The following article has been submitted to multiple newspapers as an opinion piece. If it is selected for publication, I will post the links here. In case you are wondering, all the figures are quoted from the 2008 publication "Public Transportation: Facts at a Glance" sheet published by the American Public Transportation Association.
How we can fix our transit system (without spending billions of dollars)
Public transit is one of the most important outlets of government spending. Before you stop reading this article in disagreement, consider that transit enhances the personal opportunities of those who cannot drive and for the 360,000 people nationwide who are employed by the industry. Transit saved travelers 541 million hours in travel time in 2005 by taking cars off the road. It saves users money, too, on gasoline, car maintenance, and their time otherwise wasted sitting in gridlock, as one full, 40-foot bus takes 58 cars off the road. Plus, 4.2 billion gallons of gasoline are saved annually as a result of using mass transportation, whose use in the United States also reduces carbon emission by 37 million metric tons per year.
It's no secret that the public transit system in the Bay Area could be better, though. Living on the mid-Peninsula, I know almost no one who regularly takes transit. Which raises the question: Why? There are some large problems, such as the fact that BART does not yet reach San Jose. Another oversight is the lack of a third track on BART, which (like in New York) would allow express trains to bypass the minor, commute-lengthening stations and broken trains to be moved out of the way.
But, there are so many little improvements to be made; it would be foolish of our transit authorities not to look at them first. So, putting the big stuff aside, let’s sweat the small stuff:
1) All our public transit should have Wi-Fi. If we want to boost ridership of commuting professionals during rush hour, this is one of the best ways of doing so.
2) BART trains should be insulated for sound. I hate taking BART, because I feel that I’m sustaining permanent hearing damage in just riding the train.
3) BART should be cleaner. I know they are making strides in this area, but it is truly a turn-off to many automobile users I know to riding the system when clouds of dust emanate from the seat backs when you hit them.
4) There should be car- and bike-sharing services (e.g. ZipCar) available at every rail station. So, the train got you to Millbrae. . . now what? Imagine how many more people would take BART or Caltrain if they knew a car or bike were waiting for them when they got to their end stop.
5) All of our public transit entities should be on Google Transit, an effective online tool that allows users to easily plan a route between agencies on public transit. By freeing novice riders from those scary timetables, it can bring many new riders to the system. Being from Foster City, I have to pick on SamTrans for not yet having put itself on this service.
6) Coffee should be allowed on all trains and buses! I know BART is trying to install coffee franchises at all their stations and to design a coffee cup that does not spill. This is wonderful! Just imagine the revenue for the coffee shops and the huge allure of riding the system for those who just cannot do without their morning cup. Perhaps our buses should take note of this when said cup is completed.
These suggestions are simple and inexpensive (if not actually profitable). If we can implement these improvements, we would appreciably boost ridership. Yes, there are a lot of big improvements that need to be made if we are truly serious about getting cars off the road, but money is tight and bureaucracy is a lengthy process.
For those of you who will never take mass transit, consider that for each car taken off the road, your commute gets shorter, your air gets easier to breath, your gasoline prices go down, and less carbon is emitted into the atmosphere. Shouldn’t we all then advocate for mass transit? There’s no better time to do so than now.
Nice piece; I'm glad that you got inspired to write it.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I have a small correction that's huge: "third rail" should be "third track". It's huge because those two terms have entirely different meanings. A third track (what you're referring to) is just that... a third track. But a third rail is something that the existing BART system already has: it's the power supply rail (located outside of the two rails that the train runs on). Believe me - it's really, really important to note the difference. If anyone decides to publish this piece, make sure to ask them to make that correction.
As to my comments about that suggestion... it's extremely unlikely. Not having a third track was a deliberate decision. Every track costs hundreds of millions of dollars, and at least in America, a new rail line that proposed having a third track would probably not get federal funding (without which a line would not get built) due to cost efficiency standards. While I agree with you that it would be helpful, the cost probably far outweighs the benefit - retrofitting the existing BART system with a third track on all lines would probably cost billions. Also, in terms of a global perspective, almost all subway lines in the world run on only two tracks. While a third track does increase capacity (in certain situations), money is a big factor. New York really is an exception in this case.
Also, suggestions 1 (wi-fi), 2 (sound) and 4 (bike/car sharing) are all a lot easier said than done.
Don't get me wrong - I don't mean at all to discourage you. I'm just trying to explain that some things aren't quite as simple as they may seen.