Over the past few years, the Bay Area has grown into one of the most valuable real estate areas in the world due to Silicon Valley and other booming businesses. More people keep moving in and the mountainous area keeps expanding to meet housing demands. It seems that the transportation infrastructure is not keeping up and traffic is getting worse and worse every year. How do we solve this?
Increase housing prices to reflect limited supply
same as you solve most problems: by leaving
>>1595619Price people out to stop them from moving in. With less lower income residents, the city will be cleaner, with less crime, and public transit and public areas will be safer. The city will have less people, so there will be less traffic, transit will be less crowded, and the city will have a more community-like feel, making it harder for people to slip through the cracks into drug addiction and mental illness. The tax revenue from the higher income residents, unencumbered by thousands on government benefits, will allow the city government to vastly improve the publicly owned parts of the city, putting it leagues into the future. There will even be enough money to create a liked and not feared high-quality homeless shelter and rehabilitation center thousands of miles away from the city, for the current homeless residents to be taken to.
>>1595625>>1595622Rent has been going up dramatically
Nuke it from orbit
>>1595619I don't see a problem. There are many ways to get around the bay. Just use the one that you like the most, simple as.
Dam the bay and drain it. Creating more land for detached single family homes and expressways.
>>1595619Kill all the “environmentalists” who stand in the way of every project that would actually alleviate pollution and traffic congestion and then round up the trust fund NIMBYs and put them in concentration camps and last but not least hang Elon Musk from the top of the new Bay Bridge suspension beam and leave his body to rot like British colonial pirate punishment so the seagulls can nibble his useless corpse awayTL;DR I’m leaving this fake and gay simulacra of a state
>>1595633And nothing of value was lost. If you brought anything valuable to this state with your presence, you wouldn't be able to leave.
>>1595636the bay is the entire state?
>>1595633not sure why you think building fuckloads of new houses allowing for hundreds of thousands of new residents would ease congestion but go off
>>1595638Sorry, back to flyover for you!
>>1595636My family has been here since before it was a state you degenerate transplant resource sucking shit eater>>1595640Uhhh how about fucking fake enviros and NIMBYs fuck off and let multi family housing and a complete rail infrastructure with high speed rail go through instead of stalling and increasing project costs every step of the fucking way? You fucks are so stupid and then you’ll turn around and suck Elon’s dick for championing inherently more resource intensive projects. It’s whatever you neolibs are crashing the state so hard with no survivors that even UHaul can’t keep up with the people fleeing the disaster. Enjoy your diminished tax base and upside down house value before 2024. I’ll be laughing my ass off from my 100 acre farm innawoods
I'm saying this 100% unironically. Total economic collapse of the United States. The Chinese and Hispanics will go home. the bay area is too small and has way to many people, I remember as a kid we'd walk down El Camino and there was alot of cars but not as many as there is now. Option 2 or 3 are more unlikely
>>1595645I just don't see how growing the population will decrease congestion.
>>1595638politically and culturally, the North and the Eastern Sierra have nothing in common with the Bay Area and LA
With Northern California Unified Rail Service, of course. Also known as Prop 1A.The Bay Area will continue sprawling out in all directions, but especially eastbound towards Stockton as the area between Livermore and Sacramento fills in. To the south Gilroy, Santa Cruz and Watsonville will become the new periphery and to the north it'll be Santa Rosa and Fairfield. Everything will be based around San Jose, as Oakland won't rebuild their train terminal (or at least not within a reasonable amount of time) while SF is increasingly a dead end compared to the opportunity in the Central Valley. ACE ridership will explode and surpass Caltrain, eventually leading to electrification somehow. Already ACE has enough political patronage to support Valley Rail (their Sacramento extension) and Valley Link (formerly ACEForeward), both of which will be leveraged when the time comes for a much larger upgrade. The Stockton Diamond removal is the first step in all this, as is getting San Joaquins onto HSR tracks south of Merced.This has been coming for a decade, if not longer, and SF leaders have chosen to sit on their ass and not do anything about it. Since 2008 they could have built a Caltrain tube to Oakland and a Dumbarton bridge to alleviate congestion and housing issues, but this didn't happen and the former is mired in red tape and feet dragging.
>>1595662Yeah i don't think so. I mean congestion literally just means "too full" the city is just too full. It need less people.
>>1595638No. Even a town like Modesto went hard for Trump and Hollister (immediately outside the Bay Area) might as well be NRAville given the amount of firearms there. But despite this they are all integrating into one unified system, largely because it happens in a way that allows them to retain local control over their affairs without some larger entity like the MTC getting involved.Here is a truly ancient powerpoint slide demonstrating the change: ACE is the entity that will do most of this.
>>1595665And? San Jose isn't full. There's plenty of opportunity for development especially in the eastern parts where the BART tunnel will go. Same for parts to the south in Cupertino and Los Gatos, around the existing VTA line and abandoned train tunnel to Santa Cruz.
>>1595667Yeah it isn’t full and that’s why San Jose is a better place to live than SF
>>1595650>growing the population Not how that works. It’s about condensing the pop and making walkable communities that don’t rely on traffic. The fact that you’re too thick to get it is why I’m leaving you’re all irredeemably stupid
>>1595671Keep telling yourself that brining more people into the city will ease congestion LMAO
>>1595670yes, that's my point
>>1595672>meanwhile people keep coming regardless but there’s nowhere for them to live so they keep spreading out further and further and driving farther and farther and congest the freeways in a hundred mile radiusAnd that’s why the Bay Area is how it is today. Your method was tried, it failed miserably and now working class people can’t even own homes in the area and congestion gets worse and worse and more cars are on the roads than ever and the roads run at capacity all the time even though SF proper is still under a million people. You’re thick and stubborn and won’t move off failed policy and lack all ability for abstract analysis or understanding cause and effect. Enjoy your massive homeless pop and designated shitting streets
>>1595675Bruh putting a bunch of people in an even smaller area is just going to make congested worse, hell the sidewalks are gonna have traffic if you do that enoughMore people = more congestion no two ways about it man
>>1595676Not if you have trains connecting a network of more densely organized communities. You lower traffic because you eliminate the necessity to drive a car.
>>1595676so remove onstreet parking for full size sidewalks or better yet let people walk in the street again and ban cars
>>1595678You’re living in fantasy land, man. Adding hundreds of thousands of new residents will make congestion worse no matter what.
>>1595678You also have more open green space instead of urban sprawl. You should really research how actual functioning urban communities work and broaden your horizons beyond California’s failed policies. You know what the definition of insanity is right?
>>1595679And have free money for everyone and free food for all the homeless and robots that do all your chores for you!
>>1595681Building multi family housing =! Adding hundreds of thousands of new residents! It equals affords housing for existing residents who can now afford to buy and take an ownership stake in the community instead of renting and combining it with a well funded rail system will eliminate at least half of vehicle traffic
>>1595683Hmm I think you’re out of arguments friend you’re resorting to baseless assumptions for the intent of ad hominem! Better luck next time!
>>1595684>more homes means less residents Oh, it makes so much sense now.
>>1595691You lost pal all you got left is misrepresenting people’s positions.
>>1595699Every new home is at least one new resident.
>>1595619Strafing run twice daily by an A-10?
>transportation infrastructureDe-trunk and downgrade the Bay Bridge (convert to bus lanes, and for shits and giggles back to a tramway; add dedicated footway and cycleway to the west span, and segregate the east span's sidepath), I-80, and US-101. Build a Southern Crossing, the circumferential Cross-town and Park Presidio freeways. Dynamic toll on all the bridges; a larger congestion pricing zone bordering around Presidio, Panhandle, Mt Sutro, Twin Peaks, Glen Canyon and Islais Creek (restore the waterways to open channels while at it) for simplicity. Peak fare and off-peak discounts. San Francisco city focused. Fuck Silicon Valley and the rest of the Bay Area. (read: Only some ideas about SF, don't want to write about regional planning)
Tax credits for telecommuting. Both the employer and employee get them. If tens or hundreds of thousands of people don't need to regularly go to the office. Then it reduces rush hour traffic. If they move out of the Bay Area because they go to the office infrequently. Then it reduces demand on housing. While also making demand for express train services.Now of course local government won't care for this. As it means less spending and smaller tax bases. As huge numbers of people won't be in their areas anymore. They prefer cramming as many people in as possible. Even when it starts becoming a negative drain.
>>1595626over half of all units in SF are still rent controlled, there's massive market distortion going on. It would be probably be reasonable for people making <100k to live in SF if rent control were abolished and prices stabilized across the board.
>>1595726Also people with extensive land portfolios will flip their shit
>>1595633if you wanna go this route, why not simply reinstate the chinese exclusion act and free up the Sunset for white people?
>>1595622agreedstep 1: change the law so that property tax stops being artificially low for boomers.
Shoot anyone that blocks housing development on the grounds, of it not being minority owned or gentrification.
>>1595734Qbolish property taxes and have a city/County income tax.
>>1595662>Everything will be based around San JoseEw, SJ is probably the single worst example of an American city, it's more of an amalgamation of suburbs labelled as a city. San Francisco has a lot going for it, namely that it's an actual city.
>>1595736not a bad idea, but a land value tax would be better still.
>>1595734this would make sense in a context without mass migration and millions of pajeet and asian foreign workers filling up every nice corner of the state.
>>1595737Well, San Jose consistently ranks in the top 3 happiest cities in the US on every list. So clearly they’re doing something right.
>>1595747>measuring a subjective qualitiesIshygddt
>>1595619the only solution for the bay area is nuclear hellfire
>>1595755Emotional & Physical Well-Being - Total Points: 50Life-Satisfaction Index: Full Weight (~3.64 Points)Depression Rate: Double Weight (~7.27 Points)Suicide Rate: Full Weight (~3.64 Points)Adequate-Sleep Rate: Double Weight (~7.27 Points)Physical-Health Index: Full Weight (~3.64 Points)Sports-Participation Rate: Double Weight (~7.27 Points)Share of People Aged 12 or Older Who Used Marijuana in the Past Month: Half Weight (~1.82 Points)Retail Opioid Prescriptions Dispensed per 100 Persons: Quarter Weight (~0.91 Points)Illness & Disability Index: Double Weight (~7.27 Points)Life Expectancy: Full Weight (~3.64 Points)Food-Insecurity Rate: Full Weight (~3.64 Points)Income & Employment - Total Points: 25Income-Growth Rate: Double Weight (~3.33 Points)Share of Households Earning Annual Incomes Above $75,000: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)Poverty Rate: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)Job Satisfaction: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)4+ Star Job Opportunities per Total People in the Labor Force: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)Job Security: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)Unemployment Rate: Double Weight (~3.33 Points)Underemployment Rate: Double Weight (~3.33 Points)Bankruptcy Rate: Double Weight (~3.33 Points)Weekly Work Hours: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)Commute Time: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)Community & Environment - Total Points: 25Strength of Social Ties: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)WalletHub’s Most Caring Cities Ranking: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)Separation & Divorce Rate: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)Hate-Crime Incidents per Capita: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)Ideal Weather: Half Weight (~1.79 Points)Acres of Parkland per 1,000 Residents: Half Weight (~1.79 Points)Average Leisure Time Spent per Day*: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)Well-Being “Community” Rank: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)
>>1595769>Non-Hispanic Whites were 28.7% of the population in 2010yeah it's a gang-ridden pajeet infested shithole all rightt. marinfag
>>1595737San Jose is fucking based. I lived there for 2 years and would honestly move back in a second. It's one of the few big cities in the country that have retained some modicum of community and conservatism.
San Jose """""downtown"""""
San Francisco downtown
>>1595769Yes, and none of those things point to an objective happiness. Happiness is subjective, it cannot be measured via the scientific method. Do you even continental philosophy?
God damn starting this thread started a shit storm
>>1595797Sd is the human waste capital of the world. Since pajeet only shits on designated streets.
>>1595737Same applies to LA yet LA is the largest city in the whole country. It's just how things go.SF is a better city but unfortunately the city government is retarded, and has decided to continue to be retarded. This makes it very easy for SJ to steal their lunch, while SF figures out if it wants a second BART tube or Caltrain tube SJ is having the whole menu and will have it before 2030.
>>1595811I dream of a second transbay tube carrying an electrified capitol corridor.
>>1595797I guess this is the most /n/ place in the country after NYC? I've had many lively discussions on the state of CA rail here.
Build more multifamily housing in all parts of the Bay Area. That way you can run more trains around the Bay and more people will use bikes as well.
Build a high speed rail line to Portland , Sacramento and LA to take highway drivers off the road.
>>1595818Implying the affluent will let you build near there victorian townhouses and post war bungalos.
>>1595820Long distance drivers are causing the traffic.Its the commuters and shoppers. Doing all those short distant drives.
>>1595619I used to shill intelligent traffic light control, it stalls or releases traffic flows to avoid congestion and I know at least Germany has it.Maybe it's already being used, I don't know.And use the waterways and ocean for public transportation.
>>1595824Housing prices got so bad in the Bay that commuters moved out to Sacramento.Thanks NIMBYs.
>>1595820>to PortlandHello fellow NWP chad.
>>1595820Caltrans is werkin' it, you can see them work towards San Joaquins going as far north as Chico in the most recent state rail plan and SJRRC business plan. Building into Oregon largely depends on what Oregon is wiling to do on their side, the closer to CA's border Cascades (or similar) services get the more pressure on Caltrans to do something north of Redding.
>>1595619A final solution to the Bay Area problem.
>>1595818>cramming more people into a smaller area will reduce congestionUnless you destroy an old house for every new house you build, this will result in thousands of new residents in the city, increasing congestion.
>>1595887Nah, the transportation will trickle down from the areas with no congestion.
>>1595662I think the monstrous gub'ment should only reclaim land for tracks and stations according to some coherent plan, and together with existing infrastructure lease it to many private companies without tax gibs and many possibilities of them getting kicked out or fucked (this can be used for temper tantrums and insanity by the gov't, unfortunately).Maybe the technology evolved enough for private companies to do the rest by themselves.How the service would be split among companies is also hard to decide, if one would manage tracks, other one stations, other one the cars, or each segment of the system would have its own company. how each one would pay the others, ...
>>1595913separate private companies operating rail, stations, and procurement seems like a bad idea and would just lead to a british tier systemalso, Caltrans is perfectly competent for the role anyway
Traffic will improve as companies relocate and other companies tell employees to work from home.But they really need to build more multifamily if they’re ever going to solve their housing crisis.
>>1595917You being too poor to live in SF isn't a crisis.
>>1595933Engineers with grad degrees from Stanford making 6 figures and not being able to afford to live in the Bay is a crisis.The Bay added one new housing unit for every 19 new jobs they created between 2010 and 2016, they really need more multifamily.
What are some good sites to follow development in the Bay Area? Ever since Curbed went back to being NYC-focused I’ve lost touch with what’s going up in NorCal.
>>1595952>Engineers with grad degrees from Stanford making 6 figures and not being able to afford to live in the Bay is a crisis.They can live in the bay area, they just think they deserve a ranch in portola valley with a helipad because of toxic tech bro cultureIt's the same as YIMBYs in NYC who think they deserve a $10m town house on a six figure salary and if they don't get it, it's probably the fault of the doordash guy who brought them a $13 bottle of organic celery juice
>>1595822If we build more townhouses and bungalows, instead of mcmansions, we would have much more walkability
>>1595917>>1595961How are bigger townhouses going to solve any of the traffic issues? The space is limited so almost all the shit getting built is high density. You deluded Europeans don’t understand that the problem is inadequate freeways and poor transportation. Bart helps, but piling more people into narrow valleys is not a solution
>>1595961SF is already walkable that’s partly why it’s so expensive
>>1595963Ok then, stay fat.
>>1596003Thanks for reminding me that walking is the only method of staying in shape
>>1596006Staying active throughout the day is much healthier than going to the gym for one hour and then spending the rest of the day sitting on your ass
>>1596007Tell my boss that
There’s never going to be a “traffic solution”: as long as you have cars, you have bad car traffic.The key is to increase access to other modes of transportation, via expanding transit systems and allowing transit oriented development.
>>1596024>There’s never going to be a “traffic solutionHow about not building for traffic with too much housing?
>>1596026You can only sprawl so far. Metro Atlanta sprawls 50 miles with its suburbs and exurbs and yet traffic is still horrible. Did you learn nothing from 50 years of boomer planning?
>>1596039Sprawl isn't the problem, the problem is not knowing when to stop building housing. Did you not read my post correctly?
>>1595830Base Redwood Route fan
1. Restore most Streetcar and abandoned branch-line routes2. Some density at transit stops3. Additional BART lines as true urban transit, not commuter rail4. Electrified regional rail like Paris RER5. Freeway tunnels under SF (Fuck you 19th Ave.)6. Rebuild CA-17 to Interstate standards 7. Seize Chinese investments
>>1596039This. Spreading things out with single-family everywhere makes traffic the worst. Cities built around cars always have the worst traffic.
>>1596064Well if there were less people there there wouldn’t be any traffic
Also I agree that sprawl is just as bad as mid-rise for creating traffic. Every new home means one new resident.
>>1596064Single family bungalows only have about half the sprawl of mcmansions. Just build more modest sized houses and stop building wal mart parking lots the size of whole neighborhoods
>>1596085SF already has tons of bungalows and townhomes, they really help give it its chill vibe. Bungalows are based af.
>>1596092More in suburbs and exurbs is the key
>>1596095Probably, but they just fit so well in cities. A little bungalow with a liquor store next door is classic California surf town vibes, maximum comfy.
>>1596085I know plenty of bungalows with big yards so that’s a retarded opinion. The key is multifamily.
Cagetrolls realize they lost all the logical arguments so at this point they’re just saying we shouldn’t build any new housing.Lol.
>>1596114F U C K O F F W E ‘ R E F U L L
>>1596039Atlanta traffic is only bad if you stick to main roads during rush hour. A little map reading and you can bypass a lot of it.
>>1596147I’ve known multiple people who left Atlanta because driving there was such a nightmare.When you build your city around cars driving in it becomes hell. There’s never going to be a “traffic solution” as long as most people are dependent on cars for transportation.
build up in city centers with 6-10 story buildings. make the main stretches along san pablo ave into walking/train/bike areas like new york. if you want a big suburban home, then work from home or be ready for hell commute that already exist. this is the bugman future,, we cant all have big giant fucking backyards that are all lawns. >fuck what if suburban neighborhoods were microfarms, that would be so cool.... but yeah if you build up walkable city then bart would need a big fucking boost. build that second bridge from alameda to south city and put a bart line on it.that will also alleviate a huge crowd of workers that need to work in the SF area but dont need to be passin through downtown oakland and downtown sf traffic. that would alleviate a lot for those forced to drive like contractors and trucks doing deliveries to all the rest of the city. >bonus points, that would speed up the trip into the city from suburban folks below the crowded and slow oakland areabuild up neighborhoods around bart linesI think its bs they jacked up carpool to three people per car but allow a single driver to pay, bullshit bullshit bullshit, better be like $20 a trip. especially since that area is super suburban and its already a time sink for two neighbors (who happen to work together) to get to each other to carpool and the ods of you living very close to a coworker is not that high
>>1596201>I think its bs they jacked up carpool to three people per carThey killed carpooling for money, nobody carpools in 3's
>>1596212>They killed carpooling for money, nobody carpools in 3'sactually i think theyre following the hwy80 model. theres no bart along there so people are forced to carpool or drive an extra 30+ min.basically each little town has a parkinglot people drive to, and then they wait in line to hop into someone elses car. i wonder if this is still happening during covid. i remember seeing a thread or image about it somewhereyeah hwy 80 is so congested that even the carpool lane that you cant pay to get into AND is 3+ is also stuck bumper to bumper during peak 4:00-6:00
Light Rail on El Camino and Stevens Creek>t.408
>>1595629Its the only way to be sure
>>1596182I grew up in Atlanta. Anyone who leaves because of traffic is an idiot.
>>1595773yeah because there is an airport literally 2 miles away from the downtown area you retarded cocksucker.
>>1596302Atlanta traffic is a nightmare. Atlanta has some of the longest commutes in the country.
Increase train access and frequency by building denser development in the South Bay (Menlo Park, San Jose, Cupertino etc.)
>>1596360Can you be specific about "building denser development"
>>1595619Pic related is the only acceptable answer
>tfw only 30% of SF is single family homesBut apartments are supposed to help how?
Crazy how much of the Bay is zoned single-family-only.
>>1596408Desperately clinging to your beloved propaganda when you start to have ideas that aren’t approved, so sad. Trapped in your little ideological jail.
>>1596355Atlanta is nothing compared to driving around Tokyo or Yokohama. 40 to 60 minutes to go 40 miles in Atlanta. Versus 40 to 60 minutes to go 18 miles in Japan. If it really snarled up in Atlanta. It was 30 minutes more snaking through side roads. In Japan it would be hours.
>>1596362Mixed use high rises with in blocks of rail stations.
>>1596436So how is bringing more volume of people to an area and providing them with rail stations going to help traffic? How can you be sure they WILL use transit and not just drive making the problem worse?
>>1596438not him but remove parking requirements for buildings and give the local uhaul an overflow lot
>>159640230% of all units, but over half the land is for single family detached housing exclusively. 80% of the city is subject to the 30' height ban. Both of these have to go.San Jose has the same problems but the height ban is permanent due to Mineta Airport, hence the attempts to encourage development away from the flight paths and in Berryessa and South SJ. Oakland has neither problem, but Oakland also has black people.
>>1596483This seems like more wishful thinking
>>1596484removing the height ban would completely ruin the city and that's why it will never happen.
>guys we have a problem with flooding what do???>add more waterThis how stupid people ITT are
>>1596408Yeah I’d say the South Bay more than anything needs upzoning.
>>1596438As long as you have people and cars, you have traffic problems. There’s never been a way to “solve traffic” besides getting folks into other modes of transportation.Since Americans pay more to live near transit networks and bike lanes, we know there’s market demand for them.
>>1596522But why do they keep building multi family housing when traffic is begining to get problematic? It'd like they don't think things through and build housing up the ass without thinking about the volume it brings
>>1596522>Americans pay more to live near transit networks and bike lanesThis is not always the case btw
>>1596525Silence, everyone knows increasing a city’s population reduces traffic
>>1596402that is SF, which is just a small portion of the bay area and the housing is very different
>>1596438>So how is bringing more volume of people to an area and providing them with rail stations going to help traffic?it will get people riding public transit which would -at the very least- help traffic from getting much much worse if you continue to just build out.
>>1595619>solutionI have a solution in mind. A final solution, if you will.
>>1596492taller buildings in the non-senic valleys
>>1596543>Silence, everyone knows increasing a city’s population reduces trafficso whats your fucking solution? sterilization? genocide?
As long as you have people and cars, you have traffic problems. There’s never been a way to “solve traffic” besides getting folks into other modes of transportation.Since Americans pay more to live near transit networks and bike lanes, we know there’s market demand for them.
>>1596614It's gonna be hard to do that until someone creates a form of transportation people enjoy more than cars.
>>1596617The majority of people aren't emotionally invested in "commuting by car" if there where decent transit options, we would take them. But tens of millions of americans live in "urban" environments where a car is still a requirement
>>1596614>As long as you have people and cars, you have traffic problems.we can still dicscuss how to kep traffic from getting significantly worse as local population continue to rise
>>1596612Not him but maybe stop building more housing where congestion is starting to be problematic? ?
>>1596623>The majority of people aren't emotionally invested in "commuting by car"Source? I mean yeah sure if we could sprout wings and fly to work sure.
this bridge would connect industrial parts of oakland to industrial parts of SFthe northern bridge will take office workers in northern-east bay directly to downtown.vart tunnel is soon going to be at capacity so this route would alleviate that. you could have a bart train run on the southern bridge and possibly cnnect to the catrain station?or connect to one of the south-sf bart stations.that way people in the east bay (south oakland-hayward-freemont) could have a quicker ride to silicon valley on public transit. i imagine its a 60-90minute ride as is. you could probably cut like 20minutes off that commute with a soutth bart/ road bridgeare there big reasons not to have a train and road shar the same bridge?
>>1596632>Not him but maybe stop building more housing where congestion is starting to be problematic? ?the way out suburbs are becoming the new ghettos. theyre moving all the poor people to antioch/pittsburg and over the hill into the central valley.
>>1596633It's a leftist trick, they word it in their favor. People that deal with bad traffic are asked and they say sure if there a better alternative, the thing is not too many people around the US live around heavy traffic and you got bullshit claims like everyone wants to ditch their cars. If there wasn't as much traffic they would take the car over those other options every damn time.
>>1596640How familiar are you with the eastbay? In Hayward specifically there's so much multi family housing being built that mission boulevard cannot sustain. Within 3 years traffic will be so damn bad.
>>1596633I enjoy transit/walking/biking, and millions of young people who are moving to walkable "gentrified" neighborhoods dont seem to mind taking transit, all while suburbs become ghettos.>>1596641Not a leftist by any means. Imagine being this much of a brainwashed retard that thinks any criticism of suburban sprawl equals le leftism.
>>1596641Nobody needs to ditch cars, just build multiple options of commuting and transport so a car isn't needed every single time you step outside your door.
>>1596644People will always pick the car, I can walk some other time but not when I'm heading to work. How can you insist that many if any think like you especially in a time of covid?>>1596647Here's the thing, they make traffic really bad by densifying adding so much volume of new people that they HAVE to deal with traffic or maybe (if you're lucky save a few min using BART) albeit crowded. Why do we HAVE to have traffic for public transportation to thrive? Because very few prefer public transportation when traffic is minimal.
>>1596650>people will always pick a carSauce?>why do we have to have traffic for transitBecause running transit in a town of 100 people makes no sense! You need to have reasonably dense neighborhoods to get enough people to justify a train line. Trains are just more efficient in a city environment
>>1596652>sauce*generic pic of LA traffic is posted*So let me get this straight, in order to "give people options" you have to fuck over car drivers with induced traffic just so that few more take public transportation? In all seriousness, if Americans REALLY wanted high speed rail we'd have it but it would seem not enough people are vocal about wanting it
>>1596653You dont have many transit options in places like LA or Atlanta. Not really a choice.
>>1596656What about bicycle? They have protected bike lanes
they sold off the freeway onramp/offramp properties they could have used to build a freeway. that area is fucked cuase its too far from bart to get to compared to places like san pablo ave or along e14th
>>1596650>Why do we HAVE to have traffic for public transportation to thrive?because we cant keep widening the freeways
>>1596660What if we don't widen freeways and not add huge volumes of new residents?
>>1596661>and not add huge volumes of new residents?that would be unamerican to restrict them from coming in and even if people didnt move in, population continues to grow.
>>1596661Just design cities better so you can walk, bike or ride comfy trams, like the rest of the world does. Why do we keep building soulless strip mall "cities"
>>1596663They can come to America, sure. But why do we have to build for them where they can't afford or where traffic is just getting bad? There are better places to live...>>1596664I like a mix of all that but the high volume of people thrown in ruin it all
>>1596663>>1596664>le rail memeGuess what, having way too many fucking people makes that suck too. Stop. Building. Homes.
i know rent has gone down a lot for massivley overprices single studios in SFbut what about oakland?does anyone know of lots of rooms for rent going up in oakland? are people leaving oakland? i havent heard of any of my friends moving out of oakland spots, or renegotiating thier rent, but i have heard of lots of people finding super cheap rooms in sf.anyone have any info? im in the market for a $500 or less room in oakland near bart.5 years ago they were easy enough to find in a punk house>did all the punk houses dissapear???and i remember lots of $250-$500 warehouses spaces until ghost shit. fuckmy ideal situation is parking a short school bus in someones locked yard and using bathroom and kitchen as i please.
>>1596666>Guess what, having way too many fucking people makes that suck too. Stop. Building. Homes.how am i supposed to live where i grew up if prices of homes go up but wages and job opportunities do not. basically your telling me i have to move out if i dont become rich?
>>1596668Adapt or die, chud.
The Bay Area’s so expensive the police, firemen and teachers can’t live there. At that point you’ve got a housing crisis.
>>1596668So because you got priced out everyone should suffer with traffic? Get in where you fit in nigger
>>1596673Or just build more train lines. The gov can't force people not to live somewhere, but they can build more transportation infrastructure
>>159564795% of the traffic is indians and chinese. They don't care about it because they will put up with anything being from a 3rd world country. They don't value standard of living at all.
>>1596696the bay will never be liveable unless we get rid of all the indian and chinese H1B's.
>>1596667you need to man up and gentrify some local POC out. And remember to frequent coffee shops in revitalized neighboorhoods, black twitter hates them.
>>1596663>population continues to grownot here, young urban millennials don't have kids at replacement rate. Our neoliberal politicians sell us out and refuse to let our population stabilize at a sustainable level.
>>1596638no more road bridges, that traffic will just spill onto already congested city streets. I assume a second transbay tube would lie somewhere along that span, it should have been built yesterday.
some day bros.....
>>1596670>Adapt or die, chud.>moves into RV in front of your house>pisses into storm drain every morning because someone at an antimask rally told me its my freedom to do so
>>1596695>Or just build more train lineswhere?
>>1596707>no more road bridges, that traffic will just spill onto already congested city streets.it would aleviate congested trafific on bay bridge which already has people re-routing along richmong/goldengate bridges. It would connect people in oakland to work south of downtown san francisco
>>1596713true, I hate that the poors cut through Marin to avoid tolls and bypass the bay bridge. Northbound on GGB and eastbound on Richmond bridge are toll free. There is a literal mile long line of wagies waiting to transfer from 101-N onto 508, there isn't a direct connector.
mind you driving fucks that all you congestion slows down the speed of commerce and trucks, construction vehicles, work work work. cost everyone more $$$
There’s no way to “solve” car traffic so it’s a pointless and incredibly expensive endeavor. Just focus on better modes of transport.
Make sure you've got enough bike lanes and sidewalks, and expand the transit systems so people use cars less.
>>1596695>The gov can't force people not to live somewhereUh yeah they can it’s called not allowing new homes
>>1596776People are lazy as shit and cars are a status symbol, especially for all the richies here.
>>1596984>cars are a status symbolOnly for poors and fly*vers
>>1596986>>cars are a status symbol>Only for poors and fly*versCope, europoor
In my experience the best way to make traffic worse is to listen to Cagers and their impulsive “decision-making”.
>>1597011You’re right, listen to the geniuses that think increasing the population will reduce traffic.
>>1595619A ton of different things, most of which will either not get done or will take a stupidly long time to get done. >Electrify and completely grade separate Caltrain and add passing tracks, extend underground to Transbay Center>2nd transbay tube via a torn down 980 and Alameda, landing near Mission Bay, out Geary, and down 19th Ave>Add Caltrain tube to new transbay tube, extending from Transbay center over to Oakland and linking with existing heavy rail line over there>Finish BART phase 2 extension to downtown San Jose, and ideally send it out Stevens Creek to De Anza>Build TOD around every station possible on all rail lines and upzone wherever possibleThose are just a few big ones. I have a long list of other things that would help.
>>1595626Rent in SF is down almost 30% on average. Big drops in Oakland too. It's suburban rent and purchase prices that are increasing.
>>1595662Weird that you blame SF for a lot of these things that it has absolutely zero control over and others that it only has some control over. The city can't unilaterally build a Caltrain tube to Oakland, just for example.
>>1595666Wrong. Stanislaus County voted for Biden. So did Merced County. So did San Joaquin County. San Benito County, where Hollister is the largest city, voted overwhelmingly for Biden. Just fucking verify shit before you spout of and end up being so fucking wrong.
>>1595667You can't rebuild a train through the Santa Cruz Mountains using the old alignment of tunnels. They literally bombed them out and the route is wildy inefficient by modern standards.
>>1595773The airport limits the height of buildings in downtown San Jose. Nothing can be done about it.
>>1597031>. Big drops in Oakland too.is this only in yuppy studios?it seems like all my friends who rent $850 rooms in shared houses are still paying the same and no one has really moved out.I havent heard of people getting their rents reduced. my rooommates wanna ask or ours reduced. or at least to not fill in the back room which is supposed to be means of eggress. there is a tennant renting it out who is not home and leaves that exit locked. illegal?
im looking at craigslist and rooms in a shared house are all still $900-1100looks like only studios and whole apartments are going down?
Build an actual real metro with stops every quarter mile, like the Paris or Singapore metros. Build big-ass sidewalks.Eliminate all zoning restrictions and let the developers turn everything into Manhattan tier density. Bam, problem solved.
>>1597241>Eliminate all zoning restrictions and let the developers turn everything into Manhattan tier densityThank goodness idiots like you aren't in charge
>>1597241The zoning restrictions are not the problem gullible randroid, the problem is nobody wants to do the hard work of making a transit system that isn't hot garbage
>>1596484you can't be stopped by a height limit if you just build everything underground
>>1597264>put everything inside shifting walls of rock being pushed by entire continents floating on magmaWhat could go wrong
>>1595773Cupertino and Menlo Park need serious upzoning. They have the headquarters of the world’s largest corporations but zone like they’re small suburbs. But I agree San Jose can use infill.
>>1595735That would unironically help. Left-NIMBYs are probably the biggest threat to transit use and urbanism because they block all the urban infill.https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/01/anti-growth-alliance-fueled-urban-gentrification/617525/
>>1597283As they should, why make traffic worse? Building more transit doesn't guarantee the new residents will use it.
>>1597279>this new idea sucks until the propagandists I trust approve of it
>>1597241We could double density with gentle upzoning with rowhomes, duplexes etc. We really dont need soulless skyscrapers in MOST cases.
>>1597329But think of how many new people moving into the city would bring their cars
As you clean the shit from the street just dump it in driveways and doorsteps of politicians and millionaires.
>>1597305>muh anime cities
>>1597237No, it's across most segments, not just studios.
>>1597290It increases the chances they will if you don't subsidize and make driving hyper-convenient. Don't provide as much parking anywhere and don't have free parking in public.
>>1597408So by the sounds of it, you HAVE to MAKE the driving experience hell so that """"hopefully""""" people use public transportation.
>>1597410yeah, its very convient to drive
>>1597376>But think of how many new people moving into the city would bring their carsincrease density around train and bus lines and flat areas that are easy access on bike. ive seen a couple people here move in with cars then not replace them when they died cuase they didnt need them anymore
>>1597376Puic long term parking decks outside the city. Keep your car outside the city and safe. Use it when you need to. Otherwise use other transportation in the city.
>>1597424Ah the pleasures of youth
With that many cars in an area you’re always going to have bad traffic, which makes it a pain in the ass to use a car. They need to ramp up their train services. Fortunately, they are building new stations but they need more multifamily around the stations to keep things running and avoid insane price hikes.
>>1597410Proven to work. And not just transit but other methods.
Motorcycles.Lane filtering is already legal in Commiefornia. So just get people who commute in cars by themselves, on bikes. Single digit conversions of cars to bikes. Will yield double digit congestion reduction
I wonder if all of these stupid posts about how “rail is the only solution” that no one replies to are the same guy
SF is so beautiful.
SF is a beautiful, unique city, and truly a gem of America. Why ruin it with upzoning just so that some developers from other cities can make some short term profit?
>>1597541It's my work phone.
Hnnng so comfy
>>1597546Love those multifamily houses. The Bay Area needs comfy stuff like that all over to increase transit access.
>>1597569It already has it though. It doesn’t need more. Only 30% of homes is SF are single family anon.
Autistic Charlie Kirk lovers treat the city as a commodity, as just numbers on a screen. They can’t realize that cities have a soul. SF is one of the cities that has a soul, and it’s part of a dying breed. That’s why it’s so magnetic, and so magical when you’re there. That’s why people pay so much. If you want to destroy that with what are essentially giant room vending machines to line developer pockets, you’re anti-human.
>>1597528Upzoning won't ruin anything you fucking troglodyte. It's already the 2nd densest city in the country and replacing 2 story buildings with 5 or 6 story ones along major streets and transit routes won't detract from anything.
>>1597589Last thing SF needs is more residents
>>1597524Rail is the main solution. Nothing else works without rail to move massive traffic quickly over distance. You certainly aren't cycling or walking. Not with those hills, feces, and drug needles
>>1597589So why is it so overcrowded if it’s so dense? I wonder if it’s because it’s the best city in the US. Not that it matters. Believe it or not, there’s more to life than letting the supply and demand chart dictate everything that happens in the world.
I wonder why cagetrolls spend so much time repeating the same arguments that have already been disproven in other threads, or earlier in the same thread.
>>1597612At least we’re not like the rail trolls, they don’t even have any arguments just > duh duh upzone and rail >just upzone and rail>upzone and rail good. upzone and rail fix everything >duh just upzone it and add railThey don’t think, just repeat the same line they heard from some propaganda podcast or news outlet over and over. Absolutely zero critical thinking or problem solving about the subject, but we know why that is.
>>1597614I’m glad you admit your statements get repeatedly disproven. Thanks for that.
>>1597615Oh really? So how did you disprove this?>>1590790
>>1597616A statement that is true is that public transit is antiquated in its current form of trains on rails and buses on routes. For it to be viable and able to not slowly die out in the future it needs a complete rethink and reconstruction.
>>1597579he said Bay Area, not SF.
>>1597589San Fran doesn’t need a ton of replacing buildings, they can just build over parking lots and the occasional single-family house. It’s the Bay Area as a whole that needs to loosen zoning requirements.>>1597638Notice how much the cagetroll relies on strawmanning and lying.
>>1597614We offer solutions to the problem, you offer nothing.>rail trollsWhere the fuck do you think you are, douchebag? Its a transit board
>>1596703I remember pre vocid at 6pm in 2019 there would literally be gridlock in all the arterial roads filled with shitty crossovers and teslas being driven alone.
>>1597687Well, the first step is disallowing any new multi-family in the bay, and allowing a special property tax break for converting a multi-family into a single-family building (while keeping the historic exterior, of course) The population will fall, and congestion will reduce as well. When your nose is stuffed, you don’t get a nose job. You blow out the snot.
>>1597807>When your nose is stuffed, you don’t get a nose job. You blow out the snotBased
In the long term the Richmond bridge will need replacing, and the new one would likely carry a rail line. It would probably take SMART over to the east bay to connect with Capitol Corridor. Of course it will take decades and cost gorillions. I guess the problem is that Marin isn't that populated (250k) and I would like it to stay that way, but if you're gonna spend billions on a bridge they'll probably demand we move in more beaners and pajeets from the east bay.I don't think that the Bay should become a megalopolis, but it's probably gonna be forced onto us regardless by globalists.
>>1597811Globalism has nothing to do with the land use policies on a single metro region you poltard faggot.
>>1597610It's not overcrowded you illiterate nigger.
>>1597620Thousands of cities all over the world would prove otherwise.
When upzone and allow mixed-use, people don’t need to travel as far to get to stores, offices, restaurants etc. and when they do travel they have they density to support rail. Also, building more housing makes housing cheaper and the Bay Area is ridiculously expensive. My friend bought a house in the bay, and the sellers told him “If you bring a home inspector here we’ll sell it to someone else” because the sellers can just take you for a ride in that market. How are you supposed to buy a house and start a family in a market like that? Millennials will never be homeowners if we don’t fix this shortage.
>>1597893Lmao, I'm a zoomer and some of my friends own homes already, its called not living in san francisco
>>1597816Globalization has everything to do with the fact that the Bay Area has been turned into a playground for the global rich, and a target for the mass migration of pajeets and asians.One of the trendiest concepts of the 2010's was that of the re-emerging City-State, and to rethink our model of governance around cities rather than States. There's a reason the Electoral College and States' Rights make liberals seethe so hard
>>1595619traffic solution? urban density duh.hypocrites in bay area with their teslas. meanwhile some poor shmuck is super commuting 4 hours a day from stockton burning god knows how much CO2godamn white people are fucking retarded some times.
>>1598132but muh real estate value.. not like its a speculative market you can virtually place anywhere with stiumlus and production and it grows itself..literally next few valleys over and start again.you made it in the shittest possible spot origianlly so everything from here on out should be cheaper aside from the impossible inflation/stagflation situation.
>>1595625>Price people out to stop them from moving in.They'll live in the parks and poop in the streets.
>>1598511Not if you have an effective police force. How many homeless people are shitting in Greenwich, CT? Zero.
Why would anyone in their right mind care about car traffic? It’s not a problem you can ever solve. Just build better modes of transportation and let the cagers enjoy their self-induced harm.
>>1598511>They'll live in the parks and poop in the streets.Only because YOU LET THEM
>>1596984>>1596986>>1596991Then fuck themThen there is no solution. Let them rot in that actual shitholeMillionare homeless, love it
4 or 5 story buildings with enough of green surfaces, narrower roads, less parking spaces, weider bike lanes so people can use those bicycle trailers,every street is one way, every crossroad is 3 way or a roundabout,no strict zoning but a lot of mixed zoning,to buy property yoi need to be a citizen otherwise pay 20% xtra,no property tax for locals,no rent controls, less large blocks and build stuff to be walkable,public transport always has enough space in it for people with bikes,build down underground as well - bike parks or whatever,fuck nimby latinos,those green spaces are filled with trees and every building can take care of its own with flowers or do barbecues or whatever
>>1598698Lol thank goodness idiots like you aren't in charge
Was hearing on radio this morning that congestion pricing is being talked about for san Francisco and could end up being up to 14 dollars per toll because traffic is getting so bad. How about we stop with building so much housing if it's becoming such a problem.
Fill the bay up
Fill the gay up
>>1599967Congestion pricing has been a big success everywhere it’s been implemented. The Bay Area has a massive housing shortage and no matter how many times you spam /n/ you can’t change anything. Shrug.
>>1599987I just can't see the logic in adding more volumes of people when traffic is starting to become a problem and nobody has explained why. Is there a housing shortage or did people get priced out because I find it strange that the housing that is in need is always built where it's not needed. Why aren't they building up in the valley? Bay area is already overcrowded as fuck
>>1599999Lol keep dreaming, it'll never happen in your lifetime
As long as you have that level of car-dependency you’re going to have bad traffic. I can get in an Uber and zip around NYC quite fast even though the city wasn’t built for cars.
>>1600009>as long as you keep allowing more residents you're going to have worse trafficFTFY, don't compare Jew York to the bay area
>>1599988LeftTards purposely make traffic unbearable in hopes people ride a bike,bus,or train. In the end its worse for everyone because people will sit in traffic polluting the air even more because of the added volume of people bringing their cars too.
>>1599988>I just can't see the logic in adding more volumes of people when traffic is starting to become a problemwhere is the logic on prohibiting people from moving in. how would you do that? you cant prohibit americans from moving anywhere unless its black people in oregon 70 years ago>and nobody has explained why.population growth, dumdum
>>1600018you write like a moron. I know plenty of who switched to public transit because driving was unbearably slower.how about this one? i moved from a suburb to a dense urban area to cut my commute from an hours of driving to 20minutes of bicycle riding.>In the end its worse for everyone because people will sit in traffic polluting the air even more because of the added volume of people bringing their cars too.this sentence is atrocious. what are you trying to say? "as traffic becomes worse, more and more people switch to driving anf further congestion?"youre a moron.
>>1600030>where is the logic on prohibiting people from moving inWe're overcrowded, people prefer cars, roads can barely fit more cars and more people that come in will still pick the car. When is enough, enough? How overcrowded does the bay area need to be, yeah sure a very small amount might take bus,train,or bike but that won't help with majority of new residents picking the car.>population growth Yeah, that's to be expected but we can't keep building housing when we're already feeling the effects of overpopulation.
>>1598543>Why would anyone in their right mind care about car traffic?because 4/5 the voter base is care drivers
>>1599988>Why aren't they building up in the valley? Bay area is already overcrowded as fuckthey are in fact building up tons of giant houses in all that open valley space, but guess what. everyone there wants to work in the bay area and the huge 12 lane wide 580 freeway going into the bay is slowed to a crawl every morning from 4am to 9pm. i wonder if they would ever take bart out to stockton, lmaobuilding homes in the valley creates more traffic in the bay are because thats where the jobs are, retard.ha. im listening to public radio and they just started a program on solving atlanta traffic
>>1600036What's your solution? Do you honestly think building more housing in the bay will solve anything? Companies need big incentives for working from home
>>1600034>We're overcrowded, people prefer cars, roads can barely fit more cars and more people that come in will still pick the car.i know a number of people who let go of their vehicles when they moved into my dense urban neighborhood because it was too inconvenient and public transport was goof enough. you demand you need to be able to drive in this city for your convenience. i feel bad for the drivers who actually have to haul equipment around and are forced into this shit traffic.>When is enough, enough? How overcrowded does the bay area need to be, yeah sure a very small amount might take bus,train,or bike but that won't help with majority of new residents picking the car.as traffic and population increases, more and more people find it convenient to take public transit over driving.>>population growth >Yeah, that's to be expected but we can't keep building housing when we're already feeling the effects of overpopulation.youre a fucking moron>you "i dont like crowded freeways so people need to stop moving into where i live even though the jobs and weather is nice, that stuff should only be for me "guess what, other people want to live here too and that is their american freedrom to do so.people are gonna continue to move in and price out the locals if more homes arent build>you "well im not poor, so that not my problem" we clearly cannot 1. build more freeways2. prohibit people from moving inwell we can still focus on3. building up alternatives forms of transportyes, people prefer cars, people prefer high paying jobs, people prefer big houses over small houses, but im sorry little baby, we cannot accommodate to everyone, so those who are forced into traffic are gonna have to suffer cause we cant make bigger freeways and we cant limit population. driving is one hell of a convenience.
>>1600034just curious. what part of the bay do you live in and where do you commute too (for work)
>>1600044Beyond retardation, sooner or later sidewalks would be overcrowded if we followed your little dick plan.>>1600046Hayward, I commute to milpitas. 25 min drive to and from. Before pandemic it was 35min in morning and worst case scenario 40min in afternoon.
>>1600044>hey, our family is really poor>let's have 5 more kids
>>1600037>What's your solution?build up dense housing along bart lines and a 2nd transbay tube between alameda/collosium area to south san fransicomaybe even a 2nd bridge there to carry train, industrial truck traffic, commuter traffic to south SF without having to pass directly through downtown.im wondering if post corona virus, will SF see an exodus of tech companies, an exodus of wealthy residents and then housing prices and then traffic aleviates into SF because1. cause theres less work to drive towards2. local residents can afford to move back into the city
>>1600049yeah, people do this. were not china, we dont have baby limits.
>>1600047>Beyond retardation, sooner or later sidewalks would be overcrowded if we followed your little dick plan.like in many big walkable europeon cities. yes, that would be nice. why dont you move out to bum fuck new mexico if light traffic and open space is soo important to you? you cant control people moving into the bay but you can decide where you go!
>>1600052>like in many big walkable europeon cities. yes, that would be nice.How is living like ant colonies trampling eachother nice?>why dont you move out to bum fuck new mexico if light traffic and open space is soo important to you?Because it's not so bad, "yet"
>>1600053this country was built on refugeesi dont want them coming in and using our resources but fuck, i know i sure didnt work very hard to get this comfy life i am living.>america
>>1600054>How is living like ant colonies trampling eachother nice?pros:1. i dont have to drive to get anywhere/everywhere (grew up in suburbs)2. dont have to sit in a car in traffic for an hour to get to work.cons.1. i dont have a fuckoff huge house and yard. sounds like a big urban metropolis is not the right place for you to live.
>>1600058Where did you grow up and where did you move to?
What can be done about firetrucks/ems getting stuck in urban traffic?
>>1600060Motorcycle paramedics and air ambulances. The motorcycles get there first and stabilize. Then radio in the evacbird. More fire stations and trucks. So shorter distances and multiple choices for getting a truck to a fire.
>>1600062LOL what a shit deal for our old boomer parents, response times tripled
>>1600062Fires in apartments are far more deadly than fires in homes.
>>1600058Enjoy your city life dude lmao
We got a little lebowski urban achiever over here
>tfw living in a city literally fucks up your brainThis explains so many of the dumb ass posts I see on here.
>>1600072Those types of studies/claims are only true when it helps their narrative
>>1600059>Where did you grow up and where did you move to?hill locked suburb away from anything and everything void of public transit. you must have a car or suffer to get out of there to anywhere. no amenities beside grocery stores, mcdonalds, little shops and parks. 30-60min to get into city notrafic/traffic1hr via public transit. 1:45hr on the weekendsi moved to downtown oakland where every amenity is less than a 5minute bikeride away. i am a 20minute bart/train ride to downtown sf. i drive my van about once a week,
>hill locked suburb away from anything and everything void of public transitWhere>i moved to downtown oaklandLOL
>>1600078will be so funny when a jogger sucker punches you and takes your wallet, get a nice taste of urban lifestyle.
>>1595619a nuke would fix it. a nuke would fix a lot of things. five nukes to be safe.
>>1595645>neolibsspotted the seething communist faggot who watches vaush.
>>1595711you are truly retarded. just downright brain dead.
>>1600086>will be so funny when a jogger sucker punches you and takes your wallet, get a nice taste of urban lifestyle."its not safe to go outside"
>>1600123Not in Oakland when you're not black or brown and even then they kill/rob eachother. Sounds like fun.
I’m a “cager” and I support all the public transit possible. Getting people into bikes/busses means less cars and traffic on the road.Especially an intercity fast rail network, to take travelers off the highway.
>>1600164Here's the thing, expanding public transportation (example) BART is very expensive to expand/maintain so they add a fuckton of new residents with housing thrown in everywhere traffic ends up way worse than it was before, sure a few more will take the train but not enough to make it better than before.
bay area needs to be like new york; it needs to have dense mixed use housing to be a dynamic thriving placeor else people just waste all their money on rent whilst a few lucky people will save shit ton on taxes because of Prop-13 just like in feudalism. and now you have a class of made-its/rentiers(lords) and wagies/peasants at the bottom.
>>1599999checked and basepilled
>>1595647I went into SF yesterday and had to drive on Fell St. I remember when I was younger you could just cruise all the way past the pan handle hitting the timed lights. It was the best way to get west. Yesterday it was bumper to bumper and you would hit EVERY red light. You move a block, hit a red. It fucking sucks getting around SF. I hate san francisco
>>1595667>lets keep making it more crowded until it's just like SF and oakland
They're gonna have to allow a lot more of those high-end condos to fix their budget problems.
>>1600231SF should have fully manhattanized in the 70s and 80s, now we're stuck with disgusting glass towers in soma. Oh and it's never gonna get better unless somebody with balls in DC ends the mass importation of pajeet H1B's and other """"""skilled""""" laborers.
>>1595625And who exactly will do all the menial and other poorly paid labour?It's already across the pond in Munich (most expensive large city here in Germany) a problem for hospitals to find nurses because can no one can afford the rents anymore.
Giant Fucking Catapults