Well folks, I’ve had a chance to try a brand-spanking new Metro system — the Bay Area Rapid Transit system (BART) in San Francisco.
To those familar with my Metro blog postings in the past, I like to write about public transportation.
TOP 5 REASONS WHY DC METRO IS BETTER
- Architecture vs 60s Gov-Corporate.
- People don’t stare at you as much as they did here in SF.
- Flourescent lights somehow not as depressing in DC. Yellow colors (see photo) and flourescent lights make for sad days.
- Concrete, baby, concrete.
- The name. BART. Metro. BART. Metro.
Far from it for me to say that I have the last word on it. Gentle readers, have YOU rode the BART? Which Metro system in the United States do you like best?
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
18 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I can think of at least two people off the top of my head who are going to take your challenge, but I’ll throw in my two cents.
BART has far more comfortable seats. It had the TV monitors alerting you to incoming trains long before DC’s Metro did.
Metro has long been more deaf-friendly. It’s a little easier to navigate than BART (some levels at BART stations lead to the local trains, rather than BART platforms themselves).
Both have crappy public facilities (I can’t remember the last time I found a clean, working restroom at a BART station, and Metro doesn’t offer bathrooms– at least none that I’m aware of). Both are overpriced compared with NYC’s subway (when was the last time you paid just $2 to anywhere in the system?). Both serve some, but not all, of the airports in the area (SF took forever to route their trains to SFO, and still doesn’t directly serve Oakland, while Metro really should have been heading out to Dulles right from the start, and needs to).
I could go on, but obviously this is a matter of personal preference. For me, the two systems are representative of their regions, just as NYC’s subway is unique to its environs, and you won’t mistake Boston’s T for anywhere else. The important thing is, both BART and Metro have done a good job of serving their respective regions’ transportation needs (although they could do better!). That’s more than I can say for what passes for a subway here in L.A….
Actually, there are bathrooms in Metro. I used one at McPherson Square, but that was pre-9/11. The latest rules I know of are from March 2004, and they say that the bathrooms are for children, elderly and disabled persons, and “emergency situations.” You have to ask the station manager, and they have to escort you there, but they don’t wait for you - you can leave by yourself.
Huh– I thought there *might* be a restroom somewhere in the system. Good thing to know next time I’m at McPherson Square. But in general, I don’t recall ever seeing a bathroom in Metro. I’ll have to pay attention when I come to DC next month…
Do not rule out the El in Chicago. A rarity these days… the classic Loop through the skyscrapers… oh, I love it!
Chicago is getting there…but not to the level to where NYC and Washington is at right now.
Philadelphia has great regional rails…to my surprise. Very convenient and fast but the subway… that needs work. I think Philadelphia’s SEPTA is similar to Boston’s T.
Los Angeles? A small bump on the track? Non-existent with exception to the downtown region…am I mistaken?
You know, people rely on the idea that the “transit” automatically means trains. This is not necessarily true. Portland has one of the best public transportation systems in the country, if not the best. Light streetcars, buses and, surprise, surprise, BIKES! We ride bikes! How excellent is this? We ride bikes on designated paths to our respective destinations. And, we also get our daily exercise through this. Portland is very savvy. Throw in regular joe brew, a book and a bike- you are now a local in Portland!
We need more GREEN transportation…the combination of bus, train, bikes and pedesterian-friendly walking paths…this promotes sustainability.
I have done research on this nationwide and very few cities have this capability to the level that Portland is at right now.
I see you didn’t even Try to take on the NY subway system. Good choice ;)
Aesthetics aside, there’s a more pertinent question… is BART safer than Metro? I mean, we now have the feds investigating Metro due to a spate of incidents recently.
Metro’s falling apart now. 1970s management and design cannot accommodate the increasing # of passengers per year and it’s going to get a lot worse.
Metro wins, hands down.
I read somewhere that Metro is the only subway system that has padded seats - and out-of-towners are always commenting on how comfortable they are. Metro might also be the cleanest subway I’ve ever been on - makes sense given that it’s probably also one of the newest systems in the world.
I also like the new, user-friendly Metro map that’ll go into the cars this weekend. I’m amazed that the Yellow line now goes all the way to Ft Totten. Also like the inclusion of airport bus information.
Metro is the cleanest? Wow, the overall cleanliness standards for all light transit systems must be low. Many times when I get on the Metro, there’s a disgusting stain on the floor.
Rob, the map looks about the same as it always has to me. What exactly is “new” and “user-friendly”? Former DC folks and out-of-towners wish to know… :)
Hmm. Metro is gorgeous. And designed by one of my favorite architects. But BART is better run. And it’s not that expensive, especially if you don’t have to cross the Bay. Or if you have a monthly Fast Pass in SF and you can ride unlimited rides.
BART has a better website, and uses technology really well. Especially if you use the regional 511.org system. BART also has an elected board and so is better represented by the people.
The BART cars are shorter (so you end up with ten car trains), but you can also walk between cars. And thats nice, although, it’s never as crowded (there are so many different types of transit that cover nearly identical routes).
BART and Metro were both engineered by SF-based Bechtel. And so look very similar and work very similarly too. It’s much more difficult to construct in the Bay Area because of the earthquakes — so you’d never have the huge vaulted ceilings.
Plus, BART stations are sort of a mishmash. There isn’t always a unifying theme. The downtown Berkeley stations aren’t particularly nice, but the Oakland stations aren’t bad. The Powell Street station is definitely the coolest in a 2001 Space Odyssey kind of way, but it was supposed to be part of a large connection of underground streets.
I definitely think that Metro is easier to use. And is more awe inspiring, but BART was so convenient for me for so long and is pretty well integrated into the myriad of transit options in SF. (I NEVER felt like I needed a car there.) Plus the Bikes on BART rule were more sane. And it has that cool logo and those awesome late 60s signs. I’ll have to give it to BART.
Hello,
I have lived in San Francisco for two years and visited Washington, DC once. I can tell about my experience between both systems.
Metro has more ’standardised’ stations which make it easier to orient yourself to the direction when entering or exiting the station from the carriages or entrances. Many carriages have the LED signage for next destination which BART resisted fitting in its 600-plus car fleet.
I absolutely love those blinking lights on the platforms, letting me know how soon the next is coming. The LED signage in the stations are much better than BART because they list three next trains continuously rather than scrolling them up or rotating with warnings and advertisements.
Metro has those efficient RFID cards where the passengers can swipe to enter and exit. BART finally, yes, finally started using that technology this year after resisting and having false start.
What astounded me was the sheer depth of those Metro stations with impossibly long escalators to the surface! Not good for those in a hurry.
Metro has more frequent service than BART perhaps due to overcrowding and higher demand. What I like the most is Metro running past 03.00 in the morning to facilitate the pub crawlers, disco dancers, and like during the weekend. BART promptly shut down the system just past midnight. We started having a night transbay bus service not long ago to accomodate the furious passengers.
The BART service to SFO is always every 15 minutes. I realise it is not always the most convenient way if you have two large luggage and a hand bag. I have done this several times and questioned myself whether it was best idea or not.
Yes, Powell and Montgomery BART stations have that Mod 1960s look. Very disorienting feel to them. George Lucas filmed portion of Montgomery station for his 1971 Sci-Fi film, THX-1138.
Originally, BART was to have two levels under Market Street (Embarcadero, Montgomery, Powell, and Civil Centre), serving the north of San Francisco. However, BART dropped the plan to serve Marin County (north of Golden Gate Bridge) in the early 1970s. Marin County rejected the tax increase to pay for BART, Golden Gate Bridge wasn’t structurally strong to carry BART carriages, escalating cost of building whole system, and unfeasible plan of underwater tunnel were main reason. With upper level ‘abandoned’, BART had to give them to Muni. In a haste, they reconstructed some of entrances which make them very confusing sometimes.
Ok, my feeling is that BART carriages are much more comfortable and more roomy than Metro. Yes, the seats are padded and floor carpeted, but they’re so filthy that the cheap motels in Las Vegas look good in comparsion. Some homeless people do ‘camp’ on the benches and ride back and forth all day long.
BART carriages are long, I mean, really long! And the platforms are really long. However, BART regretted not putting in third set of doors in the middle to speed up the entering and exiting process. It also regrets not building the ‘three-platform’ with inner for entering and outer for exiting the carriages as seen in some Paris Metro and Munich subway systems.
During the peak hours, the BART carriages get very crowded and have standing-only room on the routes from downtown to East Bay. My secret is to board them in Civic Centre station instead of Montgomery or Embarcadero if you are heading to East Bay. This way you always have a seat.
From the seat of my pants, I feel BART carriages are more quiet and smooth than Metro. It could be due to those padded seatings.
Um, overall, BART is a very good system. Metro has more deaf-friendly features and more accessible (i.e. more stations, frequent service, extended operating hours, etc.)
Oliver
Of course, Rob has to say BART instead if New York’s fabulous subway. Subway easily routs Metro.
R-
And this contributes to the discussion how…?
Oh, BART, hands down. I’m from the Bay Area (tho’ I lived in DC for a few years), and BART had comfy, padded seats from the very beginning - and prides itself on that. Rob, its safe to infer that you’ve either never ridden BART or that you’ve completely forgotten what it’s like, or you wouldn’t have said that Metro is the only one with padded seats. If Metro does have padded seats, that must be very, very recent. I remember being horrified when I first saw the holes in the seats and discovering they were there to allow urine to flow to the floor. You’d never find that on BART.
And BART stations vary. Many are outdoor, which I like. I think most of them are more brightly lit than almost all Metro stations, though. I found Metro stations to be oppressively dark, thanks to the very dark gray concrete and odd yellow/orange lighting, coming from the Bay Area, where I used BART regularly and often. (Still do - in fact, when I first read this post, I was on a train headed to work.) DC1974 and Evans both have good points, which I *mostly* agree with.
Christian, I believe BART is safer. I, an avid news junkie, haven’t heard of criminal incidents on BART in a long, long time, and I often see BART security on the trains and in the stations.
The only thing I can give the Metro is that it goes to more places, while BART relies more on connections with other transit systems. Twixt the two, BART hands down, easily, for me.
I do love the Underground in London and the Metropolitain in Paris, though. Both are very easy to use, except for having to walk blocks underground to make a connection, and go just about everywhere in both cities. The Metro has gorgeous architecture and features. Two of my faves are the mosaic-ized walls around the spiral staircases in the Montmartre station and the Art Nouveau entrance to the Abbesses station (if I’m not misremembering which station has what).
Can’t edit my comment? Anyway, I notice you chose the Lake Merritt station for the picture. That one has some natural lighting flowing in, and isn’t it brighter than the Metro stations? ;) And, Evans, I’m sure I’m one of the two people you had in mind. ;) Inquiring minds want to know - did the other person take the challenge or not?
The other person didn’t, but that person hasn’t been on any of the forums for a while… Are inquiring minds satisfied? ;)
I know BART, I been on BART. And BART for sure has plenty of opportunities to improve itself.
I’ve lived in both SF and DC areas and I prefer BART. Folks who ride BART are more friendly. They’ll even give up a seat for an elderly or pregnant woman. I’ve never seen anyone on DC’s Metro do that. Also, DC Metro riders hog the seats! Here’s a mini story..one day I got on Metro heading for Dupont Circle and I saw an empty seat (last one) and a black woman had her bag on it. I politely asked if I could sit down..she rolled her eyes and refused to move her bag…so..I went ahead and sat down pushing her bag with my ass towards her. She gave me a dirty look and I told her to move. My stop came up and turns out it was her stop too and as soon as the door opened I put my middle finger right into her face an inch from her nose and left.