The cardboard looks a little low to me:
Is this a legal thing or an illegal thing? IDK.
Things are better now, at Fell and Divis, usually. We lost a few parking spaces on Fell, but, you know, the Needs of the Many, yada yada yada…
Hippies love cars. Did you know that?
These cars are legally parked – I’m used to seeing another row of cars queuing up, parked in the slow lane, all the live-long day…
BTW, these days there are more vehicles registered in San Francisco County than ever before.
And let’s not talk about all the extra unregistered vehicles we have, like owned by people who move here from a different state and never get CA plates, like for years and years.
Anyway, maybe I caught RG on a slow day, but Trader Joe’s #100 up on Masonic fixed its similar issue, more or less, years ago, so why can’t Rainbow?
Get up to speed here by reading down and take a look at Hoodline and StreetsblogSF and here’s the short version about the campaign to “save” a redundant bus stop what’s nine seconds away from another. (And here’s a parody blog post that has a lot of images on this topic.)
Now take a look at this:
“Volunteers Needed to Help Us Save the 21 Hayes Muni Line!
Posting ID : A1050191362
Date Posted : 20 days ago
Category : Volunteers
Help us save the 21 Hayes MUNI line! The San Francisco Municipal Transport Agency (SFMTA) is currently in the process of removing bus stops on the 21 Hayes MUNI line. This will result in an increase in the number of passengers at downstream/upstream bus stops, as well as increased pressure on the already overcrowded 5 Fulton line.
We need a group of volunteers to stand at bus stops in two-hour shifts, and inform passengers about the impending changes. Volunteers will be collecting signatures on a petition to tell the SF District Supervisor, London Breed, that passengers of the 21 Hayes and 5 Fulton want to keep the existing stops, which will prevent an increase in the number of passengers at downstream/upstream bus stops, as well as increased pressure on the already overcrowded 5 Fulton line.
Volunteers SHOULD NOT be shy, SHOULD be morning people, and SHOULD be ready to collect as many signatures as possible. A bonus if volunteers are from the Nopa/Alamo Square/Western Addition/Hayes Valley neighborhoods, and/or live near the 21 Hayes line, and the 5 Fulton MUNI lines.
CASH BONUSES FOR NUMBERS OF SIGNATURES COLLECTED
TIME(S): 7AM-10AM on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday mornings (4/15, 4/16, 4/17)”
So these hyper-enthusiastic people got paid? So they weren’t volunteers at all?
And who’s the mastermind behind these efforts – who’s paying the cash bonuses?
This kind of thing makes a mockery of district elections, IMO.
Anyway, it appears as if the SFMTA will enshrine this useless bus stop tomorrow, May 5, 2015…
The official decision comes May 5, 2015, but the Central Coffee people know they’ve already “won” on this issue so now they’re acting as they aren’t involved. See?
So if the SFMTA wants to eliminate this redundant stop, it seems as if the easiest way to do that would be to cancel the #21 Hayes entirely. I mean it doesn’t make sense to space bus stops nine seconds apart, does it?
The people of Central Coffee might think they’re clever to unnecessarily slow down the 21 in order to make more money, but they’re not.
(And the office of London Breed seems to be out of touch on this one. Apparently, she’s going to get a left-of-center challenger and it would certainly look funny if there have been political donation$ made by the Central Coffee people to interim Mayor Ed Lee or to London Breed – I mean those are the two I can think of. Obvs, you need money to win elections, but this sitch seems to be going over the line. So this is a kind of corruption, or perhaps the London Breed office is out of touch? I’ll tell you, Ross Mirkarimi knew the same very district on a block-by-block basis. Who’s the energetic, hands-on Ross Mirkarimi of London Breed’s office? There might not be one. One wonders if RM and/or Christina Olague insisted upon this redundant bus stop as well. What this does is make a mockery of corruption-inducing district elections.)
End Of Line.
[UPDATE: James writes in to remind us all that:
….people could still conceivably email the board at MTABoard@sfmta.com or show up at the shitshow on May 5th.]
Word comes from James, see below.
This is fucking bullshit, man. (A few days later, I actually timed a bus – it took nine whole seconds for the driver to pull out of the stop at Masonic and then start pulling into the one by the coffee shop.)
Here’s the nut graf from the head of the SFMTA:
“Based on community feedback at the SFMTA Board of Directors meeting this week, from Supervisor Breed’s office and by email, we are modifying our proposal for the 21 Hayes. We are no longer recommending removal of the inbound bus stop at Central Avenue.”
So, SFMTA, you’re a part of the problem, right? Do you realize that, SFMTA?
“They arent’ removing the stop. I just got this in my email:
Dear sir or madam:
Thank you for reaching out with your concerns about the 21 Hayes. First and foremost, I would like to make it clear that we have no plans to discontinue the route. In fact, we are planning to increase service during both a.m. and p.m. peak periods to provide greater reliability for customers.
We had recommended removing a couple of stops along the corridor with the goal of further improving reliability on the 21 Hayes. As we work to improve Muni citywide, selective bus stop removal is one of many tools in our toolbox to reduce travel times and create a more efficient public transit network. By optimizing the location of bus stops and reducing the number of stops, we can improve service for customers, reduce conflicts between buses and other vehicles, improve safety for people walking and bicycling, and decrease the amount of time buses spend stopped at stoplights.
We are committed to a thoughtful and community-based process when selecting which stops to remove or relocate. Based on community feedback at the SFMTA Board of Directors meeting this week, from Supervisor Breed’s office and by email, we are modifying our proposal for the 21 Hayes. We are no longer recommending removal of the inbound bus stop at Central Avenue. We will move forward with the recommendation to eliminate the outbound stop at Lyon and to lengthen the inbound stop at Lyon.
These items will be heard by the SFMTA Board on May 5. As always, we welcome and invite public comment. You can find out more about the Board meeting online at http://www.sfmta.com/board.
To learn more about how we are improving Muni throughout San Francisco, including major service increases that start tomorrow, visit http://www.muniforward.com. You can also sign up for alerts specific to the lines you ride.
Thank you again for taking the time to write and for participating in the process to improve Muni service in San Francisco.
Edward D. Reiskin
Director of Transportation
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
The SFMTA simply can’t do it. Or it hasn’t done it, not yet.
Here’s the sitch on Hayes – what do you see?
I see two active bus stops.
Here we go, pulling out of one…
And pulling into the next, nine seconds later, per the camera EXIF file:
And look, you can see the next stop too.
The SFMTA knows this is a ridiculous situation, but it’s afraid to talk about it.
Perhaps 2015 is the year that this gets fixed, we’ll see.
(And then after that, there’ll be other stops to remove. I don’t really get why we need lengthened stops on this line, but perhaps this will become clear with time.)
I don’t know if I’m explaining things the right way here, so I’m offering you, the Gentle Reader, a copy of the postcard I just got in the mail.
All right, let’s review: MUNI has two bus stops between Central and Masonic on the same short block of Hayes Street. This is absurd.
Our SFMTA wants to correct this Accident of History by removing the inbound stop at Central. This would leave two inbound stops for nearby residents of the 94117 – at Lyon and at Masonic.
The idea forwarded by the owner of Central Coffee, that making the inefficient 21 Hayes line (which still has waaaaay too many stops) more efficient will instead make it less efficient (leading to its termination), is absurd.
Here’s the latest outrage, this corporate mailer recently sent to hundreds(?) (or thousands) of residents who live near Central Coffee:
[I should add, don’t try to click over to the “NOPA-Rider” website, as the site isn’t functioning and I’m getting a phishing warning when using both Chrome and IE. I don’t exactly understand how browsers work and why there are so many false alarms for legitimate sites, so, anyway, my advice is to not to click over there.]
I’ll tell you, if I were a rent-seeking coffee-shop owner and I wanted to selfishly dictate how the #21 should be operated, I wouldn’t go about things this way.
And I’ll ask you, Gentle Reader, why would somebody living in the SoPA (Southeast of Panhandle Area) be so so concerned about a bus line what’s serving the NoPA (Northeast of Panhandle Area)? One would think a Haight Street resident wouldn’t even consider The Great Speeding-Up Of The Bus Stop-Clogged 21 Hayes a bad thing, much less worthy of opposing with such a massive campaign.
So here’s the difference.
I think that the 21 Hayes should have the following number of bus stops inbound betwixt Central and Masonic:
Our SFMTA thinks that the 21 Hayes should have the following number of bus stops inbound betwixt Central and Masonic:
Zero as well, prolly.
Our SFMTA is proposing that the 21 Hayes should have the following number of bus stops inbound betwixt Central and Masonic:
One, for now.
And the owner of Central Coffee thinks that the 21 Hayes should have the following number of bus stops inbound betwixt Central and Masonic:
Two, at least.
I mean, right? Like if having bus stops just nine houses apart* is such a good thing for “efficiency,” why shouldn’t we add a third stop in the middle of the block so that the stops would be merely four houses apart – is that going to be the next proposal?
(You think I’m a MUNI fanboy? Hardly. FTR, MUNI sucks, hard.)
Anywho, tomorrow is the Big Day for this decision, supposedly.
One hopes the SFMTA will be able to handle this kind of pressure properly.
*I’m srsly. This is the current situation. This is what our poorly-run SFMTA is trying to fix.
The First Rule of Park Club is No Slacklining.
And The Second Rule of Park Club is No Slacklining too.
Except this blanket prohibition isn’t in the SF Park Code.
Isn’t that funny?
The closest thing I can find is a prohibition against damaging trees.
Is that close enough?
JM Legal O
But prove me wrong, kids.
Prove me wrong.
As you’re reading, enjoy some Crystal Method:
When you’re getting about the mean Streets of San Francisco, you should imagine that every driver you encounter is an uninsured, recently-released felon who’s driving an unregistered vehicle. That’s how I’ve been doing it the past quarter-century.
Conversely, when you’re driving, you should imagine that all the peds around you are suicidal. That means that you should expect them to dart out from the sidewalk right into your path.
So if you’re looking at things that way, then it makes sense to stay Hell away from sidewalks.
Thusly. All the way up* Ignatious Heights on outbound Fulton past Masonic:
I’m not saying it’s easy to safely drive an MUNI bus, but I’m saying some drivers are better than others. This driver lacks respect for the SFMTA’s ideologically and politically-skewed impulses, as do I.
Remember, Safety First, Ideologically-Driven “Streetscapes” Last.
*And just look at the traffic coming down the hill – does anybody actually use the suicide lane to turn into the dead-end that is USF, seen camera right? (Maybe USF Security does?) Man, this isn’t how I would handle this stretch of Futon. And, oh yes, SFMTA, you should add a traffic signal on Clayton so the USF dormies can get to their inbound #5 Fulton bus stop, but you already know that, don’t you, SFMTA?