Lack of notice, outreach, and communication during the whole planning process is a major source of problems.
Would like to see a representative from the Small Business community on the MTA board.
They encourage the merchants associations to continue what they are doing in demanding consideration from the MTA.
Due Process important.
There appears to have been no real time studies or consideration for business operations in the areas that they are eliminating and limiting parking.
Effects of smaller projects on larger areas need to be taken into consideration during construction and after.
A pave it and paint it plan would solve many problems. It would allow for faster, cheaper and easier changes as the traffic patterns shift and needs change. (i.e. the 17th street burp)
Most of the issues between traffic and cycles could be solved by paving the streets and fixing the dangerous potholes and other obstacles that cause erratic lane changes for all vehicles. Smoother streets and easily read signs would help the safe flow of traffic and the costs would be a lot lower.
Parking removal and lack of parking seems to be the major problem for everyone. We need to re-visit the policies that are driving these programs.
We must change the attitude that we are not building any more parking. We have got to change this attitude. We need parking as well as bike lanes. We are the tax payers.
We must realistically provide for the visitors and commuters who cannot take public transit into the city.
Mayor’s task force wants to do twice as much as it can afford. Why not do less at half the costs?
Blind loyalty to ideology, at the expense of the whole community is not the answer.
People are already avoiding certain neighborhoods due to parking difficulties.
Are BART passengers in San Francisco being subsidized by Muni riders and by BART customers from the suburbs? Or is it the other way around? And does it really matter, or should we just be thankful that people are choosing BART over clogging the roadways in this transit-first city?.
These are some of the questions arising from an aggressive effort by the newest, youngest member of the BART Board of Directors, Zakhary Mallett, who has proposed severing BART’s partnership with the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority to end their joint “A” Fast Pass program that allows unlimited rides on both systems for $74 per month.
And after he’s done with that, Mallett says he’ll take aim at the BART fare structure that charges $1.75 for rides of six miles or less, saying that San Francisco residents shouldn’t be able to access BART’s relatively luxurious trains for less than the $2 it costs to catch a Muni bus… (more)
As a longtime N Judah rider, I know all too well that that transit line is next to impossible to ride in the period near the conclusion of a home Giants game. And don’t get me started on trying to ride during Outside Lands.
So I have been very curious about how the transit agency might improve service to accommodate riders attending games at the new Warriors arena!
In an effort to get ahead of these problems, one SF Supervisor is proposing a $1-$3 surcharge for tickets at larger sports and entertainment events, with the money from that surcharge going to the SFMTA.
What do you think, is that a positive step towards managing Muni’s event issues? Or is it spitting into the ocean (or the wind)? Tell us what you think… (more)
This sounds like the congestion parking theory run amok. They got away with charging more for parking during “events”. Next will want to charge more for Muni riders during events. The just raised the fast pass fairs. Here is a better idea. Throw the MTA Board out and reset the policies.