L-Taraval: SFMTA Seeks To Remove Parking, Add Boarding Islands

by Fiona Lee : hoodline – excerpt

With the recent release of the final results of a six-month boarding zone pilot, SFMTA hopes to add boarding islands and remove multiple stops to make the L-Taraval corridor safer for pedestrians and passengers.

The boarding zone pilot took place over a six month period at inbound stops at 26th, 30th, 32nd, 35th and 40th avenues and included improved signage, flashing lights and painted lane markings to alert drivers…(more)

As you can imagine the removal of these stops is not popular with Muni riders on the L-Taraval. They will show up and are asking for support from other Muni riders and people who oppose bus stop removal at the SFMAT Board Meeting on December 5th. Please see this letter from Paula of Save Our L Taraval Stops!

Most of you do not ride the L Taraval, but you have supported our efforts over the past two years to help us keep our stops.  Sadly, earlier this year we lost 8 of our L stops.  This coming Tuesday, December 5, the SFMTA (Muni) Board of Directors will decide whether to remove 4 more:  inbound and outbound at 44th Avenue, and inbound at 35th Avenue and for a variety of reasons, the staff recommends removing them.  We need your help one last time!
1.  Can you please attend the Board meeting on Tuesday December 5, City Hall Room 400, at 1 pm?  We need a very big presence, and so many L riders cannot get off from work.   We can provide you with written statements.  A few of us need to provide more information than we can say in 2 minutes, so we will have statements for a few others to finish.   And we are hoping to have folks read some of the many moving emails that L riders are sending discussing how losing their stops will be a hardship to them and their families, so that the Board members will hear the words that they might or might not have read.  And if I can put it together, I’ll try to get photos of some of those folks so the Board members can see their faces, tho I am not sure if that will happen.  And it’s fine if you prefer to make your own 2-minute statement on the hardships that seniors, people with disabilities, families with young children, and other riders will face if their stops are removed, and how in the world can they remove the inbound stop across from Safeway!  There will be a number of people saying that.  Please let me know if you can make the meeting.
2.  Can you please email public comments this week to MTABoard@sfmta.com and katy.tang@sfgov.org and norman.yee@sfgov.org  with a blind cc to saveourLtaravalstops@gmail.com   Tell them how it will be a hardship for seniors, people with disabilities, families with young children, and others if the L Taraval stops at 44th, and inbound at 35th and 17th are removed.  Pease email them even if you plan to attend the Board meeting on Tuesday.
So many of us across the City have struggled and fought the many changes that SFMTA has tried to impose on use.  We have tried to support you when we can.  We hope you will be able to support us this one last time.

If anyone wants to read the staff report, slide presentation, or agenda for Tuesday’s meeting, the links are below.  About a third of the discussion in the staff report is on stop removal.  Thank you so much for all your support these past two years.  We are in the stretch run.

Paula, Save Our L Taraval Stops!

Advertisements

Can crowd-sourcing bus routes solve Bay Area commuters’ woes?

SAN FRANCISCO — Long maligned as the least desirable form of public transit, buses are making a comeback.

These aren’t the lumbering behemoths most often associated with frequent stops, long rides and dingy carriages. Enter Chariot, Lyft Shuttle, MagicBus and the latest addition to the East Bay, OurBus. With crowd-sourced routes and app-based hailing, cushy interiors and shorter rides, these privately-owned services are positioning themselves as serious competitors to public transit.

That has transportation experts hopeful the new services will get cars off the road, reduce traffic and provide options for commuters where there are limited or no bus routes. But those same experts also question whether the upstarts will threaten the viability of public transit by siphoning passengers and making it more difficult for public operators to serve the lowest-income and wheelchair-bound riders who depend on them…(more)

How is a jitney style bus different from a rideshare? Companies have been using similar size vehicles as rideshares to transport employees for a while. These pre-dated tech buses and empolyees have been encouraged to share rides for a long time before the “sharing economy” was established. This is much like hitchhiking, which is what we had prior to Uber and Lyft. Maybe we should consider going backward and actually sharing rides the old-fashioned way. Put the corporations out of business by offering free services. How much more dangerous is hitchhiking than taking Uber or Lyft? presumably the drivers know there way around, which is more than can b said for the Uber and Lyft drivers. As for why private car owners are working “for” Uber and Lyft – probably many are working to pay the exorbitant rents that must pay since the advent of the PAID, formerly free, sharing services. Some may be working to pay to park their vehicles. This is the face of gentrification brought to us by City Hall and SFMTA. They cleared the streets to make room for “their” corporate buddies. There is a name for this kind of government.

Excellent Uber Ad Distills the Problem With Uber in Crowded Cities

: streetsblog – excerpt

In a brilliant new spot, Uber inadvertently lays out exactly why its for-hire vehicles won’t solve transportation headaches in crowded cities…

There’s certainly a place for these services in the transportation ecosystem, but they’re not a solution to moving large numbers of people in crowded cities. No app, no matter how user-friendly, can turn cars into a congestion fix… (more)

My favorite false narrative that joins the fake news category is the claim that a troll is running on social media that “Uber is a pubic transportation system”. The Mayor of SF must have bought that article as he made a deal to transfer public property to Uber in exchange for data. Is it time for the public to start boycotting these cars by returning to “free” rideshares called hitchhiking?

America’s Buses Lose Riders, Imperiling Their Future

By David Harrison : WSJ – excerpt

A staple of American urban life—the city bus—is in a state of steady decline.

Ridership on city buses around the country was down 13% in the second quarter of 2017 compared with the same quarter in 2007, according to Transportation Department data, a drop that has left transit agencies scrambling to make up for lost revenue and contemplating additional service cuts on top of ones they have already made … (more)

If Muni spent more money on doing what riders ask for and less on high-level salaries for managers who ignore the public, PR schemes they claim are outreach, and high tech gadgets they might see an increase in ridership. When has the SFMTA responded to any public suggestions that did not fit their plans? How many people warned against the Design and Build Walsh contract?

I have a suggestion for them to ignore. Loose the attitude that you KNOW IT ALL and react to what the public is telling you by taking alternatives to the Muni.

The public is voting for smaller more comfortable vehicles when they switch to Chariot, Uber and Lyft. The SFMTA is still buying larger, longer, less comfortable buses and planning for standing room only crowded conditions for its riders. Hire more drivers and lay off the planners. Muni is a NOW thing not a 40 year plan.

Instead of punishing the ride hail services for getting it right, learn from them and add some jitney-size vehicles to the Muni fleet. Ask the Muni drivers who deal with the public for suggestions on how Muni can improve the ride and routes. Maybe return some of the bus stops.

Big Philanthropy Takes the Bus

By Benjamin Ross : dissentmagazine – excerpt

In 2002, Royal Dutch Shell’s grant-making arm set out to influence transportation policy in developing countries. Initial “market testing,” the Shell Foundation itself has said, revealed that a program directly funded by Shell would lack “credibility,” and so Shell decided to channel its money through an “intermediary.” Several bidders competed to play this role. Shell chose the World Resources Institute, a business-oriented environmental nonprofit.

The resulting program was dubbed EMBARQ. With Shell’s financial support—starting with a $7.5 million grant—and ongoing guidance, EMBARQ urged cities to rely on buses that run on Shell’s product instead of building electric-powered subways.

Buses, to be sure, are essential to any transit system, and they rarely get the respect they deserve. Improving them can serve social justice as well as transport. But ordinary buses are hardly a credible substitute for subways. So EMBARQ promotes what is called bus rapid transit, or BRT. This refers to bus routes with special features, such as travel lanes where cars are excluded, that are said to offer rubber-tired travel that’s as good as rail but costs less. It’s an elastically defined concept that comes in many flavors; the common element is less the transportation than the politics of it. BRT is the bus you get when you don’t get a train…

BRT was newly in vogue among transit planners when Shell and EMBARQ took it up. But it’s an idea with a history… (more)

 

CA bullet train authority postpones critical $30M contract award

Kim Slowey : constructiondive – excerpt

Dive Brief:

  • The California High Speed Rail Authority has postponed awarding a key, $30 million operations and management contract for the first leg of its new rail line through the state’s Central Valley region, according to Courthouse News Service. CHSRA was scheduled to award the contract at its monthly meeting Thursday.
  • The CHSRA had planned to tap DB Engineering & Consulting USA, a subsidiary of German rail company Deutsche Bahn, for the project, but Spain-based bidder Renfe protested the decision at the last minute. Renfe objected based on its scoring process, during which the company said it received high marks in two out of three categories.
  • The CHSRA’s reluctance to move forward with an operations contract led some meeting attendees to suggest that the authority was dragging its feet at a “critical time” in the bullet train’s schedule. The agency, which is already late in delivering the first segment of the high-speed rail by eight years, will address the contract award issue at its next meeting in November…

Dive Insight:

Earlier this month, the Los Angeles Times published a June CHSRA report that said the 119-mile line through the Central Valley cost $1.7 billion more than originally forecast, which raised the total price tag to $8 billion. The CHSRA chalked up the increases to the rising cost of land, the cost of utility relocation and negotiations with freight companies over the logistics of running high-speed trains near their tracks. It is unknown whether this add-on will raise the entire projected cost of the rail past its current budget of $64 billion… (more)

BART’s new cars finally pass safety tests, on track to roll by Thanksgiving

By Michael Cabanatuan : sfgate – excerpt

BART’s sleek new railcars finally passed safety tests over the weekend — months behind schedule — and are on track to start carrying commuters around Thanksgiving, transit officials said Monday.

John Garnham, project manager for BART’s new fleet, said the first 10 new cars, which have undergone rigorous testing and subsequent fixes for the past year and a half, completed the last of a lengthy checklist of tests and requirements on Saturday… (more)

Lyft and Amtrak now let passengers book rides to and from the train station

by Nick Statt : theverge – excerpt

Another business links up with Lyft, and not Uber

Lyft is partnering with Amtrak to help train passengers get to and from the train station. The new deal will let you book a car with the ride-hailing service from within Amtrak’s mobile app. If you’re a new Lyft rider, using the promo code “AMTRAKLYFT” grants you $5 discounts on the first four rides, regardless of whether they’re booked through the Amtrak app. Lyft says its service reaches 97 percent of all Amtrak riders in the US..
The business lingo Lyft is targeting here is known as first- and last-mile service, and it’s a big market opportunity for ride-hailing apps. Both Lyft and Uber allow people to get around without having to rely on their own vehicles or public transport, but neither can really solve the problem of having to get to and from larger transportation hubs like airports and train stations. The ride-hailing industry fought vigorously, and largely succeeded, at muscling airports into allowing drop-offs and pickups. Now, it appears like trains are presenting a new battlefront for Lyft and Uber to control how consumers travel…

Lyft and Uber want to control how you get to and from every transportation hub.

Most poll respondents don’t plan to ride SMART

By Stuff: ARGUS-COURIER – excerpt

Last Mile Issues require parking options

A majority of respondents to an online Argus-Courier poll said that they would not use the SMART train for their daily commute.

Here are some comments:

“Aside from the fact there is a serious lack of parking near the train station, the train goes nowhere near where I work in San Rafael. Walking or taking a bus to or from the train station will not work either. I will continue to drive.”

“I’d like to, but that may change depending on price, in particular, as well as timing with the Larkspur ferry. ”

“I am retired but want to ride the train and see the sights once all the bugs are worked out.”

“I do not and do not know anyone who will. This train has cost us millions in taxpayer dollars and has woken me up several times as it blows its horns.”

“I go into San Francisco. It is not time or cost effective, including the incomplete route to the ferry.”

If the transportation authorities quit fighting and added sufficient parking to their list of amenities for ALL public transit stations and hubs, they would not have the problem of a sinking ridership. There is no excuse for this lack of parking at the stations other than an out-dated notion that people can and should be controlled by a “wiser” government.

SFMTA approves dedicated bus lanes for Geary Boulevard

By Jerold Chinn : sfbay – excerpt

San Francisco transit officials on Tuesday gave a key approval to a $300 million bus rapid transit project that will change the way Muni runs the 38-Geary local, rapid and express routes through the Geary corridor.

The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Board of Directors approved the state environmental review report and adopted the recommended “Hybrid Alternative” design of the project.

Commissioners of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority approved the same report and recommended design in January.

The project will dedicate red transit-only lanes from Gough to Stanyan streets along the curb edge, then in the median from Stanyan Street to 28th Avenue, and then back to curbside from 28th to 34th avenues.

Transit-only lanes already exist on the downtown portion of the Geary corridor, but will have improved bus stops as part of the project…

The project has had opposition from merchants worried about construction hurting businesses and critics of the project who have said the project is costly.

San Franciscan’s For Sensible Transit filed a lawsuit earlier this year against the project citing that transportation planners did not study in full detail the no build option in the environmental review report. Other concerns included construction costs and construction impacts.

Bob Starzel, director of the San Franciscan’s For Sensible Transit, said the group does not like the way the project has been planned. He advised the SFMTA board to not “rubber stamp” the project:

“The only way we could talk you is by a lawsuit. We prefer to do it in a more enabled way.”…

After Tuesday’s approval, Brisson said staff will work on the detailed designs of the project, which includes the roadway and right-of-way changes. The SFMTA plans to seek public outreach on the detailed designs.

Transit officials also expect to the complete the federal environmental review process later this year.

Brisson expects to bring back a legislative package to the Board of Directors of the proposed roadway and right-of-way changes in early 2018… (more)

Why does such a big story have little press so far, and no comments. Citizens are looking into how the EIR is approved without a project description.

Why are we spending $300 million dollars on the consolidated center lane when the project manager admits that the rapid and local lines will share bus stops after the two lines are consolidated in the center lane and the only no time savings will come from eliminating a few stops.

Taxpayers should request an explanation for spending $300 million dollars on a complex center lane when removal of a few bus stops will cost nothing and get the same results.

As the number of tents on the sidewalk mounts and crime increases, keep in mine that the red paint applications trigger an annual maintenance expense that will become a part of the growing SFMTA budget each year, tell your supervisors what you prefer to do with your tax dollars.

This project will not proceed without federal dollars so be sure to weigh in with your federal representatives and watch the state reps as well. To better understand how these projects are coming to our streets, read the following document: http://livablecity.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/tlc_path.pdf

%d bloggers like this: