[ak217]

This kind of journalism really bugs me.

There are too many ways in which the author strains logic and reason. I think the companies of Silicon Valley are very interested in improving public transportation, but held back by an ineffective transit governance system. I think the comparison to the gold rush is ridiculous, as is the statement that "technology is just another boom" (what?). I think being a technology hub has done more to improve the lives of everyone in the Bay Area than any other human-controlled factor, but authors like this one are too concerned with irrelevant impressions and skin-deep, false comparisons to consider that.

[moultano]

If the Caltrain connected to any other public transit system in a reasonable way, I don't think the Google busses would exist. Riding trains is much more pleasant than riding busses, but not if it adds an extra hour to your commute each way.

Furthermore, if you want cheaper housing, build more of it. I don't think there's an easier way around it.

[rayiner]

It's a tiny piece of the puzzle. To have a really usable public transit network ala Chicago or New York, you have to coordinate zoning with transit.

1) The terminal transit station should be built so as to exit right into the central business district. The Caltrain station is too far from SOMA and lacks decent public transit. Meanwhile, Chicago's three transit stations exit right at the perimeter of the Loop (within walking distance of nearly any office building, and with a transit ring around the perimeter of the CBD). New York's two transit stations exit right into Midtown.

2) You have to allow high-density construction near the transit stations, so people can live within walking distance of commuter transit. Look at the Menlo Park Caltrain station. There's nothing around it. There are far smaller Westchester towns that have a substantial downtown core around their Metro North stations.

With housing prices being what they are in Silicon Valley, there should be 30+ story buildings ringing the Caltrain stations in Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Mountain View, etc.

[specialist]

> To have a really usable public transit ... you have to coordinate zoning with transit.

+1

My position is a bit stronger: It all starts with zoning.

There was a geek news item recently that note the difference in USA and Canadian sprawl, which the authors believed started with how parcels of farm land were measured out. In the USA, parcels were squarish, requiring roads everywhere, requiring everyone to have automobiles. Whereas Canada made theirs long and narrow, to optimize farm-to-market transportation. Subtly different initial conditions causing very different land use.

In the jurisdiction I live, better transit has been actively thwarted for decades by the suburbans. For example, years ago, we got an Oregon-style Growth Management Act, which tries to slow sprawl, preserving farm lands and habitat. The suburbans frame it as anti-growth. But in fact GMO is pro urban and opposition is anti-urban.

I am fascinated by the increasing urbanization of the under 30 demographic: It's happening despite the pro-sprawl incentives and policies. An example of society way out in front of policy.

Locally, I think this is perfectly captured by the head quarters of Microsoft and Amazon. In the 90s, Microsoft created a campus atmosphere in former second growth woods (Bellevue/Redmond). Having nearly everything newly minted university graduates would need right there on campus. It was very desirable.

Now in the 2010s, Amazon is transforming an urban area, South Lake Union. The area now has housing, hip food, great access to parks, culture, etc. In fact, in order to attract the young talent they need, I can't imagine Amazon locating anywhere other than an urban environment.

[worace]

That comment about parcelling land reminded me of something I read about the parcelling system used in the French colonies along the St. Lawrence and Mississippi rivers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seigneurial_system_of_New_Franc...

Basically the same principle except in this case the transport system was the river and the land usage is optimized to give as many people access to it as possible. Interesting to see the idea cropping up again in reference to modern public transit.

[rayiner]

Great comment. Also: where can I subscribe to your newsletter?

My wife and I were just talking about this the other day. The "campus" tendency of old-line tech firms seems to be the result of wanting a smooth transition between college and work for new employees. But the newest batch of college kids is more urban and don't necessarily want their office to resemble a college campus or the suburbs where they grew up.

[specialist]

Thanks. Sorry, no newsletter, blog, rss feed yet. Went dark while I recharged my batteries. Been working on some open government stuff. Will hopefully go public soon.

[tomkarlo]

It's worth noting that they're in the process of extending BART to the Caltrain (which is relatively recent itself.) There's a ton of cut-and-cover work going on down 4th street to do this.

Why would you see big residential buildings in Menlo Park or Palo Alto? SF, unlike most cities, has a lot of people commuting outwards towards the suburbs from the city each day. It's SF where you need the extra housing, not SV.

[mc32]

That's MUNI to Caltrain, IIRC (central subway project). But that's probably better anyhow, since BaRT only serves a single corridor thru SF.

[tomkarlo]

Whoops. You're right, my bad.

[ahlatimer]

They are in the process of building the Transbay Center [1] which would bring Caltrain closer to the heart of SOMA. Slated for completion in 2017. You can see the construction of it on google maps: http://goo.gl/maps/iMfZx

[1]: http://transbaycenter.org/

[rayiner]

The TransBay development looks awesome. Reminds me a lot of Ogilvie in Chicago (exiting into the base of a skyscraper with integrated retail). It looks like the future--I'm sure San Franciscans hate it.

[philsnow]

If this is the future, the folks who made the MTR in hong Kong must have access to a time machine ;)

[reaperhulk]

There's only one way to test the efficacy of these proposed solutions: SimCity.

[asveikau]

I thought the Central Subway (4th and King to Chinatown) could improve this, if you could go from Powell to Caltrain without taking that long loop around the Bay (or walking, which can sometimes be quicker). But that probably won't be there for a while (anyone know the date?).

What I'd most like to see from Caltrain is more frequent trains. It's annoying to arrive only a few seconds late (due to a Muni delay) and then have to wait an hour for the next one. The 9:36 southbound they introduced in October helps. I'd like to see more of this.

Edit: Couldn't find actual completion date, so edited to reflect that fact.

Edit 2: Was referring to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Subway

Edit 3 (Last one!): This page from a while back says service begins 2019 http://www.sfcta.org/delivering-transportation-improvements/...

[rayiner]

An hour between trains is ridiculous. On Metro North I've got 8 trains between 7 am and 9 am from my town into NYC. Weekends are on the half hour.

[asveikau]

To be fair there are (just looked it up) 8 southbound trains between 7 and 9. After 9:07 it gets spotty. It's harder for me to make those early trains because in addition to not being much of a morning person (yes, for that I'm just whining), I also take Muni to get to the station which takes a while.

[dsl]

I usually catch the 9:37, which end up being pretty empty (compared to the earlier trains I ride once in a while). I get why service drops off.

Pro tip: Get off at 4th and King and walk to Caltrain if you are cutting it close. You'll beat MUNI most of the time.

[ahlatimer]

If you're talking about the Transbay Center, that's supposed to be completed in 2017. http://transbaycenter.org/construction-updates/project-sched...

[Peroni]

I agree with pretty much everything you're saying but at the same time, I found the perspective of the author fascinating.

I'm Irish and I live and work in London in the UK. I've only spent a couple of months in San Francisco when I was much younger (before I truly realised the scale of silicon valley) and all I ever really hear about the place is the glorified, rose tinted glasses perspective.

Reading a negative perspective of the city & the valley was genuinely refreshing despite the authors blatant ignorance of youth tech culture.

[tomkarlo]

I'm not sure it's right to call this "journalism." It's an individual opinion that doesn't seem to be supported by much actual investigation, or reporting. It's how she sees the world through her eyes and imagines things to be, based on her experience and anecdote, much of which is grossly inaccurate.

Would she be happier if Google didn't offer buses, folks were forced to either drive individual cars or live outside of SF, and SF couldn't collect all those tax dollars it needs to fund its immense city budget?

If SF didn't have the tech industry and adjacent biotech industry, it would be another Detroit - a post-industrial city without a new source of external income. Instead, the Bay Area benefits from rising real estate values, tax revenues and an international profile.

[angersock]

Instead, the Bay Area benefits from rising real estate values, tax revenues and an international profile.

I think that's sort of the central point of the article, though--as this gentrification and displacement of established community members continues, what exactly is "The Bay Area" that is benefiting?

Is it the real estate holding companies (many of them likely international)? Is the current batch of fresh faces for the tech grinder, until they make enough money and burn out enough to move elsewhere? Is it the visiting people who want to see what SF is like?

The author seems to suggest--rightly or wrongly--that the true Bay Area is the established communities, the hobos, the homeless, the old, the artists, and that none of these groups are actually getting anything out of this deal.

(disclaimer: I live in Houston, so I have no idea what the day-to-day of the Bay Area is like. We've got very low cost of living here, terrible public transit, poor bikability, and no zoning...and I don't think I'd trade it for anywhere else in the States.)

[tomkarlo]

"Real estate holding companies?"

The broad majority of SF housing is one or two family dwellings. (I'd guess as much as 90% of the city.) They're mostly occupied by owners, not rented, so the folks who benefit are the existing residents of the city who own their homes.

[taligent]

You seem to be getting oddly defensive and completely missing her point.

It isn't that IT/Biotech doesn't have a role to play in San Francisco. It does. But rather it should be more mindful about its impact on the broader community. The large number of well paid IT workers do badly distort pricing e.g. housing and IT companies should apply more pressure on governments to improve infrastructure wherever possible. It's always a legitimate point to consider the gap between the "haves" and "have nots".

And the Google bus was meant to be symbolic. I doubt she has an actual problem with it.

[tomkarlo]

I'd have to take issue with the idea that an influx of well-paid workers "distorts" the housing market. Do they drive housing prices up? Yes. Is that really a "distortion"? It seems like the normal process of supply and demand to me.

What I'm taking issue with is the underlying hypocrisy of folks who want the benefits of this influx (higher taxes, more city services, young people moving to town and spending their money) while complaining about what they perceive to be the negative effects like higher rents and Google Buses. They fail to note how many negatives would come from _not_ having a robust industry locally - fewer city services due to less tax revenue, more crime and an aging population that earns less and leans on city services more.

SF spends more per-capita on social services and non-profits than just about any other major US city. That budget comes in large part from the paychecks of these single young people who are choosing to pay some of the highest total federal/state/city taxes in the nation. That's why I find these kind of pieces hugely objectionable. Their underlying message is "we'll take your money, but you're an outsider that's not really welcome here."

[jmspring]

Journalism? I read it more as a blog rather than any sort of investigative journalism piece. People have their perspectives on how places have changed with the boom and bust cycles that have come to the Bay Area.

The bus analogy is really just an example of the larger observation that the author is making -- with the technological boom currently going on, there is an impact on the city, it's culture, and those living there. This has happened a number of times in San Francisco. One of the not so distant past examples was the concern around the gentrification of Bay View/Hunters Point. There are only so many places in San Francisco where people, not making tech salaries, can afford to live. As those place turn over due to evictions, sale, etc. there is one less place someone who may have been in the city can afford to live.

I'm not arguing if it is good or bad, but these booms do bring impacts to a city with constrained boundaries like San Francisco.

[inafield]

All I read from the author is a bunch of whining. My employer hires a masseuse once every two weeks and all employees who want to will receives a 15-minute chair massage. Should the "person on the street" whine because this isn't provided to non-employees?

My employer also buys us fresh fruit once a week. It's a perk for a healthier snack rather than a vending machine. Should the "person on the street" whine because this isn't provided to non-employees?

[jmspring]

I'm not speaking in specifics, I am speaking to the general affect upon the make up of the city as a whole. The "bus" is just one small part of the overall "diary".

There have been similar such things written many times over about San Francisco over the years -- not just based on the influence of tech.

[josephlord]

> I think being a technology hub has done more to improve the lives of everyone in the Bay Area than any other human-controlled factor, ...

Improved the life of "everyone"? There are winners and losers in almost every change and the specific examples of evictions are likely just some examples of those whose life is not improved. The average effect may be positive but to deny that some will have lost out is quite narrow minded.

[taligent]

And the big problem is that native SFers who have lived in those homes for decades are being evicted in favour of overseas workers who may only be there for a few years.

Situations like this tend to breed resentment and destroy communities.

[talon88]

I'm not sure it's really 'journalism', per se, as it is flowery language complaining about something with vague metaphors.

[andrewcooke]

it's very good writing, by an award winning writer, in one of the top lit magazines.

but i don't expect people on google buses, or hn, to know that, even less recognise it.

[edit: and... the entire post has been flagged off the front page (59 points, 2 hours ago, page 2). because anything critical is clearly irrelevant, as well as poorly written, and clearly not understanding what it's really like. la la la. what a pile of shit this place is at times.]

[tomkarlo]

Good writing isn't the same as good journalism. If you have one without the other, it has very different implications for the impact of a piece.

[taligent]

The large, bold heading "Diary" would imply this was an opinion piece. No ?

[tomkarlo]

Fair enough, although this comment thread was about its quality as journalism. Ultimately, this is a site about news "hence 'hacker news'", so you have to expect that a piece posted will be judged on its factual quality, and by proxy, its journalism, rather than the literary quality of its writing.

[scarmig]

For the record, plenty of people at Google read magazines like LRB or NYRB. Significantly more than the general population, probably even the population of people with undergraduate or graduate degrees.

Some people here being, charitably, more focused on the tech side of the brain than other parts doesn't change that, though it can give misleading impressions.

[mturmon]

I don't disagree with you that highly-educated groups, like at Google, probably read LRB, NYRB, n+1, and other magazines with cultural influence at a much higher rate than the population at large, and more than non-techies might suspect.

But, there is certainly touchiness on hn when authors with, say, a "humanist" perspective critique the tech sphere.

There's a tendency to say these writers are not being sufficiently rational, that they are using incorrect terminology, and other things that seem like evasions on the part of much of the hn readership.

Another approach is to assume that the writer has a point, and to try to appreciate the piece for what insight it can provide. Or as a wise man said, "Try to be one of those on whom nothing is lost."

[icebraining]

Not a fan of Gonzo Journalism, eh?