Quote:
Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp
People I know living in the bay area have said to me that it feels completely impossible to raise a child without leaving, even dual incomes of $100K+ don't buy you an enough space to comfortably fit a family. Being able to afford that while still being able to maintain your career in SF would certainly interest some people. But the price and the commute times would have to be right, and it's hard to know exactly how many would actually use it.
|
I would not bet on this project being completed.
That said, assuming it's completed, and assuming it's a success, I don't see why it would increase affordability within the Bay Area. The region would obviously be more expensive if it had a highly successful, high capacity rail corridor, as opposed to the current scenario, where SF proper has no intercity rail, and commuter rail is a limited diesel line that doesn't even go to the downtown core.
I mean, that's like saying the NE Corridor would be more expensive if you removed the NE Corridor line. Obviously the corridor would be less desirable if you removed a vital transit link.
Also, affordability within the Bay Area is a bit different than in other high-cost metros. Typical high-cost metros have an expensive core and affordability generally rises as you head further out (NYC would be pretty typical). In contrast, SF city proper is arguably more affordable than the Peninsula, and relative affordability is more a function of access to Silicon Valley major HQ. This means that relative affordability isn't an issue for most SF-bound Caltrain commuters, unlike most suburban rail commuters around the world.
Threaded Mode