5 ms·

Or speed and augment existing infrastructure. Spend a billion dollars on feeder light rail to Caltrain. Run twice as many cal trains. Oops, neighbors complain a

Or speed and augment existing infrastructure. Spend a billion dollars on feeder light rail to Caltrain. Run twice as many cal trains. Oops, neighbors complain about traffic wait times. Bury five of the crossings. Now you can speed up the cal train. Nice. Now run more trains, connect the stops to the places people actually live and work. Do the same in and around Sacramento and LA. But don’t build a bullet train to nowhere. There’s so much more good we could have done with billions in transportation funding.

deathanatos 8y ago
> Run twice as many cal trains. My understanding of this is that CalTrain is already running at capacity. Trains are, essentially, back to back. Part of the electrification project is that the electric engines should have better acceleration than the current diesel ones, allowing tighter packing of trains on the tracks. (And thus, more trains, and thus, more capacity.) We really, IMO, need 4 rails from SF to SJ, but if Atherton doesn't want to give up a few trees, I can only imagine the hell that would get raised for more space. That, and funding. > Bury five of the crossings. AIUI, Mountain View considered this (grade separation) w/ the Castro/Moffett/Central intersection, but decided against it, opting instead for simple removing the crossing. (The wrong decision, IMO. I'd bury the train, but I think the (canned) plan was to bury the road, as it would be less disruptive.)
- nostrademons 8y ago
  That was my understanding as well. Someone did an analysis when I was at Google and concluded that there was basically no way to optimize the rush-hour schedule further and pack further trains in, given reasonable acceleration/deceleration constraints and station boarding times. I've also had the experience of sitting at the Castro/Moffett/Central crossing for 20 minutes as 3 trains go by and block every opportunity for a green light. "AIUI, Mountain View considered this (grade separation) w/ the Castro/Moffett/Central intersection, but decided against it, opting instead for simple removing the crossing." Wait, are they getting rid of the Castro crossing? This seems...strange, given that that crossing is the primary highway access to downtown (via 85), one of the primary routes between the Googleplex and downtown/Castro, and also links a densifying residential neighborhood to downtown. Are they getting rid of the bus service between Caltrain and the Googleplex as well?
  - jdashg 8y ago
    Shoreline, Evelyn, and Dana are the primary links to downtown from the north and south, with Shoreline and Dana/Evelyn via Whisman linking to Central. Shoreline is really close to Castro, but its capillary connections to Castro are pretty narrow, though there are a bunch in parallel.
  - deathanatos 8y ago
    > Wait, are they getting rid of the Castro crossing? That's my understanding. See https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/pw/transport/services.asp https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/pw/transport/services.asp — specifically, the section titled, "Transit Center Master Plan" and the diagram on that section. See also the link in that section that points to http://www.mountainviewtransitcenter.com/ http://www.mountainviewtransitcenter.com/ and the images on that page, particularly http://www.mountainviewtransitcenter.com/images/Castro%20View.jpg http://www.mountainviewtransitcenter.com/images/Castro%20Vie.... I originally just heard this through a friend who is more active in MTV politics that I am, but that seems to be the official info/site for it.
    - nostrademons 8y ago
      Oh. There's actually a bunch of really good stuff in that plan - the rail crossing is being replaced by pedestrian/bike undercrossings, Evelyn is being extended to Shoreline, and a protected bike lane goes from Steven Creek trail to the transit center. IMHO they should just get rid of the 101 & 85 Moffett interchanges. It's close enough and low-traffic enough that residents can just use Shoreline/Ellis/Whisman. That would make Moffett a prime bike boulevard between downtown & Caltrain and the Googleplex via Stevens Creek Trail, which would make Caltrain + bike into Google (and the Ellis office park area) very attractive, which would take cars off of 101 & Shoreline, which is desperately needed.
      - DrScump 8y ago
        they should just get rid of the 101 & 85 Moffett interchanges 85? Aside from the SB Moffett to SB 85 onramp, I don't know of an 85/Moffett "interchange".

deathanatos 8y ago

> Run twice as many cal trains. My understanding of this is that CalTrain is already running at capacity. Trains are, essentially, back to back. Part of the electrification project is that the electric engines should have better acceleration than the current diesel ones, allowing tighter packing of trains on the tracks. (And thus, more trains, and thus, more capacity.) We really, IMO, need 4 rails from SF to SJ, but if Atherton doesn't want to give up a few trees, I can only imagine the hell that would get raised for more space. That, and funding. > Bury five of the crossings. AIUI, Mountain View considered this (grade separation) w/ the Castro/Moffett/Central intersection, but decided against it, opting instead for simple removing the crossing. (The wrong decision, IMO. I'd bury the train, but I think the (canned) plan was to bury the road, as it would be less disruptive.)

nostrademons 8y ago
That was my understanding as well. Someone did an analysis when I was at Google and concluded that there was basically no way to optimize the rush-hour schedule further and pack further trains in, given reasonable acceleration/deceleration constraints and station boarding times. I've also had the experience of sitting at the Castro/Moffett/Central crossing for 20 minutes as 3 trains go by and block every opportunity for a green light. "AIUI, Mountain View considered this (grade separation) w/ the Castro/Moffett/Central intersection, but decided against it, opting instead for simple removing the crossing." Wait, are they getting rid of the Castro crossing? This seems...strange, given that that crossing is the primary highway access to downtown (via 85), one of the primary routes between the Googleplex and downtown/Castro, and also links a densifying residential neighborhood to downtown. Are they getting rid of the bus service between Caltrain and the Googleplex as well?
- jdashg 8y ago
  Shoreline, Evelyn, and Dana are the primary links to downtown from the north and south, with Shoreline and Dana/Evelyn via Whisman linking to Central. Shoreline is really close to Castro, but its capillary connections to Castro are pretty narrow, though there are a bunch in parallel.
- deathanatos 8y ago
  > Wait, are they getting rid of the Castro crossing? That's my understanding. See https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/pw/transport/services.asp https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/pw/transport/services.asp — specifically, the section titled, "Transit Center Master Plan" and the diagram on that section. See also the link in that section that points to http://www.mountainviewtransitcenter.com/ http://www.mountainviewtransitcenter.com/ and the images on that page, particularly http://www.mountainviewtransitcenter.com/images/Castro%20View.jpg http://www.mountainviewtransitcenter.com/images/Castro%20Vie.... I originally just heard this through a friend who is more active in MTV politics that I am, but that seems to be the official info/site for it.
  - nostrademons 8y ago
    Oh. There's actually a bunch of really good stuff in that plan - the rail crossing is being replaced by pedestrian/bike undercrossings, Evelyn is being extended to Shoreline, and a protected bike lane goes from Steven Creek trail to the transit center. IMHO they should just get rid of the 101 & 85 Moffett interchanges. It's close enough and low-traffic enough that residents can just use Shoreline/Ellis/Whisman. That would make Moffett a prime bike boulevard between downtown & Caltrain and the Googleplex via Stevens Creek Trail, which would make Caltrain + bike into Google (and the Ellis office park area) very attractive, which would take cars off of 101 & Shoreline, which is desperately needed.
    - DrScump 8y ago
      they should just get rid of the 101 & 85 Moffett interchanges 85? Aside from the SB Moffett to SB 85 onramp, I don't know of an 85/Moffett "interchange".