Comments on: Sierra Club: Speed up MTA service to save $, prevent cuts http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/02/04/sierra-club-speed-up-mta-service-to-save-prevent-cuts/ A transit riders' association for San Francisco Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:02:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: goodmaab http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/02/04/sierra-club-speed-up-mta-service-to-save-prevent-cuts/#comment-5508 goodmaab Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:51:41 +0000 http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/02/04/sierra-club-speed-up-mta-service-to-save-prevent-cuts/#comment-5508 The M-line and lines downtown are significantly slower consistently. Delays, and upcoming work on the St.Francis Circle rail will make things only worse. The proposed future routing of transit into Parkmerced allowing private development to step in to finance track and platform construction, vs. adequate direct routing of transit and assessing equitably the neighborhoods and institutions where transit occurs is a sincere issue lacking in the future proposed lines in our district. The SFSU/CSU MOU with the city and county of SF ignored joint impacts and "fair-share" payment in terms of the SFSU student ridership on the M-Line to downtown. Many students, seniors, disabled, and working class citizens in Parkmerced and outlying district 11 residents including METNA neighborhood areas are cut from the access due to these changes. If muni has such a problem in terms of funding, develop alternative lines such as BRT along Sunset Blvd., along Juipero Serra Blvd. and the old St.Francis Circle Line, re-place the cut 88 bus around lake merced, and the 18 with a speedier designated local lane for transit or BRT, or future light-rail systems. Perhaps not even a MUNI train, but a newer green option that allows bike, pedestrian and rail to work as the primary routes, and placing car/auto traffic in restricted 1-2 lane max. systems. Transit first policy, must not allow private development to dictate the routing of future transit. Federal Funding for direct linkage, tunneling, out along 19th ave, junipero serra blvd. to daly city bart or colma for auto traffic, and placing rail above ground or aerial systems is the best solution to the current blockage in district 7. As an architect, and resident of this area, I am concerned that LRV speeds, still are a big concern when they are being proposed in very "tight" future lines in the Parkmerced areas "vision-plan" when SFPUC rail safety spokespersons indicated the MUTUAL and LARGER benefit to tunneling the systems and "LAYERING" in the needed changes regardless of cost... Its a safety issue that is primary and not a cost issue.... The M-line and lines downtown are significantly slower consistently. Delays, and upcoming work on the St.Francis Circle rail will make things only worse. The proposed future routing of transit into Parkmerced allowing private development to step in to finance track and platform construction, vs. adequate direct routing of transit and assessing equitably the neighborhoods and institutions where transit occurs is a sincere issue lacking in the future proposed lines in our district. The SFSU/CSU MOU with the city and county of SF ignored joint impacts and “fair-share” payment in terms of the SFSU student ridership on the M-Line to downtown. Many students, seniors, disabled, and working class citizens in Parkmerced and outlying district 11 residents including METNA neighborhood areas are cut from the access due to these changes.

If muni has such a problem in terms of funding, develop alternative lines such as BRT along Sunset Blvd., along Juipero Serra Blvd. and the old St.Francis Circle Line, re-place the cut 88 bus around lake merced, and the 18 with a speedier designated local lane for transit or BRT, or future light-rail systems. Perhaps not even a MUNI train, but a newer green option that allows bike, pedestrian and rail to work as the primary routes, and placing car/auto traffic in restricted 1-2 lane max. systems.

Transit first policy, must not allow private development to dictate the routing of future transit. Federal Funding for direct linkage, tunneling, out along 19th ave, junipero serra blvd. to daly city bart or colma for auto traffic, and placing rail above ground or aerial systems is the best solution to the current blockage in district 7.

As an architect, and resident of this area, I am concerned that LRV speeds, still are a big concern when they are being proposed in very “tight” future lines in the Parkmerced areas “vision-plan” when SFPUC rail safety spokespersons indicated the MUTUAL and LARGER benefit to tunneling the systems and “LAYERING” in the needed changes regardless of cost… Its a safety issue that is primary and not a cost issue….

]]> By: Don http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/02/04/sierra-club-speed-up-mta-service-to-save-prevent-cuts/#comment-5506 Don Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:27:26 +0000 http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/02/04/sierra-club-speed-up-mta-service-to-save-prevent-cuts/#comment-5506 I agree that the speed of Muni is critical. If the time it takes to get to work on Muni is similar to the time it takes to drive, more people will use Muni and be willing to pay higher fares. I do not understand how Howard’s proposal will work. I would appreciate it if Rescue Muni would asses Howard’s proposal and make it more understandable to us civilians. Just how would the right turn thing work and what would be the impact on other streets? Time is money, so making automobile and truck traffic more congested would have negative economic impacts. The idea of congestion pricing in other cities was to relieve congestion for all forms of transportation; to speed the movement of goods and services. Good traffic engineering can relieve congestion with the same number of vehicles. Is that the essence of Howard’s proposal? It is true that between 1960 and 2000 fewer San Franciscans used transit and more drove to work, but many of those were reverse commuters. Since 2000 fewer San Franciscans are driving to work. The big increase is in telecommuting and walking. I agree that the speed of Muni is critical. If the time it takes to get to work on Muni is similar to the time it takes to drive, more people will use Muni and be willing to pay higher fares.

I do not understand how Howard’s proposal will work. I would appreciate it if Rescue Muni would asses Howard’s proposal and make it more understandable to us civilians. Just how would the right turn thing work and what would be the impact on other streets?

Time is money, so making automobile and truck traffic more congested would have negative economic impacts. The idea of congestion pricing in other cities was to relieve congestion for all forms of transportation; to speed the movement of goods and services. Good traffic engineering can relieve congestion with the same number of vehicles. Is that the essence of Howard’s proposal?

It is true that between 1960 and 2000 fewer San Franciscans used transit and more drove to work, but many of those were reverse commuters. Since 2000 fewer San Franciscans are driving to work. The big increase is in telecommuting and walking.

]]>