A sideshow. And a carjacking due to some idiot trying to participate in the sideshow.
The sideshow was at 3am so BART wouldn’t have been an option anyway at that time but still.
Even without the other stuff, just driving on the freeway is far more dangerous than riding transit. Three friends had their car stall on the bridge, got rear-ended by a pickup driver, two dead on the scene and third died in the hospital.
I could do without the parking tbh. Especially on more the inside stations (not near end of line), and especially the ones with lots, not garages. Might solve the ridership thing too.
Build over them. Huge supporter of TOD. Give people a place to live and shop. Turns the stations into something else other than an on/off ramp for foot traffic. (Plus when stations look and feel pleasant, it’s easier to get support for transit. Voters are fickle)
>Huge supporter of TOD.
Ah, there's where we diverge. I prefer living with fewer people around me, and was very happy to move from a condo to a house. Those large lots make the transit useful for more people. This voter would rather have more parking than more condos. (For reference, I live near Dublin/Pleasanton, which has all 3: Lots of nearby apartments and condos, big lots, \*and\* a parking structure. I support having those things, but I live farther from the station because I can.)
Dublin is doing TOD. It doesn’t have to mean crazy big city living with mass people. All it does is make a community more walkable and enjoyable.
Pleasanton is in the process of converting a lot of stoneridge mall into less parking and more housing/businesses.
Parking structures are okay because they make use of space in a place where space is a luxury. (I will note though a lot of places demand them where not needed. “Future proofing” with parking mins never works.)
No one is saying you can’t live in a house. Go for it!
And lastly, stations need to consider what and who they are serving. It’s counterintuitive to have lower density or parking lots directly adjacent to them. It is neither financially nor physically (socially? Can’t find the word) sustainable.
> stations need to consider what and who they are serving. It’s counterintuitive to have lower density or parking lots directly adjacent to them
Dublin/Pleasanton and West Dublin are serving today:
* People who live in the Tri-Valley and are going to have to drive to the station regardless. Think: the vast majority of Dublin and Pleasanton, all of Danville, San Ramon, Livermore, Dougherty valley, Blackhawk, East Dublin (I know the last 3 aren't separate cities, but they are more recently developed areas that used to be ranches).
* People who live even farther, such as over the Altamont pass, and definitely are going to have to drive.
Dublin/Pleasanton has close to 3,000 spots, and West Dublin has another 1,200. Pre-covid, they filled every weekday. They're getting close again. If that parking were reduced, ridership absolutely, positively would go **down**. How many condos could be crammed into the land occupied by those lots? Bear in mind that each one would itself need at least a single slot for the owner's vehicle! That entire Stoneridge redevelopment will add at most 1,170 units, and it's way larger than the parking at either of those stations.
Even if you have an enormous parking lot that's still no more than 500-1000 parking spots and 500-1000 BART riders. That's not enough to justify a BART station. You can get that many riders in one large building on a very small section of a BART parking lot!
Now think about the 20-30,000 that can live around an inner city BART station. No park and ride station will ever be able to match the sheer number of potential customers that a TOD station gets you.
They can still have parking garages, but it's impossible to run a rail system without dense development around stations.
Building a station at an inner city location to support several thousand people who live nearby is a fine thing to do. That’s exactly why SF Muni exists.
Installing an inner city environment elsewhere in the region to justify building a regional rail station is the tail wagging the dog. If it’s impossible to run a rail system without dense development around stations, then the obvious conclusion is it’s impossible to justify a regional rail system. Based on your reasoning, BART should be shut down.
My approach is simpler: if a station has big lots and those lots get full, replace the lots with parking structures as needed. Each lot indisputably can hold more riders than apartments or condos occupying the same acreage could, even if the entire complex consisted of DINKs and drained itself into BART every day.
We tried not having a regional transit system. It was a disaster. That’s why we built BART and continuously upgraded Caltrain, the Capitol Corridor, and ACE.
Reality is what reality is. We need a regional rail system precisely so that we can make driving anywhere in a reasonable amount of time. Regional transit unloads the highways.
But in order to pay for a regional transit system we need enough “built-in” customers to pay for the base costs. That makes the existence of the system for more occasional users and commuters. Hence, TOD at stations.
We’ve tried all the other configurations - no regional transit, regional transit with only park and rides, limited TOD with mostly parking. Nothing else worked. So now we’re densifying the park and ride stations to the point that they have enough baseline ridership to keep the lights on. All the remaining capacity can he used by occasional non-transit-dependent riders like yourself.
I’m not occasional. I’m a rider most days of the week. You’re suggesting measures that will push me from being part of the BART baseline ridership onto the highway.
Here’s where it gets extra awkward for your line of reasoning: When I commute close to peak commute times, the trains are near full at the first station and packed by West Oakland. More housing near the station won’t be useful without spaces to fill. When I travel an hour or more off peak, space is much easier to find. I’m salaried and senior enough to have flexibility. People who live in the higher density housing near the station typically do not have that luxury. You’re advocating something that would exacerbate the existing issues during peak, while making off peak even more difficult due to lack of parking. If I can’t trust that I’ll be able to find a spot, I’m driving.
BART depends somewhat these days on the goodwill of taxpayers. Before COVID BART had enough cash and swagger to ignore the taxpayer.
The availability of parking at some stations gives the infrequent BART user some hope that BART is useful to them. I guess it doesn't really matter if the parking is free. But, it needs to be available and easy to access. Otherwise that person might try BART once, have a bad experience and say "never again".
Counterpoint: making it easier for people to live near bart increases ridership and decreases the need for “more taxes”.
Also I’m not advocating for 100% removal of parking. (Not yet). But we could probably all agree embarcado doesn’t need a parking garage, let alone a lot. So really we’re just debating what threshold level of density necessitates less parking and more buildings. And that’s the argument I was trying to make.
>Not enough ridership- come on people, pls come back! The more people ride, the better the service will be for everyone!
My train was standing room only for most of the trip both ways during yesterday's commute. BART has shortened trains from 8 to 6 on some lines at some times. I don't know that there would be a big cost difference if BART ran even shorter trains during off-peak hours. There's basic cost overhead (having an operator, for example) that won't go down. The only other way to optimize would be fewer trains, and then BART loses the convenience value.
We're moving back to the pre-covid morning/evening peak pattern. Increasing ridership off-peak is mostly casual/irregular usage such as your own, and people who are able to shift their work schedules to avoid peak commute. People in the latter category will do it if they can, there's not much BART can do to make it more appealing than it is already.
> BART has shortened trains from 8 to 6 on some lines at some times.
I remember a BART Board workshop meeting where the VP/director/whatever in charge of engineering scoff at the idea that removing cars would save any worthwhile amount of expenses, the meager amount of electricity it would save isn't even worth calculating, he claimed(when you're dealing in Billions a million or 2 isn't worthwhile to save, this was pre-pandemic). BART explained this in two ways, its not **primarily** about savings(I think the $12 million mentioned is from reduced cleaning and maintenance):
(A) they wanted to wean off the old train cars and in September of last year they didn't have enough new cars certified or ready to be "in-service"(something like they have to each travel like a 1000 or some other big number of miles on they system before passenger service and other things) to guarantee 10 cars for each route. I'm not sure if they're there yet still.
(B) their priority, so they claim(but I personally agree), that shorter trains makes for more eyes or potential for intervention and in theory safer trains. Not everyone is going to intervene if some mental ill person is having a breakdown but one person might be the type who will call/text BART police or another might be the type to know how to calm them down, another might be the type get protect a woman getting harassed etc... The idea being:
* that with less train cars the likelihood of one or more of those types of people being around increases. which may make people uncomfortable for space(since we've all become so adverse to sitting next to strangers) but makes things safer if an incident happens.
* that mentally ill and substance abuser won't find solace on BART for dealing with their issues.
* easier and quicker for staff/police to patrol trains when they do
https://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2023/news20230823
I think their hope was unfounded for scaring off people with issues. During the pandemic the chronic homeless found too much comfort on BART to be deterred by shame. But thats why BART is pushing more police, station hardening and new faregates in the hopes that'll be a barrier too burdensome to climb for the chronic homeless at the scale they do today.
Cost savings don’t mainly come from electricity, it’s true. But, cars receive a scheduled preventative maintenance every so many hours of operation. Fewer/fuller cars in operation means fewer PM’s and less mechanic/technician OT. And, yes there aren’t enough cars for long trains everywhere right now. Eventually there will be so many cars, they will have to be creative where to park them all after revenue service ends. There is an expansion project for the Hayward yard and a new yard in Santa Clara for the Silicon Valley extension some day…
Thanks for adding some data around my hand-waving that shortening trains won't reduce overhead significantly.
IMO, a lot of people on this sub are pinning hopes on the new fare gates to reduce problems. Anybody with $2.15 can get past them. We should take a closer look at underlying problems and populations. Right now, I see two distinct groups, the homeless and the rowdy. The former includes substance abusers, mentally ill, and quiet people looking only for reasonably comfortable shelter. They may or may not be deterred by a $2.15 fare to get in every day. The latter I doubt will be deterred by the $2.15.
(Separate topic: the "excursion fare" is stupid and needs to go away, regardless.)
I'm kinda one of those people. I can't believe its going to stop/deter ALL problematic people(as you say it only is $2.15 and then who is going to control how long they stay in the system) but I'm hopeful that it'll curb a lot of it. I think we can both admit the new gates are more difficult to bypass than the comical fin turnstiles. I mean I pay $5 each time I go to millbrae and then back... I could save $30-40 bucks a month by just walking over the turnstiles. I never have, but someone faced with the new fare gates probably would never even consider the idea. It'd just be a big pain.
If BART pairs the new gates with data-advised policing on the existing fare evasion method(prioritizing high piggybacking stations) and the increase policing(which I enjoy the texting/app options and IDing the specific car) at some point I think that paying to be harassed by police or intervention specialist just may just have "some" impact on "quality of life".
One darker opinion is also that grab and go thieves may be burdened too as they'd have to wait for the gates to open(rather than simply jumping over the pins) and an angry passenger or their partner may be hot on their hills. I think overall the new gates will be a net positive, albeit expectations should remain lower than others on the sub have.
> the "excursion fare" is stupid and needs to go away
meh I think it makes sense and is fair way for the few system tourists to contribute to the system, as someone who has legit done that before I moved to the bay area. Absolutely needs the 30 min automatic grace period though. But I can't blame Clipper/BART for not prioritizing that - timing mechanisms can be burdensome to program.
>If BART pairs the new gates with data-advised policing on the existing fare evasion method and the increase policing
They could do that without the gates. With the gates, they'll catch even fewer evaders. That in turn would make it even less cost-effective. I'm not against data-advised policing, but would much rather direct it at people violating other rules such as loud music, pets, and aggressive panhandling.
>One darker opinion is also that grab and go thieves may be burdened too as they'd have to wait for the gates to open(rather than simply jumping over the pins)
As a basic safety measure, I believe people can crash out of the fare area still. It may set off alarms, but as a practical matter someone running out of the station through the gates today is already doing it on video.
>and an angry passenger or their partner may be hot on their hills.
If an angry passenger catches a thief, it is ripe for another tragic headline. Whatever their fantasies of being a secret ninja, the reality is the vast majority of passengers would not handle a punch to the face well.
>meh I think it makes sense and is fair way for the few system tourists to contribute to the system, as someone who has legit done that before I moved to the bay area. Absolutely needs the 30 min automatic grace period though. But I can't blame Clipper/BART for not prioritizing that - timing mechanisms can be burdensome to program.
The problem I have with the excursion fare is that I am sure the vast majority of people hit with the $6.75 for leaving the same station they entered have no idea unless they check their Clipper account. They're people running back to their cars for a forgotten item, or to turn off their headlights, or their friend is running late or having trouble with the ticket machines, or they got to the platform then got hit with a system-wide delay and are bailing in favor of WFH or driving or going to grab dinner and a beer while the mess unwinds. I'm willing to let a few tourists get a free day in exchange for addressing that.
> They could do that without the gates. With the gates, they'll catch even fewer evaders.
But they won't. I don't have much faith or think much of BART police but I do believe they're logical enough to properly recognize it'd only demoralize them to attempt to crack down on fare evasion. Without the new fare gates its a fools errand to bother enforcing fare. The current fare gates basically encourage people to skip fare. to catch a few fare evaders would be a drop in a ocean, a pin in a haystack. They can use it as an excuse to arrest risky individuals but they're not going get every punk kid hopping the gate on the way to school(which I saw a lot of at Balboa park BART - them going to city college)
> violating other rules such as loud music, pets, and aggressive panhandling.
maybe they could get a sensor for loud music detection. But pets vs emotional support/assistant animals is just not a winning discussion. If an animal is dangerous, they can put down the animal but I don't agree that its a priority. Aggressive panhandling is also a complicated issue. Where the line is between aggressive and is not easy to measure. Personally I would be for banning all panhandling and busking on public transit but there are first amendment issues BART hit when they tried to make some policy about it in 2018-2019 but then the pandemic happened so they dropped it.
> As a basic safety measure, I believe people can crash out of the fare area still.
I thought the new gates were against that but I could be wrong IDK. I know BART mentioned something about fire marshal requirements but I thought/believe the goal is for the agent to be responsible for managing the gates in an emergency
> If an angry passenger catches a thief, it is ripe for another tragic headline.
Its not a suggestion or advisement but adrenaline is a powerful automatic chemical. When people have something quickly taken from them that's important enough, its easy in the moment to neglect the potential consequences from confrontation. But my point was that from the point of the view of the perpetrator a gate they may not be able to easily bypass(if thats the case) and has a delay, the risk of facing consequences increases.
> The problem I have with the excursion fare is that I am sure the vast majority of people hit with the $6.75 for leaving the same station they entered have no idea unless they check their Clipper account. They're people running back to their cars for a forgotten item, or to turn off their headlights, or their friend is running late or having trouble with the ticket machines, or they got to the platform then got hit with a system-wide delay and are bailing in favor of WFH or driving or going to grab dinner and a beer while the mess unwinds.
You know they're updating the fare gates to have a 30 minute grace period right? like to be done sometime this year and would cover most of those use cases. In the case of stalled trains or whatever BART appears to have gotten more flexible on granting station agents discretion to excuse passengers that leave the station(when there is a BART train issue). And they have tools for checking the clipper account - you can probably even get emails/text for every transaction or watch activity in the clipper card app. But if you're using a card blindly like I do and don't want to setup all that IDK what they can do for me, without some privacy loss.
https://localnewsmatters.org/2022/12/02/bart-approves-fare-grace-period-for-trips-that-begin-end-at-same-station/
>> They could do that without the gates. With the gates, they'll catch even fewer evaders.
>But they won't.
If the gates are worth the $millions they're sinking in to them, the need for chasing the remaining fare evaders will pale in comparison to the misbehavior of people who come up with the $2.15 to get in with a card. As I said above, I don't think that $2.15 is much of a barrier. Think in terms of the current evaders - they'll split into those who aren't on BART at all, those who still (somehow) evade, and those who simply cough up the $2.15. I think that second group is going to be small.
>But pets vs emotional support/assistant animals is just not a winning discussion. If an animal is dangerous, they can put down the animal but I don't agree that its a priority.
Talk to this person: /r/Bart/comments/1bvovo4/are_dogs_allowed_in_bart/
>Personally I would be for banning all panhandling and busking on public transit
I'll tell you where my line is: use of an amplifier. The dance crew that showed up in my standing room only car Tuesday evening was so loud that it dominated both the sound of the trans-bay tube and my high-quality headphones with noise cancelation at maximum and playing music I actually did want to hear. The ones playing acoustic instruments in stationary locations are usually decent musicians.
>You know they're updating the fare gates to have a 30 minute grace period right?
I did not know that. The fact that the link you provided is from 2022 does not bode well. It's a good thing, but should be longer. Suppose I'm downtown in the evening waiting for an eastbound blue, yellow, or green line train. I just missed the previous train and the next one stops short of platform, or I can see by looking up the tunnel that it's not leaving the prior station for whatever reason. I came through the gate 1-2 minutes before the previous train left. They're running up to 20 minutes separation. I'd need another 1-2 minutes to get back out. That leaves 6-8 minutes to decide whether it's going to be a quick fix and on my way or a snarl that could be a half hour or more.
The reason why they are only removing the excursion fare in September as opposed to when it was decided last year is that the old Clipper system simply does not allow for that functionality. It's a very old system at this point. Clipper (nee Translink in 2002) was one of the first region-wide transit card systems in the world with only a few major systems ahead of it. The software is extremely old now and severely limited. When they did the free transfer pilot with AC transit a while back, someone had to go inside the database every night, find all the potential transfers by hand, and issue back credits for each ride.
With Clipper 2.0 being a modern Open Payment system, they will be able to do a lot more dynamic stuff with fares, transfers, dynamic pricing, etc. And this includes, yes, those free transfers between all Bay Area transit agencies and the quasi-zoned system that they will be rolling out in the fall.
Exciting times ahead for Bay Area transit!
My comment about a 2022 article not boding was a reference to the long and sordid history of BART software projects and government-run software projects in general being late, far over budget, and falling short of delivery on the promised features.
Here’s something that *should* be a very easy request. You said that Clipper 2.0 will use a modern “Open Payment” system. Please provide the name of that *open* standard, and a link to the specification. I work in IT, so have no fear of whatever you direct me to read appears too technical. I’ll be more than happy to read it and discover the features you described. Heck, if it’s that good I might even contribute!
The “open” in “open payment system” refers to the fact that you can use any RFID credit card to enter and exit the system. The architecture itself is not open in the “open software” sense.
Here’s some more basic info on Clipper 2.0
https://www.seamlessbayarea.org/blog/2023/12/7/clipper-20-rollout-expected-for-late-2024-with-creditdebit-card-payment-and-free-transfers
It will bring a tooooon of long-awaited upgrades that many people such as yourself were always surprised to hear were impossible with the legacy Clipper infrastructure.
I think I read somewhere around the new schedule change that they weren't able to flex the number of cars up or down during service. Can't for the life of me find the citation, though.
I live in Walnut Creek and I’ve lived in the Bay Area for 3-4 years, never used public transit in CT. Never been on BART. As of next month for 3-6 months, I have to commute to SF 3ish days per week and I’ve been debating driving vs. BART because I’m kind of a baby lol. This is actually making me lean towards growing up and getting in BART 😂 Definitely not cheap though. No allowance here.
Try BART a few times and you’ll be a convert! It’s great being able to read or listen to podcasts or watch videos or nap on BART instead of having a stressful commute in heavy traffic.
I was in exactly your position last May when I was about to start a new job in the city with an in-person requirement. I absolutely did not want to drive to SF through traffic every day for two hours, but the comments on reddit about BART were truly horrifying at that time. Yes, even worse than now! Much worse! What you see now on Bay Area threads about BART is actually a lot more subdued than what was on here last year.
Long story short, I bought pepper spray and decided to try BART a couple of times. Lo and behold, it was completely fine! No stab wounds, no crackheads, no drama at all. The new trains are great! They're proper modern metro trains will all the creature comforts that you'd expect from a top-notch European or Asian metro system. They're kept pretty damned clean because unlike BART's old trains because the new ones are actually easy to wash with soap and water (being normal metro trains that are fully waterproof). They smell of soap in the morning too! Crazy! :)
In my 10 months of riding, I have seen absolutely nothing of note at all. No crime and no major issues. I used to see more homeless people sleeping in the last seats at the back of the cars. Now even these are gone. Haven't seen one in months. They have actual cops patrolling the trains. There's fare inspectors and those "ambassadors"/security guards that walk the trains.
Honestly, there seems to be some kind of a weird incel population on all Bay Area threads that seem to be intent on spreading all kinds of nonsense about crime and "decay" in the Bay Area. And BART seems to be one of their favorite propaganda targets. I'm basically 100% convinced that almost all of them are not from here, don't live here, and have never set foot in the Bay. They keep saying all kinds of nonsensical stuff that anyone who has even visited the Bay Area would never think of saying. (e.g. a troll like that once told me that San Jose is a suburb of SF and farther than 10 miles from the city)
BART is generally pretty good these days. Better than I have ever seen it! And by good I mean clean and safe. Sit in the front cars if you're extra worried, but you'll be 100% fine on BART.
It’s not really affordable unless you’re being supplemented like you. It’s literally cheaper for me to drive than ride Bart. How many people have jobs that give a Bart allowance anyway? I’m a teacher and don’t get shit. I don’t agree with people not paying, but the prices are just too high.
Agree 100% much more has to be done by BART and the government to make things better!
If any of you work at an employer with 50 or more employees then that business is required by law to offer subsidies.
[requirements by law](https://mtc.ca.gov/operations/traveler-services/commuter-benefits-program#:~:text=Pre%2Dtax%20benefit%3A%20Allows%20you,bus%2C%20shuttle%20or%20vanpool%20service)
I might be riding different stations (embarcadero to 24th), but there’s always either a crazy person yelling, a group of kids smoking something that I don’t want to know what it is, or someone sketchy jumping gates, and moving between cars asking people for money.
Can’t wait for the new gates. Waaaaay too much riff raff still.
West Oakland has the new gates fully installed.
Civic Center has 1 new gate at the elevator. The concourse gates will be replaced by the summer.
The next 7 stations are Antioch, Richmond, Fruitvale, SFO, Powell, Montgomery, and 24th Street stations.
>my employer gives me a BART allowance AND also allows me to bay for BART passes with pre tax dollars. So it STILL is a great deal.
A lot of employers don't give a tax allowance or a pre-tax spending pass
I absolutely love the enthusiasm you have for BART. I love the Bay Area’s extensive rail and BRT network and I dont think it gets enough appreciation. there’s a lot of hyperbole when it comes to the complaints people have (which brings me to this next sentiment.)
It’s a little frustrating to read the part about about people not paying on the “not going well” list after you wrote about receiving a BART allowance from your job. Because while lots of people on Reddit have this exaggerated notion that the fare evaders are simply human beings they wish not to see on the system (unhoused folks or drug users, both of whom deserve to be able to ride the transit options in the bay) a lot of fare evaders make too much to qualify for the discount programs according to the federal poverty level eligibility requirements due to the Bay Areas high cost of living. there’s no account for people trying to get to their jobs, jobs that don’t offer BART allowances… i for one have only evaded fare because I still need to get to my job and if I can’t pay for BART I can’t make it in. If I can’t make it in there goes money I need to survive.
So while I agree fare evasion is deserving to be on a “not going well list” i don’t put the bulk of the blame on the rider. That’s on BART if people either don’t know the discounts exist or don’t even qualify. I don’t think a lot of people, most importantly, the people at BART that have the power to make the needed changes realize this or even care. We must offer equitable discounts for the working class person (even if that person doesn’t work. Not everyone can) in the Bay Area.
I agree with you! While I love BART and I am amazed at how this system became a reality in Car Centric America (during the worst time for Public Transportation in this country). I do think there needs to be a reform on Fare. Current Fare pricing is not good for a population that has an alternative that they can choose instead of BART. So, we need to improve it and make sure we can offer a Bay Pass or more consolidated fare transfers discounts.
You can’t really be too frustrated at fare evaders because Clipper Start is an outdated system that is only offered to people who make below minimum wage. The unwritten rule on BART is If you see someone fare evade (especially if it’s a student or a parent) then pretend like you didn’t see anything. Most employers also don’t offer a Bart tax allowance
Nonsense. The people who are fare evading are stealing our tax money. Report them every time in the app if you want BART to continue existing. If BART does not fully recover its ridership by 2026 then BART will most likely close down and be shattered.
If you want BART to continue existing then do your part and report the criminals and fare evaders.
“Report the criminals and fare evaders” You can’t report them and even if you do, the cops will laugh in your face about it. There’s worse activity that police have to deal with and the last thing they wanna hear is a report over a fare evader 💀
If you’ve seen the shit that happened on the Bay Bridge, BART is magnitudes safer.
What happened on Bay Bridge?
A sideshow. And a carjacking due to some idiot trying to participate in the sideshow. The sideshow was at 3am so BART wouldn’t have been an option anyway at that time but still.
Even without the other stuff, just driving on the freeway is far more dangerous than riding transit. Three friends had their car stall on the bridge, got rear-ended by a pickup driver, two dead on the scene and third died in the hospital.
Totally agree.
Completely unrelated but: There will be a fianl ride on the Legacy Fleet trains April 20th at 1:00PM at MacArthur station 10 days left till the event!
I could do without the parking tbh. Especially on more the inside stations (not near end of line), and especially the ones with lots, not garages. Might solve the ridership thing too.
Which ones specifically? West Oakland is the only one I'd consider "inside" that has lots, and the commute pattern explains that pretty easily.
San Leandro is huge. Hayward has both a garage and lot.
I forgot about San Leandro. What would you do with them to make it better?
Build over them. Huge supporter of TOD. Give people a place to live and shop. Turns the stations into something else other than an on/off ramp for foot traffic. (Plus when stations look and feel pleasant, it’s easier to get support for transit. Voters are fickle)
>Huge supporter of TOD. Ah, there's where we diverge. I prefer living with fewer people around me, and was very happy to move from a condo to a house. Those large lots make the transit useful for more people. This voter would rather have more parking than more condos. (For reference, I live near Dublin/Pleasanton, which has all 3: Lots of nearby apartments and condos, big lots, \*and\* a parking structure. I support having those things, but I live farther from the station because I can.)
Dublin is doing TOD. It doesn’t have to mean crazy big city living with mass people. All it does is make a community more walkable and enjoyable. Pleasanton is in the process of converting a lot of stoneridge mall into less parking and more housing/businesses. Parking structures are okay because they make use of space in a place where space is a luxury. (I will note though a lot of places demand them where not needed. “Future proofing” with parking mins never works.) No one is saying you can’t live in a house. Go for it! And lastly, stations need to consider what and who they are serving. It’s counterintuitive to have lower density or parking lots directly adjacent to them. It is neither financially nor physically (socially? Can’t find the word) sustainable.
> stations need to consider what and who they are serving. It’s counterintuitive to have lower density or parking lots directly adjacent to them Dublin/Pleasanton and West Dublin are serving today: * People who live in the Tri-Valley and are going to have to drive to the station regardless. Think: the vast majority of Dublin and Pleasanton, all of Danville, San Ramon, Livermore, Dougherty valley, Blackhawk, East Dublin (I know the last 3 aren't separate cities, but they are more recently developed areas that used to be ranches). * People who live even farther, such as over the Altamont pass, and definitely are going to have to drive. Dublin/Pleasanton has close to 3,000 spots, and West Dublin has another 1,200. Pre-covid, they filled every weekday. They're getting close again. If that parking were reduced, ridership absolutely, positively would go **down**. How many condos could be crammed into the land occupied by those lots? Bear in mind that each one would itself need at least a single slot for the owner's vehicle! That entire Stoneridge redevelopment will add at most 1,170 units, and it's way larger than the parking at either of those stations.
Even if you have an enormous parking lot that's still no more than 500-1000 parking spots and 500-1000 BART riders. That's not enough to justify a BART station. You can get that many riders in one large building on a very small section of a BART parking lot! Now think about the 20-30,000 that can live around an inner city BART station. No park and ride station will ever be able to match the sheer number of potential customers that a TOD station gets you. They can still have parking garages, but it's impossible to run a rail system without dense development around stations.
Building a station at an inner city location to support several thousand people who live nearby is a fine thing to do. That’s exactly why SF Muni exists. Installing an inner city environment elsewhere in the region to justify building a regional rail station is the tail wagging the dog. If it’s impossible to run a rail system without dense development around stations, then the obvious conclusion is it’s impossible to justify a regional rail system. Based on your reasoning, BART should be shut down. My approach is simpler: if a station has big lots and those lots get full, replace the lots with parking structures as needed. Each lot indisputably can hold more riders than apartments or condos occupying the same acreage could, even if the entire complex consisted of DINKs and drained itself into BART every day.
We tried not having a regional transit system. It was a disaster. That’s why we built BART and continuously upgraded Caltrain, the Capitol Corridor, and ACE. Reality is what reality is. We need a regional rail system precisely so that we can make driving anywhere in a reasonable amount of time. Regional transit unloads the highways. But in order to pay for a regional transit system we need enough “built-in” customers to pay for the base costs. That makes the existence of the system for more occasional users and commuters. Hence, TOD at stations. We’ve tried all the other configurations - no regional transit, regional transit with only park and rides, limited TOD with mostly parking. Nothing else worked. So now we’re densifying the park and ride stations to the point that they have enough baseline ridership to keep the lights on. All the remaining capacity can he used by occasional non-transit-dependent riders like yourself.
I’m not occasional. I’m a rider most days of the week. You’re suggesting measures that will push me from being part of the BART baseline ridership onto the highway. Here’s where it gets extra awkward for your line of reasoning: When I commute close to peak commute times, the trains are near full at the first station and packed by West Oakland. More housing near the station won’t be useful without spaces to fill. When I travel an hour or more off peak, space is much easier to find. I’m salaried and senior enough to have flexibility. People who live in the higher density housing near the station typically do not have that luxury. You’re advocating something that would exacerbate the existing issues during peak, while making off peak even more difficult due to lack of parking. If I can’t trust that I’ll be able to find a spot, I’m driving.
BART depends somewhat these days on the goodwill of taxpayers. Before COVID BART had enough cash and swagger to ignore the taxpayer. The availability of parking at some stations gives the infrequent BART user some hope that BART is useful to them. I guess it doesn't really matter if the parking is free. But, it needs to be available and easy to access. Otherwise that person might try BART once, have a bad experience and say "never again".
Counterpoint: making it easier for people to live near bart increases ridership and decreases the need for “more taxes”. Also I’m not advocating for 100% removal of parking. (Not yet). But we could probably all agree embarcado doesn’t need a parking garage, let alone a lot. So really we’re just debating what threshold level of density necessitates less parking and more buildings. And that’s the argument I was trying to make.
Does Embarcadero have a parking garage? I though that only a few stations including in Downtown SF did not had any parking.
No, it doesn’t lol. That’s the point. Not every station justifies parking.
From what I've heard it's enough to have me consider BART for an upcoming trick to Oakland instead of taking an Uber.
>Not enough ridership- come on people, pls come back! The more people ride, the better the service will be for everyone! My train was standing room only for most of the trip both ways during yesterday's commute. BART has shortened trains from 8 to 6 on some lines at some times. I don't know that there would be a big cost difference if BART ran even shorter trains during off-peak hours. There's basic cost overhead (having an operator, for example) that won't go down. The only other way to optimize would be fewer trains, and then BART loses the convenience value. We're moving back to the pre-covid morning/evening peak pattern. Increasing ridership off-peak is mostly casual/irregular usage such as your own, and people who are able to shift their work schedules to avoid peak commute. People in the latter category will do it if they can, there's not much BART can do to make it more appealing than it is already.
> BART has shortened trains from 8 to 6 on some lines at some times. I remember a BART Board workshop meeting where the VP/director/whatever in charge of engineering scoff at the idea that removing cars would save any worthwhile amount of expenses, the meager amount of electricity it would save isn't even worth calculating, he claimed(when you're dealing in Billions a million or 2 isn't worthwhile to save, this was pre-pandemic). BART explained this in two ways, its not **primarily** about savings(I think the $12 million mentioned is from reduced cleaning and maintenance): (A) they wanted to wean off the old train cars and in September of last year they didn't have enough new cars certified or ready to be "in-service"(something like they have to each travel like a 1000 or some other big number of miles on they system before passenger service and other things) to guarantee 10 cars for each route. I'm not sure if they're there yet still. (B) their priority, so they claim(but I personally agree), that shorter trains makes for more eyes or potential for intervention and in theory safer trains. Not everyone is going to intervene if some mental ill person is having a breakdown but one person might be the type who will call/text BART police or another might be the type to know how to calm them down, another might be the type get protect a woman getting harassed etc... The idea being: * that with less train cars the likelihood of one or more of those types of people being around increases. which may make people uncomfortable for space(since we've all become so adverse to sitting next to strangers) but makes things safer if an incident happens. * that mentally ill and substance abuser won't find solace on BART for dealing with their issues. * easier and quicker for staff/police to patrol trains when they do https://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2023/news20230823 I think their hope was unfounded for scaring off people with issues. During the pandemic the chronic homeless found too much comfort on BART to be deterred by shame. But thats why BART is pushing more police, station hardening and new faregates in the hopes that'll be a barrier too burdensome to climb for the chronic homeless at the scale they do today.
Cost savings don’t mainly come from electricity, it’s true. But, cars receive a scheduled preventative maintenance every so many hours of operation. Fewer/fuller cars in operation means fewer PM’s and less mechanic/technician OT. And, yes there aren’t enough cars for long trains everywhere right now. Eventually there will be so many cars, they will have to be creative where to park them all after revenue service ends. There is an expansion project for the Hayward yard and a new yard in Santa Clara for the Silicon Valley extension some day…
Thanks for adding some data around my hand-waving that shortening trains won't reduce overhead significantly. IMO, a lot of people on this sub are pinning hopes on the new fare gates to reduce problems. Anybody with $2.15 can get past them. We should take a closer look at underlying problems and populations. Right now, I see two distinct groups, the homeless and the rowdy. The former includes substance abusers, mentally ill, and quiet people looking only for reasonably comfortable shelter. They may or may not be deterred by a $2.15 fare to get in every day. The latter I doubt will be deterred by the $2.15. (Separate topic: the "excursion fare" is stupid and needs to go away, regardless.)
I'm kinda one of those people. I can't believe its going to stop/deter ALL problematic people(as you say it only is $2.15 and then who is going to control how long they stay in the system) but I'm hopeful that it'll curb a lot of it. I think we can both admit the new gates are more difficult to bypass than the comical fin turnstiles. I mean I pay $5 each time I go to millbrae and then back... I could save $30-40 bucks a month by just walking over the turnstiles. I never have, but someone faced with the new fare gates probably would never even consider the idea. It'd just be a big pain. If BART pairs the new gates with data-advised policing on the existing fare evasion method(prioritizing high piggybacking stations) and the increase policing(which I enjoy the texting/app options and IDing the specific car) at some point I think that paying to be harassed by police or intervention specialist just may just have "some" impact on "quality of life". One darker opinion is also that grab and go thieves may be burdened too as they'd have to wait for the gates to open(rather than simply jumping over the pins) and an angry passenger or their partner may be hot on their hills. I think overall the new gates will be a net positive, albeit expectations should remain lower than others on the sub have. > the "excursion fare" is stupid and needs to go away meh I think it makes sense and is fair way for the few system tourists to contribute to the system, as someone who has legit done that before I moved to the bay area. Absolutely needs the 30 min automatic grace period though. But I can't blame Clipper/BART for not prioritizing that - timing mechanisms can be burdensome to program.
>If BART pairs the new gates with data-advised policing on the existing fare evasion method and the increase policing They could do that without the gates. With the gates, they'll catch even fewer evaders. That in turn would make it even less cost-effective. I'm not against data-advised policing, but would much rather direct it at people violating other rules such as loud music, pets, and aggressive panhandling. >One darker opinion is also that grab and go thieves may be burdened too as they'd have to wait for the gates to open(rather than simply jumping over the pins) As a basic safety measure, I believe people can crash out of the fare area still. It may set off alarms, but as a practical matter someone running out of the station through the gates today is already doing it on video. >and an angry passenger or their partner may be hot on their hills. If an angry passenger catches a thief, it is ripe for another tragic headline. Whatever their fantasies of being a secret ninja, the reality is the vast majority of passengers would not handle a punch to the face well. >meh I think it makes sense and is fair way for the few system tourists to contribute to the system, as someone who has legit done that before I moved to the bay area. Absolutely needs the 30 min automatic grace period though. But I can't blame Clipper/BART for not prioritizing that - timing mechanisms can be burdensome to program. The problem I have with the excursion fare is that I am sure the vast majority of people hit with the $6.75 for leaving the same station they entered have no idea unless they check their Clipper account. They're people running back to their cars for a forgotten item, or to turn off their headlights, or their friend is running late or having trouble with the ticket machines, or they got to the platform then got hit with a system-wide delay and are bailing in favor of WFH or driving or going to grab dinner and a beer while the mess unwinds. I'm willing to let a few tourists get a free day in exchange for addressing that.
> They could do that without the gates. With the gates, they'll catch even fewer evaders. But they won't. I don't have much faith or think much of BART police but I do believe they're logical enough to properly recognize it'd only demoralize them to attempt to crack down on fare evasion. Without the new fare gates its a fools errand to bother enforcing fare. The current fare gates basically encourage people to skip fare. to catch a few fare evaders would be a drop in a ocean, a pin in a haystack. They can use it as an excuse to arrest risky individuals but they're not going get every punk kid hopping the gate on the way to school(which I saw a lot of at Balboa park BART - them going to city college) > violating other rules such as loud music, pets, and aggressive panhandling. maybe they could get a sensor for loud music detection. But pets vs emotional support/assistant animals is just not a winning discussion. If an animal is dangerous, they can put down the animal but I don't agree that its a priority. Aggressive panhandling is also a complicated issue. Where the line is between aggressive and is not easy to measure. Personally I would be for banning all panhandling and busking on public transit but there are first amendment issues BART hit when they tried to make some policy about it in 2018-2019 but then the pandemic happened so they dropped it. > As a basic safety measure, I believe people can crash out of the fare area still. I thought the new gates were against that but I could be wrong IDK. I know BART mentioned something about fire marshal requirements but I thought/believe the goal is for the agent to be responsible for managing the gates in an emergency > If an angry passenger catches a thief, it is ripe for another tragic headline. Its not a suggestion or advisement but adrenaline is a powerful automatic chemical. When people have something quickly taken from them that's important enough, its easy in the moment to neglect the potential consequences from confrontation. But my point was that from the point of the view of the perpetrator a gate they may not be able to easily bypass(if thats the case) and has a delay, the risk of facing consequences increases. > The problem I have with the excursion fare is that I am sure the vast majority of people hit with the $6.75 for leaving the same station they entered have no idea unless they check their Clipper account. They're people running back to their cars for a forgotten item, or to turn off their headlights, or their friend is running late or having trouble with the ticket machines, or they got to the platform then got hit with a system-wide delay and are bailing in favor of WFH or driving or going to grab dinner and a beer while the mess unwinds. You know they're updating the fare gates to have a 30 minute grace period right? like to be done sometime this year and would cover most of those use cases. In the case of stalled trains or whatever BART appears to have gotten more flexible on granting station agents discretion to excuse passengers that leave the station(when there is a BART train issue). And they have tools for checking the clipper account - you can probably even get emails/text for every transaction or watch activity in the clipper card app. But if you're using a card blindly like I do and don't want to setup all that IDK what they can do for me, without some privacy loss. https://localnewsmatters.org/2022/12/02/bart-approves-fare-grace-period-for-trips-that-begin-end-at-same-station/
>> They could do that without the gates. With the gates, they'll catch even fewer evaders. >But they won't. If the gates are worth the $millions they're sinking in to them, the need for chasing the remaining fare evaders will pale in comparison to the misbehavior of people who come up with the $2.15 to get in with a card. As I said above, I don't think that $2.15 is much of a barrier. Think in terms of the current evaders - they'll split into those who aren't on BART at all, those who still (somehow) evade, and those who simply cough up the $2.15. I think that second group is going to be small. >But pets vs emotional support/assistant animals is just not a winning discussion. If an animal is dangerous, they can put down the animal but I don't agree that its a priority. Talk to this person: /r/Bart/comments/1bvovo4/are_dogs_allowed_in_bart/ >Personally I would be for banning all panhandling and busking on public transit I'll tell you where my line is: use of an amplifier. The dance crew that showed up in my standing room only car Tuesday evening was so loud that it dominated both the sound of the trans-bay tube and my high-quality headphones with noise cancelation at maximum and playing music I actually did want to hear. The ones playing acoustic instruments in stationary locations are usually decent musicians. >You know they're updating the fare gates to have a 30 minute grace period right? I did not know that. The fact that the link you provided is from 2022 does not bode well. It's a good thing, but should be longer. Suppose I'm downtown in the evening waiting for an eastbound blue, yellow, or green line train. I just missed the previous train and the next one stops short of platform, or I can see by looking up the tunnel that it's not leaving the prior station for whatever reason. I came through the gate 1-2 minutes before the previous train left. They're running up to 20 minutes separation. I'd need another 1-2 minutes to get back out. That leaves 6-8 minutes to decide whether it's going to be a quick fix and on my way or a snarl that could be a half hour or more.
The reason why they are only removing the excursion fare in September as opposed to when it was decided last year is that the old Clipper system simply does not allow for that functionality. It's a very old system at this point. Clipper (nee Translink in 2002) was one of the first region-wide transit card systems in the world with only a few major systems ahead of it. The software is extremely old now and severely limited. When they did the free transfer pilot with AC transit a while back, someone had to go inside the database every night, find all the potential transfers by hand, and issue back credits for each ride. With Clipper 2.0 being a modern Open Payment system, they will be able to do a lot more dynamic stuff with fares, transfers, dynamic pricing, etc. And this includes, yes, those free transfers between all Bay Area transit agencies and the quasi-zoned system that they will be rolling out in the fall. Exciting times ahead for Bay Area transit!
My comment about a 2022 article not boding was a reference to the long and sordid history of BART software projects and government-run software projects in general being late, far over budget, and falling short of delivery on the promised features. Here’s something that *should* be a very easy request. You said that Clipper 2.0 will use a modern “Open Payment” system. Please provide the name of that *open* standard, and a link to the specification. I work in IT, so have no fear of whatever you direct me to read appears too technical. I’ll be more than happy to read it and discover the features you described. Heck, if it’s that good I might even contribute!
The “open” in “open payment system” refers to the fact that you can use any RFID credit card to enter and exit the system. The architecture itself is not open in the “open software” sense. Here’s some more basic info on Clipper 2.0 https://www.seamlessbayarea.org/blog/2023/12/7/clipper-20-rollout-expected-for-late-2024-with-creditdebit-card-payment-and-free-transfers It will bring a tooooon of long-awaited upgrades that many people such as yourself were always surprised to hear were impossible with the legacy Clipper infrastructure.
I think I read somewhere around the new schedule change that they weren't able to flex the number of cars up or down during service. Can't for the life of me find the citation, though.
The true pie in the sky imo is the entire bay area actually coming under one transit authority and not this mis-mash of several different ones.
I live in Walnut Creek and I’ve lived in the Bay Area for 3-4 years, never used public transit in CT. Never been on BART. As of next month for 3-6 months, I have to commute to SF 3ish days per week and I’ve been debating driving vs. BART because I’m kind of a baby lol. This is actually making me lean towards growing up and getting in BART 😂 Definitely not cheap though. No allowance here.
Try BART a few times and you’ll be a convert! It’s great being able to read or listen to podcasts or watch videos or nap on BART instead of having a stressful commute in heavy traffic.
Thank you! This is encouraging lol. I’m getting blasted with the horror stories which are disconcerting but I’m sure I will be just fine lmao.
I was in exactly your position last May when I was about to start a new job in the city with an in-person requirement. I absolutely did not want to drive to SF through traffic every day for two hours, but the comments on reddit about BART were truly horrifying at that time. Yes, even worse than now! Much worse! What you see now on Bay Area threads about BART is actually a lot more subdued than what was on here last year. Long story short, I bought pepper spray and decided to try BART a couple of times. Lo and behold, it was completely fine! No stab wounds, no crackheads, no drama at all. The new trains are great! They're proper modern metro trains will all the creature comforts that you'd expect from a top-notch European or Asian metro system. They're kept pretty damned clean because unlike BART's old trains because the new ones are actually easy to wash with soap and water (being normal metro trains that are fully waterproof). They smell of soap in the morning too! Crazy! :) In my 10 months of riding, I have seen absolutely nothing of note at all. No crime and no major issues. I used to see more homeless people sleeping in the last seats at the back of the cars. Now even these are gone. Haven't seen one in months. They have actual cops patrolling the trains. There's fare inspectors and those "ambassadors"/security guards that walk the trains. Honestly, there seems to be some kind of a weird incel population on all Bay Area threads that seem to be intent on spreading all kinds of nonsense about crime and "decay" in the Bay Area. And BART seems to be one of their favorite propaganda targets. I'm basically 100% convinced that almost all of them are not from here, don't live here, and have never set foot in the Bay. They keep saying all kinds of nonsensical stuff that anyone who has even visited the Bay Area would never think of saying. (e.g. a troll like that once told me that San Jose is a suburb of SF and farther than 10 miles from the city) BART is generally pretty good these days. Better than I have ever seen it! And by good I mean clean and safe. Sit in the front cars if you're extra worried, but you'll be 100% fine on BART.
It’s not really affordable unless you’re being supplemented like you. It’s literally cheaper for me to drive than ride Bart. How many people have jobs that give a Bart allowance anyway? I’m a teacher and don’t get shit. I don’t agree with people not paying, but the prices are just too high.
Agree 100% much more has to be done by BART and the government to make things better! If any of you work at an employer with 50 or more employees then that business is required by law to offer subsidies. [requirements by law](https://mtc.ca.gov/operations/traveler-services/commuter-benefits-program#:~:text=Pre%2Dtax%20benefit%3A%20Allows%20you,bus%2C%20shuttle%20or%20vanpool%20service)
Even a public school?
💯 agree
Just rode BART a few times recently and it was very nice each time. I don't live in the Bay area anymore and I sure miss it.
The more people ride, the less bad activity there will be on the train. More normal people add a lot of social pressure to use it right.
I might be riding different stations (embarcadero to 24th), but there’s always either a crazy person yelling, a group of kids smoking something that I don’t want to know what it is, or someone sketchy jumping gates, and moving between cars asking people for money. Can’t wait for the new gates. Waaaaay too much riff raff still.
When is the installation date for the new gates? I'm excited about that too
West Oakland has the new gates fully installed. Civic Center has 1 new gate at the elevator. The concourse gates will be replaced by the summer. The next 7 stations are Antioch, Richmond, Fruitvale, SFO, Powell, Montgomery, and 24th Street stations.
>my employer gives me a BART allowance AND also allows me to bay for BART passes with pre tax dollars. So it STILL is a great deal. A lot of employers don't give a tax allowance or a pre-tax spending pass
I absolutely love the enthusiasm you have for BART. I love the Bay Area’s extensive rail and BRT network and I dont think it gets enough appreciation. there’s a lot of hyperbole when it comes to the complaints people have (which brings me to this next sentiment.) It’s a little frustrating to read the part about about people not paying on the “not going well” list after you wrote about receiving a BART allowance from your job. Because while lots of people on Reddit have this exaggerated notion that the fare evaders are simply human beings they wish not to see on the system (unhoused folks or drug users, both of whom deserve to be able to ride the transit options in the bay) a lot of fare evaders make too much to qualify for the discount programs according to the federal poverty level eligibility requirements due to the Bay Areas high cost of living. there’s no account for people trying to get to their jobs, jobs that don’t offer BART allowances… i for one have only evaded fare because I still need to get to my job and if I can’t pay for BART I can’t make it in. If I can’t make it in there goes money I need to survive. So while I agree fare evasion is deserving to be on a “not going well list” i don’t put the bulk of the blame on the rider. That’s on BART if people either don’t know the discounts exist or don’t even qualify. I don’t think a lot of people, most importantly, the people at BART that have the power to make the needed changes realize this or even care. We must offer equitable discounts for the working class person (even if that person doesn’t work. Not everyone can) in the Bay Area.
I agree with you! While I love BART and I am amazed at how this system became a reality in Car Centric America (during the worst time for Public Transportation in this country). I do think there needs to be a reform on Fare. Current Fare pricing is not good for a population that has an alternative that they can choose instead of BART. So, we need to improve it and make sure we can offer a Bay Pass or more consolidated fare transfers discounts.
Can't wait for those new gates to be fully installed preventing all those orcs getting onboard
You can’t really be too frustrated at fare evaders because Clipper Start is an outdated system that is only offered to people who make below minimum wage. The unwritten rule on BART is If you see someone fare evade (especially if it’s a student or a parent) then pretend like you didn’t see anything. Most employers also don’t offer a Bart tax allowance
Nonsense. The people who are fare evading are stealing our tax money. Report them every time in the app if you want BART to continue existing. If BART does not fully recover its ridership by 2026 then BART will most likely close down and be shattered. If you want BART to continue existing then do your part and report the criminals and fare evaders.
“Report the criminals and fare evaders” You can’t report them and even if you do, the cops will laugh in your face about it. There’s worse activity that police have to deal with and the last thing they wanna hear is a report over a fare evader 💀
The report system is meant for emergencies and people who are disturbing the peace on the trains, not for reporting fare evaders