Famous SF Transit Hub Headed toward Gridlock

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditmail

The intersection of Van Ness and Market is so well served by public transit that it is known as the “Hub”, short for “Transit Hub”.  What City Hall is now planning for the Hub would transform it into a congested mess.Image result for urban traffic jam

The City Planning Department estimates that almost 1,700 additional parking spaces could be constructed in the immediate vicinity of Van Ness and Market.   If so, developers would derive profits both from their prime transit-oriented locations and the parking.

Add to this the so-far uncontrolled impact of Uber and Lyft.   At least 45,000 Uber and Lyft vehicles now operate in San Francisco, which account for over 200,000 auto trips a day.  It does not take much imagination to recognize what 1,700 additional off-street parking  spaces and hundreds of daily Uber and Lyft pickups and drop-offs would do Van Ness and Market.

If there’s to be no projection against excessive traffic at the Hub, then where?

admin

3 Comments

  1. Savemuni needs to radically rethink it’s stance with respect to congestion. SF will become more congested for private automobile use. That is a reality that’s not open to question. What is open to question is whether that congestion is allowed to spill over into making MUNI slower. There are a number of tools that SFMTA(C) have at their disposal to mitigate that impact, transit only lanes, light synchronization, parking space removal, flow control being just a few examples. saveMUNI needs to be advocating those solutions not inveighing against UBER, Lyft and developer ‘profits’. A failure to do that will result in significant loss of support from its members and the community generally.

    • Dear Nic…We agree that congestion should not be allowed to slow up or otherwise impeded bus loads of riders, whether private or public. Enforced transit only lanes…especially during peak driving hours…appear to be the most effective way of achieving that objective. Most of us (with a few holdouts) have no particular bias against either private operators or operator profits. Having worked in both the public and private sectors I personally believe that even with profits a competent private operator could provide better service than what is now being provided.

      On the other hand we’re not prepared to accept the idea that cities must take ever increasing loads of congestion with congestion itself as the only limiting factor. There are things that can be done to curb excessive congestion, as have been successfully demonstrated by many cities elsewhere in the world and in some U.S. cities. Jerry

  2. Solution route the BRT around south to ceasar chavez, and back up potrero or a southern market street to connect back to the T-Line, increase capacity and bandwidth along these development zones. Possibly another at grade line along another major east west corridor street?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *