Light rail sucks, no argue about that. Buses are pretty good. Caltrain is decent. But in such a low density area it's hard to expect something good out of public transportation.
Light rail sucks, no argue about that. Buses are pretty good. Caltrain is decent. But in such a low density area it's hard to expect something good out of public transportation.
While Google Maps' colors don't make it easy to visualize, perhaps you can get a sense of it: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Perth,+Australia&hl=en...
But Perth appears to have at least one district worth visiting. The thing you have to understand about SV is most of the "cities" there have exactly zero districts worth visiting. Mountain View has a little bit of a business district. You can walk across it in about 90 seconds. Palo Alto has University Ave. But that's about the extent of things. Here's the center of Cupertino, which appears to be a kilometer-wide intersection of two massive, pointless roads: http://goo.gl/maps/EYLq9. Here's the middle of Sunnyvale: http://goo.gl/maps/51LLL. Beautiful downtown Santa Clara: http://goo.gl/maps/q8WpU
These places are not places, they are irredeemable ruins of the 20th century. No transit system will ever work there.
[A real question; I've no idea about Palo Alto or Mountain View, but have vague memories of hearing they're "desirable" (and expensive) locations in SV...]
Here is the area around a Palo Alto Cal Train station: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=palo+alto+cal+train+station...
Here is the area around a Westchester Metro North station: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Station+Plaza+N,+New+Rochelle,...
If you introduce light rail without changing the zoning surrounding the stations, you end up with poorly utilized transportation that does not promote the growth of urbanized areas.
I personally don't see any problem with Caltrain. It's relatively reliable and goes often enough. The only thing that's missing is free wi-fi, but I think they plan to put it in there eventually.