Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kkt]

I would think San Bruno-Sausalito would be thru traffic for SF proper, yet going out to 580 and 880 seems like it would be WAY out of the way.

Much faster (and more direct) to take 380->280->19th Ave than to mess with near-downtown SF via 101/Central Freeway anyway.

Possibly although 19th Ave and Park Presidio and the Golden Gate Bridge can easily be moving at slower than a walking pace.

True but when it isn’t it’s much faster than taking the surface streets if a tunnel were available. How about getting rid of the fucking toll booths that require you to slow down!?

It ain't the toll booths.  For one thing, there's none going north, and southbound they're collected electronically only.

A lot of it is traffic to the bridge visitor's center and to the vista point on the Marin side for tourists who want to walk across and take photos.  They crawl along the curb lane, waiting for parking places to open up in the view points.  Maybe a large parking lot in the Presidio with shuttle buses to both Bridge vista points?  If they're running shuttle buses anyway, maybe even start the run at Powell and Market for excellent connections to other public transit.

[Techknow]

I do agree the Central Freeway is a glorified half-mile ramp to US-101 south and I-80 East. I got to agree with skluth's points though. I'm not sure what the land would be re-used for. More public housing? There's public housing already and more coming throughout the city.

Can be, but should?  SF is creating a situation where driving is a necessity but extremely inconvenient.

In downtown, yes extremely inconvenient, but in that case I'd say public transit is good enough to get around (but not international wise.) In most of the city though I think the geography especially hills and slopes make driving inconvenient. Now owning a car in SF as opposed to being thru traffic is a real pain.

So what is the thru traffic?  Chopped liver?

From my experience:
North to Marin/Sonoma/Mendocino countries: I-280 -> CA 1 at Daly City -> US 101 right before the Golden Gate Bridge

North to Sacramento/Oregon: I-80 -> I-505 -> I-5

East to Reno and beyond: I-80

South in the Bay Area: I-280/US 101 south, taking CA-85 if necessary

South to LA/San Diego: I-80 -> I-580 -> I-5

Of all these directions, the first is a real slog to get through but it's "consistent" in that it usually takes me the same amount of time for me to get to the Bay Bridge (30 min from across town in SF) In all the days of the week, daytime traffic through the Bay Bridge has always been bad, the pandemic did not appear to change that despite traffic on US-101 in the peninsula being better than pre-2020.

[bing101]

Interestingly San Francisco Proper has the same amount of freeways as Vallejo, CA.
US-101, I-280 and I-80 for San Francisco Proper.

Vallejo, CA has the same amount of freeways I-80, I-780 and CA-37

Only difference here is that San Francisco has to please the Venture Capitalists and financial district crowd that do have offices in the city.
Sure there has been talks to open more VC's offices in other parts of the country.
How about this one and it will be in debates for now move the Venture capitalists companies to Sacramento and have Branch offices there if this is a good solution to anything and it will take decades to find out.
Get the decent high paying jobs out of San Francisco and spread it to other parts of California or other parts of the USA.

Yes I mentioned this in the Austin, TX example but that we have to wait in terms of decades to find out.
How about another move some jobs to Stockton and Modesto where some of the commuters are coming from apparently to enter San Francisco and San Jose. Why San Joaquin and Stanislaus counties have not considered this one is yet to be seen here.

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/inno/stories/news/2022/11/15/sir-robotics-us-headquarters-cmc.html


Note there are talks to have some tech operations in the Sacramento area, Also Vacaville has been another place of interest to have the biotech industry in Vacaville as part of a move to reduce traffic going to San Francisco and keep jobs within California. Yes this move in the Vacaville area if successful would reduce the number of people going to San Francisco going to work from the Sacramento area.

https://solanoedc.org/news/vacaville-launches-california-biomanufacturing-center
https://www.thereporter.com/2021/07/09/agenus-purchases-site-in-vacaville-for-biomanufacturing-center/
https://www.northbaybusinessjournal.com/article/article/vacaville-unveils-california-biomanufacturing-center-plan-to-spur-2b-in/

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=32318.0
We mentioned this here on I-80 express toll lanes project for Solano County, CA given that this portion has to respond to both Sacramento and Bay Area commuters at the same time.
 

[Max Rockatansky]

Interestingly San Francisco Proper has the same amount of freeways as Vallejo, CA.
US-101, I-280 and I-80 for San Francisco Proper.

Vallejo, CA has the same amount of freeways I-80, I-780 and CA-37

Only difference here is that San Francisco has to please the Venture Capitalists and financial district crowd that do have offices in the city.
Sure there has been talks to open more VC's offices in other parts of the country.
How about this one and it will be in debates for now move the Venture capitalists companies to Sacramento and have Branch offices there if this is a good solution to anything and it will take decades to find out.

SF has more than six times the population of Vallejo in the same land area.  There isn’t any city on the west coast that really comes close to the same population density as SF.

[bing101]

Interestingly San Francisco Proper has the same amount of freeways as Vallejo, CA.
US-101, I-280 and I-80 for San Francisco Proper.

Vallejo, CA has the same amount of freeways I-80, I-780 and CA-37

Only difference here is that San Francisco has to please the Venture Capitalists and financial district crowd that do have offices in the city.
Sure there has been talks to open more VC's offices in other parts of the country.
How about this one and it will be in debates for now move the Venture capitalists companies to Sacramento and have Branch offices there if this is a good solution to anything and it will take decades to find out.

SF has more than six times the population of Vallejo in the same land area.  There isn’t any city on the west coast that really comes close to the same population density as SF.

True too.

[skluth]

A couple quick comments.

The land below the Central Freeway is already mostly developed. There's 13th St, a dog park, a skate park, and a couple businesses (including a U-Haul) store their vehicles in the parking lots under the viaduct. There's very little land that can be developed as most of it is already in use. The giant parking lot at 11th and Bryant is probably where a new I-80 interchange hits the streets.

So what is the thru traffic?  Chopped liver?

This is San Francisco. Thru traffic doesn't rate that highly. You're basically an annoyance to them and if they could get away with banning all thru traffic, they would.

Sorry to be so negative about this but I think I'm just being realistic. I agree it would be nice to have a freeway connection from the south end of the Golden Gate to I-80 or I-280. I just don't believe it's going to happen. If a meteor destroyed everything from Pacific Heights to Union Square, SF residents would probably insist the entire area be rebuilt as a car-free zone. That's the warped political reality of San Francisco.

[kkt]

A couple quick comments.

The land below the Central Freeway is already mostly developed. There's 13th St, a dog park, a skate park, and a couple businesses (including a U-Haul) store their vehicles in the parking lots under the viaduct. There's very little land that can be developed as most of it is already in use. The giant parking lot at 11th and Bryant is probably where a new I-80 interchange hits the streets.

So what is the thru traffic?  Chopped liver?

This is San Francisco. Thru traffic doesn't rate that highly. You're basically an annoyance to them and if they could get away with banning all thru traffic, they would.

Sorry to be so negative about this but I think I'm just being realistic. I agree it would be nice to have a freeway connection from the south end of the Golden Gate to I-80 or I-280. I just don't believe it's going to happen. If a meteor destroyed everything from Pacific Heights to Union Square, SF residents would probably insist the entire area be rebuilt as a car-free zone. That's the warped political reality of San Francisco.

Possibly if it could be built as a tunnel, but even tunnels cause surface disruption for exits and entrances and ventilation as well as during construction.  I have some optimisting sketches from when I was a kid about where it might go through rock deep enough to tunnel through.  But the truth is even if a tunnel could be built, nobody would spend the kind of money it would take.
Not for a freeway mainly serving people passing through.

[bootmii]

I would think San Bruno-Sausalito would be thru traffic for SF proper, yet going out to 580 and 880 seems like it would be WAY out of the way.

Much faster (and more direct) to take 380->280->19th Ave than to mess with near-downtown SF via 101/Central Freeway anyway.

Possibly although 19th Ave and Park Presidio and the Golden Gate Bridge can easily be moving at slower than a walking pace.

True but when it isn’t it’s much faster than taking the surface streets if a tunnel were available. How about getting rid of the fucking toll booths that require you to slow down!?

Especially when they only let you pay by plate or transponder.

[Techknow]

Interestingly San Francisco Proper has the same amount of freeways as Vallejo, CA.
US-101, I-280 and I-80 for San Francisco Proper.

You omitted the Mission Freeway portion of San Jose Avenue from I-280 to Randall Street. It's not a "real" freeway due to its 45 MPH speed limit and one northbound at-grade intersection but it was planned to be so back in the 50s.

[bing101]

Interestingly San Francisco Proper has the same amount of freeways as Vallejo, CA.
US-101, I-280 and I-80 for San Francisco Proper.

You omitted the Mission Freeway portion of San Jose Avenue from I-280 to Randall Street. It's not a "real" freeway due to its 45 MPH speed limit and one northbound at-grade intersection but it was planned to be so back in the 50s.

Good Point and there was supposed to be CA-1 as the 19th's ave freeway in the city. Also I-280 was supposed to connect to I-80 and CA-480 at one point back when Chase Center and Oracle Park were industrial wastelands.

[vdeane]

This is San Francisco. Thru traffic doesn't rate that highly. You're basically an annoyance to them and if they could get away with banning all thru traffic, they would.

Sorry to be so negative about this but I think I'm just being realistic. I agree it would be nice to have a freeway connection from the south end of the Golden Gate to I-80 or I-280. I just don't believe it's going to happen. If a meteor destroyed everything from Pacific Heights to Union Square, SF residents would probably insist the entire area be rebuilt as a car-free zone. That's the warped political reality of San Francisco.

I highly doubt that attitude is unique to San Francisco, or even to large cities.  Doesn't make it right.  The "we live here, everyone else can go f*** themselves" attitude needs to go, not just here, but everywhere.

[US 89]

This is San Francisco. Thru traffic doesn't rate that highly. You're basically an annoyance to them and if they could get away with banning all thru traffic, they would.

Sorry to be so negative about this but I think I'm just being realistic. I agree it would be nice to have a freeway connection from the south end of the Golden Gate to I-80 or I-280. I just don't believe it's going to happen. If a meteor destroyed everything from Pacific Heights to Union Square, SF residents would probably insist the entire area be rebuilt as a car-free zone. That's the warped political reality of San Francisco.

I highly doubt that attitude is unique to San Francisco, or even to large cities.  Doesn't make it right.  The "we live here, everyone else can go f*** themselves" attitude needs to go, not just here, but everywhere.

Oh, it definitely isn't. But the degree to which residents make that attitude a part of their identity seems to be much bigger in SF than many other places.

[kkt]

I think there needs to be a balance between travelers and residents.  Putting freeways through does have negative consequances, and not just for the displaced landowners.  San Francisco is particularly densely populated with people as well as landmark locations that it would be sad to lose.

[Bobby5280]

Frankly I see nothing but stagnation in the cards for the Bay Area. That's going for all forms of transportation. Costs of doing anything there are too high. Plus there is a serious out-migration of blue-collar and service-sector workers.

Driving in or thru San Francisco is bad enough just in terms of all the stop lights and other crap. The Bay Area has among the highest gasoline prices in the nation. Here in Lawton, OK I can fill up at Sam's Club for $2.54 per gallon. In San Francisco fuel prices are nearly double that level. Some stores are charging as much as $5.39 per gallon currently. Add fees from toll bridges to that. I imagine someone having to commute from places like Stockton or Tracy into the Bay Area to work a modest pay job would probably have to do the park and ride thing at some point. They lose a hell of a lot of the day just in commute time. It's no wonder so many people are moving out of California.

New York City suffers from the same problem. I lived there for 5 years (in the late 80's to early 90's). My commute back and forth to college was 90 minutes each way. I have no desire to go back there. Where I live now it takes me less than 10 minutes to drive from my house to my workplace.

[ClassicHasClass]

Some stores are charging as much as $5.39 per gallon currently.

Oh, you should have been here a couple months ago.

[ZLoth]

On the rare occasion that I attended a show in San Francisco, usually at The Warfield Theater, I would end up taking BART from the Orinda station rather that try to lose my mind crossing the bay bridge and finding parking in that area. The problem is that, when you combine the population of the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim and the San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), you are effectively talking about 45.6% of the total population of California in those two areas alone.

As I have stated too many times, I lived in California for 41 years, and so glad to have escaped almost four years ago now. I have no desire to move back or visit.

[Max Rockatansky]

On the rare occasion that I attended a show in San Francisco, usually at The Warfield Theater, I would end up taking BART from the Orinda station rather that try to lose my mind crossing the bay bridge and finding parking in that area. The problem is that, when you combine the population of the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim and the San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), you are effectively talking about 45.6% of the total population of California in those two areas alone.

As I have stated too many times, I lived in California for 41 years, and so glad to have escaped almost four years ago now. I have no desire to move back or visit.

When I worked in Los Angeles, San Diego and the Inland Empire I would commute in from Phoenix.  My employers back then kept giving me relocation offers to move to California, it just wasn’t workable given the cost of living compared to Arizona.  The story was very much the reverse when I was offered a transfer from Orlando to the Central Valley.  As much as you like to paint the entirety of California as consisting of Bay Area/Los Angeles elements don’t agree with it isn’t the reality across the board. 

[kkt]

Frankly I see nothing but stagnation in the cards for the Bay Area. That's going for all forms of transportation. Cost of doing anything there are too high. Plus there is a serious out-migration of blue-collar and service-sector workers.

Driving in or thru San Francisco is bad enough just in terms of all the stop lights and other crap. The Bay Area has among the highest gasoline prices in the nation. Here in Lawton, OK I can fill up at Sam's Club for $2.54 per gallon. In San Francisco fuel prices are nearly double that level. Some stores are charging as much as $5.39 per gallon currently. Add fees from toll bridges to that. I imagine someone having to commute from places like Stockton or Tracy into the Bay Area to work a modest pay job would probably have to do the park and ride thing at some point. They lose a hell of a lot of the day just in commute time. It's no wonder so many people are moving out of California.

New York City suffers from the same problem. I lived there for 5 years (in the late 80's to early 90's). My commute back and forth to college was 90 minutes each way. I have no desire to go back there. Where I live now it takes me less than 10 minutes to drive from my house to my workplace.

I certainly see why especially for less than median incomes people would get tired of it and want to leave.  However, I'm not seeing an overall decline in real estate prices there.  For people who can still afford to live somewhere near where they work it's still a pretty nice place.  I know it's a squeeze on the less well compensated workers though - teachers, cops, service workers of all kinds...  They are making a little effort toward making public transportation better.  I think besides BART there's also a passenger ferries from Vallejo and Richmond into the S.F. waterfront.

[Bobby5280]

I certainly see why especially for less than median incomes people would get tired of it and want to leave. However, I'm not seeing an overall decline in real estate prices there.

Historically California has been able to supplement its workforce greatly via legal and illegal immigration. Lately even that factor has not been enough to offset the overall net losses in population over the past couple years. And then the people emigrating to the US aren't exactly stupid either. I would at least expect more people trying to legally emigrate to the US to choose locations other than California where to live.

The living cost situation in California is so absurd that the contagion is trying very hard to spread elsewhere. Santa Fe is total high cost douche town now. The rapid population growth in Austin could hit a hard ceiling, thanks in part to the celebrities and other fat-wallet people moving there, making an already expensive living-cost city even more so.

[kkt]

Housing is expensive where there are jobs that allow enough people to pay those prices.

[Bobby5280]

Every one of those high income locales depend on low wage workers to toil away at jobs in restaurants, retail stores and all sorts of other businesses. Those high income places aren't exactly receptive to ideas like building units of housing affordable to people who work in those kinds of businesses.

At this point I don't know how service sector businesses in cities with extremely high costs of living like San Francisco can manage staffing their businesses at all. Crappy, low-wage jobs in retail stores, restaurants, etc are plentiful everywhere, not just places where the living costs are insanely high.

[ZLoth]

On the rare occasion that I attended a show in San Francisco, usually at The Warfield Theater, I would end up taking BART from the Orinda station rather that try to lose my mind crossing the bay bridge and finding parking in that area. The problem is that, when you combine the population of the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim and the San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), you are effectively talking about 45.6% of the total population of California in those two areas alone.

As I have stated too many times, I lived in California for 41 years, and so glad to have escaped almost four years ago now. I have no desire to move back or visit.

When I worked in Los Angeles, San Diego and the Inland Empire I would commute in from Phoenix.  My employers back then kept giving me relocation offers to move to California, it just wasn’t workable given the cost of living compared to Arizona.  The story was very much the reverse when I was offered a transfer from Orlando to the Central Valley.  As much as you like to paint the entirety of California as consisting of Bay Area/Los Angeles elements don’t agree with it isn’t the reality across the board.

Lets see here.... by MSA....

• Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim - 33.6%
• San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley - 12.0%
• San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA - 8.4%

In terms of land area, they represent a small chunk of California. But, in terms of political power, they run California, and the policies made under the Capital Done in Sacramento affect all of the Californians whether it be DMV registration fees or gas taxes at the pump. Los Angeles considers the rest of California as one big giant straw for the water to be sucked dry.

[Max Rockatansky]

On the rare occasion that I attended a show in San Francisco, usually at The Warfield Theater, I would end up taking BART from the Orinda station rather that try to lose my mind crossing the bay bridge and finding parking in that area. The problem is that, when you combine the population of the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim and the San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), you are effectively talking about 45.6% of the total population of California in those two areas alone.

As I have stated too many times, I lived in California for 41 years, and so glad to have escaped almost four years ago now. I have no desire to move back or visit.

When I worked in Los Angeles, San Diego and the Inland Empire I would commute in from Phoenix.  My employers back then kept giving me relocation offers to move to California, it just wasn’t workable given the cost of living compared to Arizona.  The story was very much the reverse when I was offered a transfer from Orlando to the Central Valley.  As much as you like to paint the entirety of California as consisting of Bay Area/Los Angeles elements don’t agree with it isn’t the reality across the board.

Lets see here.... by MSA....

• Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim - 33.6%
• San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley - 12.0%
• San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA - 8.4%

In terms of land area, they represent a small chunk of California. But, in terms of political power, they run California, and the policies made under the Capital Done in Sacramento affect all of the Californians whether it be DMV registration fees or gas taxes at the pump. Los Angeles considers the rest of California as one big giant straw for the water to be sucked dry.

Do you actually have anything worthwhile to contribute to these threads about California roads besides how much you hate the state?  Of all the topics on this board this is the one you pick to whine about California again.  I don’t think any of this in the discussion were trying to promote SF or California as being the greatest place ever to live.  You left and chose what you feel is a better living situation for you in Texas.  Why do we need to hear about your angst about a place you no longer live ad nauseam? 

[US 89]

I hate California.

I love California.

I hate California.

I love California.

This thread in a nutshell.

[Scott5114]

On the rare occasion that I attended a show in San Francisco, usually at The Warfield Theater, I would end up taking BART from the Orinda station rather that try to lose my mind crossing the bay bridge and finding parking in that area. The problem is that, when you combine the population of the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim and the San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), you are effectively talking about 45.6% of the total population of California in those two areas alone.

As I have stated too many times, I lived in California for 41 years, and so glad to have escaped almost four years ago now. I have no desire to move back or visit.

When I worked in Los Angeles, San Diego and the Inland Empire I would commute in from Phoenix.  My employers back then kept giving me relocation offers to move to California, it just wasn’t workable given the cost of living compared to Arizona.  The story was very much the reverse when I was offered a transfer from Orlando to the Central Valley.  As much as you like to paint the entirety of California as consisting of Bay Area/Los Angeles elements don’t agree with it isn’t the reality across the board.

Lets see here.... by MSA....

• Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim - 33.6%
• San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley - 12.0%
• San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA - 8.4%

In terms of land area, they represent a small chunk of California. But, in terms of political power, they run California, and the policies made under the Capital Done in Sacramento affect all of the Californians whether it be DMV registration fees or gas taxes at the pump.

That's a lot of words to say a whole lot of nothing, other than perhaps you think California is the only state that works that way, which is wildly incorrect.

Lets see here.... by MSA....

• Kansas City - 30.4%
• Wichita - 22.0%

In terms of land area, they represent a small chunk of Kansas. But, in terms of political power, they run Kansas, and the policies made under the Capital Dome in Topeka affect all of the Kansans whether it be KDOR registration fees or gas taxes at the pump.