5 ms·

Ok, but central valley cities are all very car-oriented. If you take the train to Bakersfield you'll be in Bakersfield without a car. I've never been there to s

by tdeck 4y ago

Ok, but central valley cities are all very car-oriented. If you take the train to Bakersfield you'll be in Bakersfield without a car. I've never been there to say for sure, but I suspect that's a bad time and you'd want to rent a car or take Uber when you arrive. Both of those aren't convenient, which is a problem for passenger rail in the US in general. You end up in a big parking lot by a strip mall near nothing walkable.

ryukafalz 4y ago
Sure but if you densify first then people start complaining there’s not enough parking. You need to do both.
nalrey 4y ago
Isn't it a classical chicken and egg problem? Reliance on car => no public transport; No public transport => reliance on car. Someone should make an effort to change it.
- rayiner 4y ago
  HSR isn’t “public transport.” Completely different things. And not even Japan has public transport serving agricultural places.
  - nalrey 4y ago
    I would love to hear why HSR is not "public transport." Also, Central valley is not just an agricultural place: "On less than 1 percent of the total farmland in the United States, the Central Valley produces 8 percent of the nation's agricultural output by value: US$43.5 billion in 2013." From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Valley_(California) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Valley_(California)
  - boondaburrah 4y ago
    I'm not sure what your definition of public transport is. Regarding Japan, if you mean "publicly owned" then Japan Rail is private. If you mean "available to the public" then I can walk into Tokyo station 10min before a bullet train leaves, buy a ticket, and be in Kyoto in 2 hours.
    - rayiner 4y ago
      “Public transit” means transit operated by or on behalf of municipalities for getting around cities or metro regions. Inter-city rail is generally not considered “public transit.” It does not mean “available to the public.” You can also buy a plane ticket at Haneda and be in Kansai in less than 90 minutes. Japan Rail isn’t any more “public transit” than ANA.
      - runarberg 4y ago
        I’m not sure what is the point in arguing semantics, but I’ll take the bait. I think you have a different idea of what public transit is then most people I’ve talked to. Most other uses of the qualifier “public” are not this limited. e.g. public infrastructure, public art, and public libraries only requires that it is available to the public without major hurdles or restrictions, not who operates it and for what purpose. In my books, transit is no different. If a transit is available to the public it is public transit. In fact there are many airlines which I consider public transit. Including domestic air travel in Iceland and Greenland (and even between Iceland and Greenland) is public transit.
      - boondaburrah 4y ago
        In which case, I would find myself uttering the phrase "Tokyo has no public transit" which I don't think is the case. Every train in Tokyo is inter-city rail, and I think that seems to work just fine.
  - mulmen 4y ago
    I have taken a train through agricultural areas of Japan. It was really nice actually. Tokyo Subway to Shinkansen to a regional train to a single car train. All with painless in-station transfers. Also the California HSR project includes modernization of connecting services. Do you consider Caltrain to be public transit?
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/public%20transportation https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/public%20transpor... "a system of trains, buses, etc., that is paid for or run by the government"
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
flomo 4y ago
I thinks the idea is companies would put their back offices in Bakersfield instead of Salt Lake or somewhere.
SECProto 4y ago
> If you take the train to Bakersfield you'll be in Bakersfield without a car And if you live in SF or LA and are going to Bakersfield to visit friends or family, that won't be an issue at all. And Bakersfield will likely densify a bit with HSR. And maybe it'll cause higher ridership on the currently limited local transit options, allowing them to expand routes and increase frequency, increasing their usefulness to the local area.
runarberg 4y ago
I’ve actually taken the bus from LA to Bakersfield and the train onward to Oakland. Both were packed. Bakersfield is not a prosperous city by any means. I doubt car ownership is any higher there then in LA. The people that live there deserve to be able to travel comfortably to nearby cities without having to have to put in the expense of owning a car. The area around the current Amtrak station is actually quite walkable, with some transit serving it (I’m not so sure about the planed HSR station north of downtown, though hopefully they’ll make some improvements before it opens in 2030).

by tdeck 4y ago

ryukafalz 4y ago

Sure but if you densify first then people start complaining there’s not enough parking. You need to do both.

nalrey 4y ago

Isn't it a classical chicken and egg problem? Reliance on car => no public transport; No public transport => reliance on car. Someone should make an effort to change it.

rayiner 4y ago
HSR isn’t “public transport.” Completely different things. And not even Japan has public transport serving agricultural places.
- nalrey 4y ago
  I would love to hear why HSR is not "public transport." Also, Central valley is not just an agricultural place: "On less than 1 percent of the total farmland in the United States, the Central Valley produces 8 percent of the nation's agricultural output by value: US$43.5 billion in 2013." From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Valley_(California) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Valley_(California)
- boondaburrah 4y ago
  I'm not sure what your definition of public transport is. Regarding Japan, if you mean "publicly owned" then Japan Rail is private. If you mean "available to the public" then I can walk into Tokyo station 10min before a bullet train leaves, buy a ticket, and be in Kyoto in 2 hours.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    “Public transit” means transit operated by or on behalf of municipalities for getting around cities or metro regions. Inter-city rail is generally not considered “public transit.” It does not mean “available to the public.” You can also buy a plane ticket at Haneda and be in Kansai in less than 90 minutes. Japan Rail isn’t any more “public transit” than ANA.
    - runarberg 4y ago
      I’m not sure what is the point in arguing semantics, but I’ll take the bait. I think you have a different idea of what public transit is then most people I’ve talked to. Most other uses of the qualifier “public” are not this limited. e.g. public infrastructure, public art, and public libraries only requires that it is available to the public without major hurdles or restrictions, not who operates it and for what purpose. In my books, transit is no different. If a transit is available to the public it is public transit. In fact there are many airlines which I consider public transit. Including domestic air travel in Iceland and Greenland (and even between Iceland and Greenland) is public transit.
    - boondaburrah 4y ago
      In which case, I would find myself uttering the phrase "Tokyo has no public transit" which I don't think is the case. Every train in Tokyo is inter-city rail, and I think that seems to work just fine.
- mulmen 4y ago
  I have taken a train through agricultural areas of Japan. It was really nice actually. Tokyo Subway to Shinkansen to a regional train to a single car train. All with painless in-station transfers. Also the California HSR project includes modernization of connecting services. Do you consider Caltrain to be public transit?
- jacquesm 4y ago
  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/public%20transportation https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/public%20transpor... "a system of trains, buses, etc., that is paid for or run by the government"
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

flomo 4y ago

I thinks the idea is companies would put their back offices in Bakersfield instead of Salt Lake or somewhere.

SECProto 4y ago

> If you take the train to Bakersfield you'll be in Bakersfield without a car And if you live in SF or LA and are going to Bakersfield to visit friends or family, that won't be an issue at all. And Bakersfield will likely densify a bit with HSR. And maybe it'll cause higher ridership on the currently limited local transit options, allowing them to expand routes and increase frequency, increasing their usefulness to the local area.

runarberg 4y ago

I’ve actually taken the bus from LA to Bakersfield and the train onward to Oakland. Both were packed. Bakersfield is not a prosperous city by any means. I doubt car ownership is any higher there then in LA. The people that live there deserve to be able to travel comfortably to nearby cities without having to have to put in the expense of owning a car. The area around the current Amtrak station is actually quite walkable, with some transit serving it (I’m not so sure about the planed HSR station north of downtown, though hopefully they’ll make some improvements before it opens in 2030).