$3 toll hike plan has Bay Area politicos dueling for dollars

By Matier & Ross : sfchronicle – excerpt

Night-Bridge

Traffic streaming across the Bay Bridge into San Francisco on a weekend evening. photo by zrants.

East Bay officials are threatening to oppose a regional ballot measure calling for a toll increase of as much as $3 on area bridges unless they get a bigger cut of the pie — and that’s triggered some last-minute political wheeling and dealing to get everyone on board with the transportation initiative.

“We are talking about an extra $700 a year,” Orinda Vice Mayor Amy Worth said of her suburban constituents.“These are working people who use the bridges to get to their jobs.”

Worth, who as a member of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has a say in how transit dollars are allocated, has some prominent company in questioning how the proposed ballot measure is being put together. State Sen. Steve Glazer, an Orinda Democrat, and GOP Assemblywoman Catharine Baker of San Ramon say BART in particular needs to be well policed if it’s going to be trusted with millions of additional toll dollars.

“The current proposal falls well short,” said Glazer, who has been on a one-man crusade against BART ever since a pair of 2013 strikes at the transit agency made life miserable for riders in Orinda and everywhere else in the East Bay…

Beall said lawmakers have about two weeks to reach a deal if the measure is to make the ballot next year. Whatever eventually lands there probably has a decent chance of passing, regardless of whether the East Bay officials endorse it… (more)

Keep LA Moving

keeplamoving – excerpt

Masonic traffic b 081713

Photo of traffic stuck on Masonic before the road diet. These scenes are being repeated all oer the state of California. LA citizens are fighting back.

It’s official! KeepLAMoving has filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court against the City of Los Angeles.

Our 53 page petiton alleges that the City did not follow proper CEQA procedure, denying residents their due process before the project commenced. It’s Court Case No. BS 170 464. Click here to see it. 

The Neighborhood Council of Westchster/Playa voted to send Mike Bonin a letter opposing the road diets on Culver and Jefferson. Click here to read it.

Gridlock Is Not The Answer

BART: $20 million for expanded parking at Dublin station hinges on Assemblywoman Catharine Baker

By : mercurynews – excerpt

DUBLIN — Assemblywoman Catharine Baker unexpectedly secured a $20 million commitment from the governor’s office to pay for expanded parking at BART’s Dublin/Pleasanton station, which would fulfill a long-held promise by the transit agency to build a second garage there.

The only problem? BART’s governing board doesn’t want the garage. And that has the $20 million in limbo while Baker decides how to spend it…

BART’s board was split on the new plan, voting 5-4 to adopt the so-called “hybrid” model, which also includes proposals to enhance the station’s connections to the Iron Horse Trail, install new bike parking and work with the local bus operator to improve transit to and from the station. The plan is more flexible, and would use attendant-assisted parking with automated parking structure modules added over time to test their effectiveness, staff said.

But Baker isn’t buying it. She doesn’t trust the automated parking structures, which are used worldwide but she said have yet to be tested at a transit station, where hundreds of people get off the train at the same time during rush-hour commutes…

“Look at how unreliable BART’s escalators and elevators are,” Baker said. “BART wants to promise that not only will that technology be reliable, but it will get them their car in 90 seconds. … I just don’t believe that plays out in reality.”

So where does that leave the $20 million? Baker says the money will be used to build some parking structure near the BART station, whether it’s on BART property or not… (more)

Carpool cash doled out to slash traffic

By Samantha Weigel : smdailyjournal – excerpt

In the ongoing effort to reduce congestion in a region where nearly 70 percent of people drive to work alone, $1 million will be offered to those who carpool to or from San Mateo County

The City/County Association of Governments announced a new pilot program this week that plugs in to the proliferation of smartphone apps and the rise of the sharing economy.

C/CAG will help subsidize carpooling for those who live or work in San Mateo County by offering $2 for both drivers and passengers traveling during peak commute hours. The program began last week for those using Scoop Technologies’ smartphone app and another contract is being drafted for Waze Carpool, said C/CAG Executive Director Sandy Wong.

“We want to try out more innovative strategies to reduce congestion,” Wong said. “We capture the new trend in the sharing society, and are using new technology of the app that provides users a more real time base.”

The app matches people who live and work near one another, with people booking rides just a few hours in advance. Passengers pay a distance-based amount to the driver. Scoop touts its app as a way to save time by steering people toward the carpool lane, reducing traffic and helping commuters save money… (more)

Carpooling Incentive Program Launches For South San Francisco Residents

patch – excerpt

280-Overpass

Cars driving into the city on one of the many southern access freeways photo by zrants

The “Carpool In San Mateo County!” program offers drivers and riders a $2 incentive per person during peak commute times.

 

SAN MATEO COUNTY, CA — The City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) is launching a pilot program to encourage San Mateo County residents or commuters who work in San Mateo County to utilize private sector carpools during peak travel periods.

The Carpool In San Mateo County! program will leverage mobile carpooling applications (apps) to increase local carpool ridership, therefore reducing single occupancy vehicles, traffic congestion, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the need for parking within San Mateo County. Commuters are able to save time, money, and the environment through the Carpool In San Mateo County! program.

Carpool In San Mateo County! offers drivers and riders a $2 incentive per person for each trip that begins or ends in San Mateo County during the peak commute periods (5:30 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.). The program offers a maximum of $4 per rider and driver each day… (more)

San Franciscans want happy trails — not rocky roads

by Aaron Peskin: marinatimes – excerpt

Budget season has drawn to a close, and the city has made a significant investment in our city streets with the Board of Supervisors approving an additional $90 million in road work and resurfacing funds to be spent down over the next two years.

These are the funds that will be used to repave our city streets (600 blocks annually), extend or repair our sidewalks, paint our bike lanes, and fill pesky potholes. San Francisco Public Works is hiring more workers, and San Francisco has slowly increased its Pavement Condition Index Score…

The wrong signs get posted for the wrong projects on the wrong streets, construction equipment lies inactive for months in on-street parking spots, while a seemingly never-ending parade of orange-and-white striped A-frame signs line the streets letting merchants and residents know that they should brace for yet another construction project that might or might not have an actual public benefit. At the very least, it could be coordinated much better.

In addition, the hearing revealed that some repetitive projects are dropped from the city’s database, in violation of the city’s moratorium on digging up the city streets more than once in a five-year span. For example, the corner of Green Street and Columbus Avenue has been dug up at least four or five times in the last six years, yet San Francisco Public Works did not have that data for those jobs on file.

I am working with Supervisors Jane Kim and Norman Yee on legislation that would create stricter conditions for subcontractors and would trigger a construction mitigation fund for projects that run over budget or drag on endlessly.

The time has come to make sure that we are managing San Francisco taxpayer money responsibly when it comes to our city streets; these safety and road resurfacing projects are priorities that shouldn’t have to be painful… (more)

This pretty well covers the frustrations that residents and businesses are feeling with the street construction repair program being set up and “managed” by the SFMTA. The subcontractors were a problem for the residents dealing with street trees and damaged sidewalks and the Supervisors solved that one. Now it is time for them to take on the street subcontractors.

At the top of the list of issues, is the lack of skilled labor in the construction business due to the overwhelming number of projects underway. We are doing too much too fast and the quality of the work is suffering because of the unrealistic pace. This is why we need to slow it down. We will be having talks this month over various options for solving this problem. Thanks to supervisors Peskin, Yee and Kim for taking this on.

NO NOTICE: A number of other issues were raised at the meeting described here. One is the most familiar of all that accompanies every complaint being raised from “overnight” tow-away signs to sudden contractors tearing up sidewalks without a visible permit – NO NOTICE ahead of the sudden pop-up construction work. Obviously the multi-million dollar noticing system that SFMTA is using to communicate with the public is failing to do the job. We need a new procedure of noticing.

As Supervisor Breed pointed out at the meeting, unnecessary controversial bulblouts and other street “improvements” are going onto small side streets with no accident history under the guise of “Safe Street improvements.” The SFMTA staff had no real excuse for this when quizzed on the matter.

A similar issue is ongoing with regard to the hated Red Lane “experiments” that were put into areas of the city, in including Mission Street, that were not designated as “experimental” areas, and the required “studies” for the “experiments” were not done in a timely fashion.

Concerned citizens conducted their own “unpaid” studies and discovery, and obtained documents showing an uptick in accidents on certain Red Lanes were not included in the final reports given to the state agency in charge of approving the extension of the Red Lane “experiments”. The SFMTA cherry picked the test areas that proved the Red Lanes improved the speed of the buses yet neglected to “share” the data that showed an increase in accidents on some of the “experimental streets.

Complaints were filed and if the judicial system works, the matter should be investigated.

Transit agency ‘mistake’ reveals extra parking removed from Potrero Avenue

By Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez : sfexaminer – excerpt

Sometimes, San Francisco makes mistakes…

Like not listening to the neighbors who know the street…

…neighbors are also concerned that the Potrero Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project was designed before Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital built its new trauma wing — and that those 2014 transportation plans reportedly block emergency vehicle access…

That allegation from neighbors was later expressed by Supervisor Hillary Ronen’s office to the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, which heads the project.

These concerns prompted the SFMTA Board of Directors to approve the project in a limited capacity Tuesday and carve out a hole in their plans directly in front of the hospital so that portion can be studied…(more)

Here is something for the next SFMTA study.

We opened this story with the last article we see on the Potrero Project and the warnings from neighbors that this new road configuration is dangerous. So far we have seen no mention of the 4-car pile up that draw ambulances and stopped traffic yesterday, June 20, during rush hour, in front of the entrance to SF General, as residents on the 900 block of Potrero Avenue predicted.

So far as we know the accident was only recorded by the neighbors, who seem to be more vigilant than professionals in documenting the problems on Potrero. It was no-doubt witnessed by a lot of commuters stuck in the street, who were probably grateful they were not the victims of this folly.

Hours of wasted time in this one accident will not be made up soon by the faster buses we are told will go soon whizzing by on transit only lanes. Since the SFMTA did not consider the victims of this accident worth noting, we doubt they will end up in their count.We are here to fill in the media gaps. This marks the second story we scooped this month. More videos and links will follow and hopefully some of our press partners will take this story up, when they finish reporting on the latest Trump tweets.

Witness statement:

I’d say southbound traffic was diverted onto 21st Street for at least half an hour.  I came out onto my front steps to smoke at about 6:20pm and saw the police SUV and diversion already happening to my left, then noticed all the emergency vehicles and the aftermath of the accident to my right, just south of the 22nd Street east offset.  I got to the scene within a couple of minutes, shot video (that I still haven’t watched) on my cell phone, which then immediately died, then ran home to get my iPad and was back shooting video by 6;27, first of the accident, next of the intersection of Potrero Avenue and 21st Street.  Then I went back inside to post the videos from my iPad while my phone continued to charge.  By 7(?)pm, the streets were open again.

Before and maybe after, I was listening to music through headphones in the back of my house, hence missing facts.

Video links below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xd8iskKgxg8

 

 

Open Thread: Is it Time to Pilot a Sidewalk Bike Lane on Market Street?

By Roger Rudlick : streetsblog – excerpt

Call Them “Sidewalk-Height Raised and Curb-Protected Bike Lanes” Maybe?

Yesterday, I took a ride on a Jump electric bike on Market Street. Ryan Rzepecki, the CEO of Jump, was riding alongside. When we stopped, we talked about how nerve racking it is to ride on Market. We also discussed how comfortable it is to ride in Berlin, where, in many places, rather than stripe a bike lane on the street (American-style, in the gutter, as on Market Street) they stripe it on the outer edge of the sidewalk.

A short time later, I noticed the brick treatment on Market near Duboce, seen in the lead image, and thought to myself: that looks just like a Berlin bike lane.

I fear some readers are already foaming at the mouth. In San Francisco, the mere intimation of putting a bike lane on a sidewalk causes heads to explode (maybe it’s better to call it adding a raised bike lane?)… (more)

As long as they don’t extend the sidewalk into the street by pouring more concrete, it might not be a bad approach on streets like Potrero, where there is a real need for traffic to flow into and out of the hospital with ease, and on the street and parking and delivery must also be accommodated. We should ask the emergency respondors whether this would be a better approach than what they are dealing with now.

Salesforce buys naming rights to Transbay Transit Center

By John King : sfchronicle – excerpt

San Francisco’s new downtown transit center will have something in common with AT&T Park and Oracle Arena — a corporate name.

Salesforce, a software company with its headquarters and 6,600 employees in the Bay Area, has agreed to a 25-year, $110 million sponsorship of the 2½-blocklong facility set to open next spring at Fremont and Mission streets. The deal includes naming rights, which means that the complex would be known as the Salesforce Transit Center.

Similarly, the 5.4-acre rooftop open space will become Salesforce Park if the board of the Transbay Joint Powers Authority approves the contract Thursday at its monthly meeting.

The cloud-like Salesforce logo that adorns two towers near the transit center would not appear on the exterior of the new facility, however. Nor would Salesforce have veto authority on events held in the park, even those of rival corporations… (more)

What a coincidence. This naming announcement comes out right after the plaza re-design was heard in Planning. The Commissioners were not too supportive of the changes suggested this week. Let’s see if they feel more supportive next time.

RELATED:
Facebook to build a small city next to its headquarters

SF residents are the only casualties in ‘war on cars’

By Sally Stephens : sfexaminer – excerpt

280 traffic on a cloudy day by zrants

San Francisco is a transit-first city. Those of us who live here are told we should use Muni to get around. Or ride a bike. Or walk. But above all else, we should not drive our cars.

To reinforce this, city policy makes it easy to remove existing parking spaces — turning curbside parking spots into parklets — and explicitly prevents new developments from providing a parking space for every unit built. Some have called this a “war on cars.”

If you look at the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s Strategic Plan, however, it turns out that “transit first” includes prioritizing ride-hail vehicles. In essence, The City wants people to get out of their own cars and into other people’s.

There’s no war on cars in San Francisco if the cars are being driven for profit. Those are welcome here — even if the drivers don’t live here, don’t pay taxes here and, often, don’t even know how to get from one place to another in The City.

No, the war on cars is aimed at San Francisco residents.

A recent report released by the San Francisco County Transportation Authority showed that cars from ride-hail companies Uber and Lyft make more than 170,000 trips — driving more than half a million miles — within The City every weekday. Nearly 6,000 ride-hail cars clog the streets during peak commute hours…

San Francisco’s “war on cars” targets residents to give up their cars, while allowing — even encouraging — people from out of town to drive all over our city, as long as they’re doing it for money…(more)

SFMTA is taking our public streets and selling them to THEIR preferred car-shares and other corporate entities. As if Uber and Lyft and the tech buses weren’t enough of a nuisance, the SFMTA has now invited Scoot to park their Scooters and (4-wheeled vehicles, that some of us refer to as cars) pretty much anywhere they want to. There is a hearing on this matter at the Planning Commission this holiday week on Thursday. If you object, let the Planning Commissioners and your supervisors know. Details are here:


Thursday, July 7, 1 PM
agenda
Room 400 Planning –  Transportation Commission

Item 15. 2017-000475PCA CAR-SHARE AND SHARED LIMITED RANGE VEHICLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS [BOARD FILE NO. 170625,  PREVIOUSLY BF 161349] Planning Code Amendment to allow Shared Limited Range Vehicle Parking. (But only Scoot and city-owned vehicles appear to be in on this deal that will hand public property over to city commercial interests.) Private owned vehicles cannot park in Daylight zones. yet, SFMTA’s CHOSEN vehicles may. UNLESS RESIDENTS STOP THIS SCOOT PREFERRED PARKING PROGRAM.