Replying to a message of Richard Webb to Bob Ackley:

 BA>> the peninsula - but they refused to abide by the *no federal money*
 BA>> stipulation (IOW they would not enact the local taxes required). 
 BA>> The fact that BART has not extended much in recent years can be
 BA>> attributed to that conflict - communities want BART service but they
 BA>> also want federal money to pay for it, and BART won't allow that. 

 RW> OF course, which is why I said it'll never happen.
 RW> cOmmunities in metropolitan areas are big on wanting mass
 RW> transit services, until the bill comes due, then there's a
 RW> lot of moaning about the costs involved.  Knew Bart was one
 RW> of these, no federal $$$ projects.

I remember back in the mid to late 1960s when construction of BART was
underway.  Think about the co$t of installing a subway system in an old,
long established city (Oakland).  In addition to digging the trenches (and tearing
up major traffic arteries in the process - for months), they had to move the
already long buried water, sewer, power, telephone and steam lines.

I don't know how they did it in San Francisco.  In downtown SF, some of the 
city's trolleys were already subways and BART was put in below them.

--- FleetStreet 1.19+