Posts Tagged ‘pedestrians’
IDK, man – 60 foot buses on McAllister?
They’ll be like the Mammoth Car from Speed Racer, non?
They’ll be just like this monster:
Hello, Backwards MUNI. Hey, what are some of the downsides of this plan? Oh, none, none at all? Well, that’s reassuring. But hey MUNI? What about your Only In Frisco “work rules?” Are those a part of MUNIFORWARD? Oh they are, but you just don’t want to deal with them? OK. OK fine.
Anyway, here’s the “big” announcement:
These big monsters look more comfortable on Mission, just saying:
On It Goes…
Our SFMTA Wants to Claim It’s Increasing Parking Up at Twin Peaks, But It’s DECREASING Parking – One Simple Trick!Thursday, July 14th, 2016
Most of the tourists on top of that twin came from all the cars you can see on the left side. But all that parking is gone now, so tourists aren’t going to go to the top of Twin Peaks as much anymore.
What’s that, “good,” you say? Well OK, but why doesn’t the SFMTA just come out and say that? Instead, we get this:
Will any parking be added or removed? No parking is being proposed for removal. Today, informal (illegal) parking takes place at the center of the Figure 8 and occasionally in the outer lane of the roadway. This project will formalize parking at both the center and south intersections, increasing the number of available stalls. Parking in the travel lane will no longer be possible.
So they’re not “removing parking,” they’re simply blocking cars from getting to the parking spaces? And you can’t park on the side of a highway in CA anymore, is that correct, really?
So the real answer to the question Will any parking be added or removed is:
Yes. Hell yes.
But who are these people so uncouth and “informal” that they think they can park their rental cars on the side of the road and walk up a hill for a look-see? Just fucking tourists, that’s all. And it’s not even the same ones day after day and year after year – it’s a constant flow of new people from all over the Bay Area, California, ‘Mericah, and The Rest Of The World. Those are the people the SFMTA and the Rec and Park (RPD – it’s Frisco’s name for the Parks and Recreation Department) are getting rid of, at least on busy days.
Here you go:
Making Room to Enjoy Spectacular Twin Peaks by Aaron Bialick
Friday, April 15, 2016
But the SFMTA isn’t really making anything is it?
Access by foot and bike is pretty limited, the road that loops around the mountain top in a “figure 8” is underused by car traffic and the loop’s intersections are confusing.
OK, well, “access” by foot and bike will still be “pretty limited” after the SFMTA completes the scheme it came up with, right? And let’s take a look at that road, on a dreaded sunny day:
Now, would you say that the east (left) side of this figure 8 is “underused?” No, not at all!
Hey, is being “car-free” a good thing? Like is it as good as being something like herpes-free? One wonders.
On Tuesday, the SFMTA Board of Directors will consider approval of a pilot phase…
This means that the SFMTA is going to do what it wants to do, with the little bit of money it can scrape up to enact its ideology.
The project was shaped with community feedback…
First of all, there’s no community up there atop Twin Peaks. Second of all, if there is, it’s tourists (international, national, regional, and local) and this plan cooked up by the SFMTA is about as anti-tourist as one could imagine.
We’d also create legitimate parking spaces at the center and south intersections to address the illegal parking that already occurs.
WHAT WHAT? So all these People With Cars, the hundreds of People what congregate up there sometimes, they’re parking on the side of the highway “illegitimately?” So it’s legal but it doesn’t comport with SFMTA ideology? Or maybe it’s illegal, but our SFMTA hasn’t seen fit to put up signage what explains things nice and clear for visitors who don’t really have a good handle on English? And so all the scores of places where people park now and, indeed, the past century, all of that was not and is not “legitimate?” Whoo boy.
So the plan is to decrease access IRL and advertise this paint job (that doesn’t add ANYTHING) as one what will “increase” access.
Will that cost anything? Yes.
Will it cost the vaunted SFMTA anything. No, not really. Just a bit of paint…
Our SFMTA’s Plan to “Increase Access” at Twin Peaks WIll Actually Decrease Access – Trying to Figure the Figure 8Friday, April 8th, 2016
IDK, man. On the one hand, SFGov promotes the 49-Mile-Drive, but OTOH, SFGov wants to make it more difficult.
Take a look here down below – where are all these cars going to go after this plan gets going?
The plan, advertised as one what would “increase access,” will decrease access, obviously. Parking areas will be decreased by a whole lot. Oh what’s that, that’s a good thing AFAYAC, Gentle Reader? Well, fine – but let’s agree that taking out scores of places for people to park is going to make for a less-busy Twin Peaks, for better or worse.
And hey, are these people glorious Pedestrians / People With Bikes or are they terrible, horrible People With Cars? One simply can’t tell. Some locals walk and bike up here, but I see very few tourists attempting to do so. Mostly they come by tour bus or car, FWICS.
On It Goes…
Will the SFMTA/RPD’s Car Ban Plan for the East Side of Twin Peaks Increase Access or Decrease Access? Take a Look at This PhotoTuesday, March 15th, 2016
Take a listen, to Phil Matier here.
And then take a look, at what an Ivy Leaguer / Attorney / Former Gavin Newsom Jogging Buddy Who For Some Reason Is In Charge Of Our Park System has to say here:
As he sees it, the plan “increases the recreational accessibility of the area and makes it safer for bicyclists and pedestrians.”
As for safety, we’ll have to wait and see. But as for “accessibility,” this is going to be a Big Fat Decrease.
Here’s the east side of Twin Peaks Boulevard as it looks when the parking lot at Christmas Tree Point is all fulled up:
Where are these people going to go? Not Twin Peaks, that’s for sure. This plan will decrease access, certainly. (Or is the SFMTA going to run a shuttle bus up here? IDTS)
And oh, here’s how Phil Ginsburg attains access himself, using a car:
Proposed Figure 8 for Twin Peaks: Let’s See if SFGov’s Half-Ass Overgoverning is Better than Its Half-Ass UndergoverningWednesday, February 24th, 2016
Losing one lane of traffic should be no problem, but I don’t know where our tourists will be able to park after the SFMTA gets through.
They kind of make things up on their own now.
The fourth of July is prolly the busiest day of the year up here, for the fogworks shows you might be able to see some years
Rec and Park has no idea what it’s doing, as you can see, as per usual. What did they do, just put up some signs and walk away?
Anyway, that’s the update from the Wild West…
Our MASONIC AVENUE STREETSCAPE PROJECT is a GO for Mid-2016, Apparently – The Pros and Cons of This Grand Mal ProjetThursday, January 14th, 2016
Here you go, some non-pdf images that ppl will actually be able to find in six months, you know, after this official link will no longer be working, for whatever reason:
Getting Ready for Construction After a multi-year, community-driven planning and design process to create a safer and better Masonic Avenue, the city is pleased to announce that construction on the Masonic Avenue Streetscape Project will begin in mid-2016!
After all the delays, one doesn’t know how the SFMTA knows that it will actually get going. IRL, what the SFMTA is saying here is that it’s PLANNING on getting going in mid-2016 or later. I’d prolly lose any and all exclamation points as well. Also, instead of “community-driven,” I’d read that as SFMTA-driven. As far as safety is concerned, we’ll have to wait and see. The primary effect will be to slow this part of Masonic down down down. In recent years, pedestrian / cyclist deaths on Masonic have been caused by two severely drunk drivers, and one jaywalking pedestrian. So, will this happily-named “Streetscape!” pork-barrel project prevent DUI drivers? Nope, not at all. Will it lessen the bad effects of drunk driving? I srsly doubt it, but we’ll see. And, since this project’s northern border is at Geary, it will necessarily have little to no effect upon jaywalking Trader Joe’s shoppers at the top of the hill area. As far as whether Masonic will become “better,” well that’s debatable. I’ll concede it might be a better street for some. Of course, the SFMTA, being the inefficient political beast it has become, won’t never concede nothing nohow. It won’t even agree to test out how much these changes will slow down traffic, even for one day. What you’d do is cone off the slow lane of inbound Masonic one random morning and then watch the traffic back up and then spend your time explaining away all the consequences. Obviously, the SFMTA doesn’t want to do that, so it makes excuses. Fine. I’d expect nothing else from it.
San Francisco Public Works will be the managing the construction phase and is in the process of hiring a contractor. This project will bring a variety of new features to Masonic Avenue, including a landscaped median, better lighting, an improved sewer system, raised bikeways, bus stop enhancements, and a new public plaza at Geary Boulevard.
It will also take away some things. What are those, SFMTA? Oh, you don’t want to say? OK fine. One of these effects will be a slow down of MUNI on Masonic during the morning and evening drives. But, because they’ll put in some bus shelters, public “access” to transit will be “improved.” This makes no sense. How much will MUNI be slowed? We’ll have to wait and see. And then, the SFMTA will step up a few years later to spend more pork, more of The People’s Money, to “tune-up” Masonic. So that’s a double-win for the SFMTA, even though it’s not clear that the current plan will be a net “improvement.”
These enhancements are all in support of San Francisco’s Vision Zero goal of eliminating all traffic deaths in the city.
This is a simple definition of VisionZero. The complicated version is that, somehow, without really even trying, SF will miraculously eliminate all transportation deaths in SF County by the year 2024 and all in years future. If you acknowledge that this impossible goal is in fact impossible, then there are many positions at the SFMTA for which you’d be ineligible. Oh well.
If you have any questions about construction, please contact Alex Murillo at Alex.M.Murillo@sfdpw.org or 415.558.5296. Parking Management The SFMTA’s recent launch of Residential Permit Parking Area Q has helped keep parking available for local residents and businesses—additional evaluation data will be available in the coming months.
As a general rule, our SFMTA tends to favor Masonic Avenue area residents vs. the current users of Masonic and to a ridiculous degree. JMO.
To offset some of the parking being repurposed…
What would a neutral word be for “repurposed?” Would it be “eliminated?” Yes it would.
by the Masonic Avenue Streetscape Project, the SFMTA is evaluating nearby streets for opportunities to increase on-street parking supply and will be engaging the community for feedback.
So, our SFMTA has been saving up its energy to “create” parking spaces exactly at the time it wants to hush complaints of eliminating parking spaces? Apparently. Looking at the map on the second page, some of these blocks would appear to be non-starters. Our SFMTA certainly approves of illegal double-parking on Central Ave, but this map would make a hash of that, oh well.
These efforts are in addition to the 20 spots already added on Fulton between Central and Baker as part of the separate Muni Forward 5 Fulton Rapid Project.
Our SFMTA boasts of putting in bike lanes on Fulton, and then pushing them towards the center of Fulton, but then come two blocks of 90 degree parking, the least cyclist-friendly thing I can imagine. But this placated residents and that appears to be one of our SFMTA’s Most Important Things.
And on it goes. If you want to read about Masonic, start here and spend all day if you want, I don’t care. Anyway, that’s the update for 2016. Traffic’s going to get a lot worse as soon as parts of Masonic start getting shut down and then it won’t get much better after construction is completed, oh well.
If you have any questions about potential added parking near Masonic Avenue, please contact Maurice Growney at Maurice.Growney@sfmta.com or 415.701.4549. For more information: sfmta.com/masonic MASONIC AVENUE STREETSCAPE PROJECT N Masonic Avenue Area Proposed Parking Changes Potential Back-In Angled Parking Potential 90 Degree Parking Forthcoming Back-In Angled Parking (Legislated 2012)