Yesterday while riding in one of BART’s “fleet of the future” trains, a middle-aged woman sat across from me. She was having difficulties with the seat, because the seat is too damn high:
As you can see, her feet come nowhere near reaching the floor. And that’s despite sitting at on front edge of the seat. It is hardly the first time I’ve seen something like this. Every time I see someone shorter than 5’2 try to sit in one of these seats, they look like a toddler in a high-chair.
Apparently the new Muni LRV‘s have the same problem, which makes me wonder if this is a stupid new fad among US transit planners. Signs posted in the new BART cars explain that the higher height is a design feature because it provides more space under seats to store luggage. I have yet to see anyone take advantage of this, as most riders prefer to keep their laptops and purses on them at all times.
BART staff was aware of this problem, but dismissed any concerns. Their PR web producer writes:
As a 5-foot-2-inch tall person, I had never really thought about seat height. BART’s 16.5 inches fit me just fine. (They’re among the lowest of its peers — consider 17 inches in Boston, 18 in Washington and 19 in Vancouver.) I tried out some examples of higher seats, and didn’t mind the dangly, feet-not-touching-the-ground feeling. It was pointed out that higher seats are more forgiving for taller people or those who have difficulty getting up and down.
Higher seats, cantilevered out from the walls, make vacuuming and/or mopping the floors quicker and easier. If there’s a trend to higher seats, my guess is that’s what’s behind it. I’m tall, and I’ve noticed the new “comfort height” (ADA-compliant-height) toilets are noticeably easier and more comfortable to sit down on and get up from. So there’s something to that thing about higher seats being easier to use for those who have difficulty getting up and down.”
[…] No, BART, the seats are really too high (Systemic Failure) […]
But 85% of BART demand is based on getting Orinda businessdudes to and from airports, so it looks like design meets the system’s needs. Once you take one trip to London/Hong Kong/Tokyo/Oslo/etc and get all excited about airport—smartcard—train—luggage—downtown business hotel there’s no looking back — we’ve just got to have that right here, too.
I mean, look at the last 30 years of BART priorities and look at the way its board votes and look at the projects its staff promotes and look at what MTC funds. No billion dollar stations for little people, browns or yellows, that’s for sure.
Also: those inter-car doors and narrow doorways? BART’s surfing that cool 1970s retro wave! Cowabunga.
Its incredible how much of our word is designed around the average height of a man (5’10) then the average height of women (5’4). When kitchen appliances were standardized with counters in the 40s and 50s, they were built to be comfortable for a man cutting vegetables, even though in that incredibly sexist environment, it was only women who worked in the kitchen.
I marvel at parking meters that are perfect for my height (5’10) but shorter women cannot see.
I am sure this was a product of the same decision. A group of male engineers built it, tested it out, and approved it, but never incited a 4’11 woman to give it a go (never mind children).
I’m 6′ 2″ and even I find these seats odd. They’re very uncomfortable with weird support, and are indeed still too tall.
Shorter seats = Manspreading.
Pick the lessor of two evils.
I’m no expert in manspreading, but isn’t seat width the more critical factor? I believe the newer seats are narrower.
[…] noted earlier, seats in the new BART trains are uncomfortably high. SF Muni made the same mistake with […]