4 ms·

> Caltrain does run down there. We could have beefed up that system and had a tremendously efficient train system, with trains leaving every 15 minutes or so fo

by raldi 13y ago

> Caltrain does run down there. We could have beefed up that system and had a tremendously efficient train system, with trains leaving every 15 minutes or so for the peninsula The problem is that Caltrain (and BART outside SF proper) has its stations along the periphery instead of the heart of town. You can't jump on Caltrain in the Mission or Noe Valley or even Market St, and on the southern end, it's not going to drop you off anywhere near anything. This is because California, and the Bay Area in particular, follows a policy of "The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many", and when previous generations were deciding where to put stations, they didn't use eminent domain like most municipalities would; instead, they built them either in the few parcels of vacant land off on the periphery, or along the freeway land they already owned, which is perhaps the most pedestrian-hostile arrangement possible.

dllthomas 13y ago
Outside of SF proper, Oakland, Berkeley and at least a few other stations...
- raldi 13y ago
  That's true, but just take a look at this BART map: http://ctchouston.org/blogs/christof/wp-content/bart_row.jpg http://ctchouston.org/blogs/christof/wp-content/bart_row.jpg The purple lines are the tunnels. The yellow lines are the stations built along freeways. Only the tiny non-purple, non-yellow fragments were built where the actual demand is. (Source: http://www.ctchouston.org/intermodality/2006/05/06/tale-of-two-subways/ http://www.ctchouston.org/intermodality/2006/05/06/tale-of-t...)
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > The yellow lines are the stations built along freeways. Per the legend, that's "existing right-of-ways" which include freeways and existing railways. > Only the tiny non-purple, non-yellow fragments were built where the actual demand is. Well, except for much of the East Bay (certainly the two northern lines, which I'm most familiar with), where the freeways BART follows (including the tunnels that follow them) also run right through the heart of the main cities. Just because they had existing right of way of leverage doesn't mean that it wasn't where the actual demand is.
BashiBazouk 13y ago
Uh...have you actually ridden Caltrain? Outside of SF, Caltrain stops in the very heart of each down town. San Bruno, Burlingame, San Mateo, Belmont, San Carlos, Redwood city, Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Mountain view, San Jose all have stations that border the historical main down town (I think Sunnyvale and Santa Clara as well). In SF proper, it's probably more to do with geography than land purchases. Trains really don't like hills and tunneling is expensive. The problem is really, that the train tracks were built in the 1860's when all these places were little towns linked by farms and fields. Then the automobile took over and there was just not seen the need for branch lines. Now it's solid industrial/suburbia all the way up and eminent domain would be way too expensive both in terms of money and politics.
- milkshakes 13y ago
  Ironically, most of the larger tech companies based out of the valley are closer to the highways than they are to the Caltrain stations; the shuttle shitshow at MTV/PA is testament to that.
  - BashiBazouk 13y ago
    Nothing ironic about it. When these plots were being sold off the car was king (and really still is) and passenger train service was almost discontinued due to lack of ridership. Putting tech centers next to freeways was quite sensible at the time.
- raldi 13y ago
  > Uh...have you actually ridden Caltrain? No, and that's sort of my point. I've lived in SF since the summer of 2008, and not once in all that time has Caltrain ever been useful to me. It doesn't pick up anywhere near anything, and it doesn't run to any place I want to go. Meanwhile, when I lived in New York, I rode the subway, the LIRR, the PATH train, Metro North, and even Amtrak all over the place, in no small part because Penn Station and Grand Central are located right in the middle of everything and thoroughly connected to local transit.
  - 13y ago
blackjack48 13y ago
This sentiment has its roots in the Freeway Revolts of the 60s and 70s. Caltrans had massive plans to wrap the entire Bay Area in freeways (plans which were only partially implemented) and the backlash put the brakes on not just new highway construction, but any kind of major infrastructure improvement. The high number of land takings is part of the reason why high speed rail is drawing a lot of criticism. In fact, peninsula residents more likely oppose the aerial grade-separation structures that would improve Caltrain service as well, not HSR itself.

by raldi 13y ago

dllthomas 13y ago

Outside of SF proper, Oakland, Berkeley and at least a few other stations...

raldi 13y ago
That's true, but just take a look at this BART map: http://ctchouston.org/blogs/christof/wp-content/bart_row.jpg http://ctchouston.org/blogs/christof/wp-content/bart_row.jpg The purple lines are the tunnels. The yellow lines are the stations built along freeways. Only the tiny non-purple, non-yellow fragments were built where the actual demand is. (Source: http://www.ctchouston.org/intermodality/2006/05/06/tale-of-two-subways/ http://www.ctchouston.org/intermodality/2006/05/06/tale-of-t...)
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > The yellow lines are the stations built along freeways. Per the legend, that's "existing right-of-ways" which include freeways and existing railways. > Only the tiny non-purple, non-yellow fragments were built where the actual demand is. Well, except for much of the East Bay (certainly the two northern lines, which I'm most familiar with), where the freeways BART follows (including the tunnels that follow them) also run right through the heart of the main cities. Just because they had existing right of way of leverage doesn't mean that it wasn't where the actual demand is.

BashiBazouk 13y ago

Uh...have you actually ridden Caltrain? Outside of SF, Caltrain stops in the very heart of each down town. San Bruno, Burlingame, San Mateo, Belmont, San Carlos, Redwood city, Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Mountain view, San Jose all have stations that border the historical main down town (I think Sunnyvale and Santa Clara as well). In SF proper, it's probably more to do with geography than land purchases. Trains really don't like hills and tunneling is expensive. The problem is really, that the train tracks were built in the 1860's when all these places were little towns linked by farms and fields. Then the automobile took over and there was just not seen the need for branch lines. Now it's solid industrial/suburbia all the way up and eminent domain would be way too expensive both in terms of money and politics.

milkshakes 13y ago
Ironically, most of the larger tech companies based out of the valley are closer to the highways than they are to the Caltrain stations; the shuttle shitshow at MTV/PA is testament to that.
- BashiBazouk 13y ago
  Nothing ironic about it. When these plots were being sold off the car was king (and really still is) and passenger train service was almost discontinued due to lack of ridership. Putting tech centers next to freeways was quite sensible at the time.
raldi 13y ago
> Uh...have you actually ridden Caltrain? No, and that's sort of my point. I've lived in SF since the summer of 2008, and not once in all that time has Caltrain ever been useful to me. It doesn't pick up anywhere near anything, and it doesn't run to any place I want to go. Meanwhile, when I lived in New York, I rode the subway, the LIRR, the PATH train, Metro North, and even Amtrak all over the place, in no small part because Penn Station and Grand Central are located right in the middle of everything and thoroughly connected to local transit.
- 13y ago

blackjack48 13y ago

This sentiment has its roots in the Freeway Revolts of the 60s and 70s. Caltrans had massive plans to wrap the entire Bay Area in freeways (plans which were only partially implemented) and the backlash put the brakes on not just new highway construction, but any kind of major infrastructure improvement. The high number of land takings is part of the reason why high speed rail is drawing a lot of criticism. In fact, peninsula residents more likely oppose the aerial grade-separation structures that would improve Caltrain service as well, not HSR itself.