Using BART from walnut creek monthly pass/costs???

[wrcousert]

Why isn't there a single transit agency for the entire Bay Area? If the agencies were to unite under one organization, they could pool their resources. Scheduling would be so much easier if bus lines could cross county lines. A single monthly pass should be able to cover all forms of public transit.

Look at NYC. The city is spread over five different counties, yet they somehow managed to create a transit system that would cover the entire region. They only recently introduced a monthly pass for the subway.

If they can do it, why can't the Bay Area?

[jade408]

Hopefully that happens as the individual agencies are running low. Unfortunately the MTC loves BART and gives BART all of the funding.

There is also no incentive to think regionally, whether that means for transit, roads or urban planning here. This explains why density limits in Berkeley lead to sprawl in Brentwood and Livermore. The Bay is also spread out very far geographically. From North to South, the Bay Area runs about 90 miles (About Santa Rosa to San Jose) and another 50 east to west (Pacifica to Brentwood or so). For perspective, Philly is about 80 miles from Manhattan and obviously, Philly transit decisions only have a minor impact on Manhattan's. The commuter train is owned by a different agency.

It is hard to get such a huge area to agree, and there is no shared history across cities. Some towns started off as farm land, and only changed in the past 50 years or less. Some towns only incorporated in the early 90s

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by jade408

Hopefully that happens as the individual agencies are running low. Unfortunately the MTC loves BART and gives BART all of the funding.

There is also no incentive to think regionally, whether that means for transit, roads or urban planning here. This explains why density limits in Berkeley lead to sprawl in Brentwood and Livermore. The Bay is also spread out very far geographically. From North to South, the Bay Area runs about 90 miles (About Santa Rosa to San Jose) and another 50 east to west (Pacifica to Brentwood or so). For perspective, Philly is about 80 miles from Manhattan and obviously, Philly transit decisions only have a minor impact on Manhattan's. The commuter train is owned by a different agency.

It is hard to get such a huge area to agree, and there is no shared history across cities. Some towns started off as farm land, and only changed in the past 50 years or less. Some towns only incorporated in the early 90s

Thank you for the reply. This makes a bit more sense now. From the little I understood of BART/CalTrain history, I always thought it was just disagreement from different municipalities and NIMBY-ism that prevented the region from working together...which I initially felt was a pretty petty and short-sighted reason not to get along and think longterm.

But, as you put it, the Bay area is pretty huge geographically and has only recently been built up (compared to east coast cities, that is). It makes a bit more sense why regional development wasn't critical in the past.

That being said, I'd still like to know why BART and CalTrain basically operate over similar areas and why they weren't at least combined initially. And also, why couldn't they combine now? I've read that CalTrain has had major financial woes, and could even close up shop. Is it too late in reality to combine it with BART somehow? I just don't see how it's beneficial/economically sustainable to have two agencies essentially doing the same thing when you could combine their forces.

Being from outside the area, though, this is just my opinion. I realize it's a complicated problem and also is probably a pretty contentious subject for many people.

[jade408]

BART made another interesting decision. It uses really special tracks and cars. In fact the only other similar system in the US (and perhaps the world) is the commuter rail in DC that goes to Maryland. Caltrain is actually on the train tracks. Hopefully high speed rail can help save Caltrain. But honestly, Caltrain is pretty crappy. Best case during commuter hours, it might come by every 30 minutes. The rest of the day and on weekends it is up to every 2 hours. And it doesn't even stop at every station. It also isn't well connected to the rest of the transit network in the surrounding community. So it is usually a pain to take Caltrain to anywhere because the buses don't really connect. You find quite a few bikers on Caltrain.

BART runs every 20 min on the weekend and during commute hours up to every 10 at the end of the line, and every 5 or so in the middle "core" stations.

BART and Caltrain only overlap in San Mateo county (the Peninsula) and BART covers the bulk of the East Bay, from Richmond to Pittsburg to Dublin including the larger cities of Berkeley, Oakland and Fremont.

[NorCal Dude]

I dont think santa clara county pays into bart, its just san mateo, sf, alameda, and contra costa.

Thats part of the reason bart will never get built to san jose, people in santa clara county have no need for it. Cal train gets you to sf and san jose and most people in san jose have no need or interest in going to the east bay so theres just no reason for it.

[mayorhaggar]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

That being said, I'd still like to know why BART and CalTrain basically operate over similar areas and why they weren't at least combined initially. And also, why couldn't they combine now? I've read that CalTrain has had major financial woes, and could even close up shop. Is it too late in reality to combine it with BART somehow? I just don't see how it's beneficial/economically sustainable to have two agencies essentially doing the same thing when you could combine their forces.

Caltrain is much more of an old fashioned commuter rail system like METRA in Chicago or LIRR in the NYC area. It is based on the old Southern Pacific commuter line that was established in the 19th century, so the backbone of the system has been there for a long time. Caltrans took it over and turned it into Caltrain in the 1980's I think.

BART was built in the 1970's. Before BART people would take ferries and streetcars across the bay--there used to be streetcar lines that would operate across the Bay Bridge on one of the levels.

So I think a lot of it is to do with systems that were already in place. It's impossible to get anything done in the Bay Area so I think BART and Caltrain took the lazy route and are set up kind of weirdly.

I sort of like Caltrain though, it's VERY reliable and runs like clockwork (when it hasn't run anyone over) and you can drink booze on it which is kind of weird but cool. But the 4th and King station is ridiculously far from downtown SF and it does take a long time to get down the Peninsula.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by NorCal Dude

I dont think santa clara county pays into bart, its just san mateo, sf, alameda, and contra costa.

Thats part of the reason bart will never get built to san jose, people in santa clara county have no need for it. Cal train gets you to sf and san jose and most people in san jose have no need or interest in going to the east bay so theres just no reason for it.

BART to San Jose is already headed to the environmental report phase now. (Feds sign off on environmental report to bring BART to South Bay - San Jose Mercury News) (for better or worse) and it is happening. SJ people have been claiming they need BART for the past 30 years. And unfortunately BART will bankrupt itself to give it to them. It is completely illogical.

[wrcousert]

Originally Posted by jade408

BART to San Jose is already headed to the environmental report phase now. (Feds sign off on environmental report to bring BART to South Bay - San Jose Mercury News) (for better or worse) and it is happening. SJ people have been claiming they need BART for the past 30 years. And unfortunately BART will bankrupt itself to give it to them. It is completely illogical.

Wouldn't it be cheaper to extend Santa Clara County's light rail to the Fremont BART station? A lot cheaper?