Friday, January 18, 2013

Just a quick thought...

but am I the only transit geek that gets annoyed when people call Metrolink "the metro"? Because it happens ALL THE TIME. You get on the train and someone talking loudly on their cell phone says to their conversational partner "Yeah, I'm on the train... you know, the metro... to LA..."

Metrolink is a thing. Metro is also a thing. They are two totally different things. This is a huge pet peeve of mine, and probably only mine.


  1. Don't worry, it's not just you that is peeved by this. I cringe every time my friends say it as well. Usually I respond by emphasing the Link at the end, Metro-LINK.

    Actually what's been annoying me lately is peoples lack of knowledge of Metrolink's fares. As of late, some of my colleuges who were interested in trying out Metrolink were under the impression it was only about $4.00 for a trip to LA!

    Even the security and bus operators at the Riverside Downtown Terminal were recommending "the Metro" to passengers waiting for route 216 to Orange County, once again under the impression the fare was under $10.00.

  2. Horacio-

    Good, I'm glad it's not just me.

    I should mention, though, that the Metrolink is around $10 to the OC. I think the fare to Orange is like $7.50, one way. It's $12.50 one way to LA Union, which is kind of around $10. And Metrolink is ridiculously expensive for urban commuter railroads. I listen to Bay Areans bitching about BART fares and invite them down south.

    Part of the problem is that so little of our population has ever actually tried transit. I was out with (otherwise awesome and progressive) friends last night, and the lady of the couple mentioned that, despite growing up in Riverside, she had been on an RTA bus a total of once in her life.

  3. Yeah, it's $10.00 even from Riverside Downtown to Santa Ana, so I feel it is somewhat costly. And I hear you about the fares. Even MTA'S MNRR and LIRR out east has a more consistant fare structure.

    And regarding the latter, it's a damn shame. No wonder many are so ignorant about local offerings. The misunderstood fare is just one of many examples.

    Lastly (off-topic), I was actually considering starting a blog of my opinion in regard to transit in the I.E. I was actually just somewhat joking about it, but now I might seriously consider. I just wouldn't want to "compete" with you if somewhat understand.

  4. A bit off topic, but I remember your being quite positive about a Magnolia streetcar in the past. One thought I had was, why not put an infill station at Magnolia on Metrolink? There's a relatively disused looking parking area on the Riverside line that would be a great location:,-117.390981&spn=0.00375,0.004731&t=h&z=18
    Just walk across the street to shops and entertainment, plenty of parking lots in the area for longer term transit oriented development.

  5. Anon- Basically it boils down to service frequency. If the Riverside Line were something more like the San Bernardino line, with 15-minute-or-better peak frequency and hourly-or-better off-peak, it'd be worth doing. Right now, though, the Riverside Line is running 6 trains a day, and most of those peak-hour peak-direction. Plus, Metrolink's fare structure currently heavily penalizes short trips. (I proposed a solution to this earlier: So it wouldn't be terribly useful for people to ride between the Plaza and Downtown on Metrolink, nor do I think there's much of a long-distance market that would use a Plaza station that couldn't go a bit further and use the existing Downtown station. If Metrolink were, say, BART, it'd be a great idea, but with the present awfulness of the Riverside Line I don't think it'd be worth it in any meaningful sense.

  6. Although if the Mayor has his way there will be streetcars down both Magnolia and University...

  7. Quite honestly I don't see there being any new Metrolink stations within the City of Riverside south of the Downtown Riverside Station.

    But streetcars? I'd like to here more about that.