SFist Tonight
Week Around the Ists
SFist Tonight
The Week Ahead: Bay Area Concerts 11/23 - 11/29
BART Cop Smashes Drunk Dude's Head Through Glass
Since they know you enjoying having that self-centered, Berkeley-bound guy poking you in the testes with his over-sized backpack, and you can't get enough of hearing that self-consciously melancholic girl sitting behind you, crying on her cell to her boyfriend over her mundane existence, BART officials are now debating increasing charge you more to use trains during peak hours "to spread use of the system more evenly throughout the day." Yay. See, it seems that Bay Area Rapid Transit is reaching capacity (500,000 people a day), so they'd like you to use the BART trains a) only if you really need them, and b) during wonky hours of the day. Good luck with telling your boss that you're coming in at 10 a.m. now. (SFGate)
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookTips
Contribute
Latest Tip:
that youtube video has been yanked by the user who posted it... here's another version of it (looks
[more]
That will just make people drive!
If anything, make it cheaper.
ahhh, sometimes I wonder about
these people in charge.
Yeah, that's awesome that I get to pay more for having a job.
They could have a few "Spare BART" days where bridge tolls are free.
Some systems do this already, like the DC Metro, but the difference is that the Metro goes to way more places, and is a lot cheaper during non-rush hour.
Bart is already too expensive. Imagine paying 10$ to come in from Pitsburgh...!
Wat's the point.
HERE IS WAT TO DO PEOPLE: (please post because ACcustomer service is pretty much unexistent)
1/ Find an AC transit transbay route.
2/ Get/use your Translink card
3/ Most of the time the translink base doesn't work!!!!
4/ You ride for free!
SERIOUS PEOPLE, this works
I have done it (as 90%) of the riders get a free ride
RAD!
Welcome to the ex-bart riders secret society
thanks translink!!!!
DC Metro is head and shoulders better than BART and should be emulated in every way - that is, if you're trying to be a commuter rail system.
@ lola
I agree. Ride AC Transit. MUNI. SamTrans. County Connection. WestCAT. Tri-Delta Transit. Union City Transit. VTA. Emery Go-Round. Golden Gate Transit. Caltrain. Options abound.
these systems will then begin to tailor their services to the rush-hour commuter that BART may abandon. BART should instead consider ripping seats out of cars like Chicago's CTA. ALL OF THE SEATS (on a few cars per train).
This is one of the stupider ideas I've seen. Let's encourage people to take BART, but then charge them more for the "luxury."
FAIL.
Amusing that the feds are trying to push congestion pricing for traffic to get people out of their cars, then BART will decide to push them right back into them...
As long as they still take my Muni FastPass, I couldn't care less.
And when ridership fails to rise because the majority of people who take BART take it to their 9-to-5 jobs, how long will it take the board come back to the public begging for additional funds because ridership did not reshape itself as planned?
Welcome to Econ 101, not to be confused for socialism. Now that driving is too expensive, BART is now overflowing. Now BART has to do what the Bay Bridge will eventually do: create demand pricing to shift the load to other hours, make people move closer to work, or leave the area.
Honestly, if you are bitching about BART fares, maybe you should live somewhere cheaper, like the Bayview, and commute up the 9X or T for $45/mo?
That's a terrible idea, screw your loyal patrons by raising prices during commute hours. Don't forget, if your employer offers commuter check, use it! For me, I spend $30 a month in transit tickets and save at least $8 each time.
BART sure knows where to spend their money... remember the sippy coffee cup idea? Then it all of a sudden died because a BART board member did a demo and spilled her drink all over the ground in front of the press.
ok...pittsburg for 10 is NOTHING compared to communiting on Metro North in and out of NYC. and the minimum wage there is way lower
This is something only a moronic suit who gets to set his own hours (BART officials, evidentally) would dream up. They clearly have no concept of life in the real world.
It's the transit equivalent of "let them eat cake."
Eh, people who have the flexibility will just adjust their schedules, causing BART to raise rates throughout the day. It's a win-win!
As mentioned, the D.C. Metro does something similar, in that it has rush-hour and non-rush-hour fares. Thing is, the rush hour fares are cheaper but comparable to BART's all-day fares (the maximum fare on Metro during peak hours is $4.50 one way, BART is $6.60), and the non-peak fares are significantly lower (maximum fare is $2.35). However, I highly doubt BART would actually LOWER the current fares for non-peak hours - they'd just add to the current fares, making the system even MORE expensive than Metro.
As a D.C. native who still follows the ongoing (often hilarious) saga of the city's public transit, I had a sense of deja vu reading this article in the Chron. The exact same story appeared in the Washington Post several months ago - Metro was thinking of raising rush-hour fares significantly in order to "encourage people to change their work schedules" and blah blah, exactly what BART says. Of course, there was such an immediate and violent outcry that the idea was quashed almost instantly. I'm sure it'll take BART years of pricey "studies" to determine that, in fact, this is a horrible idea.
Metro is a very similar system to BART, yet it is run FAR more competently (especially since ousting Dick White) and with much more compassion for its riders.
@bornandraised SERIOUSLY! I visited some family back east this summer in Scarsdale and it cost $17 dollars roundtrip to go to NYC on Metro North. Seventeen freaking dollars! It would have been cheaper to just stay in a crappy hostel in the city. The $7 I pay to commute to SF feels cheap.
For all the bitching and whining, I'm surprised how few people groked the fact that BART is perilously close to capacity. Reducing ridership a bit gives them much more room to cope with unexpected failures.
From the article:
Longer trains and tighter headways will help, slightly. Most BART riders will pass through Embarcadero, Montgomery, and Powell. With two tracks and ~700 ft trains you're at or near the practical limit of train traffic. With slow elevators and only a handful of elevators, you're already pushing the limits of how many people you can push through a given station at a time.
Sure, you could rip out a bunch of seats and make room for more standees. Get ready for the suburbanites to bemoan the lack of seating (BART is a luxury transit service to them).
With only two tracks through SF, adding more tracks across the bay will only allow trains to pile up underwater. Sure you could add additional tracks, but nobody wants to disrupt downtown SF like that. Nobody wants to pay for that either.
Sure, you could evict MUNI from the upper level. But... aw hell who am I kidding, that'd be an AWESOME first start. Let MUNI flail about on the surface ONLY and run BART from West Portal to West Oakland. Alas...
The problem with these ideas is that it is often an issue of trying to force people to radically redesign their lives in order to save a couple bucks.
I can vaguely understand the concept of congestion pricing for driving. Assuming, unlike the GG bridge, there is adequate public transit available to handle the traffic instead. For public transit, however, it makes no sense. People are often using the system to go to their jobs where they don't control the hours they can go. The only real options being presented are to leave your job, move, or just pay them more money.
I also wonder if it will apply in both directions. We live right next to a BART station and my girlfriend commutes every day to downtown Oakland where she works right next to another BART stop. Will the congestion pricing be for all lines going everywhere or only following traffic into and out of SF during rush hour?
Once again what we need to do more than anything is look at how other cities are solving or otherwise dealing with these problems and try to see what we can learn from that. Instead we get half-assed ideas like this that won't have any effect other than charging a captive audience more money.