My answer to this is YES! Aesthetcics set the tone for future development. Think of a quaint neighborhood full of Revival houses. Now build a cheap box that maximizes dollars per square foot. What have you just done to that neighborhood? What do you think the next person will do when they want to remodel? They’ll be less likely to build a traditional house because it is harder to justify the extra cost due to the addition of a poor comp. And so it goes in a downward spiral. Once you go down that path -corrupting the integrity of the initial continuity of design – you can’t turn it around. When I designed and built the addition to my house, I put my money where my mouth is and my neighbors are extremely happy I did. If HSR builds industrial looking elevated structures, it will only invite more of the same. If they build context sensitive structures it will be an asset and help continue thoughtful design surrounding the tracks.

That said, I think the way to go about it is to encourage local communities and/or a separate entity to fund the upgrades for higher quality aesthetics, rather than accounting them to the HSR project. The aesthetics benefit the community and the state tax base rather than rail transit.

Regarding the pedestrian undercrossings, they are scary all over the world. This could be mitigated with making them very well lit. Since HSR will have CCTV along the entire route, it might also be possible to have surveillance of the undercrossings, to add an extra safety measure.

That would make perfect sense and the pictures that Emma linked to show designs that makes that possibility much easier than a berm. The change was made so long ago that I honestly don’t recall how many crossing points existed before the berm. There are one or two tunnels that allow pedestrians to cross. Tragically, I believe an assault and rape occurred in or by one of those tunnels a few years ago.

“Would you agree that even before the berm, east San Carlos was separated from the rest of San Carlos; the question now is exactly how that separation works and what the tradeoffs are with the berm?”

I think the separation became much greater. You could look across El Camino from either side and see what was there. The berm blocks out our neighborhood entirely and the issue we face is that our city council seems to have adapted an “out of sight, out of mind” approach to issues revolving around our neighborhood.

I think the questions in my mind are; Is the current berm design the best solution for HSR in San Carlos and the peninsula? Where will the extra tracks for HSR fit on the berm? If the Berm needs to be widened how will that be possible given that SamTrans plans to build buildings 60′ from the current tracks (not 60′ from the berm)? There currently is plenty of space in San Carlos to accommodate different designs for HSR, in what ways will those be limited by placing buildings so close to the existing tracks? I’d like to see those HSR design issues settled before any development occurs directly adjacent to the tracks anywhere along the peninsula at least it seems to me that it would make more sense to do that.

As to the Berlin wall example, I brought it up because you quoted the wall in your original post. I think the Highway System and Urban renewal projects are better examples.

GESC :

“The corridor is far less permeable and pedestrian access has been significantly decreased.

Didn’t the addition of the bike/ped underpasses at Commercial and F Streets actually increase (legal) permeability by halving the distance some folks would have to walk/ride in order to reach one of the road crossings?