Comments on: Top 5 Reasons Why DC Metro is Better than BART http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/ Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:48:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Oliver http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-77448 Oliver Sat, 27 Jan 2007 10:29:10 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-77448 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 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

]]> By: Ill take BART over other subways http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-76716 Ill take BART over other subways Fri, 19 Jan 2007 20:17:45 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-76716 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. 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.

]]> By: David Evans http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-76588 David Evans Thu, 18 Jan 2007 01:57:06 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-76588 The other person didn't, but that person hasn't been on any of the forums for a while... Are inquiring minds satisfied? ;) The other person didn’t, but that person hasn’t been on any of the forums for a while… Are inquiring minds satisfied? ;)

]]> By: David Evans http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-76587 David Evans Thu, 18 Jan 2007 01:56:03 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-76587 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... :) 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… :)

]]> By: David Evans http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-76491 David Evans Wed, 17 Jan 2007 08:34:19 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-76491 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... 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…

]]> By: Richard Roehm http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-76286 Richard Roehm Tue, 16 Jan 2007 13:33:17 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-76286 I know BART, I been on BART. And BART for sure has plenty of opportunities to improve itself. I know BART, I been on BART. And BART for sure has plenty of opportunities to improve itself.

]]> By: Jen http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-73000 Jen Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:21:19 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-73000 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? 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?

]]> By: Jen http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-72954 Jen Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:17:40 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-72954 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). 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).

]]> By: Pippin http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-71059 Pippin Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:59:03 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-71059 And this contributes to the discussion how...? And this contributes to the discussion how…?

]]> By: The One and Only Ridor http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-70096 The One and Only Ridor Sat, 13 Jan 2007 08:20:32 +0000 http://www.deafdc.com/blog/bobby-cox/2007-01-11/top-5-reasons-why-dc-metro-is-better-than-bart/#comment-70096 Of course, Rob has to say BART instead if New York's fabulous subway. Subway easily routs Metro. R- Of course, Rob has to say BART instead if New York’s fabulous subway. Subway easily routs Metro.

R-

]]>