California Transit Nerd

Given most of the non renewable is natural gas based which is something we have excess domestic production of I’m less worried about electric prices changing substantially.

a black and white British Rail poster titled "The argument for electrifying our railways, will become clearer in time." with four panels showing scenes from 1978, 1987, 1995 and 2005 with oil running out over that period

"The argument for electrifying our railways will become clearer in time."
British Rail, 1979.

At this time better to just go BEB given the infrastructure required

I know there was plans right as the line was first being abandoned because my mom moved out there during that era and my grandpa wanted it.

I still think in the mid 80s it would have been better to use the newly acquired SP ROW from Tracy to Niles for a half hour regional rail service over blue line BART

It could absolutely be done and doesn’t matter if they pick light rail or a small multiple unit.

There’s a couple of timetables up here

www.bartchives.com/bart-express...

If you want to spend some time at Contra Costa County they have copies of a late 70s early 80s plan to turn the SP branch line into transit instead of being trailed

We need to make stricter VMT analysis and stop allowing projects that increase them.
Why are California officials so obsessed with highway and expressway expansion like it’s the 1960s. It doesn’t fix traffic and it’s growing increasingly expensive with less and less funding

Why are Metrolink service improvements (SCORE) going to miss the Olympics?
1. lack of dedicated funding
2. (mis)management by county DOTs that are hyper-deferential to NIMBYs, leading to cancelled projects
3. lack of staff capacity to design projects

Putting busways on existing streets are among most cost effective projects. 20% speed improvement = 20% ops savings or 20% frequency improvement at no ops cost. They're like printing cash

Stairs at a rack full of database servers some of which are SQL clusters on a SAN with 2N redundancy so we can lose any item and keep going

East Bay for Everyone Opposes Cal Chamber "BACA" CEQA Ballot Measure Streamlining sprawl development is not "Pro-Housing!"

Thanks to the important CEQA reform passed last year, the @calchamber.bsky.social BACA measure does nothing for the infill housing we need.

What it does do is streamline everything from sprawl detached housing to highways to data centers.

Read more: eastbayforeveryone.org/2026/03/05/s...

I know no Governor candidate wants this question but we need to have a discussion about continued highway expansion in the face of climate change and the fact we can’t build our way out of congestion but we spend billions a year trying.
It’s likely going to have to be forced on counties by the state

Yeah between 1-2 months for the entire network

Would be helpful to get some of the worlds single largest users to reduce their consumption

How about the next lane goes though your bedroom

StreetSmart 14.1 - What to look for from the 2026 Legislature - Streetsblog California Our first nearly-comprehensive look at what is, and isn't, moving.

Leaders with @calelectricrail.org, @calbike.bsky.social and @movecalifornia.bsky.social talk with Streetsblog about what to expect...and not expect...from the legislature in 2026 in part 1 of this week's StreetSmart podcast.

cal.streetsblog.org/2026/03/04/s...

I really want to restrict what projects can call themselves multi modal and use even a penny of state funds. At least half should be going into non car/truck/motorcycle improvements

If we wanted high speed rail even with our inability to do things cheaply 4-5 route miles a day or 1.5-2k route miles a year

45.6K Single track miles a year
India at its peak in the early 2020s hit 4.5K STM a year

Using an absolutely insane 8M (Caltrain modernization costs which had so much go wrong) a single track mile we could be electrifying 125 track miles a day.

Seattle's code limits midrise single-stair apartment buildings to 4 apartments per floor.

The International Building Code (which, despite the name, is rarely used outside the US) allows two-stair apartment buildings more than 600' long, with dozens of apartments per floor.

That’s of course only the state money. Most counties have a tax going towards highway expansions be they GP, HOV or HOT lanes, “safety” improvements of interchanges and more questionable value at best projects

Even moving half of the 20B we spend on car infrastructure to transit and active mobility would be transformative
1B on complete streets
2B on regional/intercity rail
2B on HSR
5B on operating subsidies for local transit

I know no Governor candidate wants this question but we need to have a discussion about continued highway expansion in the face of climate change and the fact we can’t build our way out of congestion but we spend billions a year trying.
It’s likely going to have to be forced on counties by the state

Yeah. I don’t have a decent diagram I can find.
Most people would probably like 2 bathrooms for 3 bedroom

You have 800 sqft to add 6 bedrooms. That should be enough space. Are they going to be massive no.

This is on a 50x105ft lot with ~70% coverage so 3700sqft.

www.bchousing.org/sites/defaul...

They could have put 32 people a floor and I would be fine with that as long as they simulate that against the largest code compliant double stairwell setup.

They made a lot of poor choices to justify something minor rather than what they seem to have wanted to say which is no change.