Because the parking is free or low-cost, lots fill up very early in the morning, with some spaces taken by people who don’t need to drive. If you take a 6AM train and you live a couple of blocks from BART, so you can easily walk or bicycle to the station, you might as well drive there if the parking is free. As a result, there are no spaces left by 8AM, and some people drive all the way to work because there is no parking for them at the BART station.

BART could benefit from Shoupian pricing of its parking: set the price high enough that there are always a few vacant spaces. The BART system would benefit from the higher revenues. People who don’t take BART now because of lack of parking would begin to take BART. Overall ridership would increase, as some people who now drive to the station shift to other modes and some people begin to take BART who now are deterred by lack of parking.

Not only outrageous but disconnected from reality. Even if they wanted to provide excellent feeder service it is impossible to compete with BART’s parking policy. And lets not even get into the putative fare transfer policies.

Look at the origins for people in a place like Concord station and you see many more or less drive down the street to the station.

Or if you lived in Alameda would you pay $75 a month for your AC pass to wait for a infrequent bus so to BART?

According to BART’s outdated 2002 West Oakland Station Access Plan, “The majority of passengers that use this station do not live in West Oakland.” The plan’s map of “AM Weekday Home Origins” shows that many drivers bypass outlying BART stations in Contra Costa County to board at West Oakland. BART-operated lots at outlying stations that only charge a dollar or are free are of course filled very early. BART should stop encouraging unsustainable travel patterns that burden the entire transportation system. Make parking available at suburban stations for those willing to pay for the convenience!

BART parking at Fruitvale BART is only $1/day, while nearby private lots charge between $3 to $12.

As someone who has spent years in the parking management and equipment business, I say WTF?!

A solar powered “pay by space” parking meter that accepts coins, bills, and credit cards costs $10-20,000 each, fully installed, including the back end software system to manage a large network of machines. Even at the highest $20k price, $2mil would buy 100 of them – and no BART parking facility is anywhere near to being large enough to require 100 multi-space parking meters. 10-40 machines should be sufficient to cover each BART station lot, maybe even less if you just put the machines in the station itself (instead of in the lot, which is less convienent, but protects the machines from the elements and vandals).

So BART director, if you are making you decision on a cost/benefit analysis, your costs are WAY off – and I’m more likely to vote you out for your shoddy decision making process than I am for having to pay to park at BART.

The car to BART ridership will whine that they are “getting screwed for trying to do the right thing”, but this should fall on deaf ears. Similar to the AIG bonus babies, they won’t go scurrying back to the Bay Bridge, parking at West Oakland – the most expensive – would be eaten up by a toll alone if one drives to SF, not to mention the cost of parking in SF.

Retail businesses subsidize parking to attract profitable customers – BART is not making a profit off of their customers so this argument doesn’t wash.

In theory, raising the cost of parking would drive the demand for better feeder service, which in my opinion should be spearheaded by BART. AC transit and County Connection also need to serve people who aren’t going to BART, since these feeders don’t run on a profit BART should contribute – since BART saves money by reducing parking need.

–Katherine