having a massive negative effect on Metro. If it is true that CaBi has already had a negative effect on Metro revenues, well, that had absolutely nothing to do with any discounted transfer program.

[PotomacCyclist]

@mstone 137538 wrote:

The reason not to do it is that it’s pointless. At best they’ll get flak for a regressive giveaway to the rich people who ride the bikes and that distraction is one more they just don’t need. I get that you think cabi is the answer to everything, but it simply can’t provide a benefit to metro that’s worth any time or money investment at all.

Here we go with the personal attacks again. This is the CAPITAL BIKESHARE sub-forum, which is why I post about Capital Bikeshare on this sub-forum. That’s the whole point. If you don’t like reading about CaBi, you can always skip this sub-forum.

Where exactly did I say that CaBi is the answer to everything? On this thread? Nope. On other threads? Nope. Do I like CaBi? Yes. Do I post about it often? Sometimes, yes. Do I think it is the answer to everything, or at least the answer to all transportation issues in the DC region? Nope. But you set that false characterization up and engage in yet another personal attack on someone on the forum. It’s not the first time.

The whole point of this suggestion is that it could be a low-key/low-cost way to bump up non-car commutes a bit. Nothing more, nothing less. Did I say that this idea would magically allow the region to tear up the Beltway, I-395, I-66 and all the other major roads, because more people might start using Metro and CaBi? Please.

I mentioned that I do not know the specifics of the potential cost. There would be no maintenance, operations or safety personnel who would work on this whatsoever. The programming cost could be more than I expect. That’s why I post on the forum, to see if others have valid, insightful comments and suggestions, pro or con. Not automatic dismissive statements and personal attacks based on your personal biases. I know there are some tech-minded people who post on the forum. Many work for gov’t agencies or private companies who might be involved in programming of this sort. While they would not be allowed to post about confidential info, they could probably post an educated guess about whether something like this would be a lot more expensive than I’m thinking it is. I would welcome such insight. Starting a thread on the BikeArlington forum doesn’t immediately add millions of dollars of costs to Metro or CaBi. It could be a good idea or it could be a bad idea. Nothing you have said makes me look at the idea critically in any way.

It’s a simple thread, about a possible idea. I would like to see what the pros and cons are, based on data or educated guesses based on data and other insights that people may have. Gripes about how I think “CaBi is the answer to everything,” well, I can’t say I find that useful at all. The only thing I’ve gotten out of your responses is that you want me to shut up about CaBi. Since you are not the forum dictator, I will not shut up about CaBi. I will continue to post about it when I think it’s appropriate. Like it or not, Capital Bikeshare is now a major part of cycling in the DC region. You may despise it and you may try to shut down discussion about it on the forum, but the forum covers bike commuting, bike infrastructure and bike planning, among other bike-related topics. Capital Bikeshare is a significant part of all of those topics and categories.

[PotomacCyclist]

This is not something that would take up any time from safety, operations or maintenance personnel whatsoever. The software people would program this into the system, if it were to be added. Those people do not work on maintenance, safety, operations or management.

The point is not just to target current Metro riders. The idea is to add one more (of many) incentives to get people out of single-occupant cars and onto other forms of transportation. If something can provide a minor incentive at relatively little cost, why not do it?

Admittedly, I don’t know exactly how many people would be needed to program this discount or how much that would cost. Metro already has occasional changes to fare and transfer pricing. When that happens, they need to reprogram the electronic systems. So they already have the system in place (or they use particular contractors to handle the programming). Since you have not stated how much this would cost, I don’t understand your objection. This is not a major physical overhaul of the system or a large-scale project like the Silver Line. (One recent study blamed the Silver Line expansion for much of the maintenance issues, but I think the consistent underfunding of the system over a period of decades also plays a major part. A different article noted that Metro maintenance has been underfunded almost from the very start.)

[PotomacCyclist]

I actually rode over to the Tidal Basin yesterday during lunch. Of course it was very crowded. I rode on the streets more than I usually do there. In the stretches where I stayed on the sidewalk, I walked the CaBi bike, moving at about 0.25 mph. That’s just life during peak bloom or near peak bloom. But it’s still worth it to me.

The blossoms didn’t appear to be quite at peak bloom, which is defined as 70 percent of the Yoshino trees blossoming. It might be at 50-60 percent, so it’s close. It was supposed to rain overnight. That may have blown away some of the existing blossoms, but maybe not.

The streets are fine, but the pollen levels spiked noticeably yesterday. A couple weeks ago, I took a single 24-hr Claritin-D tablet but that was it. I’ve been OK in recent days, doing some evening riding on most days. But yesterday, if I didn’t rinse off my face immediately after riding around, my eyes would start to burn badly because of the pollen. That may not be a road or trail condition, but it’s definitely a riding condition.

I’ll probably be riding around more areas with cherry blossoms this weekend. I’ll bring a water bottle. Not so much for drinking but mostly to rinse out my eyes every 30-60 minutes. The pollen is going to be bad.

[PotomacCyclist]

Do DC 311 and Twitter. And Facebook. I reported terrible road conditions north of the Lincoln Memorial a few years ago. (There was construction nearby, but the road was still open, so I thought it should still be in a usable condition.) I don’t ride on that street too often so I forgot about my complaint. Then about two or three years later, I received an email update that the issue had been resolved. I barely remembered filing the complaint.

The point? Sometimes DDOT can take a LONG time to take care of a problem.

I’ve also reported other issues that were resolved much quicker than 2 or 3 years. They repaired the crumbling concrete on the 15th Street protected bike lane, next to the Treasury Dept., just a few weeks after I complained about it on DC 311. If you also post on Twitter and Facebook, you might increase the chances of a quicker resolution.

[PotomacCyclist]

From last year’s series

[ATTACH=CONFIG]11330[/ATTACH]

[PotomacCyclist]

I just hope it remains operational. Many of the NPS water fountains on the National Mall/East Potomac Park rarely work. At least the last time I checked them. (Admittedly that was a while ago.)

[PotomacCyclist]

How does slower speed make bike travel less safe? Bikeshare seems to show pretty clearly that slower speeds on a bike tend to be very safe. Bikeshare users tend to travel much more slowly than other cyclists. The injury rate is lower than among cyclists in general and the fatality rate… well, after something like 25 million bikeshare trips nationwide (probably higher at this point), there hasn’t been a single bikeshare fatality in the U.S. That makes (slow-speed) bikeshare the safest common transportation mode out there. Plenty of drivers, pedestrians, motorcyclists and some cyclists die on U.S. roads and trails. No bikeshare users so far. (There have been a couple bikeshare fatalities in Canada and Mexico.)

The heavy, stable bikeshare bikes also play a role in the safety of bikeshare. So does the upright riding position (because it’s easier to see hazards and an upright rider is more visible to other road users). But I think the slower speeds of bikeshare play a major role in the excellent safety history.

[PotomacCyclist]

The forecast is for less than an inch of snow in Arlington, DC and Alexandria on Sunday. But 1-3 inches in most of the VA and MD suburbs.

[PotomacCyclist]

Rain on Saturday, snow on Sunday? That’s what Weather Underground is showing in the forecast, even though temperatures will remain in the mid to upper 30s throughout the day. Maybe it will just be some flurries.

[Author]

Posts