3 ms·
The prices in the Mission or downtown Palo Alto, for example, don't really reflect your contention that people in California don't want to live near public tran
by akgerber 11y ago
The prices in the Mission or downtown Palo Alto, for example, don't really reflect your contention that people in California don't want to live near public transit. The real issue is that California isn't building much new transit, and it's essentially impossible to build much new housing or corporate headquarters nearby— so it's mathematically impossible for many people to live near public transit.
- ghaff 11y agoIn general, rail projects are considered to increase property values. In fact, I've read the argument that light rail isn't really cost effective vs. dedicated bus lanes but the commitment associated with a rail line makes often makes it preferable for planning purposes. (In that buses, in addition to having a lower-class image, can always have their routes altered so--the argument goes--people won't make property decisions based on bus lines.)