T-Third Phase 3

Another topic that was brought up at last night's SFCTA-CAC meeting was to look at the T-Third Phase 3 concepts. Phase 1 is what we currently are using. Phase 1 will be completed when the Mission Bay Loop is constructed in the coming year. Phase 2 is being built now and will open up the T-Third to Chinatown. Phase 3 would take the line from Chinatown all the way to North Beach and Fisherman's Wharf, but realistically wouldn't be constructed for another ten years at least.

While last night's discussion was only to present a few of the proposed ideas that came out of a 400-page study by SFMTA, a couple of D10-related issues popped out at me.

First, the study as presented to us on the CAC didn't seem to consider effects on the southern half of the T-Third line. Two-and-a-half minutes between trains on the Phase 2+3 portion of the line got me wondering about whether this meant that trains could be prioritized for the northern half of the line and if we in the Southeast would end up seeing the service levels we've been promised.

Second, the idea that potential funding could come from "Land Use Value Capture", including Infrastructure Finance District (IFD); Community Facilities District (Mello-Roos) (CFD); or a Special Assessment District (SpAD) got me thinking that if people on the wealthier northern end of the line were paying for this, then they might think that they'd be in their right to expect prioritization of trains at the expense of the Southeast.

Of course, SFMTA staff reassured me that we'll see improvements on the whole line, including the Southeast, once the Mission Bay Loop and Phase 2 are completed, with two-car trains and headways of 5-minutes to Mission Bay and 7.5 minutes to Bayview/Sunnydale. A community member also reminded us that MUNI won't be the only way to get from Bayview to downtown if we get a Caltrain station at Oakdale, Bayshore gets its improvements, or if a BRT to Balboa Park BART happens.

Despite these assurances, I will continue to impress upon SFMTA and the SFCTA the importance of including the Southeast's users of the T-Third in discussions regarding the northern end of the line so that we're all aware of what's going on and can make sure that our concerns are addressed.

Jerrold Ave center turn lane

A few weeks ago SFMTA installed an ill-conceived new center turn lane on Jerrold between Quint and Phelps that is dangerous for drivers, pedestrians, and especially cyclists.

I received a call yesterday from Liveable Streets project manager Philip Louie to discuss it, and he left me even more displeased than I had been before.

Basically SFPUC had requested the new striping, in his words, to help their workers walk (jay-walk) across the street more safely by giving them a refuge area in the middle of the street. Wouldn't a midblock crosswalk have been a better option if trying to address pedestrian safety? Since when is a bidirectional center turn lane an approved pedestrian refuge? Since it has gone in, I've seen all manner of vehicle using the center lane as a travel lane because they're now pushed too close to the parked cars at be curb to drive through there safely. Check out the video I recorded the other day of a truck making a turn from Quint onto Jerrold and then never leaving the new center turn lane. Note the SFPUC workers standing in the narrowed travel lane and the empty angled parking on the north side of the street taking up space that could have been recovered and used for a bike lane.

He admitted the design was probably not the best, but my guess is that this is what SFPUC had designed and wanted, and SFMTA did no work to look at alternatives and just did what SFPUC proposed because it was cheap and easy.

Their idea of neighborhood notification was to put up small signage on a few light poles in the area, a technique that is useless if trying to engage motorists or cyclists and may as well not even be there. The project was brought before the SFMTA board, but because no one knew about it, it passed. It never showed up on MyStreetsSF or on Envista, so there was no way for anyone to find out about this unless they were walking through the area while the signs were up.

His attitude was that because traffic counts were so low on Jerrold, it really didn't matter that it's not the best design. I'll admit, I blew my stack at this because it speaks to the way we get shafted time and again like this from one city agency to the next. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but this was blatantly a "they should be happy we're doing anything for them" kind of attitude.

They're unlikely to change it unless they get negative feedback from users. For the record, my proposal to calm traffic speeds is to remove the underutilized angled parking on the north side, and install bike lanes to act as a buffer between parked cars and traffic, and a mid-block crosswalk for SFPUC workers to cross the road more safely.

I have asked Mr. Louie to send me the following information:
- when the SFMTA board heard and approved this
- where funds came from to do the work
- how much it cost
- what alternatives were looked at
- where this design originated (ie. was this what SFPUC asked for)
- when the follow-up traffic speed study will be done
- whether site-specific jobs like this are required to be posted on Envista or MyStreetSF
- data on traffic speeds and counts and dates and times measurements were taken,
- along with what MTA considers low volume.

If you're also not happy about the outcome or the lack of outreach to the community, I encourage you to contact Mr Louie by email at Philip.Louie@sfmta.com and cc his boss, Ed Reiskin at Ed.Reiskin@sfmta.com and let them know.

Muni's Transit Effectiveness Program Community workshop, April 21st at VVCC

As part of the ongoing Transit Effectiveness Project (TEP), Muni is recommending several options to improve reliability and the overall customer experience by reducing travel time on our most heavily used bus routes and rail lines.

Come to a community workshop! These workshops are one of the best ways for SFMTA staff to hear from you. If you ride any of the routes listed, please attend and learn more about options to improve your Muni experience.

8X Bayshore Express Proposals
Saturday, April 21, 2012
10AM - noon
Visitacion Valley Community Center
50 Raymond at Bayshore

For more information, please contact 311 or email us at tep@sfmta.com.

SFPark Plan for Potrero Hill & Dogpatch on hold, Mission Bay OK

Updated Mission Bay SFPark plan

The Potrero Hill Boosters and the Dogpatch Neighborhood  Association have rallied residents and forced the SFMTA to drop plans, for the moment, to install parking meters throughout these two areas.  However, there is still a large swath of city that will become metered, as shown in this graphic from SFGate.

Tonight, the Coalition of Residents and Businesses in San Francisco's Eastern Neighborhoods will be meeting to discuss the plan.  Supervisors Jane Kim and David Campos will attend today's meeting, as well as SFMTA officials. The meeting begins at 6:30 p.m. at Project Artaud (Z-Space) at 450 Florida St.

The SFMTA, like many agencies throughout the city and beyond, miscalculated the resistance that they'd receive, didn't do the amount of outreach necessary to get people on-board, and ended up losing - or at least delaying - receiving funds that the agency says it needs, all while further alienating the citizenry. 

It seems these agencies make a cost-benefit analysis on their outreach.  Last year, SFWater seemed to think it could do very little outreach to the Portola and change plans midstream without anyone noticing that they were not going to reopen Bacon St over their reservoir.  They didn't count on a few dedicated neighbors catching wind of the plan (which wasn't a 'plan', according to the agency, but rather a 'proposal') and pushing back, getting hundreds of neighbors out to a public meeting that ended up forcing the agency to reverse course, much like what happened in Potrero Hill.

Why can't these agencies just do the actual work or engaging neighbors, laying out their case, showing the whole picture and being honest throughout, and coming to an amenable solution for the majority of people.  The minute you try to go behind someone's back, they'll mistrust you forever.

I just wish these agencies would follow one simple rule: engage, don't enrage!

SFMTA Mission Bay Parking Management Plan Rescinded

From Tony Kelly, President of the Potrero Boosters,

Hi everyone,

As you know, the Potrero Boosters and the Dogpatch Neighborhood Association filed an appeal with the Board of Supervisors, seeking to overturn the Categorical Exemption from Environmental Review for MTA Order 4005 - the SFPark program expansion adding parking meters to our neighborhoods. This was in response to the MTA hearing on January 13, where Hearing Officer John Newlin approved the order with slight modifications (over the objections of hundreds of residents and businesses) and sent it to the MTA Board.

The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and the City Attorney have just informed us that the MTA Hearing Officer has rescinded his approval of MTA Order 4005 in its entirety. Because of that rescission, there is no approval for us to appeal to the Board of Supervisors, and our appeal is being returned to us. Any new parking meter plan will have to go back to the Hearing Officer before going to the MTA Board.

Clearly this is great news for community advocates and stakeholders, who are happy to work together on a better program of parking management for our neighborhoods. We look forward to MTA joining us in that work.

Tony Kelly
President, Potrero Boosters Neighborhood Association

Rational Pricing: The Mission Bay Parking Plan

As most of the news of late has been about how pissed off the residents and businesses of Potrero Hill are about SFMTA's new parking meter plan, one might get the impression that this opinion is universal.  So why, then, is SFMTA pushing ahead and forcing this down people's throats without taking into consideration anything that anyone is telling them?  Well, maybe it's because they feel like they've done the required outreach, have gotten a good deal of feedback, and not everyone, it turns out, is against them.

Back in November, a SF Streets Blog commentary discussed the issue of free parking and the dysfunction that it causes.  Thursday, they wrote again about "the plan to put a rational price on car parking around the developing Mission Bay area."  According to the article,

Among the organizations supporting the plan are Livable City and the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, who sent letters to the SFMTA this week encouraging staff to move it forward.

“The expansion of metered spaces will provide the parking turnover that neighborhood-serving businesses need,” wrote Livable City Executive Director Tom Radulovich in his letter. “SFPark metering and pricing will also reduce cruising for parking in these neighborhoods. Cruising for parking generates traffic which delays Muni, produces greenhouse gas emissions, and distracted drivers making multiple turns endanger pedestrians and cyclists in these increasingly pedestrian- and cycling-oriented neighborhoods.”

The fight will continue, to be sure, but unless SFMTA backs down, it looks like meters will be coming whether some residents and business owners like it or not.


h/t A. Lantsberg

Residents Outraged by Proposed Parking Meters Are Mostly Ignored

With the hearing room and two overflow rooms full of residents, it's mind-blowing that the SFMTA is planning to completely ignore everyone they heard from and just do what they want.  The hearings are simply for show.  Read more at Mission Local and the SF Bay Guardian. Check out the Mission Bay Parking Plan here.

The next hearing is to be held Feb 7, 1PM, room 416 at City Hall. The way the Potrero Hill Yahoo Group is lit up about this, you can bet there will be even more outrage at the next meeting.

SFMTA Mission Bay Parking Plan

In a follow up to the Potrero Hill parking meter situation, Supervisor Cohen has written the following to the SFMTA:

If you can make it, please let your voice be heard at the SFMTA meeting Friday, January 13 at 10AM, City Hall!

SFMTA Mission Bay Parking Management Plan Meeting

Map of MB Parking Management Strategy

The Sustainable Streets Division of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency will hold a public hearing on Friday, January 13, 2012, at 10:00 AM, in Room 416 (Hearing Room 4), City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, San Francisco, CA 94102, to consider the Mission Bay Parking Management Plan.

The plan itself can be found here at the SFPark website.

There is a petition at http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/stop-parking-meter-installation-in-potrero-hill/ that reads:

Stop Parking Meter Installation in Potrero Hill

Installation of parking meters in residential areas such as Potrero Hill makes no sense, especially on streets that are highly residential. Many car owners have no choice but to park on the street. MTA's proposed plan would install parking meters directly in front of large apartment buildings giving residents no options.

The proposed plan includes the following (from the SFMTA Hearing Notice):

SFMTA launches Central Subway Website

The Central Subway line will (?) one day connect the Southeast neighborhoods of San Francisco to Downtown and Chinatown.  SFMTA has recently launched a website to provide the community with updates on the project.  Check it out at http://www.centralsubwaysf.com/

Silver Terrace Traffic Calming Hearing

Friday, March 18, 2011

10:00 AM

Rm 416, City Hall

San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Hearing

There will be a hearing to discuss community-developed traffic calming proposals for local streets within the project area.

AREA-WIDE TRAFFIC CALMING Silver Terrace neighborhood, bounded by Bayshore Blvd, Silver Ave, Palou Ave, Williams Ave and Phelps St