The genteel people of Woodside Ca

Per various mailing lists, someone in Woodside is laying tacks on Kings Mountain Road, clearly to cause flats for cyclists. Flatting on that descent at speed would be "not good" Visible - 40 of the 43 tacks we encountered on the post-ride ride up King's Mtn Rd today - all in groups of 6-8 tacks, in the uphill bike lane. 1/4 - 1/3 mi apart, from 1/2 mi past Huddart Park Entrance up to 1/2 mi from Skyline Blvd - 7 groups of tacks total. Someone is sending bikers a "message" ... so let's be careful on that road. The 3 tacks that caused flats (me, and 2 other noon-Meetup riders) were tossed before we started collecting them for safety and evidence.

Fell/Oak bike lane - inside the minds

There is a "Petition" of sorts regarding the potential changes to Fell/Oak to provide separated bike lanes. I consider the project to be very important - this short stretch of pavement from Scott to Baker links the very bike friendly Wiggle route with the off road path down the panhandle to JFK drive in the park which was always pretty sedate but will now have a separated bike lane. It's always amusing to check out internet comments, but this petition has some pure gold.

I live in the neighborhood and the problem is the gas station and people who drive down Fell street with total disregard for the residents of the area. Fell Street traffic moves at a fast pace, what needs to be address is the speed limit and bike and pedestrian safety. There should be no right hand turns on a red at Fell and Divisadero. Penalizing the residents of the area whom do happen to drive and park in their neighborhood is wrong.

Translation: I live on Fell and want the people driving through here to slow down, but I want parking for myself. I want a lowered speed limit on this street that people will magically obey, but when the original plan called for removing a lane - which would actually lower the speeds on Fell, I protested it.

I've lived in the neighborhood for 22 years and eliminating my parking spaces would greatly affect me since my house does not have garage and I can not afford $250/month rental for a parking space.

It would be a huge hardship for me to have to pay $250 a month to rent a space for my car given my 2 Bedroom rent controlled apartment is $245 a month.

I do agree that Fell and Oak have become dangerous with people driving too fast and Ted & Al's towing constantly double parking AT RUSH HOUR causing massive frustration, confusion and back ups. I don't see how removing the parking spaces will solve this problem.

I don't care if removing the parking spaces will solve this problem. Fixed.

My car is part of my family and i already spend hours each week looking for parking.

In this stress filled world, most people do not get the chance to spend hours each week with their family. Fortunately for this person, a lack of parking has solved this problem - hours weekly with "part of my family".

I think the current Fell St bike lane is perfectly fine.. The same kind of bicycle lane should be placed on Oak street. I don't believe that the current bike lane is hazardous for cyclists. A more serious problem in this neighborhood is the large number of cyclists on the sidewalk. In both directions and on both sides of the street. I have almost been run down several times coming out of my front door or going around a corner.

Please remove parking on someone else's street for a bike lane but not mine. I think the bike lane on my street is perfectly safe for cyclists, despite the fact they are so scared shitless riding on my street that they ride on the sidewalk. Come to think of it, that makes it safe for cyclists, but it's hell on pedestrians. Wait...

Comment on Caltrain fare changes...

An anonymous commenter writes...

Now the new fees have me pissed. My old dual 8-ride system is going away so I'll have to purchase a 4-zone monthly. This ups the monthly payment by $20 and yearly up significantly since there are 2 or more months when I travel much less than the value of a monthly - so I have to go back to managing the account which is a pain in the ass. Also pisses me off that Lawrence is costing me ~$50 a month to cross that zone boundary. Makes me almost want to say fuck them and only do a 3-zone. I don't think I've ever been checked between Lawrence and Sunnyvale.

And Caltrain thinks this fare increase will work out OK.

A few things to note.

While Caltrain has noted that 6% or so of their passengers use 8 rides (down from 16% before Clipper), they don't give any real clue as to the nuances of this number. A larger percentage of riders switch to 8 rides a couple of months per year, most notably December where many riders take a week or more off from work. So the total population impacted is much higher than 6% (plus the 10% that were already impacted). And as you can see, this population is not happy.

It also underscores the level of math that riders do regarding the amount of money they spend on Caltrain. The accounting can go down to the nickel. On the other hand, it's a very rare bird that understands "If I drive at 8 AM, I burn an extra half gallon of gas on 101 than if I drive at 11 AM, because of time I spend idling in traffic". The cost of driving is very abstract. We know quite clearly that very few amortize the life of their transmission when calculating the cost to drive 40 miles to Mountain View.

It's less clear, but I theorize it is absolutely true that drivers also have a pretty static view of how much it costs them in gasoline, the one marginal cost they actually consider when comparing driving to public transit. They think "I get X miles per gallon" and "pay Y dollars per gallon". Time spend idling in traffic is neglected, and the price of gas is frozen at an optimistic level. They decide "It costs me $7 roundtrip to drive" and that number rarely changes because they aren't getting feedback from the car that "because you missed the exit and had to circle an extra 5 miles, you burned an extra dollar in gas". But they sure as hell remember every time they forget to tag off Clipper!

With the internal biases in calculation stacked against the use of transit, fare increases like this can be deadly to ridership levels.

Caltrain Fare Increase Hearing, Feb 2, 10 AM, San Carlos HQ

Here is the agenda item for the Caltrain Fare Increase (also known as "Change to the Codified Tariff").

Summary - no 8 ride tickets, 8 ride ticket users use their Clipper card to buy one way tickets and get a resulting 15% fare increase.

Paper tickets increase by 25 cents per zone, which is a 12.5% increase.

Send comments to changes@caltrain.com to provide feedback.

AGENDA ITEM # 3
FEBRUARY 2, 2012
PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD
STAFF REPORT
TO: Joint Powers Board
THROUGH: Michael J. Scanlon
Executive Director
FROM: Rita P. Haskin
Executive Officer, Customer Service and Marketing
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE CODIFIED
TARIFF
ACTION
On December 1, 2011 the Board approved a public hearing to be held February 2, 2012 for the
consideration of changes to the Codified Tariff.
SIGNIFICANCE
Holding the public hearing will allow Caltrain to receive input on proposed Codified Tariff
changes that may impact customers.
Changes under consideration are:
A. Additional Regional Clipper® Implementation Measures
- Increasing the cost of paper One-way and Zone Upgrade tickets by up to 25 cents per
zone and Day passes by up to 50 cents per zone. Note: The cost of a One-way ride will
remain the same for those using a Clipper card. Day passes are not available on
Clipper. Monthly Pass prices will remain the same. See Attachment A for proposed
fare chart.
- Elimination of the 8-ride Ticket.
B. Go Pass
- Increasing the cost of the Go Pass by $10 to $165, and setting the minimum level for
employer participation at $13,750 per calendar year.
C. Sales Period
- Lengthening the sales period for monthly transportation passes and parking permits
from the 9th of the month to the 15th of the month.
BUDGET IMPACT
There is no impact to the budget for holding the public hearing.
Page 2 of 2
4022012.1
BACKGROUND
Staff developed the proposed changes to meet the responsibilities placed on Caltrain by
Metropolitan Transportation Commission Resolution 3866 and upon analysis of customers' fare
media usage, especially in light of Caltrain's transition to Clipper. The proposed changes to paper
ticket prices are intended to incentivize use of the Clipper fare payment system, which has been the
focus of significant regional investment over the past several years. The 8-ride Ticket is no longer
a sustainable fare product for various reasons, including that it cannot be altered for improved
performance within the Clipper system. The proposed changes to the Go Pass cost and annual
minimum would move that program towards revenue neutrality. Finally, the extended sales period
for monthly transportation passes and parking permits would benefit the agency in terms of the
quantity of passes and permits sold, and customers, who would gain flexibility in timing their
purchases.
The public outreach program regarding the proposed changes and this hearing included four
community meetings (Gilroy, Mountain View, San Carlos and San Francisco), bilingual
newspaper notices, a news release, station flyers, bilingual onboard messages to train riders,
Facebook postings, Tweets and a presentation to the Caltrain Citizens Advisory Committee.
Information also was posted to the Caltrain website, which allows readers to translate it into
dozens of languages.
Staff established a number of ways for customers and the public to provide their input: at the
community meetings, via a unique e-mail address, through the postal service, and with a call to the
Customer Service Center’s general number or one for those with hearing impairments.
Staff will consider public testimony and input from members of the Board of Directors before
developing final recommendations for board consideration at its March 1, 2012 meeting. The
changes would go into effect July 1, 2012.
Prepared by: Rita P. Haskin, Executive Officer, Customer Service and Marketing 650.508.6248

How is Caltrain like a teenage boy.

In 2011, Caltrain was in a bind. They cooked up a plan that involved service cuts and a fare increase. Their press release is no longer on their website but it is here for posterity

Caltrain Sets Public Hearings: Proposed Service Reductions, Station Closures, Fare increases and Declaration of Fiscal Emergency

Caltrain followed this with many public hearings, and community meetings that included a sitting US Congresswoman to circle the wagons and get everyone to pitch in to cry for more money for Caltrain. These hearings were very well attended, as people responded to clearly defined things that they do not want - paying more and getting less service. Got that - people don't want to pay more, and they'll complain about it, no matter what it is. Fast forward to 2012. Caltrain is trying to raise fares again. This isn't really a sky is falling moment. If you look at the Agenda from the January 2012 JPB Meeting you will see that

Deputy CEO Gigi Harrington said revenues are about $3 million over budget in October, of which $2.8 million is farebox revenue. Expenses are within budget.

Caltrain is already getting $3 Million in fares over projection yet they are proposing a fare increase. Hmm. That's going to be an uncomfortable set of public hearings where people show up to complain about the FARE INCREASE. Then again - will anyone even know that there is a fare increase?

Caltrain Holds Meetings About Proposed Changes to Codified Tariff January 17, 2012 Caltrain will hold four public meetings and a public hearing where staff will present proposed changes to some Caltrain fares that would become effective July 1, 2012.

Interesting. When they want to fire up the troops, it's a fare increase. When they want to slide it in before lunchtime, it's "changes to some Caltrain Fares". I used that same trick - when I was fourteen years old ;)

The case for bicycle infrastructure - Cesar Chavez Hairball

This is the Cesar Chavez "Hairball" intersection with Highway 101 in San Francisco.
View Larger Map I pass through here a few times per week on my bicycle to get to Caltrain. I am not alone - on this morning's ride there were three other cyclists passing through this same spot - to get to the Caltrain station (or any other destination in that area), you either have to brave the hairball, take a "more direct route" over Potrero Hill (a hill with a 20%+ gradient) or detour a couple of miles to 17th Street. On the right side of the photo you can see a sidewalk along the freeway onramp. This leads to the "Underpass of Broken Bottles and Dreams", a sidewalk cum bike path that requires you to first access it by crossing the onramp, then follow a narrow chute under the 101, strewn with well, broken bottles and dreams (a.k.a. homeless people). There is a signalized crossing of Bayshore Blvd and then you rejoin Cesar Chavez in the offramp from 101-N. Two of my companions chose this option this morning. Another woman chose against the path. She rode "as right as practicable" so to speak, in the far right of the roadway, then crossing the freeway onramp and then hugging the white line on the right of the underpass. This required her to pass the exit onramp to Bayshore Blvd South, then go under the freeway. I chose a third option. Having turned onto Chavez via a left turn off of Bryant South, I took the middle of the far left lane. A maneuver that requires nerves of steel and hopefully cooperation from drivers as you navigate under the underpass. The majority of traffic is headed to the freeway or Bayshore so I find this to be the spot that gives me the most breathing room. After getting past the Bayshore onramp, I switch into the right hand lane to finish the underpass. This led to quite a scene - there were cars headed to the freeway, cars headed to Bayshore, and a car headed through, with a bike in the left lane and a bike hugging the curb in the right lane. Fortunately we all sort of looked out for each other and made it through, but I won't call it comfortable nor efficient. When my female companion and I finished our crossing, we then had to merge across the 101-N offramp that enters Chavez, which was a bit messed up because there were 2 cyclists merging from left to right, and 2 cyclists on the right hand side who had just crossed the onramp having come off the "UBBD". How it this optimal? Safe? Useful? Answer - it's not. You can't really say that any of us broke the rules, but we all took a different choice from three unpalatable options. Designing useful and clearly defined infrastructure that works for bikes and cars is good for everyone. And of course, when we reached Pennsylvania Avenue, where I turn left to go to Caltrain, one of the bike path cyclists took the same left turn as me, onto a three lane section, the rightmost lane being the onramp onto 280-N. I took the middle lane (rightmost non-freeway lane), he took the left lane (avoiding the 280 traffic and traffic from Chavez WB that has a free right turn into the freeway onramp and often merges into the middle lane). Needless to say that didn't work out too nicely either. The other two intrepid cyclists bypassed Pennsylvania and took a left onto Iowa Street instead, which has its own issues. This is what happens when your designs do not take into account the mix of traffic that will use a street.

Letter to John Avalos regarding Fell/Oak bike lanes.

For those of you not in the loop, the separated bike ways on Fell and Oak - an important link in the Bay to the Beach route for the connecting the city set of bikeways, has been Monkey Wrenched and it if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's probably Mayor Ed Lee.

Supervisor Avalos -

My name is John Murphy, you may recall me from a bike ride we took down Cesar Chavez street during your Mayoral Campaign. That day I made a point that this street was supposed to have already been striped with a new bike lane, but that the office of Interim Mayor Edwin Lee delayed this very important project on a important bike route which is nonetheless not very comfortable for cyclists to utilize. Today, the Interim has been dropped from Ed Lee's title, but his disregard for the safety of cyclists has not.

The major missing link of the Bay to the Ocean bike way, the notorious blocks of Fell and Oak street from the Wiggle to the panhandle, was scheduled for an improvement including a separated bikeway by early 2012. That section is currently used by thousands of cyclists on a daily basis despite the requirement for nerves of steel. Thousands more refrain from riding between the East and West halves of the City solely because of this short 3 block section.

That improvement was suddenly delayed to 2013, with the notice from the SFMTA that this is at the behest of people who are concerned about the loss of parking. This project has been in the works for years, yet just as final planning is going into place, the parking issue is suddenly a showstopper. No matter that the SFMTA made the statement, we all know that the buck stops in room 200.

As one of the best ambassadors of cycling on the SF Board of Supervisors, I would like to ask you to utilize your slot in the next question time with Mayor Ed Lee to ask him to dovetail his pronouncements at the 2011 Bike to Work day that he wanted to see a route from the Bay to the Beach by the end of the year with the delays eminating from his office. Clearly he will give an evasive answer but I think it is important for him to put his waffling on the public record.

Thank You

John Murphy - San Francisco