HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Subject: Re: Taxes, Development, and Transit
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 20:11:20 GMT

In article <18s1uuINNpr1@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, fuzzface@cats.ucsc.edu (Aaron Priven) writes:
> 
> If I were going to pick a place to start -- a place to begin
> transforming the South Bay from what it is now to a real *city* -- as
> opposed to a "suburban fabric" connected by arterial roads -- I
> wouldn't have picked the current route of the Light Rail.  I would
> indeed have chosen places that already have high density.  In Santa
> Clara County, of course, these are hard to come by; and they did pick
> downtown San Jose as the most important point.  I would think downtown
> Los Gatos or Mountain View (which now, again, is being chosen) would
> have been better as original choices.  But you pick high-density end
> points not so much to serve traffic going between them as to create
> endpoints for initial travel *before* development actually occurs.
> The low-density points in between, with luck and skill, get developed
> afterwards, and you have an entire corridor.  Then you fan out into
> other corridors and develop those places.  Unfortunately,
> transportation and city planning in the Bay Area aren't connected.
> Transit planning is connected to road planning, and the two have
> totally different requirements for placement.  (The freeway's a half
> mile down?  so what, a half mile isn't much to drive.  The transit
> station's a half mile down?  ugh, forget it, I'll go take the
> freeway.) Meanwhile city planning is in the charge of the wealthy
> "neighborhoods" whose main concern seems to be making sure property
> taxes on their houses don't go up by increasing the usage of their
> lands.

Many of the high density developments in Santa Clara county are already
served by rail -- downtown Palo Alto, downtown Mountain View, Santa Clara,
San Jose, etc.

One of the problems with Caltrain is that it is run by three different
agencies.  Imagine how far BART would have gotten if Muni, AC Transit,
CCCTA, WestCat, and the Flea were responsible for funding it.
Could Santa Clara county go it alone?  I.e. could the Santa Clara county
part of Caltrain be upgraded to 15 minute service without upgrading the
rest?  I know that wouldn't be optimal, but it still seems better than
any of the other transit corridors, not to mention cheaper.

jeremy
From: marc@octel.com (Marc Lewert)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Taxes, Development, and Transit
Date: 16 Sep 92 00:44:41 GMT
Organization: Octel Communications Inc., Milpitas Ca.

In article <prn1kus@sgi.sgi.com> jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) writes:
>
>Many of the high density developments in Santa Clara county are already
>served by rail -- downtown Palo Alto, downtown Mountain View, Santa Clara,
>San Jose, etc.

True, but how many commuters, remaining in the south bay, does it serve.
The problem here is that the use of the rail line has never been possible
for me because so little of the south bay is actually within it's area.
If I am going to/from the south bay to the peninsula (sp?) or SF, then yes,
it can and is used.  Going from Palo Alto to San Jose is less convienient.

In my case, I remain within one town, and may SO does not even cross the
rail line.

	marc

-- 
[ Marc Lewert                      Phone: (408) 321-6626                 ]
[ Octel Communications Corp.       AspenNet(tm): (408) 321-6700 MB 6626  ]
[ 890 Tasman Dr.		   USENET: ...!uunet!octela!marc         ]
[ Milpitas, CA 95035               Smart Mailer: marc@octel.com          ]
[ Disclaimer:  The company knows what I think, I tell them often enough. ]
[ zen hugs - the hugs that you would get, if we were there,              ]
[            if we could hug you, but we aren't, and we can't            ]
[            - Anne McCaffrey, Mercedes Lackey, "The Ship Who Searched"  ]
From: lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Taxes, Development, and Transit
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:19:12 GMT
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: boom.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <prn1kus@sgi.sgi.com> jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) writes:
>Could Santa Clara county go it alone?  I.e. could the Santa Clara county
>part of Caltrain be upgraded to 15 minute service without upgrading the
>rest?

Before we tackle "could" lets look at "should". As an extreme example,
imagine light rail running on the Palo Alto-Cahill segment of
Caltrain, at 15 intervals, hooked into the other light-rail lines at
Mountain View and Cahill.  What would the estimated ridership be? How
many people could replace their car commute with this service? And how
do these numbers compare with the number of people who commute from
stations south of Palo Alto to stations north of Palo Alto via
Caltrain? One can imagine a system where San Jose [BART extension
and/or the tracks used by the Capitols] and Palo Alto stations are the
two heavy-rail terminuses for out-of-county commuters, with the rest
of the rail in the county exclusively serving the function of local
light-rail transit.
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Subject: Re: Taxes, Development, and Transit
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 03:59:01 GMT

In article <18tl9pINN85j@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, fuzzface@cats.ucsc.edu (Aaron Priven) writes:
> In article <po1ssrs@sgi.sgi.com> jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) writes:

[ Both wrote a lot about Taxes, Development, and Transit ]
There's not much more to say on the matter.  But,

> >> You know, Vancouver is *not* the transportation paradise that's been
> >> pictured here.  
> >
> >Well I disagree.  Having spent time on both transit systems and examining
> >schedules, transit is far more competitive with the auto in greater
> >Vancouver than in the greater Bay Area.  It may not be a paradise, but
> >it's not Hell, either.
>  
> The advantage of Vancouver, it seems to me, is not so much that it's 
> great for transit patrons as that it's really bad for cars.  Thus, 
> there's enough ridership to justify decent frequency.  But other than 
> frequency I don't think there's really that much to commend BC Transit 
> itself.  

Skytrain is quick and inexpensive too.  The express buses are about as
quick as cars and they run all day and evening.  They also have timed
transfers at most of the suburban exchanges.  Overall, BC Transit is
frequent, reasonably fast, and their train system is frequent and cheap.
I'm sure they have problems, but overall they seem to do a better job
than most other North American transit agencies.  Much of their success
is no doubt due to a lack of freeways, but that fact does not make them
unsuccessful.

> If they destroyed all the freeways in San Jose a lot more people would 
> ride the light rail...

And bikes and buses too.

jeremy
From: goodwine@fortweyr.EBay.Sun.COM (Ed Goodwin)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Pontiac GrandAm 4-sale
Date: 11 Sep 1992 23:57:08 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: ba
Reply-To: goodwine@fortweyr.EBay.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: fortweyr.ebay.sun.com


                                For Sale:

1988 Pontiac Grand Am SE

  turbo 4 (175 HP)
  alloy wheels with new performance radials
  premium factory sound system (AM/FM/Cassette, power amp, 6 speakers)
  factory A/C
  power steering, brakes, windows, locks, antenna
  variable intermittent wipers
  cruise control
  remote trunk, gas-filler, hood releases
  driving lamps

This is a fast, good-handling car with plenty of room for 4-5 people and 
a good-size trunk (rear seat folds 60/40 for even more carrying space).

So why are we selling it if it's so good?  
We've had it for four years (it was one of the last '88s) and we saw a 
new car that we wanted more.

Asking $8,000 obo.

call Ed or Adele at (408) 227-4292
or reply via email to this message (I only get email during work hours)
From: lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: 20th Birthday Party for BART
Date: 12 Sep 1992 18:21:55 GMT
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Distribution: ba
NNTP-Posting-Host: boom.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <18s2goINNq38@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> fuzzface@cats.ucsc.edu (Aaron Priven) writes:
>
>BART is required by the State act authorizing its existence to serve
>Northwest San Francisco.  I really hope they get their acts together
>and realize that BART support of a Geary Metro extension is the best way
>they could support that part of San Francisco (without pointless
>duplication of services).  

If BART is ever going to extend across the Golden Gate bridge, it has
to get to the Northwest corner of the City somehow; in addition, if
the Presidio is really going to be transformed into an international
center for non-profit foundations, its going to need regional transit
serving it. The two easy ways of connecting existing BART to the
bridge would be west on Geary and then north on Park Presidio, or
north on Van Ness to Lombard and West on Lombard to Doyle Drive.
Looking at the map, its hard to imagine any other route that could
survive the NIMBY factor; Van Ness and Lombard are the only two
streets in the whole region that do not feel residential, but more
like freeways with stop lights, and Geary is out of the high-rent
district.  The Van Ness-Lombard route makes a lot more sense for BART,
facilitating a Fisherman's Wharf station and a Palace of Fine
Arts/Letterman Hospital station to serve the Presidio. In this case
the MUNI Geary extension could serve the original mission of the NW
San Francisco station.

Of course we'll all be dead before this ever happens ...


Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Re: Southern Pacific Commuter Line Tryout
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Distribution: ba
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 23:46:18 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.211318.16999@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
|> 	It would be interesting to see which is faster between
|> Richmond and West Oakland: this commuter train or BART.

Hmmm.  If BART is faster or reaches your final destination better than
a bus over to the TransBay Terminal, you'd probably be better off
transferring to BART at the Richmond.  Since you said the trial commuter
train will be free, I doubt many will do this until they start charging.

What is being done to promote this commuter train trial?  Promotion is
very important with something like this.  It'll be hard to make a good
conclusion about feasibility or market demand if nobody knew about the
train...


|> 	One might ask why SP has become so interested in passenger
|> railroading lately, since its record for the last couple of decades
|> has been one of indifference at best. A cynical suggestion is that SP
|> is hoping to board a gravy train of rail-transit subsidies, which
|> would include such things as track maintenance.

Gravy train or not, it can be a hell of a lot cheaper to pay an existing
railroad with operable tracks and right of way to run a service for
you than to build and run your own infrastructure...



|> 	If this venture proves successful, can we expect some other
|> railroads to get into the game? Might Union Pacific have a similar
|> test run on its Fremont-Stockton line? Since I live along that line,
|> I'm not likely to complain :-)

The UP will be running a their test/trial/demo train for VIPs and pols
on Friday the 18th.  It'll run from Sacramento to San Jose via Stockton
and Livermore.  It looks like UP wants to run a two year trial service
from Stockton to either Union City BART or San Jose (they haven't
decided yet).  Like CalTrain's interim Gilroy service, the two year UP
trial might have two trains coming in in the morning and two going out
in the evening.

-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
From: jciccare@adobe.com (John Ciccarelli)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Palo Alto ISTEA projects
Date: 8 Sep 92 18:44:16 GMT
Reply-To: jciccare@adobe.com (John Ciccarelli)
Followup-To: ba.transportation
Distribution: ba
Organization: Adobe Systems, Mountain View, CA

Regarding the following Palo Alto ISTEA project listed as "ranked high 
for funding" in the September/October "Spinning Crank" (Silicon Valley 
Bicycle Coalition newsletter), 

ari@leland.Stanford.EDU (Ari Ollikainen) writes:

>>    Bike/ped bridge over Embarcadero by the CalTrain tracks
>
>What lunacy is this?  Is this a bridge for PALO ALTO HIGH SCHOOL, or 
>a bridge east of PAHS? There is an existing bridge across Embarcadero
>namely Alma...
>
>We don't need more Fletcheresque bike/ped barrier equipped bridges!!

1) Regarding the Embarcadero bike/ped bridge:

It's a bike/pedestrian bridge adjacent to the *west* side of the tracks, 
connecting PAHS with Town & Country.  The T&C entrance is a fatal accident
waiting to happen, for kids walking crossing from Paly High.

This bridge will also be a link in a west-of-the-tracks bike route extending 
from south Palo Alto (via Park Avenue and Mariposa/Castilleja), through Paly 
property (currently as a 2-way bike path adjacent to the Churchill St. 
entry road), across Embarcadero, through the soon-to-be-replanned Urban 
Lane development behind Town & Country, to University and the train/bus 
station.

2) Regarding barriers ("mazes") on P.A. bike bridges and undercrossings

FYI, Ellen and others of us on Palo Alto's BAC are generally opposed to 
the barriers you mention -- this issue is raised at nearly every meeting. 
IMHO, city transportation staff thinks the mazes protect pedestrians from 
"speeding" cyclists, and -- where the ramps are inclined -- prevent the 
creation of an "attractive nuisance" (the planning term) for skateboarders 
and kids.  So far, P.A. cyclists have yet to persuade them that they also
seriously hinder transportation cycling.  

Perhaps you should write a letter to Gayle Likens at the city, telling 
her how the barriers at bike bridges and undercrossings interfere with 
bicycle transportation (use of trailers, grocery carriers, and tandems).
Your input may help get this situation changed.

/John

-- 
John Ciccarelli           Adobe Systems,  1585 Charleston |    _~C      __C
jciccare@mv.us.adobe.com  Mountain View CA USA 94039-7900 |  ='\<,    ='\<,
uunet!adobe!jciccare      415/962-6677,  fax:415/903-0584 | (&)/(\)  (&)/(\)
=== "If you live within 7 miles of your job, why drive?" === BIKE TO WORK ==
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: 20th Birthday Party for BART
Organization: LLNL
Distribution: ba
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:58:42 GMT

In article <18tcg3INNerd@agate.berkeley.edu> lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro) writes:
>In article <18s2goINNq38@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> fuzzface@cats.ucsc.edu (Aaron Priven) writes:

	[BART to NW SF:
		W along Geary Ave./Blvd. and N along Presidio Blvd
		N along Van Ness St. and W along Lombard St.
	]

	One of the big problems with San Francisco is its rather steep
hills; I don't know offhand what its steeper grades are, but I'm sure
that they are greater than BART's upper limit of about 3.5%.
Certainly, Van Ness St. and Geary Ave.  are rather steep. I learned it
from one of the handouts I got at the BART birthday celebration, which
mentioned that a 7% grade on Rte. 4 is being smoothed out to 3.5% for
the BART tracks.

	My own speculation is to go east from the Civic Center station
east along Fulton St., then turn north at Presidio Blvd. Alternately,
one could turn northwest from the area of the Daly City station and go
north along 19th St., jog a bit to the east at Fulton St., then turn
north again on Presidio Blvd. But from what I recall of the
above-ground view of the area, there are some rather steep hills
there; I'll have to check a topographical map of SF some time.

	I note that the original plan for BART in the 1950's featured
a line following the northern waterfront from the location of the
Embarcadero station. That has the plus of not climbing any steep
hills, though it would require the same kind of tunneling that Market
Street has, which is actually below the water level in the Bay.

Newsgroups: ba.windows.x
From: lora@askinc.ASK.COM (Lora Shirley)
Subject: OSF/Motif Developer's Mtg: September 16
Keywords: OSF Motif X11
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Inc.
Date: 6 Sep 92 00:04:53 GMT


               OSF/Motif Developers Meeting: September 16

  Please join us at a jointly sponsored meeting of the OSF/Motif
  Developers Group and Drinking Society and the BayCHI OSF/Motif BOF.
  The meeting is at 7:00 PM on Wednesday, September 16.

  The topic for the evening is ""Extended Uses of WCL" (Widget Creation
  Library), presented by Ron Edmark.  Ron is a Senior Research
  Engineer at Integrated Systems, Inc., where he is responsible for
  the specification, design, and implementation of graphical user
  interfaces.  Ron has been working with X and Motif since 1989.  His
  current project is the design of a new 2d, 3d interactive graphics
  modeling engine.


  The meeting location is at NCD's facilities, 339 N. Bernardo in 
  Mountain View, directly off of the Central Expressway.
 


  About the Santa Clara Valley OSF/Motif groups:
  *********************************************

  The Silicon Valley OSF/Motif Developers and Drinking Society and
  BayCHI's OSF/Motif BOF (Birds-of-a-Feather) group are two Bay
  area groups that hold monthly meetings to discuss Motif
  development issues.  The topics discussed include: releases and
  features of the Motif toolkit, X11, UI builders, and products
  developed using Motif.

  Meetings are held on the third Wednesday of the month, at 7pm at
  NCD's facility at 339 N. Bernardo St. in Mountain View.  North
  Bernardo Street is located on the Central Expressway, between
  Mary and Castro Streets.

  The meetings are open to the public.  There are no membership or
  admission fees.

  A joint planning committee schedules the meetings.  If you would like to
  discuss a topic of interest to this group, please contact Lora Shirley
  415-335-5288.


  Upcoming Meeting Dates:
  ********************************************

  Wednesday, September 16, 1992     "Extended Uses of WCL"

  Wednesday, October 21, 1992       
  




Newsgroups: ba.motss
From: rogerk@QueerNet.ORG (Roger B.A. Klorese)
Subject: Re: It's time for a poll...
Reply-To: rogerk@QueerNet.ORG (Roger B.A. Klorese)
Organization: QueerNet
Distribution: ba
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 06:01:38 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.034458.25317@genghis.borland.com>, phw@genghis.borland.com
(Peter Weyzen) writes:
|> If Clayton would
|> just talk to some of us, he would realize that *WE* are not
|> in favor of pedophilia!

This is not true.  He has talked; he has not realized anything of the kind.
Do not dignify his rantings with a response; what you propose is not a poll,
but a loyalty oath, 90s-style.  Fuck Cramer and the agenda he rode in on.
-- 
ROGER B.A. KLORESE                                              +1 415 ALL-ARFF
rogerk@unpc.QueerNet.ORG                 {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!unpc!rogerk
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it's something to get away from."
                                                                   -- J. Foster
From: polack@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (Devra Polack)
Newsgroups: ba.motss
Subject: Berkeley Co-op Seeks Swell Female
Keywords: Berkeley Co-op Seeks Swell Female!
Date: 9 Sep 92 01:48:10 GMT
Organization: International Computer Science Institute, Berkeley, CA, U.S.A.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
We're a mixed household on Ashby Ave., near the Claremont
Hotel, co-operatively owned and collectively run.

20 min. walk to UC campus, 20 min. walk to BART and Mills Shuttle.
Near Claremont Canyon, etc., in Elmwood district.

We're a mixed crowd, and in more ways than one, looking for
a creative, independent woman to join our household.  Large, roomy
house with big back yard, studio garage, garden, treehouse.

The room opens up *Oct. 1st*, and is spacious, carpeted (in a hardwood house),
with window seats near trees.  Rent is $380/mo., 1st and last.
Sorry, no meat, smokers, t.v.

Please feel free to write me with questions, or call
either of the following numbers:

(510) 486-1982			(510) 843-7245

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Devra (a.k.a.   polack@icsi.berkeley.edu)
From: wje00@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Warren Jay Eggly)
Newsgroups: ba.motss
Subject: Lesian and Gay Volunteer Mobilization Meeting
Date: 8 Sep 92 16:58:13 GMT
Return-Path: <@juts.ccc.amdahl.com:wje00@juts.ccc.amdahl.com>

From: Warren Jay Eggly

Phone: 415/348-7992

Date: September 6, 1992

Subject: Press Release

	Lesian and Gay Volunteer Mobilization Meeting.

The San Mateo County Democratic Party is having a Lesbian and Gay Volunteer 
Mobilization Meeting. Volunteers are need to do Voter Registration, Precinct 
Walking, and Voter Phoning. The meeting will be on Wednesday, September 16, at 
7:00pm, the San Mateo County Democratic Party Headquarters, 714 South "B" 
Street, San Mateo, California 94401. For information call the SMCDP at 415/348-
7992. Contact is Warren Jay Eggly

San Mateo Democratic Headquarters
714 South "B" Street
San Mateo, California 94401
Phone: 415/348-7992
Fax:   415/348-4853
From: booter@Autodesk.COM (Elaine Richards)
Newsgroups: ba.motss
Subject: AIDS Grove Work Party - Sept. 16 (Sat) 9AM-3PM
Date: 15 Sep 92 23:17:29 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: The Autodesk Ant Refuge




On Sept. 16 (Sat.) a group of people will be getting together in Golden
Gate Park to work on a newly-reclaimed section of the park, which is in
the process of being renamed the AIDS Grove.  This is a section to
honor/memorialize people who have shuffled off the mortal coil due to
AIDS.

Golden Gate Park, under several administrations suffered horrible
neglect. It is just now being remedied. This project is one such
renovation. When I saw this spot years ago, it was rapidly
deteriorating into a swamp full of beer bottles. The beer bottles are
gone, brambles have been removed, mulch has been placed and beautiful
trees from a Japanese-American association have been planted. There is
much more to come in the next few years, as evidenced by the plans.

This is a wonderful way to remember friends, family and loved
ones as well as a great way to improve the park and meet new people.

The work starts at 9AM (They don't mind if you show up later) and
continues to about 3. This year will be their first anniversary, so
there will be festivities. Food and beverages are often supplied.
(One of the women is good at schmoozing bakeries for goodies)

Its hard to describe where it is, so I will attempt a map.



	Fulton St.
---------------------------------------------------
                                                  |
                                                  |
                                                  |
                                                  |
G.G.P.       conservatory      JFK Drive          | Fell
___________________________________________________--------------------------
			/				Panhandle
                       /                          --------------------------
          AIDS        /                           | Oak
         Grove       /                            |
                    /                             |
                   /                              |
       bowling    /                               |
       green     /       kiddie park              |
                /     carousel                    |
---------------/


---------------------------------------------------
	Lincoln Way
---------------------------------------------------


Now, this is probably not too accurate, but if you can get to the Bowling 
Green, you are Very Close. The site is just Northish of the B.G. You
will see lots of people with tee shirts with the logo.  Some will be
hoes, some will be rakes, and there will be more tools if you axe politely.

ER
-- 
E. Richards  fernwood!autodesk!booter or booter@Autodesk.COM

"A mere corroborative detail to add artistic verisimilitude to
 an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative."