Metro exploring retail in rail stations

Transit

by David Alpert • May 7, 2009 11:01 am

Example of a potential retail cart from another city.

Metro officials plan to solicit proposals from potential vendors to operate retail kiosks in at least twelve Metro stations, according to a presentation they showed the Riders' Advisory Council last night.

The plan is in its very early stages, but staff have identified a set of stations that have high enough ridership to potentially support retail, but also have enough space for at least one vending cart.

The proposed locations include the sidewalks outside Anacostia, Fort Totten, Branch Avenue, Glenmont, New Carrollton, Shady Grove, and West Falls Church; the Kiss-and-Ride at Branch Avenue and the short-term parking area at Vienna; areas inside the station but outside the faregates in Gallery Place, King Street, and Rosslyn; and inside the paid area of Gallery Place, Metro Center, and Vienna. Some stations include multiple potential locations, and Metro is also open to bidders suggesting other locations as well.

Since Metro prohibits eating in stations and on trains, the retail carts won't serve coffee, bagels, or other food that people might eat during their trip. Metro did issue an RFP in May of 2006, but which prohibited any sales of food, beverages or tobacco, but received no satisfactory proposals. This RFP will allow packaged food and drink but will still prohibit tobacco. Cynthia Jachles, who is managing the project, is waiting to see what bidders suggest, but believes that in addition to non-food items, vendors could sell packaged food such as take-home dinners or lunches for riders to buy as they exit Metrorail.

RAC member Frank DeBernardo also suggested Metro reach out to the U.S. Postal Service, as his commute by bus and train from Greenbelt to Virginia does not pass by any post offices. Many riders might find it convenient to mail a letter or buy stamps while waiting for the train. Other members including Fairfax's Evelyn Tomaszewski worried that despite the restrictions, this program might increase eating and drinking on Metro, which is still fairly common despite the rules.

Potential retail location at King Street.

Jachles, who previously worked on retail concessions for New York City, talked with many other transit agencies about their experiences. Chicago and San Francisco, which also prohibit eating and drinking on their transit systems, have successful retail kiosks in some of their stations. Also, police officers in at least one other city feel that vendors have improved safety by adding "eyes on the street."

Metro hopes to find one "master licensee" who can operate at least one kiosk at all twelve stations. That will ensure that retail serves all jurisdictions and simplify enforcement, such as cleanliness. However, Metro is open to individual vendors submitting proposals for single locations, either at one of the twelve stations or somewhere else.

Several RAC members, including Sharon Conn of Prince George's and DC's Carol Carter Walker, asked whether the Master Licensee system would cut out opportunities for small, local and/or minority businesses to participate. While they can still submit bids, the Master Licensee might be able to take the most profitable spots. On the other hand, at this point Metro doesn't even know whether a vending program will work or how much revenue they can earn. Retail is a very low-margin business, and it's possible that only a larger operator will be able to run concessions in Metro stations at all.

In fact, suggested RAC Chair Diana Zinkl, it's possible that one or two locations at twelve stations is not even enough. She pointed out that the areas around many stations, even denser, more urban ones like Bethesda, lack places for someone to buy food or other items when exiting the system to go home or visit a friend. Perhaps a "critical mass" with more vendors in one location would actually draw more traffic and increase the opportunities for success, she said. Some other members echoed a desire for more vendors in more locations. Kelsi Bracmort of DC suggested Metro investigate ways to let riders pay for items with their SmarTrip cards.

According to Jachles, the Metro board will make these decisions, including whether to prefer a Master Licensee or more individual vendors, how many vendors to place at each station, as the program evolves. The Board will review this plan on May 28th, but will know much more once they receive proposals. If they get a lot of individual vendor bids, Jachles explained, they can decide whether to accept those over a Master Licensee. They'll also know the tradeoffs, such as whether food vendors offer more revenue to Metro, and can decide whether to take more of increasing eating on trains if the revenue would cover added cleaning staff.

Hopefully, Metro will also enable the RAC and other members of the public to see more information about the bids, so we can advise the Board on the best course of action. Ultimately, adding retail options could significantly help riders, especially those like DeBernardo who commute between stations with few or no other retail options, and bring in more revenue for Metro as well. Metro staff also decided to present this plan to the RAC very early in its evolution, which provides more opportunities for input. Other departments should follow this project's example.

33 comments — Share	— tags: Metro, RAC, retail

Passenger flow for individual Metro stations (Aug 10, 2009)
Metro board says no to food, "master licensee" (May 28, 2009)
RAC: too few budget choices, too little time (Apr 24, 2009)
Metro reveals planned art for Silver Line stations (Apr 23, 2009)
Joining the Riders' Advisory Council (Jan 29, 2009)

Comments

It would seem that one of those Redbox DVD rental vending machines would be a no brainer.

by RJ on May 7, 2009 11:13 am

I'm not saying it's a deal breaker but you're going to run into some IRS problems if people are allowed to buy stuff with their smartrip cards. Many Smartrip users get transit subsidy or at the very least put pre-tax money on their cards, and using those funds or even commingled funds for other purchases would probably run into some hurdles.

I think part of the thing that's driving the Smartrip software upgrade is the need to provide separate "purses" of money to pay for transit and parking in order to comply with IRS rules. This change might require a third purse in order to pay for non-transit, non-parking items.

by Michael Perkins on May 7, 2009 11:14 am

Things I could see selling (which would encourage buying-to-take-home, not buying to-eat-on-the train):

flowers

umbrellas

sunglasses

milk by the quart

bread by the loaf

seasonal produce (apples, onions, etc.)

cold packaged soups

by Elizabeth on May 7, 2009 11:19 am

I'm from Boston. I'm used to retail in some of MBTA's busier stations. It really adds a lot of convenience and a little bit of personality to the stations (and would help in a system like Metro where all the stations, IMHO, are too boring and too uniform).

Also - don't some Metro stations have existing units (boxes? stands?) that are about the same size as the large fare card machines, maybe slightly bigger, with the title "Newsstand" or similar on them, but closed up? I could swear I've seen this some places. So maybe it's time to re-open them?

by JinDC on May 7, 2009 11:21 am

As long as the vendors can not sell "on-the-go" snacks, the project will fail miserably. If they want retail, they need to allow eating on the metro.

by Jasper on May 7, 2009 11:24 am

This is a great idea, but it would be better if they allowed the sale of snacks and drinks.

by eriks on May 7, 2009 11:28 am

Michael--I see your point, but is that really a problem? My employer requires a certification of the amount I use on Metro each month (i.e., round-trip fare home to work). That goes on my Smarttrip. I can use that fare for personal trips as well, but if I do then I'm going to have to provide my own money for my work commute. The only way I could use after-tax transit benefits is if I engaged in fraud in filling out the form certifying how much I need/use each month.

by ah on May 7, 2009 11:50 am

I don't know where I stand on this turning into a repeal of the no eating on Metrol rule, but as a parent I can easily list snacks that create more and less mess in the back seat of the car:

More mess: crackers, chips, fruit filled cereal bars, anything crumbly or sticky, juice

Less mess: carrot sticks, celery, cheese, sliced apples, water

Of course, we can't dictate which foods, so I say keep the ban and stock the kiosks with postal services, dry cleaners pickup/dropoff, condoms, books/magazines, pet food/supplies, gifts/souvenirs, umbrellas, a City Councilmember dunk tank (oops, did I really write that? well, it would generate a lot of revenue)

My kid would LOVE a toy metro train -- collect the whole set in fact, if only they existed. That would earn some revenue and generate some brand loyalty. So think about that, WMATA.

by Ward 1 Guy on May 7, 2009 11:52 am

Personally I think WMATA should wake up and realize that it's part of the city and not some sterile model train set. Yes, it's nice that metro is clean because there is no food allowed, but we could outlaw food and gum in parks too.

If we ultimately want the metro to become a truly ingrained part of how people get around in D.C. (and not just for commuters in suits coming in from the suburbs) we should push for food in the system so that people can live in there. You want to make it better than cars? Allow me to drink my coffee on a Saturday from my thermos.

by ae on May 7, 2009 12:09 pm

My kid would LOVE a toy metro train -- collect the whole set in fact, if only they existed. That would earn some revenue and generate some brand loyalty. So think about that, WMATA.

Yes, and it's ongoing revenue because they'd keep breaking and have to be taken out of service by parents, who would then buy replacements.

by ah on May 7, 2009 12:09 pm

Offering package food without changing the rule is an absolute guarantee that people will violate the rule, tourists in particular.

It just doesn't make sense to sell food but still prohibit eating it. Since I prefer the prohibition, then I'd say don't sell food. If that doesn't support retail, then maybe we don't need retail.

by Reid on May 7, 2009 12:11 pm

How about rather then banning food, ban littering?

by Douglas Willinger on May 7, 2009 12:16 pm

And how about some more imagination with bus stops!

http://www.toxel.com/inspiration/2009/05/01/15-unusual-and-creative-bus-stops/

I received that from the yahoos transport list.

by Douglas Willinger on May 7, 2009 12:21 pm

Might Metro be open to allowing eating and drinking in limited, designated areas? If they're small enough, they shouldn't be too hard to clean, and it might even cut down on people eating and drinking elsewhere in the system. It would be really nice if, when I get to a station only to notice that the next train's not for 15 minutes, there were a place where I could sit and have a cup of coffee while I wait. It would be especially nice if transfer stations had such places inside the fare gates. Many times have I been stuck at Fort Totten, waiting for the green line to take me home to College Park, when that chirpy, annoying "Use Metro to take you to your place to eat, instead of being your place to eat" announcement would come on, and I would think, "I would gladly do that, if only you'd send me a $#%$%@$# train."

by Johanna on May 7, 2009 12:51 pm

How about pay toilets?

by monkeyrotica on May 7, 2009 2:10 pm

Honestly, the only reason why food is such a big issue is because the trains are carpeted. Honestly, what's the benefit of having carpeted metros? Just put some standard linoleum flooring or the like and then allow food. Punish those who litter, but as "ae" said, if metro is to serve the community it should be willing to bend a bit.

by sdj on May 7, 2009 2:29 pm

"The only way I could use after-tax transit benefits is if I engaged in fraud in filling out the form certifying how much I need/use each month."

I'd imagine this is pretty common. My last employer did not verify at all how much daily round trip costs were; I got around entirely on SmartBenefits while I worked there.

by metro rider anonymous on May 7, 2009 2:50 pm

Dear God, please no food and drinks! The licensing fees from the vendors couldn't even BEGIN to cover the increased maintenance costs. I lived in New York City before, and virtually every station is a cesspit that would become literally uninhabitable without daily maintenance.

by tom veil on May 7, 2009 2:57 pm

I think one of the reason's there's carpet is to make the trains quieter.

I realy like Joanna's idea of a mini cafe inside some stations. Other then that I don't see why ready-to-eat-snacks/food need to be included for retail to succeed. I also like the ban on food. Even with the ban I have been stuck more then once in a car with someone who opens a smelly sandwhich that induces nausea (in me). All the suggestions above for retail are good ideas.

Love the idea of model metro trains. Why aren't these already available?

Of course MAKE TOILETS AVAILABLE is a prority over any of this. Make them pay toilets (pay with Smart-trip card, credit, coins, paper), whatever. Just make them easy to access without having to rely on someone else like the station manager who's busy talking to someone else and doesn't respond to you for 10 min's, then walks really slowly and takes forever to find the right key. Adults should not have to rely on/be dependent on another person (station manager, store clerk) to meet this basic biological need. It's inconvenient, inefficient, humiliating and uncivilized.

by Bianchi on May 7, 2009 3:01 pm

Ban all food except carrot sticks and water.

by Ward 1 Guy on May 7, 2009 3:10 pm

Ward 1 guy, Can we have water fountains instead of water in plastic bottles that will end up in the creeks and rivers??

Toilets (easily accessed) and water fountains would be a huge improvement. Then I'd like to purchase stamps and postcards, crunch on carrots while I write, then drop the card in a postal box before getting that model train and a magazine.

by Bianchi on May 7, 2009 3:18 pm

A precondition of allowing food (which I like, but recognize that Metro's stance has worked very well so far) would be a large enough fee on vendors to cover a ~10x larger janitorial staff, a 3x larger transit police force to tackle littering, and have some left over for things like fire evacuations. If that isn't workable, then food inside the faregates isn't workable.

by Squalish on May 7, 2009 3:30 pm

The cars are carpeted because when the system was planned in the 1960's and '70s, wall to wall carpeting was looked at as luxurious. Remember that back then, public transit had a bad rap and the planners believed that the only way to attract riders was to have the cars and stations be extremely clean and luxurious.

Fortunately in the past thirty years, the system has gotten past the point where its legitimacy is in question and has become inseparable from the region. However, we still want a clean system. I cringe everytime I go to New York and see rats in the railbeds. Just gross. We don't see rats in our Metro because there isn't food dropped in the tracks.

The janitorial costs of cleaning up everyone's trash and half-eaten fast food and half drank soda bottles and sticky seats and greasy windows and loss of ridership from a gross experience would kill the benefits of food vending profits. That's what I like least about New York's Subway. It's gross. We don't want a dirty, gross Metro.

Plus, it's just gross to be on the way to a nice dinner downtown and smell someone's nasty fast food. It's bad enough that it happens once in a blue moon under the ban. It would be worse without the ban. You would get dressed nice to go to a nice place, get decked out/dolled up(depending on gender) and then come out of the train smelling like deep-fried ultra-processed food. All just so a vendor can make a profit at stations selling food? Not worth it. That would be enough to make me want to drive everywhere. And this is me we're talking about! A GGW contributor and mass transit activist!

Looking at it from the other side, I doubt some fast food lover would want to smell my paella on the Metro.

I do like the idea of selling Metro souvenirs. Those are decent profit margin items. I can imagine the sales, especially in the stations that have tourists.

by Cavan on May 7, 2009 3:31 pm

Uh oh, Cavan, you just opened yourself up to attacks from all the people obsessed with all things NYC. haha

(I agree with you though.)

by SG on May 7, 2009 3:43 pm

The NY metro stinks, it runs 24/7, it has many lines, express trains, it covers the entire city densily, it connects nicely with regional trains, and it has a simple fare system. Oh, and let's not forget, they are hard at work fixing up their horribly neglected stations, and the results look good.

Hmmm.

We have none of that. None. But our metro doesn't stink. That's about the only thing that we do better than New York.

[PS I am not a NY affectionado, I am just trying to look objectively]

by Jasper on May 7, 2009 4:26 pm

ok. But turning our Metro into a pig pen won't address any of the issues you cite, Jasper. We'll just have a Metro with those issues that also stinks.

by Cavan on May 7, 2009 5:17 pm

Indeed, if NYC eliminated food in the subway, then it would have everything better.

Surely people can go without food for the length of a metro ride. For the passengers coming from the end of the line, even, is 45 minutes too long to go without food?

I'd rather keep metro as metro, not as a mini-mall. It's really not much bother to come up to street level and buy stamps, magazines, or a soda and chips there.

by ah on May 7, 2009 5:37 pm

Jasper, it's also mired in interminable construction delays on weekends, garbage everywhere, loud and bumpy trains, dangerous and claustrophobic stations, and if you try to eat on the train in rush hour, you'll have coffee on your shirt and cream cheese on the now angry dude sitting next to you.

Comparisons to New York City are pretty ridiculous in every measure. The Subway has 468 stops, was built by three companies over 104 years, has stops mere blocks away from each other for much of Manhattan. The Lexington Avenue line carries something like 1.3 million riders per day, which is more than the entire Metro. It's supported by density that's quite a great deal higher than DC has.

In fact, out in Queens and the Bronx, where land use is a lot more like DC, subway service is less reliable, less efficient, and about as accessible. And it still stinks and has major structural deficiencies along the railway. Don't get me wrong, I like the Subway, but it's far from perfect, even ignoring the smell and the litter.

I see really overpriced dry cleaners making bank from a shop near metro.

by цarьchitect on May 7, 2009 6:04 pm

I am all for helping out Metro fill some budget gaps. But I also really don't want to encourage people to eat on metro. They already do, way too much - and I have had things spilled on me many times. I like @Elizabeth's suggestion - umbrellas, flowers, sunglasses, etc. Things that people will actually buy, but will not encourage snacking. If Metro does decide to sell food, they need MANY MORE signs stating that this is illegal. There are nowhere near enough in the system right now.

by Matt Glazewski on May 8, 2009 7:54 am

An agreement that allows food might end up being more trouble than it is worth to Metro. It isn't practical/enforceable to allow food sales but not to allow eating, and as was evidenced by the lack of submitted proposals when Metro asked for RFP's that did not include food sales, retailers don't have confidence in the profitability of operations without selling food items.

Except- I like the idea of selling milk by the quart, bread by the loaf, cold packaged soups, etc.- things that are likely bought to be taken home. Further, perhaps the rule could be that one purchases these food items outside the faregates after leaving the system, and not on the way into the system.

by KevinM on May 8, 2009 8:43 am

Isn't the issue here putting "eyes on the street", or in this case, on the platform?

Toilet availability might well leverage increased transit ridership. (Until there's a systematic study of whether potential riders are deterred by being out of reach of toilets during their commutes, we won't know for sure.)

We do know public toilets only work when users feel safe and are safe. Retail kiosks can provide "the eyes" to make the toilets successful. So why not pair them at rail stations?

PHLUSH, a group of public toilet advocates in Portland, Oregon, has argued for the co-location of micro businesses with public restrooms. The two can be combined in one structure. Or a portable retail kiosk stationed nearby can safeguard the smooth functioning of an existing toilet.

by Carol McCreary on May 8, 2009 9:14 am

I LOVE the dry cleaning idea - dropping off/picking up dry cleaning as I get on or off the train would be amazing, especially if they had extended hours. Pay toilets would be great but only if they were very well-maintained. I like the DVD box idea and stamps, too. And newspapers/magazines, of course. With all the good ideas in these comments, I'm pretty surprised more vendors didn't come forward. There seems to be no shortage of good ideas that don't include food.

by SG on May 11, 2009 2:02 am

All of these ideas sound great, until, apparently, one crunches the numbers as relates to the profitability of retail operations without the benefit of food sales. It doesn't seem like very many business people are interested in that prospect...

by KevinM on May 11, 2009 7:06 am