5 ms·
"Also, the Milbrae and Burbank station locations will be in less accessible areas" Millbrae isn't a "less accessible area". You've got both BART and Caltrain.
by iolothebard 11y ago
"Also, the Milbrae and Burbank station locations will be in less accessible areas"
Millbrae isn't a "less accessible area". You've got both BART and Caltrain. Do a little research author? Millbrae is actually the best place IMO in the Bay Area to stop, especially if they ever expand BART.
- ghaff 11y agoNot if everyone would only live in densely populated, walkable cities created by the wave of a magic wand because that's what the author would clearly prefer.
- x0x0 11y agoWell, it's what we can afford / are capable of making work, given the constraints in California: limited land area (particularly coastal land area with nice weather), large increases in population, an inability to scale freeways to move as many people as necessary, etc.
- ghaff 11y agoMy point is that doesn't describe the reality of California for all sorts of historical reasons so assuming that's the reality isn't very useful. Perhaps SF and the South Bay should encourage higher density and mixed use communities, but that takes a long time even in the best case. The bottom line is that not everyone can necessarily live in the specific locale they'd prefer. And just making things denser isn't the answer. Marin County isn't Marin County if you make it NYC.
- saosebastiao 11y agoLand area is only a constraint in CA because they have rejected density as a solution to the constraint. The city of San Jose could be home to 13M people at Manhattan levels of density, or 7M people at Brooklyn levels of density. Instead, it is home to 1M people, with freeways that are relatively overbuilt in relative comparison.
- x0x0 11y agoI don't think you understood the article. It claims that, for speed purposes, train stops should only be in major cities and not on the urban periphery. Millbrae is hardly a major city. Nor is Millbrae particularly accessible: there is poor parking near the bart station, few options for public transport, and I doubt even 2k people live within walking distance of the bart station. Millbrae is also obviously not the best location in the bay area to stop. Millbrae population: 22k. sf population: 837k.
- johan_larson 11y agoYou want to draw a high-speed train line into SF proper? You'd be looking at clearing tens of miles of housing or digging a comparable amount of tunnel, which would be either politically difficult or $EXPENSIVE. What's your plan?
- x0x0 11y agoWell, ignoring the fact that it's being done, my plan would be to serve the bulk of the population (that would be not in Millbrae), for two reasons in particular: 1 - they're going to pay for it, 2 - political support of the aforementioned populace.
- jpatokal 11y agoThey are building the HSR into SF proper, and they're doing the obvious thing: using the existing Caltrain alignment from Millbrae into the city, terminating at the Transbay Transit Center (already under construction and build with this in mind). https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/67/California_topographical_map_of_proposed_HSR_route_%282014%29.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/67/California_to...
- ghaff 11y agoWhich is also the sensible thing--leaving aside other pro/con HSR arguments in general. It also doesn't seem to be what the article is arguing for. That said, you start having lots of connections and the value of transit systems goes down. I was just looking last night and I'm told that the time to get from SFO to the Santa Clara Convention Center/Great America/Stadium is still about 2 hours which, while theoretically doable, isn't something I'm going to do.