Muni Forward: Chestnut Street

Plans to redesign Chestnut Street, which could include the addition of a transit only lane, traffic signals, and other traffic calming measures, along with the loss of parking, have Marina residents riled up.  Or in the words of a reader who attended yesterday’s open house to discuss the project: “I’ve seen more polite crowds at a witch burning.”

A piece of the San Francisco Municipal Transit Agency’s ‘Muni Forward’ program, the proposed Chestnut Street redesign would shave 4 minutes from the travel time for the 30/30X through the corridor, in part by removing a number of existing stops.

The Marina Community Association is slated to address the project at its spring meeting on April 21.  Don’t forget your matches or extinguishers.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Bertie Anglis

    I made the mistake of driving down Chestnut the other night around 8pm. There were so many double-parked Uber/Lyft cars on both sides of the street that it was like an obstacle course. I don’t have an opinion on the proposal above, but some changes need to be made to improve the flow of traffic.

    • Posted by S

      this is a great point. For all the hate and people thinking bike lanes cause traffic, nothing is said about the thousands of additional vehicles circling the streets for these “ride-share” services. there’s no regulation on how many of these cars can be on the road at once, they’re stopping all over the place, and they’re distracted half the time playing with their phones.

      • Posted by Hunter

        THIS !!! ^^^^

      • Posted by RobBob

        What you’re saying is that SFPD needs to crack down on using a cellphone while driving, and that they can do so by using the Uber app to summon drivers.

      • Posted by Brad

        It’s not just rideshare services — it’s cops, delivery drivers, little old ladies, and bros. In short, anyone with a car is guilty at one point or another. It causes traffic all over the city, yet nothing is done about it.

        • Posted by BTinSF

          YES! Let’s ban traffic so it’ll be easier to DRIVE. Er, wait a minute . . . .

    • Posted by BTinSF

      “Calming” means impeding the traffic flow. Didn’t you feel calmer after navigating the obstacle course? The MTA believes you should have.

    • Posted by Wai Yip Tung

      All Muni Buses now suppose to have transit lane enforcement cameras. If a Muni bus weaves around your parked car in a transit lane, you will get a ticket in the mail. The base fine is $110. I’d like to see the enforcement in action.

  2. Posted by moto mayhem

    this is absolutely stupid plan. chestnut st is perfect as it is. as a matter of fact, i would rather propose taking muni off clement. lombard is 1 block away. sidewalks are plenty wide as is. and no one drives on chestnut for the great traffic flow.

    • Posted by iknowchestnut

      Completely agree. Move the 30 to Lombard, all “problems” solved. The pedestrian bulbs will mean that all traffic will halt behind a stopped muni bus, vs. the bus pulling to the curb. This is a solution looking for a problem.

      • Posted by moto mayhem

        “This is a solution looking for a problem” welcome to SF transportation planning. provide solutions when theres no problem and forget about providing a real transformative solution when there is one

      • Posted by John Murphy

        Except for that tiny problem of people wanting to take the 30/30X to downtown having to cross Lombard to get to their bus stop. But who cares about the little people.

        • Posted by Fishchum

          What about the people who currently cross Lombard to get to Chestnut to take the 30/30X?

    • Posted by busrider

      said like someone who has little or no personal use for transit; waiting for a bus on Chestnut Street is much more pleasant (and useful with many nearby retail options) than waiting for a bus on Lombard with its congestion, the noise and air pollution of this congestion, and its dearth of retail. Chestnut Street is a destination. Shouldn’t Muni riders be able to directly access this important commercial street?

      • Posted by moto mayhem

        its 1 block away. no need to be lazy

    • Posted by Marina JHS Alumnus

      Yes, who cares about the people who get run over crossing Lombard? They are beneath a Marina resident’s notice! Who cares about the cost of wiring Lombard? It all will come out of other districts’ tax money! And the 30 will be slowed down waiting for the traffic lights while crossing Lombard, but drivers don’t care (they don’t take Muni anyway). And most Marina residents think they’re better than the rest of the city, so what does this matter?

  3. Posted by DoDo

    Dedicated bus lanes, painted in RED, are a joke. Drive down Market and you will see it filled with cars with blaintant disregard .

    • Posted by S

      pretty soon the cameras on MUNI will be allowing tickets to be sent to the drivers by mail.

      • Posted by Sierrajeff

        Yay! Big Brother’s thought of everything! Who needs the discretion of a human enforcement office when the HAL-9000 can ticket witih reckless abandon!

        • Posted by Joel

          There is a human reviewing all of the captured video footage. (Cue complaints about overpaid city workers… never can win, huh?)

          • Posted by Brian M

            Maybe we can off shore the video review to Myanmar? Or maybe allow a “taskrabit” service to piecework out the process, with the “service” extracting its 50% rentier fees!

        • Posted by Matt

          It takes a certain level of privileged entitlement to pine for the “discretion of a human enforcement officer.”

      • Posted by anotherSF

        I welcome this enforcement of the laws.

  4. Posted by BobN

    Here’s a thought. Remove the stops.

    Then stop.

    • Posted by Sierrajeff

      Right!? If removing certain stops is what results in the majority of time savings, then eliminate such stops – and don’t do the rest, which is most of what’s riling up the residents.

    • Posted by badlydrawnbear

      Muni is there to help those with limited mobility get around the city.

      It might not seem a big deal to eliminate routes or stops to a healthy adult but for the elderly, people with physical disabilities, or those experiencing a temporary health issue that limits their mobility it is a whole different story.

      Reducing routes and stops means also reducing the independence and quality of life to thousands of residents.

      The ‘hardships’ of drivers taking up 20 feet of road to move a single passenger is trivial compared to residents of SF for whom Muni is a lifeline.

      • Posted by Fishchum

        Please, give it a rest. There is literally a bus stop on EVERY BLOCK westbound on Chestnut between Fillmore and Broderick. If your needs are such that eliminating a few stops and walking an extra block on a flat street is that taxing, consider taking some sort of ambulatory or assisted care transportation.

        • Posted by Mark

          More like every block west of Van Ness. In some cases you have bus stops on the same block at either end. This is one of the reasons why it takes 30-40 min to get from the Marina to Union Square (including the North Beach/Chinatown traffic mess).

          So, according to the article 33,000 people use this route on a daily basis. Sounds like it warrants extension of the Central Subway from Chinatown through North Beach and west to the Presidio under Lombard. Stations: Presidio Main Post, Lombard/Fillmore, Lombard/Van Ness, North Beach, Chinatown, Union Square/Powell. Cut travel down to about 10 min from the Presidio to Market St.

          Pros: relieve congestion on Chestnut Street; subway will attract additional riders from Cow Hollow (3 short blocks to Union St.); encourage transit-oriented development along Lombard/Van Ness
          Cons: none

          In comparison, the entire VTA light rail in all of its 42+ miles barely carries the same number of passengers daily.

          • Posted by busrider

            Yes! Extend the central subway!

          • Posted by Jake

            “33,000 customers” means 33,000 rides or trips. It doesn’t mean 33,000 people. I’m all for building more subways, but each station and tunnel segment costs hundreds of millions of dollars and there are other routes with far more traffic today and far more growth planned than the Presidio to North Beach corridor. The ‘con’ to your proposal is that there are much higher priorities for the limited funds.

          • Posted by Jake

            30 Stockton inbound onboards about 2k passengers/day in the Marina (pdf of sfmta passenger counts at namelink). The entire 30 Stockton all the way through Chinatown and SoMa only carries 28k and that is counting both directions, according to SFMTA. Wonder where or how they got a number like 33k and what does it actually mean.

          • Posted by Mark

            More like no funds in place. As for 33,000 customers I’m going by the data provided.

          • Posted by Jake

            No, you misinterpreted what they mean by “customers”. They don’t mean individual people, as you implied. They mean the number of people that board a bus. That is the only stats they have and the ones they publish. If you ride the bus to and from work, then you get counted twice: one person, two rides aka “customers” aka trips.

            Do you have any idea how many people live in the Marina? Hint, it is less than 33,000, much less.

            BTW, the VTA passenger count is done the same way. And for BART. And Caltrain.

            Also, there are billions of dollars of funds. But they are federal funds. And we have to compete for them, as we have with winning bids for the Central Subway and Van Ness BRT. Your proposal wouldn’t stand a chance against the much more attractive bids for those federal dollars.

          • Posted by Mark

            Trust me, I know there are more important transit projects that need to fight for funds. And yes, I know that 33,000 people don’t live in the Marina so you don’t need to hint.

        • Posted by sfjhawk

          sheesh. someone hasn’t called their grandparents lately.

      • Posted by Dr. House

        No, Muni is there to help ALL of us get around the city. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. Everyone is helped by faster times. If you can’t walk a block, a bus isn’t the right mode of transit anyway. Paratransit is subsidized by taxpayers and exists for those disabled people. There isn’t muni service on every street anyway so walking is inevitable.
        It’s a matter of everyone waiting 20 minutes for a bus nearly every time, and getting to your destination in 45 minutes (usual SF experience currently thanks to all the “hyper-local” routes with stops every 10 feet), versus walking 5 minutes and waiting 5 minutes average, and getting to your destination in 20.

        Or I guess MUNI can just stick to the same old stop spacing and 8MPH average speed, and people will continue to abandon it in favor of ride share services. I can get anywhere faster than muni could ever take me, with only 1-2 extraneous stops instead of 30, by using Lyft Line, and only pay $5-7.

        • Posted by moto mayhem

          take Muni off chestnut. Lombard is a perct route and 1 block away. Make more express routes on Lombard.

          Muni is becoming somewhat irrelavant for the majority (but not all) of Marina-ites due to commercial buses now. Muni sucked so bad an alternative came it, just like with the cabs and uber/lyft. Until a real form of transformative transportation (subway) makes its way to be widely used in SF (Van Ness and Geary at a minimum), people will look to alternatives to our pathetic bus system. MTA needs to think 2030 at this point. Are we all going to be on bicycles and crap buses in 15 yrs? No. the rate of bike commuting may go up to 5-6%, bus ridership will not go up, and the number of cars in the city will be higher (but thankfully many more ecofriendly). Either plan for a transformative solution that requires hard decisions and some foresight, or make the city mreo friendly for cars. Bikes and Buses is not a long term solution

  5. Posted by iknowsnow

    This is why we can’t have nice things. Like a functioning mass transit system.

    • Posted by Orland

      Depends on what the meaning of “this” is.

  6. Posted by Fishchum

    So would dedicated bus lanes on Chestnut Street mean the removal of parking spots? I’m just not seeing enough street width to handle parking, a BRT lane and an auto traffic lane in each direction.

    • Posted by iknowsnow

      The very first sentence in the article states – “along with the loss of parking”. So yes, removal of some parking spots.

    • Posted by Alai

      The picture shows parking.

      I don’t think you can call this BRT.

      • Posted by sfgirl

        Alternative B discretely hints at removing all parking spots from Monday to Friday from 7 – 10 AM between Divisadero and Van Ness. which would involve the loss of 145 spots from 12 entire blocks.

        SFMTA has downplayed those numbers by requiring you to search through a separate page for each affected block of the project in the Documents & Reports section of their website.

        I’m sure locals were be steamrolled like the Polk St neighbors were overruled. Just eliminating a few bus stops would save riders time and taxpayers tons of money, but that isn’t the goal.

        • Posted by Orland

          So what’s your concern: eliminating parking or improved transit?

  7. Posted by EcceMorons

    “Muni Forward! Residents Backward!”

    • Posted by busrider

      We all win if Muni becomes more reliable and faster. Even people who never ride Muni win. Better public transit results in higher ridership – which can lead to less congestion, better air quality, fewer traffic accidents, and many more improvements shared by all.

  8. Posted by MarinaBoy

    I think some of the plan is perfect, removing some spots is the way to go. I am not sure about the transit only lane I don’t think that is needed.

    • Posted by Fishchum

      I agree with you about the removal of some of the bus stops. On a flat street like Chestnut, there is simply no reason to have a bus stop on every. Single. Block.

      • Posted by Sierrajeff

        Ditto the 31 in the Tenderloin. WTF. Just makes the sojurn through the Tenderloin that much more depressing… stop / lurch / beep beep beep / lurch / roll 100 feet / stop / lurch / beep beep beep… sigh.

        • Posted by iknowsnow

          I swear several years ago there was a proposal to eliminate some stops on the bus lines going through the TL. (Might be been the 38? Or 38 plus 31?)

          Anyways, the usual suspects whined and complained about the overwhelming hardship it would impose on TL residents to have to walk an additional block to get to their bus stop. So into the trash can the proposal went.

          And this is why we can’t have nice things.

  9. Posted by sassyboyfrisco

    Why not ONE WAY??? Chestnut and Polk are 2 great examples of congested SF streets that could be 1 way to accommodate efficiently 2 vehicle lanes + 1 bicycle lane in a safer way.

    • Posted by S

      one way streets make cars go faster which defeats the purpose if they’re trying to make them safer. That’s why they’re trying to make more one way streets back into two-way streets south of market.

      • Posted by Sierrajeff

        They *can* make traffic faster, but they don’t have to… whereas they almost always improve traffic *flow*, by cutting down on the number of cross-traffic turns.

        e.g., Newberry Street in Boston (a very similar neighborhood, in fact) is one-way, and virtually impossible to envision otherwise – but no one would call Newberry a fast street! Ditto the cross-streets in Manhattan – making them all one-way allows for a reduction to one travel lane, while still allowing parking on both sides plus a bike lane.

        • Posted by Hunter

          Then why not just outlaw left turns on these streets instead? Maintain safety AND eliminate cross-traffic turning.

    • Posted by moto mayhem

      chestnut doesnt need a bike lane

  10. Posted by S

    the transit only lane seems to only apply in the AM during peak hours. I’m sure the loss of parking must be minimal – probably just due to the bulb outs – but if they’re removing some of the bus stops maybe they’ll add a couple in. Either way, it’s not the end of the world.

    • Posted by iknowsnow

      Don’t tell Marina residents that. Their privilege is being threatened.

      • Posted by iknowchestnut

        They just don’t want Muni screwing up their street. Seems fair. If the local residents don’t want the “improvement” why force it down their throats. Use the money saved elsewhere in the system where residents/riders actually want the “improvements”

        • Posted by Frisco

          It’s not their street. It’s a city street. The city has bigger problems to solve that might disrupt someone’s access to their favorite parking spot.

          • Posted by iknowchestnut

            If the residents (and therefore riders) don’t think there is a problem, and they don’t want a change to the streets around them, and “The city has biigger problems to solve”, then why try to force it on a community that doesn’t want it. Other areas of the city are allowed to object to changes in their neighborhoods, Marina residents have that same right. The 30, for the portion on Chestnut, is not a major transit problem for the city, or the local residents.

          • Posted by Brad

            Agreed. Just because the route travels through the Marina doesn’t make it the only neighborhood affected by poor service.

          • Posted by anon

            The “community” is the city’s residents as a whole. I very MUCH want this project, so my opinion should count too.

          • Posted by moto mayhem

            but they are not solving a problem. there is no problem there.

          • Posted by John Murphy

            Presumably the riders were showing up to complain about the 30 running 4 minutes faster?

        • Posted by BTinSF

          Because they can and are in the habit, having done it to Polk St.

        • Posted by moto mayhem

          agree. the local residents should have the say here.

          • Posted by Orland

            If typical, all the squealing being done is by a small minority motivated solely by narrow self-interest.

        • Posted by We're All Doomed

          It’s not their street.

          The Marina needs a good reaming anyways. It’s not real San Francisco, it’s PhonySF, and they can stick their Leap buses and their white entitlement up their designer [Removed by Editor]

          • Posted by Fishchum

            Wow, aren’t you open-minded and tolerant. I’ll be sure and let the locals I know in the Marina who grew up there how they’re not part of the “real” San Francisco.

      • Posted by Futurist

        You seem to use that word, privilege, a lot.

        Saying continually, serves no purpose in your comments.

        • Posted by iknowsnow

          I use it a lot because SF residents display it a lot.

  11. Posted by San FronziScheme (formerly known as lol)

    Chestnut is one of the several San Francisco “main streets” that dot our landscape. As such it should be more pedestrian friendly. We should keep all the stops signs. Muni should be on a parallel street. Sidewalks should be widened. Speed bumps should slow down traffic.

    • Posted by anon

      This. A thousand times this.

    • Posted by moto mayhem

      im sorry, but im on chestnut all the time. it is completely pedestrian friendly. do people really not think it is? are pedestrians scared on chestnut st? the sidewalks are plenty wide. the cars are going very slow already.

      • Posted by San FronziScheme

        It really depends on the time of day. There are tons of people looking for parking for their brunch on Sunday morning and they sometimes zoom around to get bcd into the smaller streets in the Marina.

        Also, Some cars will also be very confused or impatient at some crossings and force their way.

        It’s generally a very civilized place but it could used a bit of urban planning to make it better.

      • Posted by anon

        The cars are going slow, but left turns should be prohibited. I don’t know how many times I’ve almost been run over crossing the street by someone trying to sneak a left turn through.

      • Posted by Mark

        I’m on Chestnut regularly as well. Peds have it pretty good. Parking sucks and most SF drivers know to avoid looking for parking spots on Chestnut at peak times, or driving on the street at all. Transit sucks (see my respond above about extending the CS).

      • Posted by busrider

        Chestnut’s sidewalks can be packed. Pedestrians often have too little space. The sidewalks can be very congested, like on Haight Street and so many others. Decades ago, when cars didn’t yet dominate the city, sidewalks were much wider – especially along commercial streets. Then streets were widened (and sidewalks were narrowed) to create more traffic lanes and accommodate more fast moving automobile traffic. Now, finally, neighborhoods are slowly being given back to the people.

        • Posted by Mark

          Save the dramatics, please. Have you been downtown? If so, have you noticed how narrow the streets and sidewalks are? Decades before cars dominated the city they were this size.

          • Posted by anon

            The buildings were shorter then.

          • Posted by S

            like busrider said, sidewalks were narrowed in order to allocate more space to moving cars. This happened on a lot of streets actually, all over the city. Sidewalks 10-12 feet wide were pretty standard.

        • Posted by Moto mayhem

          Sidewalks are wide and not packed. I’m there all the time

          • Posted by anon

            Which makes it even more odd that you’ve never seen the sidewalks packed.

          • Posted by Fishchum

            Clearly you’re not. I live there and it only takes about 3 or 4 people walking abreast to block the sidewalk.

          • Posted by Jake

            I think Chestnut in the Marina has 12-foot wide sidewalks, which seems about medium wide for a local neighborhood business street. I’ve seen some queues for coffee/bagels/etc crowd the street, but nothing like in the CBD. Marina tends so suburban in it’s affections.

            Some Marina residential streets have sidewalks at least 15-feet wide, eg, Scott. Those streets are wide too given how little traffic they have. Anyone know why the Marina has such wide residential streets and sidewalks?

          • Posted by Moto mayhem

            You guys are really complaining when at the busiest of times you have to squeeze around 3 people on a 12 ft sidewalk. It’s never “crowded”. How much personal space do you need on the sidewalk? Why do so many people complain about such minor non life altering stuff?

    • Posted by SFRealist

      “Speed bumps should slow down traffic.”

      Are you saying that traffic moves too quickly on Chestnut? If so, you’ve never been there

      • Posted by San FronziScheme

        I responded to Moto Mayhem. The pedestrian crossings can be a challenge sometimes.

        This crossing is often a bit messy because drivers just left from the Steiner stop sign. They’re accelerating and meeting more pedestrians. Sometimes the Steiner crossing will be blocked by a line of cars that are stopped at Mallorca. Then there’s the Fillmore mess when rush hour meets shoppers.

        There could be a smarter redesign. Just saying.

    • Posted by Orland

      Everything except removal of MUNI. *Of course* transit should be a part of the Marina’s “downtown Main Street.”

      • Posted by San FronziScheme

        Delivery trucks and buses and cars looking for space and pedestrians popping up at every corner plus the occasional cyclist. Delivery trucks are not going anywhere, neither are pedestrians or cyclists. Then what gives? Just like on Polk people will drive there. MUNI could be 100% on Lombard which has 2×3 lanes + parking. There’s much more to work with on Lombard and it’s gonna be dirty and noisy forever anyway.

  12. Posted by eddy

    They shouldn’t do anything until the work on the GGB corridor is completed and the traffic patterns on Lombard are better understood. There are significant alternations to the traffic flows and access to the Marina Green, Crissy Field and the Presidio, and this will alter things greatly.

    Personally, I support eliminating parking and making chestnut street more transit, bike and people friendly.

    • Posted by eh

      How dare you suggest disrupting the city strategy of alternating between potholes and “construction and 30% less parking everywhere”

    • Posted by moto mayhem

      why do you consider it not people friendly. as someone who is there a lot, i think it is the most people friendly street for walking in all of SF. if it aint broke, dont fix it

      • Posted by John Murphy

        i think it is the most people friendly street for walking in all of SF

        Damned by faint praise

      • Posted by anon

        Cole Street is much nicer for walking. Fewer cars.

  13. Posted by Long-time San Franciscan

    This proposal is completely ass-backwards. I am fine with expanding sidewalks, and removing some parking, but keep MUNI away from there. Put it on Lombard. Just like they didn’t pick 17th street for the transit only lane, they picked 16th street – transit only lanes on Chestnut make no sense at all. And yes, stop stopping every block.

    With such geniuses at the helm, this city’s mass transit system really doesn’t stand a chance.

    • Posted by We're All Doomed

      with [people] like you crapping on Muni no wonder it sucks. [Removed by Editor]

      • Posted by Amewsed

        Umm, MUNI buses indeed suck for passengers and other drivers. Ever seen a MUNI bus park almost sideways at a stop causing all the cars behind it to sit and wait until it moves again.

        I would gladly take the MUNI underground subway, done it for decades. Pass on the buses.

      • Posted by Long-time San Franciscan

        Yes, it is because we criticize public servant that they suck. You logic is iron-clad.

  14. Posted by Bob the Builder

    The geniuses at the helm at MTA are, increasingly these days, former Bike Coalition volunteers now safely ensconced in comfortable fully-benefited, fully-pensioned jobs while still pursuing their former political agendas which are to force change on the rest of us for the good of humanity.

    • Posted by Orland

      Name names with resumes.

      • Posted by Anon

        I just did a quick Google and came up with:

        Kate McCarthy, formerly in fundraising at the SF Bike Coalition, now at the MTA on the Van Ness BRT project team.
        Kristin Smith, former employee SF Bike Coalition, now Marketing Manager SF MTA.
        Neal Patel, former employee of Bike Coalition, now in charge of MTA Livable Streets Program
        Adam Thornley, former employee of Bike Coalition, now at Serco running the 43 million dollar contract from the MTA to “manage” San Francisco city parking meters.

        Now I could post a lot more, but you get the picture. (Note…none of these people have any type of transit engineering or urban infrastructure engineering backgrounds or qualifications)

        • Posted by Orland

          Not impressed at this point.

          • Posted by Anon

            Despite declining Bike Coalition membership (dues collected 2013 of $74,000….dues collected 2009 of $333,165)…the SF Bike Coalition has been able to make up for declining dues by receiving funding from the San Francisco city government. In 2009 alone they received $305,730 alone. (items included that year had costs for items like $99,000 for Bike to Work Day, and $107,800 for “community outreach” regarding planning for Treasure Island). It would seem the former Bike Coalition Employees are giving government funds to provide “outreach” to fight “the war against cars”. The MTA has not released full figures since 2009 despite being asked by Matier and Ross.

            In addition to the names listed above, I would like to know why a former Bike Coalition fundraiser is now a manager at SFPark in charge of regulating parking garages and street parking? My favorite is former SFBC director Leah Shahum, who left her bike post after receiving a financial grant to live in Europe and “study” biking, but she is now back and heading up “Vision Zero”. Can I get a financial grant to go drive European cars for 6 months, and then come back and get a position to promote reducing automobile traffic congestion in the city?

  15. Posted by We're All Doomed

    oh the epic white whine every time they try to speed up Muni and make it more reliable. then the echo white whine of people whining about how Muni sucks.

    [Removed by Editor]

    • Posted by Amewsed

      Holy crap! Did you forget to take your calming meds? Leave the cougars on Chestnut alone. Trust me, they are not hitting on you.

    • Posted by San FronziScheme

      I was about to copypaste this post by replacing “white” with other ethnic qualifiers but realized I would end up on the front page of the SF Comical.

      You need help.

  16. Posted by BobN

    It needs palm trees….

  17. Posted by TheGuy

    The reason they will never move the bus routes to Lombard is very simple. Putting up new overhead wires on Lombard for the 30 would cost at least $10 million, so unless there’s some generous donors in the Marina willing to make that happen, then you can just forget about it.

    • Posted by Can't Think of Cool Name

      @TheGuy, why can’t the buses be swapped out to non-electric?

      • Posted by cwilly

        30x doesn’t run on the wires.

  18. Posted by ttt

    wow, i’m impressed by the stupidity of this proposal. the only thing that makes sense is getting rid of some of the stops.

    move the 30/30X to lombard and give lombard BRT lanes in the middle (just like the ones planned for van ness)

    of course the real solution is to skip BRT and build an actual subway, but that will never happen.

    • Posted by badlydrawnbear

      Muni is there to help those with limited mobility get around the city.

      It might not seem a big deal to eliminate routes or stops to a healthy adult but for the elderly, people with physical disabilities, or those experiencing a temporary health issue that limits their mobility it is a whole different story.

      Reducing routes and stops means also reducing the independence and quality of life to thousands of residents.

      The ‘hardships’ of drivers taking up 20 feet of road to move a single passenger is trivial compared to residents of SF for whom Muni is a lifeline.

      • Posted by Amewsed

        I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the instability of a MUNI bus driven by a marginal non-fireable driver (per union rules) is more hazardous and dangerous for the elderly and disabled folks. An elderly family friend was injured when she was whip sawed and thrown against the floor when the bus driver lurched and then slammed on the brakes. My uncle (who had vision problems) fell off the L Taraval when disembarking and the doors closed on him. I advise all of my family members not to ride the buses (okay for the subway.)

  19. Posted by jlasf

    I never drive Chestnut as a fast route. I expect that it will be held up by pedestrians at every corner.
    If I want to get to the GG Bridge, I take Lombard or Marina. Chestnut feels like a lively street, with a great
    mix of stores, restaurants and movie theaters. It’s not a through street. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

  20. Posted by Can't Think of Cool Name

    By my count, there are now three very real proposals (2nd Street, Polk, Chestnut) where major neighborhood arteries are up for [debatable] traffic calming redesigns.

    Not sure what to say, but to me the three proposals sure don’t sound very appealing as currently envisioned to those who know the locations the best. Seems odd MTA would be charging ahead given that perspective.

    • Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

      You betcha. The Polk street plan has been watered down so much it is nearly Coors Light. It pleases neither the parking first crowd nor the bike/ped advocates.

  21. Posted by SFredtape

    I bet if Muni proposed Leap, Chariot, and tech bus only lanes, the Marina would jump to fund the project. Who needs public transportation? Silly poor people, they don’t exist in the Marina.

    • Posted by Fishchum

      Wrong. But keep on spouting nonsense like this.

    • Posted by Amewsed

      MUNI is probably threatened by the proliferation of these private shuttles. It actually needs full-fare paying passengers to subsidize the fare cheats, low-income seniors, disabled, and youth who ride for free. Oh look, it is like the same argument that new market rate units help subsidize all those bmr units.

  22. Posted by eddy

    It is people friendly. I think they should go even further like they have in times square and put seating and maybe even close it down entirely during the commercial stretch except for cross traffic and a bus corridor. Put a parking garage where the wells fargo branch sits.

  23. Posted by Anon

    I applaud the fact that the original proposals floated for dedicated bike lanes on Chestnut ( similar to Polk) were removed. I also like the fact the MTA is starting to focus on the larger user groups of city streets which is pedestrians, public transit and cars. Chestnut is such a vibrant street I am not sure it truly needed to be fixed however. Street construction does impact small local owned businesses that may not have the staying power to last through the duration of the construction.

  24. Posted by david vartanoff

    yes, it was a proposal for the 38 local. Muni spent many planner days counting riders, counting delays which ANY 38 rider could have explained in under an hour, and then devised the stop elimination in the densest area of SF . All thjey needed to do was change the ratio of locals to Limiteds and the majority of passenmgers would have benefitted. Simple/effective.

  25. Posted by Hank

    I live on Chestnut and these changes are long overdue. A bus stop on every block is madness. Cars roll through stop signs. With traffic signals the cars will stop. This will hopefully redirect cars to Lombard.

  26. Posted by WOW

    Is everyone crazy? 117 comments so far and blood pressures raised beyond safety for a proposal that will save only 4 minutes of travel time. Maybe 10/15 minutes and it could be taken seriously. But 4 un- measureable minutes! This should be a nonstarter from the git go.

    • Posted by Anon

      @wow…even worse than the Chestnut results would be the Van Ness BRT which may create travel time savings of 2 minutes if one were to ride from Market to Lombard. 2 minutes!? (It has been pointed out that the possible time savings would be achieved more by the reduction in MUNI stops, than by reducing street parking and vehicle lanes. ) But there is a forecasted 5 years of road construction with 2 lanes or more being blocked off for extended periods. I noticed MTA representative Andy Thornily’s name for the upcoming neighborhood meeting, he is a former employee of the SF Bike Coalition, and is now going to be speaking about car sharing? Is there anyone at the MTA who has actually studied and received a traffic and safety engineering education, or have they all just put in their time on Critical Mass bike rides?

  27. Posted by bus rider

    This bus rider is glad that Muni is finally improving. BRT on Van Ness is needed. Stop elimination, transit signal priority, and other measures make a noticeable difference for every rider. And all non-riders and the SFMTA/SFBC maligners also benefit from Muni upgrades since better, more reliable and faster Muni service results in more transit riders, less congestion, more efficient use of tax dollars, and much more.

  28. Posted by Anon94123

    The private hipster LEAP bus service has been stopped from running between the Marina and FiDi by the State of California. It seems Leap Transit forgot to post proof of liability insurance, as well as causing numerous issues to be raised when they REMOVED wheelchair accessibility from their busses and installed bar seating instead. I predict they will try to get around this by making the transit service a private members “club” type operation, but in the meantime, it is back to MUNI only for Marina dwellers. (click on name for service suspension announcement)

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles