11–20 of 50 posts
No ACE train?
Sharp eyes! ACE is included in the feed, but we did not include it in the animation. We don't currently have geometries for the route alignment (the train tracks), so we'd be drawing straight lines between the ACE stops — didn't look that great in the GIF, so we left it out. [Note: I'm an Interline staffer]
Curious why the line to Sacramento (upper right) is considered the Bay Area.
On one hand, this is a great effort and I'm sure will help commuters a ton. But on the other, why on earth does the bay area have 31+ different transit agencies??
And yes, there is a lot of troll in that comment :P.
On one hand, this is a great effort and I'm sure will help commuters a ton. But on the other, why on earth does the bay area have 31+ different transit agencies??
If it actually worked well, people might use it, especially the undesirables. It’s also because the Bay Area is stupidly split up into dozens and dozens of small-medium sized municipalities spread over multiple counties. So every little group acts in their own locally optimal, shortsighted interests. Most of the people affected worst by the lack of public transportation and housing can’t vote in the areas that can ac…
Makes sense to me, especially if you are paying local income taxes in that area. I seem to recall from high school that 'taxation without representation' caused a big kerfluffle a couple hundred years ago.
On one hand, this is a great effort and I'm sure will help commuters a ton. But on the other, why on earth does the bay area have 31+ different transit agencies??
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it actually worked well, people might use it, especially the undesirables. It’s also because the Bay Area is stupidly split up into dozens and dozens of small-medium sized municipalities spread over multiple counties. So every little group acts in their own locally optimal, shortsighted interests. Most of the people affected worst by the lack of public transportation and housing can’t vote in the areas that can ac…
>I’ve been thinking the past couple of years you should be able to vote in local elections in the area you work in, even if you don’t live there. Makes sense to me, especially if you are paying local income taxes in that area. I seem to recall from high school that 'taxation without representation' caused a big kerfluffle a couple hundred years ago.
On one hand, this is a great effort and I'm sure will help commuters a ton. But on the other, why on earth does the bay area have 31+ different transit agencies??
If it actually worked well, people might use it, especially the undesirables. It’s also because the Bay Area is stupidly split up into dozens and dozens of small-medium sized municipalities spread over multiple counties. So every little group acts in their own locally optimal, shortsighted interests. Most of the people affected worst by the lack of public transportation and housing can’t vote in the areas that can ac…
In many areas this would effectively lead to the suburbs being able to dictate urban policy to the inner city, where suburban commuter interests like parking override the interests of the actual residents. The 1998 amalgamation of Toronto is a good example of this happening, and I think a lot of Old Toronto voters are quite unhappy with this, given how it led to mayors like Rob Ford who would never have been elected with the old boundaries.
Other areas try to solve this by creating an uber transit authority which theoretically directs and coordinates the smaller agencies for the greater regional good. A good example of this is the Regional Transportation Authority in Chicago. It often doesn't work out the way it's intended (in Chicago, the CTA [city proper transit] and Metra [commuter rail] still have very poor coordination, although Pace [suburban buses] and CTA do have somewhat good coordination).
A third approach is to (try to) make the whole region's transit the responsibility of one single agency. Picking Atlanta as an example here (MARTA), it tends to lead to affluent suburbs (Cobb and Gwinnett Counties) trying to stay out of the system because of concerns like "transit brings crime" and "it's too expensive and no one will use it" and other assorted nonsense. So that approach has its problems too.
In short, this is a very thorny problem and there honestly aren't a lot of places in North America that do it very well, although some are worse than others (the SF Bay Area may seem like a mess, and it is, but it's inarguably better than the dozens of barely-funded, not-at-all-sufficient systems that exist in most large and medium cities in the U.S.). I think the right solution is probably specific to each region and it still won't solve every problem, at least not without a level of funding that transit simply does not get on this continent.
No ACE train?
Sharp eyes! ACE is included in the feed, but we did not include it in the animation. We don't currently have geometries for the route alignment (the train tracks), so we'd be drawing straight lines between the ACE stops — didn't look that great in the GIF, so we left it out. [Note: I'm an Interline staffer]
On one hand, this is a great effort and I'm sure will help commuters a ton. But on the other, why on earth does the bay area have 31+ different transit agencies??
If it actually worked well, people might use it, especially the undesirables. It’s also because the Bay Area is stupidly split up into dozens and dozens of small-medium sized municipalities spread over multiple counties. So every little group acts in their own locally optimal, shortsighted interests. Most of the people affected worst by the lack of public transportation and housing can’t vote in the areas that can ac…