How BART on the Golden Gate Bridge died: A new history

Post by mvkel » Sun, Mar 06, 2022, 7:17 PM UTC

Lammy wrote: post #100

mvkel wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice history! I ride by that powerhouse regularly. There are old train tracks peppered throughout lower Marin that speak to a different kind of place than it is today.

Sorry for veering off topic but by chance do you mean actual rails and not just visible ROWs like the elevated Center Blvd between San Anselmo and Fairfax? If so I’d love to know where so I can go get some photos of them and especially of their steelmarks showing the foundry name, year, and month they were rolled. I’ve explored a lot of it between Sausalito and the Alto Tunnel and never noticed any, but I also wasn’t…

Post by ac29 » Sun, Mar 06, 2022, 8:28 PM UTC

awiesenhofer wrote: post #96

dehrmann wrote: post #2

The population of Marin County is only 258k, and more like 175k when Bart planning began. Building that line would probably serve more people in SF than in Marin, so it never really made sense.

Calling a city with 2-300k residents basically "too small for public transit to work" is definitly the most US thing I heared in a while.

Post by ohples » Sun, Mar 06, 2022, 9:58 PM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #34

jacobolus wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> car > rail. Which was true and progressive, for a period! Say, 1950 to 1970? What does “true and progressive” mean? The freeway expansions of the mid 20th century cutting through city centers were disastrous all over the USA, right from the start. Horrible for urban society, economy, equity, ... Thankfully San Francisco was never turned into https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~2... Great for…

The urban sprawl created by the automobile was not a bad thing in its time. It democratized living. No longer were workers beholdant to landlords owning buildings next to the factory. Now everyone could live basically wherever they wanted. A new job no longer meant moving house and home across the city. Consumers had a far wider choice in where they purchased goods. And when they spotted a good deal they were not lim…

Post by zamfi » Mon, Mar 07, 2022, 3:00 PM UTC

quantumwannabe wrote: post #67

zamfi wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t say where you’re from, but pre-Covid, BART’s usage had gotten so high that planners were trying to figure out how to squeeze more trains into limited headways so that the downtown track platforms didn’t become unsafe from overcrowding at rush hours. Literally it was as many trains as they could fit on the tracks. So, add SF to your list — it’s not just NYC. At least, it wasn’t. BART ridership is still down…

There were 8% fewer transit (bus and rail) trips in the Bay Area in 2018 than in 1982, despite the population increasing by over 30% and the transit systems were expanded during that time period. BART had a 17% decrease in ridership from 2015 to 2018 despite them increasing train service by 15%, which is probably what you're referring to. As of December 2021, BART ridership is only 25% of what it was pre-covid and th…

Post by JulesRosser » Mon, Mar 07, 2022, 6:19 PM UTC

laurencerowe wrote: post #52

tomc1985 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cost disease. Other countries have been completing public works projects of similar-or-larger scope for dramatically less than it costs here. How can anyone rationally accept $175 MILLION (pinky finger) for bridge planning? There are two many people sticking their hands out in American projects.

Most other counties don’t attempt to build motorways through cities the way we do in the US. Until moving to San Francisco I’d never seen a 6 lanes each way motorway. Gained a new appreciation for the public transit in U.K. cities outside of London which I’d previously considered shitty.