Comments on: Eyes on the Street: New Bus Shelters Appear on Market Street

By: bum

bum — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:56:26 +0000

It’s fairly customary for the contractor, in this case Clear Channel to be responsible for the ongoing maintenance of the new bus shelters. This includes replacing lighting fixtures, graffiti removal and even usually sidewalk cleaning/pressure washing and trash collection. The old shelters may have appeared to be in decent shape, but this is a 20 year contract; I’m not sure they would have looked so good in 20 years. In addition, in all liklihood, the old shelters are owned by the vendor previous to Clear Channel, not MUNI. So, in order to use the old shelters, MUNI would only be able to either extend the old contract (which isn’t so good for competetion), or buy up all the old shelters from the previous vendor, which I doubt they can afford.

By: taomom

taomom — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:19:07 +0000

As David Baker explained above, solar cells work when the sun shines. In order to have electricity when the sun isn’t shining, a system needs to be hooked up to the grid or have battery back-up. Unless you’re in a remote area with no electrical service, it is more economical and requires less maintenance for the grid to act as a de facto battery back-up. Most homes in the city that have solar panels are in the same situation.

By: mattymatt

mattymatt — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:01:28 +0000

I wonder what “inability to hook into the grid” could mean. I mean, if they’re solar, they wouldn’t need to hook into anything, right?

I’m not saying that it’s untrue, I’m sure there’s some perfectly logical electrical explanation; it’s just kind of a weird statement.

Oh, maybe it’s in case the solar cells crap out, they want the shelter to have a connection to the regular electrical grid as backup? I suppose that would make sense. Still, it seems like it would be better to have electrical power some of the time rather than none of the time.

By: Miles

Miles — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:36:37 +0000

Even if Clear Channel is paying for the new shelters, why were they needed? Muni almost certainly could have come away from this advertising procurement with a higher net return on the contract by letting the new vendor simply take over the old transit shelters. The ad frames seem to be the same size anyway, and most of the old shelters seemed to be in pretty good shape. While I like the new shelter design, what happens when that pretty neon gets snapped by vandals or just burns out? Does it get replaced by the vendor at all, and if so, does the cost go onto a maintenance ledger that is not capped (thus reducing Muni’s net return from the contract)?

This matters because at the time of this procurement, Muni management knew, or should have known, of the financial tsunami offshore. The signs of it have been clear to any informed observer for several years now. So just saying, “not to worry, the vendor’s paying for it” seems a little simplistic to me.

By: none

none — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 21:38:56 +0000

there’s no need for a nextbus sign on that shelter because no buses really stop there. it’s the 2nd to last stop on the 14/14L, no one is going to get on there. maybe a few people use it for the N Owl.

By: David Baker

David Baker — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 20:26:54 +0000

I think Judson True’s statement if correct. The reason that all of the shelters don’t have solar panels is quite logical. Solar photovoltaic production is quite compromised by shadowing from buildings and trees, so if there is significant physical shadowing it would make sense to not install there. Also, since these are “grid tie” systems, having no storage batteries (expensive, bulky, they degrade over time, and contain toxic metals etc) the shelter has to have an electrical grid connection for the solar to make sense. Some shelters don’t.

By: Seven

Seven — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 07:33:09 +0000

What a curiously uninformed statement by Judson True. Solar panels work fine in the fog belt, as evidenced by the many homes with panels and the giant municipal solar project at the Sunset Reservoir.

By: Whole Wheat Toast

Whole Wheat Toast — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 03:10:40 +0000

Is Muni planning on keeping any of the old shelters completely intact and stationary, by any chance?

By: Jamison Wieser

Jamison Wieser — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 03:04:03 +0000

@Bob the SFMTA isn’t spending any money on the shelters, Clear Channel pays the cost to build, install and maintain them and we get a share of the revenue.

The advertising and shelter contract revenue helps stave off even more service cuts since rider fares cover only a fraction of what it costs to run Muni.

By: Bob Collins

Bob Collins — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:17:15 +0000

Why are we spending money on new bus shelters, and a central subway for that matter? MUNI is broke, and today MTA recommended deep service cuts and some draconian fare increases. Insane.

Actually, because you will be waiting even longer for your bus, maybe they should be fully enclosed and heated. $90 Fast Passes could cover the cost.

By: John Murphy

John Murphy — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 23:33:06 +0000

Judson can call them homeless shelters because no buses will serve them. Maybe that’s Gavin’s strategy for cutting the number of homeless, putting them in “bus” shelters…

By: Suz

Suz — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 23:31:11 +0000

@Todd Let’s not get silly here. First of all the solar panels will work with the same effectiveness regardless of what ads are on the shelter.

Secondly; airline ads are rarely intended to encourage people to fly who would otherwise use transit, they are intended to encourage use of one airline over another airline.

By: mikesonn

mikesonn — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 22:33:14 +0000

@ Jarrett, guess you were right – here comes the cuts to the trunk. The fact that parking meter rate hikes still have not been discussed is criminal.

@ Todd, at least they aren’t car ads.

By: Todd Edelman

Todd Edelman — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 22:21:54 +0000

What good is a solar shelter when the advertisements therein suggest flying in airplanes?

By: mikesonn

mikesonn — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:35:36 +0000

I see it now. I was looking in the usual spots, but it is at the bottom of the 2nd to last photo.

By: Jarrett at HumanTransit.org

Jarrett at HumanTransit.org — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:35:05 +0000

Can I suggest that you and Judson both try referring to these as “transit shelters” rather than “bus shelters”? After all, you can wait for streetcars at some of them, too.

By: Matthew Roth

Matthew Roth — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:11:27 +0000

Can’t see it from the photos, but the NextBus module is on the inside of the shelter.

By: mikesonn

mikesonn — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:02:05 +0000

Where is the Nextbus sign? Also, what good are new shelters when there are less and less buses servicing them?