Bart is overrated (Fremont, Livermore, Walnut Creek: transfer, living, costs)

[evolve]

So I had to take the bart from Fruitvale to SFO. Almost 10 bucks one way...?!?
Why should I take the bart when I can drive my own car for 2-3 bucks?
I have used the Sub system in NYC and the EL system in Chicago and it doesn't cost nearly as much, not to mention it's a flat rate; not your destination.

I also heard they have a surplus...i wonder why?

So I say thanks but no thanks.

[WesternGulf]

I agree. The presence of it is great but they are definitely too proud on how they price their service. BART is no longer an incentive unless your going somewhere in between Embarcadero and Civic Center.

[mayorhaggar]

It's really a weird hybrid of a traditional subway with a commuter rail service that goes out to the suburbs. It's very convenient and it's pretty fast but it's definitely more expensive than it really needs to be.

[user376]

Originally Posted by evolve

So I had to take the bart from Fruitvale to SFO. Almost 10 bucks one way...?!?
Why should I take the bart when I can drive my own car for 2-3 bucks?
I have used the Sub system in NYC and the EL system in Chicago and it doesn't cost nearly as much, not to mention it's a flat rate; not your destination.

I agree that BART has many shortcomings. However some of your points are questionable: First, how do you drive from Fruitvale to SFO for 2-3 bucks when the bridge toll alone would cost more than that?

Second, there's a four-dollar surcharge for using the SFO stop, so trips there are always expensive.

Third, getting to the airports in NYC via public transit is not that cheap either. The JFK AirTrain is $5 (and if you want to get there quickly you also have to pay extra to use the LIRR instead of the subway). Newark's AirTrain is also $5, plus you have the NJTransit fare on top. True, it's cheap to get to LaGuardia, but not very convenient... You are correct, however, that getting to the airports on Chicago's El is easy and cheap (though it can take a while).

I do agree that BART has some problems: I think that overall it is overpriced, and that the intracity density of stops is poor. One thing I think they have gotten right, however, is destination-based pricing. People making short trips shouldn't be subsidizing those who make lengthy ones. As for the surcharge on SFO visitors, if you can afford to fly, you can afford the surcharge. Still cheaper than airport parking.

[Nineties Flava]

No its not... I get a roundtrip ticket from Fruitvale to Millbrae (further south than SFO) all the time for less than 9 dollars. One way would be around 5 bucks.


EDIT: On an unrelated note, I made the mistake of going to SFO to use their BART because I was close to it... wow at the clueless suckers who think that paying 6 bucks to get to the next stop (San Bruno) is the going rate. I ended up having to get off at San Bruno, leaving the station and re-entering (and paying again to go up to Fruitvale) to save another 7 bucks that would've been spent going directly from SFO to Fruitvale. The airport BART price is rediculous

[DarkWolf]

Originally Posted by user376

I agree that BART has many shortcomings. However some of your points are questionable: First, how do you drive from Fruitvale to SFO for 2-3 bucks when the bridge toll alone would cost more than that?

Second, there's a four-dollar surcharge for using the SFO stop, so trips there are always expensive.

Third, getting to the airports in NYC via public transit is not that cheap either. The JFK AirTrain is $5 (and if you want to get there quickly you also have to pay extra to use the LIRR instead of the subway). Newark's AirTrain is also $5, plus you have the NJTransit fare on top. True, it's cheap to get to LaGuardia, but not very convenient... You are correct, however, that getting to the airports on Chicago's El is easy and cheap (though it can take a while).

I do agree that BART has some problems: I think that overall it is overpriced, and that the intracity density of stops is poor. One thing I think they have gotten right, however, is destination-based pricing. People making short trips shouldn't be subsidizing those who make lengthy ones. As for the surcharge on SFO visitors, if you can afford to fly, you can afford the surcharge. Still cheaper than airport parking.

IDK why the surcharge the airport stations. The NJT Station is in a low fare zone , example form Westwood to Newark Penn , Elizabeth , Linden , Rahway its 8.75$. But the Airport 14.25$ , i looked at various airports around the country and Canada and they do the same thing. Charge extra for the airport....... I don't get it , is it used to take care of the stations LOL?

[matt345]

My main problem with BART is that it's an extremely wasteful use of expensive heavy rail. There's no reason why a full-fledged subway line needs to go all the way out to Pittsburg, Dublin, or Fremont. For example, on the Pittsburg/Bay Point line, once you get beyond say Walnut Creek, the stations become nothing more than a series of park and rides. Service to these areas should have been accomplished using Commuter Rail (Caltrain). Instead of building extensions to Livermore, BART should concentrate on expanding service in the inner urban core, ie where potential ridership is the highest.

To further illustrate my point consider this: BART has 104 miles in total track with 43 stations; by comparison the DC Metro has 106 miles of track with 86 stations. You tell me which system is the more useful and efficient use of essentially an equal amount of track.

[mayorhaggar]

Service to these areas should have been accomplished using Commuter Rail (Caltrain). Instead of building extensions to Livermore, BART should concentrate on expanding service in the inner urban core, ie where potential ridership is the highest.

It IS commuter rail. And it's a lot more frequent and convenient compared to Caltrain.

To further illustrate my point consider this: BART has 104 miles in total track with 43 stations; by comparison the DC Metro has 106 miles of track with 86 stations. You tell me which system is the more useful and efficient use of essentially an equal amount of track.

More stations = more stops = longer commutes.

[Mr. Fantastic]

The extra charge was approved by S.F residents to subsidize the extension. Old news.

[ttocs99]

This is a very interesting argument. The pay for distance system is probably one of the few systems in this country that charges this way. I thought it made sense while living out there. For example, the NYC subways, you pay the same $2.50 whether you go 1 stop or 50 (multiple transfers). Whereas it's quite inexpensive to go one stop on BART. Also, there are several systems in NYC that vary in price range. The Long Island Railroad for instance, costs me $205 a month. That's an average of about $5.13 a trip, when you add the times I use it for work, or even less if I use it for personal use (going to Manhattan on weekends, etc). It sounds like a good deal until you start having to use the subway as well.

Either way, I think SF's public transit is a good, efficient, affordable way to travel.