DC Metrorail transit ridership by station, daily boardings

WMATA and other transit agencies make data available about ridership for rail systems and bus lines.  

It would be easy for them to also produce it as a matter of course like in the graphic below.  

Similarly, such data could be presented by bus stop for bus lines.

Having such data easily presented makes it a lot easier to have discussions about transit stations and bus stops, whether or not bus stops could be cut in order to speed service, and what stations to invest in to improve user experience and increase ridership.

Big transit/sustainable mobility stories of 2025

Obviously this isn't everything.  But what sticks out to me.

=========

Congestion pricing in NYC.  In January I wrote that the introduction of congestion pricing in NYC was already the biggest ground transportation story of the year ("The most momentous transportation story of 2025 has already occurred: imposition of NYC's congestion zone").  Basically the results are in ("New York's Congestion Pricing Is Working. Five Charts Show Hows," Bloomberg).  It's working exactly the way it's supposed to.

As far as business effect goes, I worried about business relocation.  That may or may not be an issue.  But visitation to the core of Manhattan is up, and so are sales tax revenues, and reduction in storefront vacancies.  Plus MTA has $500+ million to invest in transit.

Protesters demonstrate outside New York Gov. Kathy Hochul's Manhattan office. Yuki Iwamura/AP

We have to remember that the Trump Administration is still fighting the congestion zone in court ("New York’s Congestion Pricing Succeeds as Trump Fights to End It," Newsweek).

That Gov. Hochul cancelled it ("The Politics That Derailed Congestion Pricing in New York," New Yorker), then reversed course, in part because of sustained public opposition to her decision ("‘Slap in the face’: outrage after New York governor halts congestion pricing," Guardian).  In the end, the price dropped from $15 to $9.

The second biggest story is ongoing financial crises for most transit systems, whose business models were crushed by covid and the shift to work from home.  Many systems have half or fewer the number of riders pre-2020.  And special federal funds for transit were increased under Biden, and not under Trump.

-- "San Diego transit at a crossroads? MTS boasts robust ridership recovery — but faces financial crisis," San Diego Union Tribune

In the SF Bay area, a referendum campaign is underway for two ballot measures to provide additional funding to all types of transit in the region.

Chicago area systems are getting a $1.5 billion payment from the state for the next few years ("Illinois enacts $1.5 billion plan to stabilize Transit and Avoid Service Reductions," Governing).

Philadelphia still needs a long term solution for SEPTA funding, as the Republican dominated State Legislature isn't particularly interested ("SEPTA got stopgap relief, but still needs a sustainable long-term solution," Philadelphia Inquirer, "Credit Shapiro for more SEPTA funds, but still need long-term fix,"  Philadelphia Tribune).  Etc.

Trump Administration uses crime incidents to demean and defund transit.  Using one-off terrible crimes to say transit is unsafe ("US threatens to withhold funds from Boston, Chicago transit agencies," Reuters, "Trump administration threatens to pull New York transit funds as it questions anti-crime efforts," AP, "Deadly stabbing on Charlotte train highlights America's transit safety challenges," ABC11), the Trump Administration used this event as an excuse to suggest defunding transit ("Trump Admin Issues New Threat After Charlotte Train Killing," Newsweek).

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said, “Safety needs to be the top priority of elected officials. Citizens don’t want federal dollars going to public transportation that local leaders refuse to keep safe!”

The fact is, transit is safer than driving ("We Need a Reality Check on Crime, Safety and Transit," "New York City’s Subway Is Actually Safer Than Your Car," Bloomberg).  

As one of the implementers of broken windows policing in NYC said, "there are always going to be high profile one-off incidents, regardless of the overall program of crime suppression."

Unforgiving Places: The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence, University of Chicago Press.

The big thing is the availability of guns ("A fighting chance: A new book challenges conventional wisdom on gun violence and suggests new approaches to solving the problem." University of Chicago Magazine), such as in LA ("Person fatally shot on L.A. Metro bus in Exposition Park," LA Times), where a fight between young adults erupted in gun violence and death on a bus.  

DC has a problem on the Metrorail system.  NYC has a problem with people who have extreme mental health issues.  SEPTA a problem with gun violence.

Problems in Minneapolis ("Metro Transit boosts uniformed security presence on light-rail trains," "What a week’s worth of rider text messages reveals about Metro Transit’s problems," Minneapolis Star-Tribune) and Seattle ("How Seattle-area transit is pushing back against crime," ), etc.

I still haven't gotten around to opining about how the BART system in San Francisco is using urban design interventions to improve safety at transit stations ("Can BART bring a Civic Center-style revival to another dilapidated S.F. station?," SF Chronicle).

Fare evasion countermeasures.  NYC, DC, and SF are installing much more difficult to evade emergency exit systems.

USDOT: all in for roads but not road safety.  Changing the funding criteria and basically eliminating transit infrastructure funding going forward ("T4America statement on USDOT proposal to eliminate federal transit funding"), same with sustainable mobility ("Trump Cancels Trail, Bike-Lane Grants Deemed ‘Hostile’ to Cars," Bloomberg) in favor of roads.  

Lots of road safety projects were cancelled because they think safety and diversity of users meaning not just automobile operators, are "woke."

Bike share growth in Toronto.

Bike share use in NYC, Washington, DC, Toronto ("How Bike Share Toronto got big — and what it will take to keep rolling," Toronto Today, "How Bike Share went from death’s door to one of Toronto’s fastest-growing ways to travel," Toronto Star) and Boston ("Bluebikes’ popularity has skyrocketed. This map shows where they are used most and where they lag," Boston Globe) is exploding.  

 DC's system launched in 2010, so it seems to me that it takes a long time to reach critical mass (see Diffusion of Innovation, ("Bikeshare Beat: Capital Bikeshare records over 6.1 million rides in 2024, fastest growing system in US," Greater Greater Washington and "Citi Bike, 10 Years Old and Part of New York’s Street Life," New York Times).  

-- "Shared Mobility's Role in Sustainable Mobility: Past, Present, and Future," Annual Review in Environment and Resources

Sadly, in many places, systems are minimally used or have shuttered operations, including high profile cities like Minneapolis ("Nice Ride shuts down pioneering Minneapolis bike share program," Minnesota Public Radio).  

It's important to figure out what separates successful places from the unsuccessful ones, to increase biking uptake.

Bike Share Toronto 2024 Business Review

One factor obviously is infrastructure along with urban form. Scale too.  

Plus, E-bikes have made a big difference too.  Although in response, cost per trip is higher.  I was always critical about e-bikes in the flat core of a city ("(Still) tired of mis-understanding of the potential for e-bikes," 2015) but it's not for me to say how people "should be using" bikes.

And of course, whether or not there is public subsidy as part of an overall transportation planning program.  Systems relying on sponsorship, like Minneapolis, fall apart when they can't replace sponsors.

-- Better Bike Share Partnership

Matt Elliott, a columnist for the Toronto Star warns us that as systems are successful, depending on the operator, they can focus more on extracting more revenue from riders, rather than improving the system ("Why dark clouds loom over Bike Share Toronto, despite its undeniable success," 2030 Bike Share Toronto Growth Strategy - Ride More, Connect More, Toronto Parking Authority, Presentation).

Here’s the problem. The TPA report, after justifiably bragging about its recent success, spends much of the rest of the document laying out ways to extract more money from the Bike Share riders who have contributed to that success. That includes “new revenue streams” like “loyalty programs, digital advertising networks, feature upsells, and advanced reservations.” It reads like a road map that could easily lead to what the tech writer Cory Doctorow has colourfully called “enshittification” — the process whereby online platforms and services decline over time as they change from focusing on what benefits users to what benefits their bottom line.

You know it when you see it. It usually starts when a service that previously offered a reasonable price and a good user experience begins constantly trying to sell you on their Premium Extra VIP Plus program while also showing unskippable ads for weight-loss drugs.

This decline can be an insidious process that starts with good intentions. For instance, Bike Share has had problems with dock and bike availability, especially at peak times of day. From the TPA’s perspective, allowing people to reserve a bike in advance for a small fee might seem like a good way to ease frustration. For users, however, a much better approach would be to add more bikes and docks in areas with high demand.

A swarm of Lime Bikes in London.

Note that the Economist argues dockless bike share is a key component to the success of bike share in London ("London has become a cycling city It shows how dockless-electric bikes could transform cities").

They argue that London is a cycling city now because of dockless bike share.).  

If one secret is making the bikes really electric, the other seems to be making them really dockless. Previously, bike-hire schemes offered a patchy service: it was often hard to find a bike and it could take ages to find a designated parking space. Today, London’s operators have more bikes. But critically they have negotiated relaxed parking rules, including on residential streets, meaning their fleets fan out widely. Lime claims that 97% of Londoners in its service area live within a two-minute walk of one of their bikes. As with Uber, it thinks users open the app if they know convenience is only a few minutes away.

This is run by operators separate from the TfL operated bike share system.   But parking and storage can be a big mess.

Slow as molasses new transit lines in Toronto ("Why does Toronto insist on taking the ‘rapid’ out of rapid transit?," Toronto Star), "City, TTC taking steps to improve service speed of Finch West LRT, Chow says," CBC).  They won't give streetcars priority over cars.

... But any Torontonian will tell you that just because the line is there on the map doesn’t mean it will get you where you need to be in any kind of hurry. Toronto has the distinction of running the slowest streetcar system in the world.

This is because the city and the TTC don’t consider it any kind of priority to make rapid transit rapid. They design these lines and choose how to operate them to ensure they are slow. On purpose. If that wasn’t clear before, it has become so in the debates at the TTC board and city council that have followed Torontonians’ astonished rage at the sloth-like performance of our new $3.5 billion LRT line.

Authorities decided to put 18 stops on an 11-kilometre route. They decided the vehicles should travel below 25 km/h (less than half the speed of the traffic beside them) through intersections and when approaching stations, assuring they will never get up to a decent speed. They decided the vehicles should stop endlessly at red lights and also be forced to wait for single-occupant vehicles make left turns or U-turns. They decided, quietly, that instead of the promised 33 minutes for a trip across the line, 48 minutes was a reasonable stretch goal — something to aim for after the slower “soft launch.”

Note that this is an issue for bus systems in most places as well.  Cars get the priority.  That should change.  Transit vehicles move far more people. 

Montreal REM expansion in Canada.  The REM is what some people call "light metro," and is a new complement ("Montreal’s New Rail Line Is the Future" Canada has forgotten how to build fast, cheap transit. A new megaproject has the fix," Maclean's), to the famed Montreal subway system, built and funded by the provincial pension system as an investment.  

But the thing is that it is above ground in most places.  Montreal's subway is 100% underground, so it can operate during terrible snowstorms.  Not the REM.  

Although to me, REM is a ripoff of government.  They get paid 75 cents per kilometer per passenger traveled per ride for 99 years.  That seems like a lot of money to me.  A 10km trip costs $7.50 Canadian ($5.45 US) to the government.  A good deal for the Pension Fund.  It would have been cheaper for local government to pay.  Financing through third parties is always more expensive.

DC dumping the streetcar ("DC makes yet another bad decision about streetcars: will replace the one line with a so called "fancy" bus | The Vision Thing," "Budget cut means D.C. Streetcar will shut down in March," Washington Post).  

This is the endgame for a poor planning process from "start" (not the initial planning) to finish.  I joke that DC and Seattle started streetcar planning in 2003.  Seattle got the first line in 2007.  DC in 2014.  

Also, the city received an unsolicited offer from the private sector to run and grow the system (that's how it's done in Portland, Oregon, home in the US to the first modern streetcar).  But they blew it off.

What could have been: "The DC Streetcar May Run to Benning Road Metro in 2026," DC Urban Turf.

As DC plans to build a new stadium for the NFL football team, the current streetcar alignment is adjacent, and could have been leveraged to provide service within the campus as a complement to bus and subway service, and link to more subway stations as another mobility alternative.

Relatedly, Minnesota's pathetic Northstar commuter railroad is closing--by not extending it to St. Cloud it wasn't particularly useful ("Minnesota's Northstar Commuter Rail to Be Replaced by Expanded Bus Service Network," Hoodline), cities in the Dallas Area Rapid Transit system are trying to opt out--an anti-transit State Government doesn't have DART's back ("So You Want to Leave DART?," D Magazine), and plenty of communities, like Illinois, refuse transit extension to their communities ("Huntley backs out of planned Metra station for new passenger train service between Rockford and Chicago," Lake County Scanner).

Electric bicycles.  E-bikes, unlike electric cars, do actually shift environmental metrics by reducing car trips ("For some parents, minivans are out and e-bikes are in," Boston Globe, "The best bike gets you out of your car," Bicycling, "How electric bikes reduce car use," Transportation Research: Part D), whereas EVs replace gasoline car trips, still creating traffic congestion and maintaining automobile dominance in the transportation planning paradigm.  But the lack of standards for equipment, safety, weight etc. create problems.

Safety/We need national standards.  Many communities are beginning to regulate electric bikes more closely in the face of deaths and accidents ("Molly’s Last Ride Twelve-year-old Molly Steinsapir crashed onto the pavement from a Rad Power e-bike and never woke up. With a poorly regulated e-bike industry, who is responsible when a child dies?," Bicycling).  

And complaints of reckless riding by pedestrians and motor vehicles operators.  Many in the micromobility world criticize this regulatory action, saying that accidents and deaths are still worse when it comes to motor vehicles.  Sure.  

True.  But working to reduce needless deaths wrt road safety (e.g., Vision Zero) should be the priority.  E bikes don't get a pass  ("14 year old riding an ebike on the sidewalk AT 25MPH, hits woman, she gets traumatic brain injury," Minneapolis Star-Tribune, "Santee poised to ban e-bikes for children under 12 City will work with schools, community to educate them about the tougher regulations," San Diego Union-Tribune, "Toronto is looking at licences for e-bikes. Here’s why that may be better for delivery riders — and pedestrians," Toronto Star, "It’s getting hard to ignore e-bikes’ dangers: If drivers of cars are responsible for their crashes, drivers of e-bikes are responsible for theirs," Boston Globe).

Plus, because of the weight of an e-bike (too much for me right now), brakes need frequent adjustment.

So should standardization of rules across the US.  Many types of electric "bikes" are more akin to motorcycles, capable of speeds much higher than a typical "analog" bicycle, say the super riders can do 20mph.  Duffers like me, more like 12 mph.  There are even electric "bikes" that go faster than 28mph.  Those aren't bikes, they are mopeds/motorcycles.

Bankruptcy.  Not unlike the beginnings of the auto industry, the new technology of electricity powered bikes leads to lots of new entrants.  But there are far more entrants than there is demand.  

A few years ago a technology leading e bike company, Van Moof, went out of business, stranding users.  Although it was acquired and restarted by a firm specializing in sports equipment.

Rad Power Bikes, a company which has set up stores around the country, but is based in Seattle, just declared bankruptcy ("Seattle e-bike pioneer files bankruptcy, owes millions," Seattle Times).  And I'd been looking at that company for a bike, because I like the design.

Gondolas in Paris: the Transit City paradigm.  Paris, which continues to expand its system of train, subway, and tram (light rail) transit ("Map of the Grand Paris Express, Europe’s Larctgest Transit Expansion Project," The Urbanist), has added gondolas to the mix ("Europe’s longest urban cable car is unveiled over dazzling capital city," Metro UK, "In the Île-de-France region, a cable car to reduce urban inequalities," Le Monde).

The new line, the first of its kind in the French capital, has been designed to connect the city’s isolated outskirts, poorly served by trains and buses, to the Métro network. At 4.5 kilometres long, the route links Métro Line 8 in Créteil to Villa Nova in Villeneuve-Saint-Georges, and passes through Limeil-Brevannes and Valenton on the way.

The cable car system — which features 105 gondolas with 10 seats each — is expected to carry around 11,000 passengers per day above Parisian streets. While the new cable car is the longest in Europe, it still lags behind the longest in the world, which connects the Bolivian cities of La Paz and El Alto over 20 miles.

Although to be fair, projected ridership is equivalent to a medium usage bus line.  OTOH, offering much faster trips and greater access and connectedness on "social urbanism" grounds.

The Le Monde article makes clear it took a long time, about 20 years, from idea to fruition.   But it was also implemented.  It's an example of the idea that to be a "Transit City" you have to keep investing in and where practical and needed, building new infrastructure.

Meanwhile proposals in DC for connection between the Rosslyn Metrorail station and Georgetown, Staten Island to New Jersey ("Bayonne mayor gives aerial gondola plan a thumbs up," Staten Island Advance) and Los Angeles ("Metro votes to approve Dodger Stadium gondola project despite protests," Los Angeles Times) languish.

Passengers wait Saturday at the new Star Lake Station. (Karen Ducey / The Seattle Times)

Transit expansions.  Are still happening, with projects that predate the Trump Administration.  One notable is Seattle ("New light rail stations open with South King County party," Seattle Times).  Each expansion generates a lot of new ridership, much more than say the Silver Line did for Metrorail in Suburban Virginia.

Last year’s extension to Lynnwood opened up the northern suburbs; this year’s stretch into Redmond welded together the tech-heavy Eastside; and now the jump to Federal Way is anticipated to be a boon for workers and students in South King County.

Up to 23,000 riders a day are expected to board or exit a train at the three new stations, boosting ridership along that 1 Line spine from the current 110,000 daily average. The Eastside’s 2 Line carries about 10,000 passengers a day, but its popularity is expected to grow once it connects with the 1 Line next year.

It's an example of how I say that transit infrastructure, done right, can have the speediest return on public investment, so it should be seen as an economic development measure.

Vision Zero/Road Safety.  For another entry, this is too long as it is.

Suburban Virginia's Silver Line Metrorail after 10 years

There's a piece in GGW, "How the Silver Line has shaped transit-oriented development in Northern Virginia," about the impact of the Silver Line on transit oriented development in Fairfax and Loudoun Counties.

The author points out development has occurred in Tysons and Reston, but less so in other areas.  

That shouldn't be surprising.  The Silver Line is very much a polycentric extension of the system, and the stations are very spread out.  

Blots of development along the line are unlikely because residents don't want to live in pods, and the distance to the core is so significant--for example the Loudoun Gateway station is about 30 miles from DC.

Plus, the supra block nature of suburban development--massive sites, massive buildings--makes the walkability element of a benefit from transit development somewhat remote.

Herndon station.

It reminds me of my 2011 piece, making the point that developers wanted that transit line in order to keep their properties relevant in the 21st century development and land use paradigm ("Short term vs. long term thinking: transit, the Washington Examiner, Fairfax/Loudoun Counties vs. DC").

And that like with DC proper, it would take 20-40 years to fully reap the impact, which Bisnow didn't take into consideration ("Much Was Planned, But Little Is Built As Final Piece Of Metro's Silver Line Approaches Its Debut" Bisnow).  

Related posts over the years include:

-- "Silver line reshaping commercial office market in Fairfax County," 2015
-- "Tysons (Corner) 10 Years after the plan to make it more walkable: the necessity of implementation mechanisms," 2020
-- "Brief follow up to intra-district transit proposal for Tysons: Toyama City Compact City initiative (Japan)," 2020
-- "A thought about an intra-district transit network for Tysons," 2020

And ideally some lessons:

-- "Metro sees the opportunity to continue the Silver Line into DC (the former separated blue line proposal)," 2011
-- "Tysons, White Flint and the continued "maturation" of the suburbs," 2013
-- "Ultimately, WMATA blue line riders have been dissed by the State of Virginia, not WMATA...," 2013
-- "Transit, stations, and placemaking: stations as entrypoints into neighborhoods," 2013
-- "Silver Line delays: maybe the real lesson is that contracting out construction to the private sector doesn't always work so well," 2014
-- "The Silver Line WMATA story that WJLA-TV missed," 2014
-- "Using the Silver Line as the priming event, what would a transit network improvement program look like for NoVA?," 2017
-- "To and from origin stations can be difficult: More on the Silver Line and intra-neighborhood transit (tertiary network)," 2022
-- "Transit oriented development station typology revisited," 2024

One where I was wrong, opining that not tunneling the Silver Line in the Tysons area was a big mistake.  

Now, I don't think it matters, given the scale of the super blocks there, above-ground transit isn't the issue.  

The size of the blocks and distance between stations is the issue.  That's the reason for the proposal of an above-ground tram..

-- "Blinking on urban design means you limit your chance for success," 2006

Quote of the day: great cities have great transit

At a public hearing a number of years ago about proposed transit system cuts in Washington, DC, a bus driver testified how his job "makes people money" in that he facilitates how people get to work.  

But he also drives people motivated by other reasons to take transit.  

David Engwicht's Reclaiming Our Cities and Towns argues in part that cities are about exchange and therefore so is transit--and exchange isn't limited to transactions, be they work or shopping, but to facilitate all forms of "doing."  

The more efficient is mobility, the more that can be exchanged.  If a city devotes itself to roads and parking, rather than transit, there is less area in which to conduct exchange.  

(Another illustration is by David Appleyard, who found that the wider the road and greater the traffic, the less interaction of residents between each side of the street, and even along their side of the street.)

WRT Philadelphia's transit cuts, I just wrote about it,"Tr ansit death spiral starts with Philadelphia."

Photo: Alejandro A. Alvarez, Philadelphia Inquirer.

From "The arts season is about to begin. Will cuts to SEPTA mean a loss of audiences?":

“You can’t be a great city or a major city without meaningful public transport, and we know when we look at systems around the world, public transport requires a subsidy.”

SEPTA “makes it possible for everyone to participate in the city’s cultural life — it is an essential infrastructure for the continued vitality of Philadelphia,” said Ryan Fleur, president and CEO of the Philadelphia Orchestra and Ensemble Arts.

=====

Note that Peter Dobrin, the author of the piece, is the Inquirer's arts reporter, and his coverage about arts issues aren't just about performance, but include important writings on the urban design quality of buildings, real estate issues, etc.  For example, "Will a revitalized ‘cleaner, greener, safer’ South Broad Street rescue the arts?."

A bit about car sharing

Zipcar bought Flexcar and then was bought by a major US car rental company.

For profit car sharing has been in the US for about 20 years.  The original services were two-way--Flexcar and Zipcar--in that you checked out a car from a specific spot and returned it to that spot, paying for full use of the car from start to end, even if there were dead times within your possession.  Other companies entered the market, but have mostly ceased operations.

There were older nonprofit operations in Chicago, Philadelphia, and San Francisco.  All were sold to for profit operators as it turns out they didn't account well enough for the cost of replacing the initial fleet of vehicles.  And other fleet maintenance costs ("As fleet grows, Communauto navigates challenges of changing thousands of winter tires," CTV News).

Later, Car2Go, a Daimler Benz company with super small cars, came on the scene with one way car share.  Once you picked up the car, you could drop it and leave anywhere else in the "car zone." 

A Car2Go on Pennsylvania Avenue SE in Washington, DC.

charlie has pointed out that it was more about helping the corporation meet EPA fleet mileage standards than being an operative service.  But it was well received and for a time was in many cities including San Diego and Seattle--and I used cars in both.  Also places like Brooklyn, Chicago and parts of LA.

The great thing about Car2Go was their small size made them super easy to park in cities with parking space constraints.

I'd written quite a bit about how cities treat car share.  Many look at it as a revenue source and charge for each car, and access to parking, making it more pricey to use--e.g., sales tax on a car share in DC was more than for an Uber/Lyft trip-- in ways that both privileged car owners over car users, and failed to take into account that car share is a form of transportation demand management--each car supports 6-8 households, and reduces demand for parking.  By contrast Canadian municipalities are more focused on the benefits ("Ditch the second car, Communauto is here," QCNA)

Mostly, one way car share is now out of business in the US.  I guess Free2Move still exists (by Peugeot) in DC.  AAA of California tried doing it in SF, Seattle, and a couple other places, but I think it's shutting down by the end of the year.  Car2Go met its demise some time ago.

In 2018, I wrote how DC was a naturally occurring leader in Mobility as a Service (MaaS), in "DC is a market leader in Mobility as a Service (MaaS)."  Most of the for profit actors are out of business now, and without one way or free floating car share, MaaS is a lot less useful for people who don't want to own cars.

The fact is only some places, and certain areas within certain places, have the urban design and density conditions to support one way car share.  In the US, I'd argue that the "transport association model" ("The answer is: Create a single multi-state/regional multi-modal transit planning, management, and operations authority associatio," 2017) would be conducive to offering one way car share and e-scooters, as it is likely that like most transportation services, some subsidy is necessary for the services to succeed.

Plus, it could operate in multiple jurisdictions as one integrated service, rather than on a city by city basis, with different rules for DC versus Arlington County versus Bethesda, etc.

News that the Montreal-based carsharing company Communauto was setting up operations in Calgary was seen by many as a step in the right direction. Taylor Lambert says that all depends on where we're trying to go. (Scott Dippel/CBC)

Communauto as North America's nonprofit car share survivor.  Interestingly, Canada has a pretty successful nonprofit car share operation called Communauto, and it offers both one way, called Flex, and two way services.  

 It's in 15 cities, and Paris, including Montreal where it started, and Toronto.  When bike share was first introduced in Montreal, you could access bike share, car share and transit all with one card  ("Communauto expanding in Montreal to meet growing demand," City News). 

From the article:

According to the news release, Communauto had already expanded its vehicle fleet in Montreal in 2023 by adding 900 vehicles. Bringing the total number of vehicles in the city to 3,700 — with the expansion this year, the new total should be 4,800. 

The new cars, will also include 85 electric cars and 70 minivans. Towards the end of the year, 400 vehicles are set to be replaced with newer models. 

They say that these additions allowed 14 per cent of Montreal households to use Communauto services, an increase of 22 per cent compared to the previous year.

In Chelsea and La Peche, boroughs in Quebec, the municipality actually paid subsidies to Communauto to bring the service to their community.

“It costs residents $12,000 per year to own a car,” said Delage, referring to maintenance costs, insurance, gas and other repairs. With Communauto, residents can sign up for a number of various membership packages from as low $0 per month and $12.75 per hour, or up to $30 per month, which will allow residents to use the cars for just $2.75 per hour. And users won’t have to pay for gas. The packages are built to cover the cost of gas through membership fees. Each car will have a Communauto credit card for users to fill up when they need to. But all the cars are hybrid – 12 Prius’ and two RAV4 SUVs.  

Equity as a burden.  One of the problems with calls for equity--making the services accessible everywhere in a community--is that in many places, it's not profitable to offer, and the places where it does work don't generate the level of extranormal profits necessary to subsidize the loss making parts of an operation.  Even in Montreal, Communauto is criticized for not offering its services in every part of the city ("Is car sharing stuck in neutral in Montreal?," Montreal Gazette, "The case against carsharing," CBC).

From the CBC article:

The need to get around the city, for different reasons and at different times of day, is universal. 

So is the right to feel and be safe as we do so. But ours is a heterogeneous community, with a wide range of physical abilities, degrees of financial security, access to technology, and other important factors that influence how each of us experiences the city. 

Therefore, if we were to try to define a transportation ideal to aim for, it ought to include access to safe, reliable, frequent transportation for all people. 

This is where the shortcomings of carsharing become sharply clear. I previously made use of car2go, and I could choose to make use of Communauto. I am able-bodied, an experienced driver with a valid licence, I live within the service zone, I have good credit and a smartphone, and though my modest income means I wouldn't make a habit of using the service, I can afford the occasional trip. That's a pretty long list of personal details, but every one is mandatory — if even one of those boxes was unchecked, I would be excluded from using carsharing. 

Another way to put it is that carsharing only serves those who can check all of those boxes. Excluded are those with financial insecurity or insufficient credit ratings; people who don't have a smartphone, including many seniors; people who live or work far outside of the service zone, which only covers about three per cent of the city; and people who are unable to drive, whether due to a disability or lack of licence. That's an awful lot of Calgarians left outside the circle.

These criticisms are comparable to those of creating bike infrastructure.  I'd argue that yes there isn't equal access, but that transportation demand management requires a number of strategies and tactics.  And it is possible to add some elements of equity to a program, like how bike share has either a low or no cost rate in some jurisdictions, for low income residents.

FWIW, this negative article assumes that car share users don't use public transit, which is the ideal service to use.  By contrast, in the MaaS entry I argue that car share is a key element of a broader sustainable mobility platform (Further updates to the Sustainable Mobility Framework," 2018) where the foundation is transit, and depending, on biking.

The way that Free2Move deals with that in DC is by having three zones, two, in less profitable areas, involve additional drop off fees of either $4.99 or $8.99.  Ouch.

Electric cars can be a burden.  Like with equity, car sharing firms are often called upon to offer only or a preponderance of electric vehicles.  But this makes the service a lot more complicated and costly.  Although I will say the electric Car2Gos in San Diego drove like a dream.  Most of the e-vehicle car sharing operations in the US have shut down.

However, Communauto is adding electric vehicles in a number of cities.

Should DC invite Communauto?  I always say when asked, that it was a privilege to live in DC, where you can live quite comfortably without a car, at least in the core of the city.  Yes it meant some constraints, depending on the reach of the transit system--before the Silver Line it was easier for me to take transit to Baltimore than to Tysons in Fairfax County.

DC should prepare for the possibility that Free2Move could go out of business.  In North America now it only operates in DC,  Scenario planning means covering the possibility.  Likely, it would require subsidy and without the transportation association approach, would be less successful..  For example, RATP, the transit provider in Paris, bought a quarter of Communauto Paris, supposedly as an investment, but it was probably more of a capital infusion.

WMATA and MWCOG announce new joint transit initiative | Could a regional "transport association" be on the horizon, or just a transit bailout?

According to Twitter and other news sources ("WMATA and MWCOG announce new joint transit initiative," DC News Now) WMATA the operator of regional subway and bus services, and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, are going to start working together.

The COG is the union of local governments and designated by the USDOT as the region's metropolitan planning organization for regional transportation planning and coordination.

From the article:

In a news release sent out Wednesday, officials said that the organizations’ Boards of Directors will meet on May 1 to start “months-long discussions about how to efficiently provide, fund, and govern public transit.”

Funny of course, because this is driven by the financial pressures faced by WMATA foremost ("Facing massive budget shortfall, Metro releases budget proposal that slashes service and increases fares") but also other area transit providers, who've lost lots of riders in response to work from home.

But the issue of base funding for WMATA has been discussed for decades, including by me.

-- "Getting WMATA out of crisis: a continuation of a multi-year problem that keeps getting worse, not better," 2015
-- "DC area transit commission board member thinks he has a brilliant idea on how to fund Metrorail: sales taxes," 2022

It's a shame that it had to reach the level of a super crisis to do anything.  15 years ago I first wrote that WMATA needed to rebuild the regional consensus about the value of transit:

-- "St. Louis regional transit planning process as a model for what needs to be done in the DC Metropolitan region" (2009)

DC area transit planning and operations is an extreme example of gaps.  Sorry to repeat ad infinitum but my joke is I might be a bad planner but I am great at gap analysis and I have been writing about this failure in transit and transportation planning coordination in the DC area for almost 20 years, with very specific suggestions on how to address it.

Concepts.  The concept of a multi-regional and multi-state transit network is outlined in "The meta-regional transit network" (2009).  I made a presentation about this at the University of Delaware public policy school in early 2010, "Metropolitan Mass Transit Planning presentation"  (link to presentation within).

My mobility shed/mobilityshed and transit shed entry dates to 2006, "Updating the mobilityshed / mobility shed concept."  

Another related concept is intra-district versus inter-district transit ("Making the case for intra-city (vs. inter-city) transit planning," 2011).  This concept eludes almost everyone who writes about transit.  It's about speed versus access.  Also see, "A thought about an intra-district transit network for Tysons," (2020).

And a more expanded concept of "sustainable mobility" as a platform dates to 2018 ("Further updates to the Sustainable Mobility Framework").

Other seeds include Steve Belmont's Cities in Full and his discussion about monocentric versus polycentric transit systems, Robert Cervero's coining of the term "commuter shed," the hierarchy of networks in the Arlington County Master Transportation Plan, the invention of transportation demand management planning in Victoria state, Australia (also see Engwicht's Reclaiming our cities and towns: better living through less traffic), mobility hubs, and the concept of high frequency transit sub-networks.

The 2018 entry, "Branding's not all you need for transit," states that there are three elements to transit systems:

• an integrated metropolitan/regional transit system through a transport association
• treating transit as a design product
• tying it all together with an integrated branding system

1.  I first understood the DC area transit planning gap in two dimensions.  By default, WMATA is the area transit planner, with no checks.  Second, when budget crisis hits services are cut.

-- "Without the right transportation planning framework, metropolitan areas are screwed, and that includes the DC area," 2011

2.  And financing. The area doesn't have a dedicated sales or payroll tax for transit (MTA and a couple other systems do have a payroll tax, it's standard in France). 

My point was to get one passed, do it when you're successful, not when you're desperate. Best would have been the early 1980s when the system was still bright and shiny and growing.

Plus WMATA's success in farebox revenue recovery (at one time, 80% for rail) was true but a chimera. It charges by mode, so bus + rail is two fares. Most transit agencies charge one fare. (2) There was a lot of use of the federal transit pass, so there was a lot of insulation from the high fares. (3) for a long time there were no real discounted transit passes, where other systems offer them to encourage transit use and discourage car use.

So in good times, revenue was high and this made the jurisdictions happy because it reduced their annual outlays.

Note in bad times, sales and payroll tax revenues tend to drop also.

Some places also take a percentage of the real estate transfer tax.  It's easier though when all the participating jurisdictions are within one state, not three.  For example, Virginia Governor Ralph Youngkin has vetoed more money for WMATA out of pique on losing another issue ("Youngkin Dumps Metro Subsidy on F.C., N. Va.," Falls Church News-Press).

-- "Metrolinx Toronto: 25 potential tools to fund transit-transportation infrastructure," 2013

Metro (WMATA) Owner's Manual: Your Metro...How to Use It, cover.  Advertising supplement to the Washington Star, 1975.

3.  My recommendation was to split planning from service..  That the planning function should define network breadth -- the broad area in which services are to be provided and network depth -- level of service standards and other requirements for service.

If the budget didn't match the network breadth and depth requirements, rather than cut service, first the transit operators should make their case for more money.  If it wasn't forthcoming, only then cut service.

4.  Combine the commuter railroads, make it a 24/7 service.  A variant is that starting in 2006 I also wrote that the area's railroad passenger services should integrate into what I later called RACER, Railroad Authority of the Chesapeake Region.  But the idea wasn't unique to me, it started a few years before that by Dan Malouff of BeyondDC.

This map is a concept, it didn't include Southern Maryland because at the time, Maryland MTA was planning light rail for the US-301 corridor.  I'd say there should be a line between Baltimore and Frederick, etc.

-- "A "Transformational Projects Action Plan" for a statewide passenger railroad program in Maryland," 2019

-- "DC, Transformational Projects Action Planning, and the Baltimore-Washington Maglev project ," 2021

In 2017, I wrote "A new backbone for the regional transit system: merging the MARC Penn and VRE Fredericksburg Lines," about how to jumpstart the railroad merger.  I note that GGW just wrote about this this week...

5.  Hamburg's transport association is the model.  In 2014, I visited Hamburg, Germany which has an amazingly integrated transit system with multiple modes--train, subway, bus, ferry--reaching hundreds of miles into two adjoining states.  

I learned that it was led by the City of Hamburg, which often holds ownership stakes in the various services, but services were delivered, including bus, by more than two dozen operators.

Hamburg "invented" the German transport association form, where all the transit operators in a region are coordinated as a group, that planning is separate, that schedules and fares are integrated.*

This came about because Hamburg realized in the early 1960s that if they wanted people to use transit, it had to be easier to use.  It took them 5 years to get everyone together, and to create a coordinated schedule and fare system. 

Later the method was adopted by Germany as a whole, as well as Austria and Switzerland.

-- HVV, Hamburg Transport Association
-- "HVV Celebrated 50 Year Anniversary, City of Hamburg
--"Verkehrsverbund: The evolution and spread of fully integrated regional public transport in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland," Ralph Buehler, John Pucher & Oliver Dümmler, International Journal of Sustainable Transportation (2018)
-- Transport Alliances - – Promoting Cooperation and Integration to offer a more attractive and efficient Public Transport, VDV, the trade association for German transport associations.  

* note that one "problem" with the VV model is it isn't expansive enough, you need private services like taxi and bike share and at times, the highway people, at the table too

A good model for coordination and presentation of modes is laid out on a website is for the Manchester, UK system.  Transport for London and SF MUNI also.

6.  Gaps don't abate.  While continuing to write often about discoordination in transit planning in the DC area, with multiple different BRT systems, and the railroads, etc.

-- "Silver Line Metro expansion a classic example of the need to have true regional transportation planning," 2011
-- "One big idea: Getting MARC and Metrorail to integrate fares, stations, and marketing systems, using London Overground as an example" 2015
-- Will buses ever be cool? Boston versus the Raleigh-Durham's GoTransit Model," 2017
-- "Route 7 BRT proposal communicates the reality that the DC area doesn't adequately conduct transportation planning at the metropolitan-scale," 2016
-- "Reviving DC area bus service: and a counterpoint to the recent Washington City Paper article," 2019

7.  German VV as the model for DC.  It took me until 2017 to write an entry specifically mentioning the German VV as the way forward for the DC area, in an organization I suggested could be called the DMVTA.  That's 7 years ago in March.

-- "The answer is: Create a single multi-state/regional multi-modal transit planning, management, and operations authority association"

Conclusion.  But I imagine the impetus for this initiative is WMATA's massive budget shortfall, not better transportation planning, coordination, and integration in the DC metropolitan area.

Note the area does some best practice things.  Like a common fare media card system, which even works in Baltimore.  

But otherwise, there are multiple different transit "stores," systems and liveries for BRT, lack of one integrated call center, failure to integrate railroad services into the fare card system, lack of coordinated planning, etc.

I guess I'll send this to them.

WMATA Chief says it’s time to talk about a regional tax to help fund Metro (DC area)

Is an interview with WMATA CEO Randy Clarke (NBC Washington).

This pamphlet was an advertising supplement inserted in the Washington Star, 3/21/1976.

I get a kick out of this because this has been raised on and off for 20 years, such as in these reports from 2004-2006.

-- Washington Metro: Deficits by Design, Brookings, 2004
-- Keeping Metro On Track: The Federal Government's Role in Balacing Investment With Accountability at Washington's Transit Agency, Brookings, 2005
-- "Mass Transit: Issues Related to Providing Dedicated Funding for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, GAO, 2006

Also a statement by a transit safety commission board member:

-- "DC area transit commission board member thinks he has a brilliant idea on how to fund Metrorail: sales taxes," 2022

It's not new.

In 2009 and a couple times afterwards, I said it was necessary for WMATA to rebuild the regional/metropolitan consensus about support for transit.  And later about various funding mechanisms.

-- St. Louis regional transit planning process as a model for what needs to be done in the DC Metropolitan region, 2009
-- "WMATA 40th anniversary in 2016 as an opportunity for assessment," 2014
-- "Funding WMATA by a regional sales tax," 2017

I also wrote that the best time to ask for money is when you're successful, not in crisis (e.g., "Creativity Helps Rochester's Transit System Turn a Profit," New York Times).  

The best time would have been in the 1980s, when the system ran well and was still expanding.  Although sales taxes aren't a cure because they fall during recessions.

Regardless of Rahm Emanuel's point about not wasting crises, my observation is that governments aren't good at decision making generally, and are particularly bad during crises.  So given there's been talk about this for at leas 20 years I'm not holding my breath.

WMATA has even more issues because if either Maryland or Virginia have Republican Governors, it makes it very difficult to develop consensus support for such a tax, because they see it, justifiably or not, as helping DC disproportionately.  Right now, Virginia has a Republican Governor.  But even Democrats like Terry McAuliffe weren't super helpful.

=== From past entries:

Transit financing.  I've written a lot about WMATA and financing.  It has a big problem in that the jurisdictions appropriate money on a year-by-year basis, not as a matter of course.  Yes, this does make it harder for the agency.  Especially because jurisdictions will put off capital expenditures as long as possible.  Many people make the point that lack of dedicated funding is why the system is in failure mode.  I disagree.

-- Getting WMATA out of crisis: a continuation of a multi-year problem that keeps getting worse, not better (2015)
-- What it will take to get WMATA out of crisis (2015)

As I've argued, the federal transit pass has historically disproportionately funded the system, alongside the practice of charging fares by mode--most systems charge one fare for a bus+rail ride.  Not WMATA.  They charge two.  And pass products lowering the overall cost of transit have historically been a low priority.

This let the system get sloppy in terms of finance, budgeting, and understanding why "WMATA is so successful at funding operations from farebox revenue."

My solution: Step 1: creating a regional transport association.  The fact that there are so many "mobility" services, even beyond transit (taxis, car sharing, bike sharing, scooters, etc.) is why I've argued that the DC area should adopt the German form of regional transport association (called a VV, Verkehrsverbund), which links planning, budgeting and operation into one overarching organization, even if many different entities provide actual transit service.    They have an integrated planning and transit fare media system.  But there are over 20 operators of the various services, including private operators of bus lines.

Step 2: Separate planning from budgeting.  Too many transit services in the DC area make planning subsidiary to budgeting.  I understand why this happens, but if there were true "mass transit planning," we would define the breadth and depth of the network that we want.  And then come up with the funding to make it happen.

Transit operators would come back and say: you've defined the network breadth and depth (level of service) as X.  But the funding won't support that.  Then there would have to be a discussion of how to address funding shortfalls in terms of raising revenues or cutting service.

Step 3: Fix the Funding.  Yep, it needs to be done, but not just for Metrorail, for all of the regional transit services.  

Step 4: WRT WMATA, declare force majeure, and contract out operation of the heavy rail system to Hong Kong's MTR.  Start over.  Force majeure allows the abrogation of all contracts and starting over. 

Note: WMATA seems to be getting its act together under Clarke.  Maybe this is no longer necessary.

Funding options.  I have other pieces about options for funding.  

-- "Metrolinx Toronto: 25 potential tools to fund transit-transportation infrastructure," 2013

suggests a more structured process for identifying funding than an interview published in the Post.

The best would be a transit withholding tax.  But if the federal government refused to participate, it would significantly reduce the revenues from it.  In France, this tax is key, called the versement transport.  But MTA in New York State, and a couple other transit agencies do a form of it as well.

The future of transit in cities.  I don't know.  Work from home has torn apart the transit business model.  Most major cities have seen a reduction by half in transit users.  And systems like WMATA have reached a ceiling in how much they can charge.  Suburban jurisdictions now truly see helping transit as helping the city at their expense, since many of their workers have been able to significantly cut back on commuting to the center city.

DC doesn't have the budget to be able to take on the full responsibility of WMATA, but that would allow it to manage it in a way that benefits the city.

Although federal agencies leaving the city for sites poorly connected by transit, and maybe sports teams too, doesn't help the transit financial model either.

Interesting point about how geography is reshaped by the way train service may be offered and routed

The Guardian has a story, "Europe’s geography ‘kind of reshaped’ as Paris-Berlin night train returns," on the "NightJet" trains -- overnight night train service between major European cities.  The services were dropped a number of years ago and are now coming back.

They mean geography more in terms of between cities, and train versus airline travel.  But the way the train line is routed changes how people may think about geography too.

I read that article around the same time as an article about newly proposed train service in the Detroit area, which will be set up to serve Detroit Metropolitan Airport, which is in Western Wayne County, and currently doesn't have train service ("Proposed train route would connect Detroit to Toledo & Cleveland, add DTW stop," WXYZ-TV).  From the article:

The proposal would start in Pontiac and go through Royal Oak and Detroit to the airport before heading down to Toledo and east to Cleveland. It will use CN, Conrail, NS, CSX and Amtrak railroads, according to Amtrak.

By routing it this way, it uses tracks emanating from Ann Arbor to reach Toledo.  But interestingly, it won't connect to a more northerly line serving Flint, Port Huron and other Michigan cities.

To me, it's not routed "directly", the way you would think, from Flint to Toledo, providing multiple connections to existing or proposed lines.

OTOH, it may be the least expensive way to provide service to the airport.

(Also note that in the "old days" train service to Toronto was routed through Port Huron, Michigan/Sarnia, Ontario, and the new proposed routing provides different connections, without connecting Sarnia to the new route.)

At the same time, the point about reshaping geography is similar to criticisms about transit diagrams, which aren't really maps per se as they can be distorted from how things are actually laid out distance-wise, but are organized in a manner to make getting around by transit more legible and easier to understand ("London Underground Maps," Edward Tufte, "Mind the Gap: The London Underground Map and Users' Representations of Urban Space, Social Studies of Science, 2008).

Transit safety and security: Broken Windows theory and reality | and the state of transit safety today

Liverpool Echo photo.

When I was in Liverpool in June of 2018, I was really surprised at how many security personnel were present at the Downtown transit stations, at the entrances and on the platforms, all wearing bright yellow vests, because the system seemed pretty safe, that safety wasn't an issue.  

-- MerseyTravel TravelSafe Partnership

MerseyTravel also has a teen "officer" program and an adopt a station program.  One adopter was 12 years old when he started ("Merseyside railway station adopter is just 12 years old," RailAdvent)

Same with one of the main Metro stations in Los Angeles when I rode that system a few years ago. Lots of police but at the time, they seemed unnecessary.

William Bratton, the former police commissioner for New York City, is attributed as the leading proponent of the "Broken Windows" theory of policing ("Broken Windows: The police and neighborhood safety," Atlantic Magazine) which posits that visible disorder in communities--broken windows on empty buildings, abandoned buildings and cars, litter etc.--left unaddressed communicates that it's okay to commit crime.  Addressing this is both a police issue and a community investment issue.  

He didn't ever come across the theory of social urbanism, but that's a good approach to implementation of the ideas of community investment ("Social urbanism and equity planning as a way to address crime, violence, and persistent poverty: (not in) DC," 2021) also different ways of serving the community ("Los Angeles police department "Community Safety Partnership," 2014).

In his second autobiography, The Profession: A Memoir of Policing in America, Bratton discusses interviewing for the New York Transit police chief job (which was the stepping stone to commissioner).  He was taken on a tour of the subway system by David Gunn, the president.  

Gunn showed him the disorder in the stations, and said "we can fix the trains and improve service but if this is the way people come into and enter the system, they'll never come back and ride the trains" (paraphrase).

Famously, this environment was addressed by Gunn and Bratton and the subway system was revitalized ("Bill Bratton Explains His Ideas of Good Policing," New York Times).  From the review:

Bratton took over the city’s transit police in 1990, at a time when the transit system was at a low point. Crime was rampant on the subways; the cars were covered with graffiti; riders were sneaking through turnstiles. Bratton implemented a strategy of “quality of life” policing, derived in large part from the “broken windows” theory advanced by the social scientists George Kelling and James Q. Wilson. Controlling minor offenses, they argued, restored a sense of security, and identified petty criminals likely to graduate to more serious crimes. The strategy seemed to work better than even Bratton could have predicted. In less than two years, robberies on the transit network were down 40 percent and crime as a whole was down 22 percent. It was such a striking — and unexpected — success that when the job of New York police commissioner opened up in 1994, when Bratton was back in Boston, there really was no other logical choice for it.

But thinking about this later, I think Bratton's policing approach on NYC Transit is the only example of actual implementation of a Broken Windows approach of investment in the facilities and service improvements--which are the facilities that present the potential for disorder in a transit system--and enhanced policing in the stations.

When Bratton became police commissioner they didn't do Broken Windows, they did "Data Oriented Policing" now he calls this Precision Policing, focused on addressing crime and the use of police time based on geodemographic analysis of crime data within precincts.

Later he was fired because Mayor Guiliani didn't like how much attention that Bratton got by the press and public, and the policing strategy changed from data based to what is called Zero Tolerance Policing, which could be pretty oppressive and didn't engage the community.  As crime dropped and police needed things to do, this was implemented in communities of color as "stop and frisk" which was later found unconstitutional.

Other police departments implemented forms of data based policing but mostly zero tolerance.  The alternative approaches community policing or problem-oriented policing--a mix of Broken Windows and precision policing--were pretty much ignored.

The state of transit safety today.  The media is full of reports of serious safety problems on transit networks--murders, assaults, and other terrible crimes.  Drug use--a few days ago BART had three overdose deaths on the system in one day.  And other problems like homelessness, panhandling, mental health issues, etc.

Crime increased during covid, although it is trending down.  But commensurate with the decline in transit use--the big systems have about 50% of the ridership they had pre-covid--there are fewer "eyes on the street" and a lot more problems reducing the likelihood of people returning to transit.

This was accentuated by the pre-covid social justice movement which led to some cities like DC and NYC decriminalizing fare evasion.

At the time many transit advocates including myself were opposed, because of the sense that it would denigrate a sense of responsibility towards the public good of transit.  Plus the findings during Bratton's time that fare beaters often committed other crimes on the system.

I read a lot of posts and comments on social media about transit system safety, and online media ("Metro gets earful from callers about safety, service, homeless on buses, trains," "Metro riders speak out about crime, drug use and homeless on transit system," "Survey says: Fewer females ride LA Metro buses and trains, many citing safety and harassment," Los Angeles Daily News).  

OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA – JANUARY 31: BART Crisis Intervention Specialists Ontreal Wiltz, left, and Morey Deundra Moore, center, talk with a man at the Fruitvale Station on Tuesday, Jan. 31, 2023, in Oakland, Calif. The BART transit agency is venturing into the area of homeless services to deal with an ever worsening homelessness crisis on trains, and in stations. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group)

Some systems have responded with ambassadors as opposed to more police, which are more costly ("LA Metro’s ‘Transit Ambassadors’ offer alternative to armed officers," Los Angeles Daily News).  Many systems are adding fare-focused ambassadors ("Sound Transit fare ambassadors are checking if you paid, but nicely," Seattle Times).

Most systems have personnel devoted to address homeless issues, including social workers.  BART recently hired a couple dozen more people to work on this ("A transit agency is taking on the Bay Area homelessness crisis," San Jose Mercury News), transit ambassadors and crisis intervention specialists.

Safety on transit definitely is top of mind for many potential riders, especially those people predisposed against mass transit--hence the rise of ride hailing (Uber, Lyft) which on a per trip basis is much more expensive, but more convenient as it usually is a point to point trip.

Hardening fare turnstiles.  In response to the decriminalization, severe loss of revenue, and crime on the system, major subway systems like NYC and DC are installing new types of fare gates which make turnstile jumping more difficult.

St. Louis is enclosing its light rail stations making them controlled access to rebuild confidence in the system.  Light rail systems are known for mostly having open platforms.  Unlike subway stations, where you have to pay before you can enter, on light rail it's more the honor system, with open access.

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune published a series on how to improve public safety on the light rail network in Greater Minneapolis:

-- "Systemic insecurity: Saving Twin Cities light rail"
-- "The safety-first effort in St. Louis: 'We had a problem to solve'"
-- "Light rail in the Twin Cities: We have a problem to solve"
-- "Eight recommendations for Twin Cities light rail"

In response the St. Louis Metrolink system commissioned a Metro Security Assessment and Strategy study.  The final report listed 99 improvement recommendations, in four categories: technology improvements; security staffing; procedures and training; and fare enforcement.  Right now more safety personnel visible on trains and other changes have been implemented, and they are implementing creating restricted access platforms

From the St. Louis article (paragraphs reordered):

... Every aspect of operations was reexamined with an eye toward keeping passengers safe. Then, because Roach felt more was needed to rebuild trust in the system, he resurrected an earlier proposal to physically secure the platforms. By spring 2024, the first four stations should be complete.

--- Metro St. Louis Secure Platform Program 

The light-rail system in the St. Louis area is second only to that in the Twin Cities area as the largest in the Midwest, with two lines and 38 stations that span two states. Like the Twin Cities, St. Louis also faced issues with rising crime and declining ridership that predated the pandemic. 

After a series of violent crimes, leaders here took decisive action starting in 2018. They zeroed in on one element above all else: rider safety. The overhaul that followed changed the city's entire approach, with a single-minded, unapologetic, safety-first mindset that has resulted in a far more visible security presence, from police and other staff on trains to better use of technology. 

The final phase is in progress now: a potentially groundbreaking conversion from the open "honor" system, like the one used in the Twin Cities, to one in which gates and fences ensure that only paid passengers have access to platforms and trains. The $52 million project includes a rarity in transit: a public/private partnership in which major downtown corporations are putting up $10 million to help fund the conversion.

... Roach touched on a point that should resonate with Minnesotans. "As we looked through the arc of what we needed to accomplish, it was confidence in the system," he said. "This is a publicly supported system, so I need folks even out in the suburbs, who may not ever take light rail, to still understand it has value. Like any Midwestern community, they want to know that it's fair and that it's safe. We decided if we could make a bold step like [secured platforms], we could really change the reality and perception of this system." The system, he said, is one in which "the public has invested millions. And they were asking us to rethink public safety."

The Star-Tribune recommends that Minneapolis go to a restricted access system for the light rail system.  According to surveys, Minneapolis Metro residents want improvements in public safety and fare enforcement.  And Minneapolis Metro has installed thousands of cameras in facilities and on trains, has a homeless intervention program, and transit ambassadors to add more eyes on the street in the system.

From "Eight recommendations for Twin Cities light rail":

• Adopt a single-minded focus on passenger safety
• Reject a piecemeal approach to safety issues
• Enclose stations as both a symbol and a strategy
• Rely on professionals to bolster security
• Step up fare compliance efforts
• Take a different approach to homelessness
• Adopt and publicize a new code of conduct that clearly and concisely spells out passenger behavior standards and consequences for violators
• Provide the public with a better online dashboard.

That's a pretty good agenda, basically it's a "Fixing Broken Windows" approach.  Also see "Criminology and the Fundamental Attribution Error," a speech by Ronald Clarke on the acceptance of the Stockholm Prize in Criminology (2015).

One that WMATA ought to pay attention to as well.

Other options.  Maybe not every station needs to be access controlled.  Thinking about it, I'd create a typology of stations based on crime statistics.  Maybe every station doesn't need restricted access, but certain stations, especially in the center city, do.

A tent city in front of Washington's Union Station last year before the National Park Service cleared the homeless encampment. (Michael S. Williamson/The Washington Post)

Addressing homelessness.  And the Post has an interesting article about how Amtrak at DC's Union Station has contracted with nonprofit organizations to work with homeless in the station catchment area on moving to permanent housing, getting necessary services, etc. ("Can we solve homelessness? A program at Union Station is a huge step").  

Note that I used to think this kind of program was innovative, but now I think of it as an indicator of system failure in terms of addressing the homelessness issue.  When libraries, parks, and transit systems are spending millions of dollars addressing the ramifications of homelessness on their facilities, it demonstrates an offloading of the problem to other agencies.

Conclusion.  For public agencies that are customer facing every moment they operate, perhaps transit systems are the most likely to execute true Broken Windows policing strategies.  When implemented such approaches see results.  Which ought to be a lesson to police departments and elected officials deal with policing and problems and disorder in their communities.