Skip to content

Recent Comments

RSS
  1.  

    Thomas Rogers

    Shoup’s idea of resident discounts is interesting, although I need to think about it a little more. Isn’t that similar to what Tony Kelly was suggesting in Potrero Hill?

  2.  

    Jass

    Wow another attack on carpools

  3.  

    Hagee Plumbing

    Thanks for share about Seeking Plumbing Services in West Seattle WA. Your information is really informative for us……………

    Quality plumbing seattle

  4.  

    Gezellig

    The important question, though, is whether the funds for drop-off facilities are 1) proportionate to current usage and 2) proportionate to the kind of usage that should be incentivized going forward.

    As for the current usage metric, a 2012 BART study (http://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/agendaitems/11-6-12item11balboaparkphaseii-revisedpublicdraftreportoct2012accessibleforboard.pdf) found the following breakdown in terms of how people arrived at Balboa Park Station:

    46% Transit
    30% Walking
    15% Drop-off/carpool/taxi
    7% Driving alone
    2% Biking

    Notice the BART systemwide averages:

    35% Driving alone
    31% Walking
    15% Transit
    15% Drop-off/carpool/taxi
    4% Biking

    (all figures from page 15 of the report)

    With a systemwide average of 15% (which Balboa Park Station also happens to share), kiss-and-ride/drop-off/taxi arrivals are already not proportionately that great.

    And then the second question of the kind of arrivals BART should be encouraging going forward—especially in a #sloganfirstcity like SF we should be walking the walk (as it were) of actually living up to the supposed Transit First/Vision Zero/20% bike modeshare by 2020/etc. goals instead of spending limited funds disproportionately on yet more auto-centric development.

  5.  

    Jeffrey Baker

    Considering the number of people carried the distance they were carried, that’s pretty good. A typical passenger car emits roughly a pound of CO2 per mile, and Caltrain carried 16 million people an average of 20 miles each last year, and provided additional CO2 reduction by encouraging those people to walk and bike more and live and work in walkable communities.

    I would say CO2 is the last thing they need to be thinking about. It would be nice if they got rid of it but really speed is the best reason for electrification.

  6.  

    Nicholas Littlejohn

    Caltrain is crazy expensive..and polluting. Their own report shows the current smoke belching trains dump 68,000 tons of greenhouse gases into our environment each year.

    It’s high time to electrify and get costs and salaries, benefits in line.

  7.  

    NoeValleyJim

    Car drivers are selfish and egotistical and could care less who is harmed by their actions. Their neighbors are harmed every time they turn on their engines.

    Car drivers directly and indirectly kill 100,000 people a year. What do you do to mitigate the risk you pose to everyone around you every time you drive?

  8.  

    vcs

    The existing ramp is designed for autos to merge in at 10-20MPH. The question is whether they should prioritize street traffic (including Muni) over pedestrians and bicycles.

    Given there is a major ped destination (CCSF) right next to a major transit hub (BART), it makes sense to prioritize pedestrians through this intersection. Even at the expense of already miserable Muni times.

    In Walnut Creek, you might have a point. But the Geneva/Ocean freeway exits were way over-built originally and none of this complexity was ever needed in the first place. Lets get rid of some of it.

  9.  

    alberto rossi

    Too lazy to look it up, but my recollection is that the study showed that less than 1% of passengers arrived by car.

  10.  

    alberto rossi

    40 times higher?

  11.  

    Richard Mlynarik

    The agency states that it has no alternative because it is required by
    regional policy to “implement, operate, and promote Clipper as the
    primary fare payment system.”

    MTC executive-director-for-life Steve “$5 billion Bay Bridge overrun” Heminger certainly has made life pleasant for Cubic, Inc, the rent-seeking defense contractor that rakes it in from Clipper, hasn’t he?

    Pity about the riders and a real shame about the little people, but business is business.

  12.  

    Chris

    I’m not in love with the proposed new off-ramp from I-280 onto Ocean Ave. The proposed new traffic light, according to the SFCTA’s report, will add an average of one minute of delay to Muni routes in both directions. That’s an average, so it will often cause longer delays than that. Additional delays and variables are the last things that the painfully slow and unpredictable K-line needs. The city should instead add a stop sign to the existing off-ramp where it merges onto Ocean. That would address the hazards for pedestrians and bicyclists and would be vastly cheaper and quicker to implement than a new off-ramp.

  13.  

    murphstahoe

    I have 3 clipper cards tied to my credit card. I loaned then to my family while they were visiting so they could bypass the lines for the cable car, and they forgot to give them back.

    So I went to Walgreens and boughf an unlinked card. QED

  14.  

    Justin

    Ummm, ok, what a term for it though, kiss and ride lol

  15.  

    HMM burritos

    http://www.sfdsp.org/

    Nothing has changed except that there is more cars and more congestion.

    Is it even remotely possible that there is a direct correlation to the parking problem and congestion to the above mentioned freeway entrance. Definitely so.

    Wonder what the block looks like where Avalos lives?

  16.  

    cmurder

    2-4 times? I call bs.

  17.  

    cmurder

    I make the same commute and I’ve seen one bike on that lane in two months.

    I’ve actually seen more riders going North on the southbound side. I bike in the city all the time, but only an idiot would cycle up to that lane or carry a bike to access that bike lane.

  18.  

    vcs

    Note that the selected option avoids rebuilding any of the freeway bridges, which may explain the massive difference.

    The kiss-and-ride is just a filled retaining wall.

  19.  

    p_chazz

    Not an apt comparison. California has higher labor and construction costs than Texas.

  20.  

    Jamison Wieser

    There is no fucking way that I’m going to give you that satisfaction of admitting the SFMTA ever makes a mistake because I never said they didn’t.

    Of course you’re just being contrary and don’t want the SFMTA to do anything to improve Muni service or quality of life. First you bitching about that boarding ramp being a monstrosity, then you don’t want it to be moved.

    Stop being so contrary about everything.

  21.  

    alberto rossi

    Nice to hear I’m not the only one upset about this. There was a website featuring pnotos of sidewalk parking in the Excelsior that went viral a few years ago. A community meeting was held but then nothing ever happened.

    The ruptured tendons in my hands are testament to the poor sidewalk maintenance and the tripping hazard that creates.

  22.  

    alberto rossi

    From the previous “Circulation Study”. It proposed about $200 million in changes, including $100 million for the kiss and ride and $70 million for the southbound offramp realignment. The remaining was for things like bus shelters, “wayfinding”, lighting, and the apparently now forgotten “eastside connector”.

    Apparently they’ve found a cheaper way to do the kiss and ride, but at the expense of the recently completeld westside connector.

  23.  

    Mario Tanev

    The much maligned $1 per stop fee for shuttles, is going to be raised to $3.55 per stop:
    http://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/agendaitems/7-15-14%20Item%2010.9%20Commuter%20Shuttle%20Fee%20TC%20amendment.pdf

  24.  

    HMM burritos

    The real problem is Avalos. The worst district in SF. Cracked sidewalks. Vacant business’. Thousands of cars blocking sidewalks. Oil stained sidewalks. Graffiti that the city won’t paint over. Crime. Very dirty streets. Public transportation is poor. Sandoval was a better Supervisor and he was horrible. I have lived in the Excelsior my whole life and have never seen it so horrible. This is a poor decision to close an exit. It is misguided. Just enforce sidewalk parking and people will sell their cars and take public transportation. Drive down Geneva to Bayshore from Mission st and you will find at least 80-100 cars parked illegally as well as cracked oil stained sidewalks.

  25.  

    coolbabybookworm

    It’s an area near transit where car drivers can drop off/pick up passengers.

  26.  

    Justin

    What the heck is a “Kiss and Ride???”

  27.  

    vcs

    I don’t see where the supposed “$100 million kiss-and-ride” figure is coming from. In the engineering report the “NB frontage road” is estimated to be about $10M.

    http://www.sfcta.org/sites/default/files/content/Planning/BalboaPark/Balboa%20Park%20Circulation%20Study%20Final%20Report%20Appendix%20C.pdf

  28.  

    Prinzrob

    No, crossing in a place where crossing is allowed is not stretching the law. Compare that to writing a pedestrian who was involved in a collision with a motorcycle an invalid ticket for behavior that was not illegal. It’s not the pedestrian’s fault that the police (and others on this comment thread) don’t know what constitutes jaywalking.

  29.  

    Justin

    I would have rather seen the I-280 southbound off ramp hitting Ocean Ave removed permanently not realigned, it would be better and safer for pedestrians, bicyclists, Muni and mainstream traffic. Hopefully in the realigned configuration that is expected to have a traffic signal hopefully they will add a new crosswalk as well. Secondly at the Balboa Park BART Station I would like to see an extension of the pedestrian ramp connecting the station to Ocean Ave extended to connect to the other side of the Balboa Park BART Station on Geneva and the Muni bus and Light Rail Stops which could and would improve the pedestrian safety and experience for those needing to get to and from those areas and transit riders

  30.  

    Justin

    “People want things to be different, but they don’t want any change,” How can you expect things to be different if there is NO CHANGE to make that DIFFERENT vision, a reality for the better??? That’s not how you solve problems, that’s how you politicized them and kick the can down the road.

  31.  

    Filamino

    I agree with you on this except for your claim of little demand for a kiss and ride area. I know people who use it almost everyday and I occasionally use it too. I have heard people complain that the kiss and ride area is not big enough because people keep parking there waiting for to pick up their passengers. I see this too when I go there, so I end up blocking the kiss and ride road to pick up my passenger. This may give the perception that it’s not being used.

    If there is no kiss and ride area, you can bet they will start using the Muni bus stops as the kiss and ride area. That would not be good.

  32.  

    Filamino

    Great. Another person stereotyping all drivers are out to kill pedestrians. Ugh. Look who is talking about throwing a temper tantrum.

    Cheryl Brinkman is only saying that because she is on the losing end of this debate. There have been other “livelier” meetings just like this, but the only difference is that she was on the winning end of the debate.

  33.  

    Filamino

    That’s really stretching the law.

  34.  

    Gezellig

    $100 million to build a totally new kiss-and-ride area is not pragmatic realism…that’s absurd.

    Anyway, the “ideal” being referred to here is not a theoretical forum pie-in-the-sky plan but the very plan SF Planning created:

    http://sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=1748

    You’re giving SF too easy a pass on doing better.

  35.  

    Jeffrey Baker

    A “decent” idea making some improvements does not necessarily rate the spending of hundreds of millions of dollars. Ask yourself if this is the best bang you could get for your millions.

  36.  

    helloandyhihi

    I’m not a huge fan of Avalos. But it’s discouraging to see comments here, where so many apparent pro-transit folks are willing to shit on a decent idea aiming to make a meaningful improvement.

    Too often, San Franciscans have such a strident view of the ideal that they reject the realistic. That prevents any real progress from happening… and that’s not ideal.

  37.  

    neutral_corner

    Ignorance of the law is no excuse for violating it.

  38.  

    neutral_corner

    No they shouldn’t.

    Again, what does that have to do with your inability to read the parking meter?

  39.  

    Gezellig

    Lol. Yeah, maybe they’re proposing to pave them in gold so as to “Restore Balance” in terms of cars always getting first-rate infra. ;)

  40.  

    alberto rossi

    Dallas capped a longer and wider section of freeway for its new arts district for $100 million. Maybe the ramps are $450 million extra each?

  41.  

    Gezellig

    Agreed! The much-better Better Neighborhoods 2000 plan was also the first thing that popped in my mind. Look at what could be:

    http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/general_plan/images/balboa/freeway_deck.jpg

    You’re totally right that $2 billion for that is incredibly unlikely. For comparison, Los Angeles is moving forward with the *much* larger project (a *mile* of freeway deck!) of capping the 101 freeway through central Hollywood at a cost of $725 million:

    http://vimeo.com/31980051

    http://la.curbed.com/archives/2013/10/plans_coming_next_month_for_hollywoods_101_freeway_cap_park.php

    Besides the fact that it wouldn’t be $2bil wouldn’t there be *lots* of money made by selling off plots of land for residential/commercial development à la the BN2000 plan?

    Balboa Park Station is one I use nearly every day and I agree–even in its current pedestrian/bike/transit-hostile setup I also don’t see much kiss-and-ride going on. Multiple heavily used bus lines and two Muni Metro lines are definitely the primary way people get there. Lots of bikes, too, despite the questionable “infrastructure” (laughable sharrows at best) all around.

    There’s always going to be some kiss-and-ride/taxis going on at a station but…$100 million to build a *new* kiss-and-ride area? That’s in the grain of the old car-centric paradigm of BART as a place you drive to as opposed to being a transit system that directly serves vibrant local neighborhoods.

    In an area already mostly lacking in true public spaces (adjacent Balboa Park itself is setup more as a suburban recreational facility), this is pretty sad.

  42.  

    alberto rossi

    I’m really sorry to see Avalos embrace this plan. The only part of it I agree with is making the southbound offramp onto Ocean safer for pedestrians. Even here the cost of doing so seems ridiculously overstated.

    Everything else is the plan will make things worse for pedestrians and bicyclists. The most wasteful part of the plan is $100 million for the new kiss and ride area. There’s simply very little demand for this. Hardly anyone is dropped off at the station now; almost all walk or take the bus. Moving the northbound on ramp from Geneva to Ocean will add congestion to San Jose as well as Ocean. It will make the pedestrian crossing here even more difficult than it is now and will be very detrimental to bicyclists.

    The intent of the new study seems to have been to drive a stake through the heart of the Better Neighborhoods 2000 plan. It proposed decking the freeway between Ocean and Geneva and building new single point freeway interchanges. Rather than consider this option, the new study dismissed it out of hand by saying it would cost $2 billion. Where this comically inflated number came from they do not even bother to say.

  43.  

    stevenj

    Far more people in SF ride transit, walk or bike than drive cars. It’s been that way for a very long time. The playing field is being leveled now. Gradually and hopefully these cumulative changes will make “transit first” mean transit first.

  44.  

    Prinzrob

    http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_26118578/reward-offered-suspect-hit-and-run-crash-oakland

    Police are still looking for the hit-run driver who struck a 53-year-old Oakland bicyclist on Broadway near Lake Temescal last month. 2010 black four-door Volkswagen Jetta, $5k reward, let’s get this sucker!

    Also from the article: “About 40 percent of accidents in Oakland are hit-and-run said Officer Greg Bellusa, lead investigator on the case.”

    Notwithstanding the oxymoron “hit-and-run accidents”, this is a shameful stat and something we need to deal with as a culture.

  45.  

    murphstahoe

  46.  

    San Jose Bike Party

    And some great news on the growth of cycling in San Jose..

    Head south on Sunday the 27th as History San presents ‘Silicon Valley Bikes – Passion, Innovation, and Politics since 1880′

    Kelly Park, San Jose, Sunday July 27, 2014 from 10am-4pm

    http://www.metroactive.com/features/bicycling-culture-bike-party-silicon-valley.html

  47.  

    murphstahoe

    Nobody made that argument. YOU made the argument that they should be driving.

  48.  

    aslevin

  49.  

    ABE

    This is a TERRIBLE idea and yet one more assault on the long term residents of San Francisco. Another corporate giveaway by Ed Lee. Giving away Public parking in overcrowded residential neighborhoods. Exempting carshare spaces from Street cleaning violations. This plan is fine for major boulevards and commercial areas. But NOT for residential areas.

  50.  

    gneiss

    Your argument about signage at the meters is a red herring. All of these complaints are perfectly fixable, from making the signage better to addressing concerns about reading the pricing on the meter screen. And to think that this is just a plot by SFMTA to make your life harder is a conspiracy fantasy on the same order as silent black government helicopters coming to take your children away.

    However, the real reason why you don’t want meters is based on your mistaken belief that somehow the city is ‘soaking’ people who drive cars in favor of those who get around by other means, and that is simply hogwash. Almost all the money spent on upkeep and maintenance of our streets comes from property and sales taxes. To posit that car drivers pay anything close to ‘their share’ for maintenance is malarkey, particularly when you factor in cost of death, injury, and lung diseases that are directly caused by having so many motor vehicles running on our streets.

    For God sakes Sebra – please educate yourself. Read something for a change rather than simply spout off about all the indignities and injustice that you experience as a poor, victimized, car driver in a dense urban space. Realize that there are over 837,000 other San Franciscans trying to get places on the same road network you use, and then you might have a better sense of what direction the city should take to manage it’s roads.