Today’s Headlines

  • CAHSRA Approves Construction of High-Speed Rail Route in Central Valley (LAT, SF Gate)
  • Caltrain to Run Baby Bullet Trains on Weekends for Three Months (BCN via SF Appeal, SF Examiner)
  • In Op-Ed, San Mateo Supervisor Argues Congestion Pricing Will Cause Congestion (SF Examiner)
  • Mission Loc@l Profiles Disabled Rights Advocate Rolf Hotchkiss and His Wheelchair Commute
  • 7 On Your Side Takes Up Case of Muni Rider Whose Clipper Card Was Overcharged (ABC7)
  • SFMTA Officials Announce New Canopy for Geneva Historic Streetcar Facility (Market St. Railway)
  • Chronicle: “SF Fee May Get Around Affordable Housing Ruling”
  • Details Vague But “Young Girl” Killed, Another Pedestrian Injured in Rohnert Park Crash (Press Democrat)
  • SF Examiner: “New Direction for Masonic Backed”
  • New Taxi Company Serving LGBT Community Launches in SF (SFist)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • @Op-Ed from SMC Supe:

    Dear Adrienne J. Tissier,

    The fact that you are 2010 vice chair of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission is actually scary. However, that fits well with fact the MTC is a very inadequate transportation governing body.

    Maybe you need to be reminded about Caltrain’s excellent service into SoMa with various Muni routes that quickly get one to the Financial District. Or, you could work to better fun SamTrans and make it a viable option for the many in your county who aren’t able to afford a car, or are forced to own one since transportation service inside San Mateo County is so abysmal.

    Also, this plan isn’t an attempt “to squeeze others to pay for their problems”. The SFCTA is looking at a way to reduce traffic caused by poor planning decisions made by counties such as your own. If San Mateo County (or Marin or the entire East Bay) wasn’t so heavily car dependent, then there wouldn’t be a concern over all those vehicles flooding the streets of San Francisco on a daily basis. All that traffic leads to faster degradation of our roads (city road construction paid for by property taxes), slower Muni travel times (driving up costs and lowering overall rider experience), and lost productivity of workers wasting time idling. San Francisco tax payers are already subsidizing an auto heavy commute for others in the bay area and you should see that as a member of the MTC.

    I urge you to reconsider your strong stance against congestion pricing. If not, then I suggest that you look into funding and expanding SamTrans and Caltrain and work with the citizens of your county to explore these alternatives to driving.

    Mike Sonn

  • If you’ve read the Examiner article about the Masonic Avenue survey data early this morning, you’ll find that the report mistakenly mislabeled the data. The 76% cited in the report really are for the Boulevard Complete Streets option and not for the half-way measures of the other option. The Examiner reporter has been notified and a correction is imminent.

    Also note: SFMTA invited on three occasions all the residents along Masonic to attend the meeting or to contact the project director. The last time 1400 invitations were mailed to all households. Several of the people who did attend actually do live on Masonic; others within a block, others use it.

  • icarus12

    The border between San Mateo and San Francisco counties is too porous to admit a comprehensive toll system. A quick check of a Bing map showed me at least 43 street crossings of that line. Charging a congestion fee for all those crossing the county line would be expensive to install and maintain. It would also be difficult to enforce, since many people would pull over to obscure their plates before proceeding down some quiet back street crossing. Can the MTA afford to employ 43 cops 24/7 to catch such people? Blocking those streets would present a safety hazard and elicit much protest from inconvenienced residents. Even on major crossings (280, 101) camera technologies might not be able to record non-paying cars whizzing by 60 mph across multiple lanes.

    Even if the system merely tagged cars passing on 101 and 280 and a few major avenues, I strongly suspect that area locals with 5 minutes to spare would detour around major toll crossings. Google and Bing maps are readily available on people’s mobile devices, so that most people would find their way across. This situation is fundamentally different from the chokepoints at Bay Area bridges that allow authorities to charge commuters big fees.

    A “congestion fee” between SM and SF counties will change people’s behavior for sure, but not in ways some folks at the MTA or this blog imagine.

  • The answer is much more simple. Just charge more to park in SF, increase the gas tax in the 9 county area. QED.

  • John, spot on. No need really to build a whole new infrastructure and pit man vs wild. Just raise parking costs, bring on street parking more in line with garage parking (should be more expensive since it’s more convenient), and you’ll see car trips drop dramatically. However, you’ll still hear a huge uproar, but that is just because Americans have a birth right to free and ample parking.