May 2005 - Transpo - list.sfgreens.org

[funking@mindspring.com: more muni meetings]
by John-Marc Chandonia 16 May '05

16 May '05

----- Forwarded message from Susan King <funking(a)mindspring.com> ----- From: FTaylor(a)cmp.com Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 10:20:33 -0700 To: "Sarah Norr" <sarahn(a)thclinic.org> Cc: transitjusticediscuss(a)lists.riseup.net Subject: [transitjusticediscuss] more muni meetings Updated May 13. All addresses are in San Francisco. Please check back for updates. Inner Mission District: Thursday, May 19th at 6:30 p.m., Mission Police Station, Community Room, 630 Valencia @17th (Muni 14, 22, 33, 26 before and after meeting; 53 before meeting only) Sunset District: Monday, May 23, 2005 at 6:30 p.m., A.P. Giannini Middle Scholl, 3151 Ortega @ 37th Avenue (Muni 29, 71, 71L) Civic Center, Downtown, Richmond District, Chinatown, and OMI meetings have already been held. Additional meetings are being planned. ----- End forwarded message ----- -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) My GPCA Endorsements (May 2005): http://sfgreens.org/jmc/

1 0

[funking@mindspring.com: FW: tolls on the GG bridge]
by John-Marc Chandonia 16 May '05

16 May '05

----- Forwarded message from Susan King <funking(a)mindspring.com> ----- ---------- From: Leah Shahum <leah(a)sfbike.org> Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 18:55:42 -0700 To: Susan King <funking(a)mindspring.com> Subject: Re: tolls on the GG bridge hey susan, I wonder if we could also ask the Green Party Transp. Committee to take a position on the toll. That would help a lot! thx leah Leah, thanks for the update. I will try to get a letter out tonight. Yesterday, a friend of mine and I drove up to Santa Rosa, and I had a thought: how about instituting a toll both ways on the GG bridge for cars? It could be $3 each way, which totals $6 for a round trip, same as the proposed increase now. It would also catch folks who go over the bridge going north and come back another way. I know it would be a logistical challenge to put up and staff additional toll booths, but it is a way to get more revenue without charging bikes and peds. It seems unfair to charge peds and bikes going north and let the cars go through that direction for free. peace, susan From: leah Shahum <leah(a)sfbike.org> Reply-To: leah(a)sfbike.org Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 13:30:38 -0700 To: sfbike(a)topica.com Cc: sfbcstaff(a)sfbike.org Subject: [SFBike] Stop the Bike Toll: Letters Needed Hi All, Things are heating up around the potential bike/pedestrian toll on the Golden Gate Bridge. See two articles on today's Chronicle and Examiner http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/05/13/BAGJQCO8AP1.DTL http://www.sfexaminer.com/articles/2005/05/13//news//20050513_ne08_pedtool.t xt ***Please take time to write a brief Letter to the Editor to the Chron & Exam on this. Here's how: Chronicle: 150 words or less. Send to letters(a)sfchronicle.com (Include name, address, contact info.) Examiner: 200 words or less Send to letters(a)examiner.com (Include name, address, contact info.) On a lighter,happier note, check out this great story on Kash, bike parking guru of the world. This was in today's Friday section of Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/05/13/WBGUFCMLIS1.DTL have a good weekend, leah -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Leah Shahum Executive Director San Francisco Bicycle Coalition WE'VE MOVED! Please note my new mailing address and phone extension. San Francisco Bicycle Coalition 995 Market St Ste 1550 San Francisco CA 94103 415/431-BIKE x-306 voice 415/431-2468 fax Bike to Work on May 19th! www.sfbike.org/btwd ----- End forwarded message ----- -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) My GPCA Endorsements (May 2005): http://sfgreens.org/jmc/

1 0

BPU
by susan vaughan 15 May '05

15 May '05

JMC -- can you please add Pi to the TWG listserv (and Emily if she has not already been added)? I am going to write a letter on behalf of the TWG to the supervisors and the board of directors of the MTA re. the money that Harvey Rose found. It appears the supes and MTA want to use the money primarily to reduce parking fines and fees. DAVE -- I have just a few comments/corrections about the items below. I have capitalized my comments. Sue > 1028� Howard Street > San Francisco, Ca. 94103 [MAY 15, 2005] > > City Hall, Room 244 > 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place > San Francisco, Ca. 94102 > > Dear Supervisor: > > The Transportation Working Group of the > San Francisco Green Party promotes social, > economic and environmental justice through the > expansion of inexpensive and appealing public > transportation services, improved pedestrian > areas and safer bicycling, especially in > underserved and low-income neighborhoods of San > Francisco. > > We believe that Bicycle Plan Update, > which you will soon be considering, does not go > nearly far enough in reflecting these values. The > plan needs improvements in a number of areas, as > enumerated below: > 1) Most importantly, the update does not express > a connected network of bicycle paths and lanes. > The limited improvements envisioned will not > provide the safety and protection demanded by > most travelers. > 2) The update does not specify quantitative > standards for a minimum level of service (LOS) > for bicyclists. Such a standard might include the > creation of a minimum number of lanes or miles of > lanes per year, and minimum standards for bike > lanes, bike paths, and shared lanes. > 3) The update should be improved to reflect best > practices from throughout the world. For example, > speed limits in residential areas throughout > Europe are 18 mph; such a low speed limit should > be recommended on San Francisco bike routes. > Also, contra-flow bike lanes would facilitate > safer bicycle travel on many small alleys in SoMa > but are not recommended in this update. > 4) ```The update does not commit the city to > accomplish specific goals by any particular date. > It does not tell us what we can expect, nor what > might be necessary or desirable, in terms of the > amount of safety education, new bicycle parking > facilities, or marketing of bicycling. > > The San Francisco Green Party urges you to > support a stronger effort to improve bicycling > conditions in this city than is represented by > this plan. Specifically, we would like you to ask > the Municipal Transportation Agency to propose > a complete bicycle network. Such a proposal would > provide bike lanes, paths, or other improvements > to connect every neighborhood in the city. In and > leading to your district, for example, > improvements to the following streets should be > included, at least conceptually or "for further > study," in the official bike plan. > > District 1: > Although it's not under the city's jurisdiction, > the bike plan should call on the Presidio to add > bike lanes on Lincoln Ave. from 25th Ave. to the > Golden Gate Bridge. Also, the bike network > designates Geary Blvd. east of ___ as the bicycle > network, although there's no reason it should not > be extended all the way to the ocean. [WHERE DO WE GET THIS INFORMATION?] Also, better bicycle access from the Avenues to Golden Gate Park with improvements to the paths at 22nd Ave. CHECK THIS [THE OFFICIAL ROUTE IS AT 23RD AVENUE, BUT THE ENTRANCE INTO THE PARK IS AT 22ND] and elsewhere should be included in the plan. > > District 2: > Although it's not under the city's jurisdiction, > the bike plan should call on the Presidio to add > bike lanes on Lincoln Ave. from 25th Ave. to the > Golden Gate Bridge. > > District 3: > Mason Street from Columbus to Jefferson should be > added to the bicycle network, in order to provide > a connection from Columbus St. and the North > Beach and Chinatown neighborhoods to the Pier 39 > area. With a designation, most bicycle funding > sources will be unavailable for a possible > bicycle path next to the newly acquired park. > Sansome Street from Washington to the Embarcadero > is a necessary companion to Battery Street, > which is being recommended for inclusion in the > bicycle network. (Stockton Street from the tunnel > to Market Street is included in the written list > of possible improvements to the bicycle network, > although it does not show up on the map.) > > District 4: > 20th Ave. should be traffic-calmed, both to > provide bicycle safety and to limit overflow > traffic from 19th Ave. Also, an improved > connection through Stern Grove should be built to > simplify and shorten by two blocks the current > bicycle route. > > District 5: > Scott Street between Haight Street and Fell > Street, and Baker Street between Oak and Fell, > are both part of the "Wiggle," a key link between > the Panhandle and Market Street; Scott Street > should have a left-turn bicycle lane approaching > Fell Street from the south and Baker Street > should have a corresponding left-turn bicycle > lane approaching Oak Street. Seventh Avenue > between Kirkham and Lincoln is another key link > that [FORMER] Supervisor Gonzalez worked on with > Supervisor Hall but which has been left out of > this bicycle plan. Stanyan Street (either on the > street or on a path in the park) provides a > critical north-south link to access the park > paths that should be included. Noe Street from > Market Street to Duboce Park is the most popular > link between the Castro and the lower Haight; it > should be considered for inclusion in the bicycle > network. > > District 6: > While the Planning Department includes a > continuation of the Howard Street bicycle lanes > west of 11th Street, onto S. Van Ness and then > onto Duboce toward Valencia, the current draft > bicycle plan omits this link. Geary Street has > been improved for bicycle travel already as part > of the transit improvements and should be > considered an official part of the bicycle > network. Grant Street and Montgomery Street > should be considered for addition due their sheer > importance to bicycle travel in that dense > neighborhood. Beale Street should be added as the > link from Market Street to the Embarcadero > between Rincon Hill and the Embarcadero. In > Mission Bay, Mission Commons provides the main > east-west link through that new neighborhood and > is in fact designated as a class 3 route in the > Mission Bay plan. > > District 7: > Teresita Blvd. must be added to the bicycle > network to meet the plan's goal of reaching to > within a quarter-mile of every neighborhood. > Clarendon, though hilly, is the only reasonable > link between the __[FOREST HILL???? LAGUNA HONDA????] neighborhood and Corona Heights, and should be included. The link from Holloway to Ocean Ave. should be moved to Plymouth, per the Better Neighborhoods plan for the area. > > District 8: > Noe Street from Market Street to Duboce Park is > the most popular link between the Castro and the > lower Haight and should be considered for > inclusion in the bicycle network. Church Street > between 16th/17th Streets and Duboce Street, is > flatter and has more potential for bike lanes > than the currently designated route through that > corridor. > > District 9: > Hampshire from Cesar Chavez to 17th Street should > be considered as an official bike route, for > people, including children, who may prefer this > quiet side street to the adjacent officially > designated Potrero Street. Bryant Street has room > for adding bike lanes without traffic impacts > through most of the Mission. > > District 10: > Bike paths around the eastern mouth of Islais > Creek could provide a car-free connection for > nearby residents and commuters. Bicycle routes to > McLaren Park are being contemplated via Mansell, > but Sunnydale should also be considered as a > possible addition. Jennings from Carroll to > Gilman, then Gilman from Jennings or Fitch to > Third, provide an essential neighborhood street > alternative to the officiall designated Third > Street. > > District 11: > > Alemany Blvd. from Arch Street to St. Charles > Street -- or DeLong Street -- provides direct > access to the BART station, and should be > preserved in the bike plan. Access to the Glen > Park BART station has not been conceptualized in > this bicycle plan, and a proposed ramp from > Arlington to Monterey that would provide a safe > connection for bicyclists was also neglected. > > [I HAVE ALSO DISCOVERED A NEW BIKE ROUTE FROM DISTRICT ONE TO DOWNTOWN THAT AVOIDS THE TURK STREET HILL. I TAKE ANZA TO MASONIC, MAKE A RIGHT ON MASONICE, TAKE MASONIC TO GOLDEN GATE, LEFT ON GOLDEN GATE, RIGHT ON DIVIS, LEFT ON MCALLISTER, RIGHT ON PIERCE, LEFT ON FULTON AND SO ON ...] If we can get this done by Sunday night, we can get them e-mailed to the supervisors by May 18. Sue === message truncated === __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail Mobile Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail

1 0

Re: [Transpo] more event followup
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 03 May '05

03 May '05

Wow, great idea. Do they have DVD equipment? Sue On Tue, 03 May 2005 09:52:04 -0700 ed <ed(a)fortmason.org> writes: > I was looking at the Issei Memorial Hall at the JCCCNC... > > Occupancy: Seats 150-175 people; fits 175-250 people for a lecture > or film; > fits 275-300 people for a social > > Email: facility(a)jcccnc.org > ph#: 415-567-5505 x227 > > What would be the budget for something like this? > > Ed > > > At 01:32 PM 5/1/2005 -0700, you wrote: > >Wonderful. I received the previous e-mail and will be in touch > with Dave > >Room (who wants to be a PANELIST when we do our next event -- I > think he > >should be). I'm going to check with Michael Connor (O'Connor?) > about > >doing the event at The Independent for Ross. Someone else also > suggested > >Cole Hall at UCSF. I'll look into both those places. > > > >Sue > > > > _______________________________________________ > Transpo mailing list > Transpo(a)sfgreens.org > https://list.sfgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/transpo > >

1 0

Re: [Transpo] more event followup
by ed 03 May '05

03 May '05

I was looking at the Issei Memorial Hall at the JCCCNC... Occupancy: Seats 150-175 people; fits 175-250 people for a lecture or film; fits 275-300 people for a social Email: facility(a)jcccnc.org ph#: 415-567-5505 x227 What would be the budget for something like this? Ed At 01:32 PM 5/1/2005 -0700, you wrote: >Wonderful. I received the previous e-mail and will be in touch with Dave >Room (who wants to be a PANELIST when we do our next event -- I think he >should be). I'm going to check with Michael Connor (O'Connor?) about >doing the event at The Independent for Ross. Someone else also suggested >Cole Hall at UCSF. I'll look into both those places. > >Sue >

1 0

Re: [Transpo] music concourse/mlk drive letter
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 02 May '05

02 May '05

Here are two letters below, one to Jon Rubin, the other to Steve Heminger. John-Marc, can you format them without me sending them in attachment form? Sue 1028A Howard Street San Francisco, Ca. 94103 May 1, 2005 Jon Rubin President of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland, California 94607 Dear Mr. Rubin: The Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party promotes social, economic and environmental justice through the expansion of inexpensive and appealing public transportation services, improved pedestrian areas and safer bicycling, especially in underserved and low-income neighborhoods of San Francisco. For this reason, we endorse the proposal for a bike pathway on the West Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, completing the bike pathway already planned from Oakland to Yerba Buena Island. It is especially important that residents of Treasure Island be provided links to San Francisco and Oakland beyond buses, which run infrequently, and privately-owned cars. Because increased bicycling is essential in order to improve Bay Area air quality, reduce traffic congestion, and maintain and improve the health of the regions inhabitants, we encourage the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to seek funds for this project in ways that will not negatively impact other bicycle and pedestrian projects or mass transit projects. In addition, the Transportation Working Group endorses the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition resolution below: We support the construction of a shore-to-shore bicycle/ pedestrian/ maintenance pathway on the San Francisco- Oakland Bay Bridge, and request that the California State Legislature and/ or the Metropolitan Transportation Commission include funding for this vital, and long overdue transportation link as part of any plan to raise the funds necessary for re-construction of the replacement East Span. A shore to shore pathway will support the Bay Area's desire to increase public health through physical activity and decreased air pollution, decrease traffic congestion, and expand sustainable modes of transportation and recreation. Sincerely, Sue Vaughan and John-Marc Chandonia Co-Chairs, the Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party Cc: Leah Shahum, executive director of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition Steve Heminger, executive director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission 1028A Howard Street San Francisco, Ca. 94103 May 1, 2005 Steve Heminger Executive Director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland, California 94607 Dear Mr. Heminger: The Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party promotes social, economic and environmental justice through the expansion of inexpensive and appealing public transportation services, improved pedestrian areas and safer bicycling, especially in underserved and low-income neighborhoods of San Francisco. For this reason, we endorse the proposal for a bike pathway on the West Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, completing the bike pathway already planned from Oakland to Yerba Buena Island. It is especially important that residents of Treasure Island be provided links to San Francisco and Oakland beyond buses, which run infrequently, and privately-owned cars. Because increased bicycling is essential in order to improve Bay Area air quality, reduce traffic congestion, and maintain and improve the health of the regions inhabitants, we encourage the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to seek funds for this project in ways that will not negatively impact other bicycle and pedestrian projects or mass transit projects. In addition, the Transportation Working Group endorses the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition resolution below: We support the construction of a shore-to-shore bicycle/ pedestrian/ maintenance pathway on the San Francisco- Oakland Bay Bridge, and request that the California State Legislature and/ or the Metropolitan Transportation Commission include funding for this vital, and long overdue transportation link as part of any plan to raise the funds necessary for re-construction of the replacement East Span. A shore to shore pathway will support the Bay Area's desire to increase public health through physical activity and decreased air pollution, decrease traffic congestion, and expand sustainable modes of transportation and recreation. Sincerely, Sue Vaughan and John-Marc Chandonia Co-Chairs, the Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party Cc: Leah Shahum, executive director of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition Jon Rubin, president of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission

1 0

music concourse/mlk drive letter
by susan vaughan 02 May '05

02 May '05

Below and attached is the music concourse/mlk drive letter. There is something wrong with the file for the cantilever letter so I am probably going to have to type it all over again. Tonight I hope. I think we should also come out with a position on Rincon Hill. This thing is massive. The entire Green Party should be coming out and saying that the includionary housing should be 51 percent as far as I'm concerned. Sue 1028A Howard Street San Francisco, Ca. 94103 May 1, 2005 Supervisor ____________ City Hall Room 244 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place San Francisco, Ca. 94102 Dear Supervisor ___________: The San Francisco Green Party promotes social, economic and environmental justice through measures that maintain and expand inexpensive and appealing public transportation services, improve pedestrian areas and enhance the safety of bicycling. The legislation introduced by District 5 Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi on April 26 reflects these values. This legislation seeks to enhance the recreational enjoyment of visitors in and around the Music Concourse of Golden Gate Park. We believe this legislation, which would prohibit the physical widening of MLK Drive, keep private traffic out of the Music Concourse, and urge the Department of Parking and Traffic to incorporate pedestrian and bicycle improvements in and around the Music Concourse, is closer to the original concept of a pedestrian oasis as promised to the voters by Proposition J, passed in 1998. We encourage you to support this legislation. Sincerely, Sue Vaughan and John-Marc Chandonia, co-chairs of the Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party CC: Gloria Young, board.of.supervisors(a)sfgov.org __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

mid-market letters
by susan vaughan 01 May '05

01 May '05

Here are two Mid-Market letters -- one for Sue Lee, president of the Planning Commission, and the other for Ramon Romero, chair of the SF Redev. Commission. Sue 1028A Howard Street San Francisco, Ca. 94103 May 1, 2005 Sue Lee President, San Francisco Planning Commission San Francisco Planning Department 1660 Mission Street San Francisco, Ca. 94103 Commission.Secretary(a)sfgov.org Dear Ms. Lee: The Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party promotes social, economic and environmental justice through the expansion of inexpensive and appealing public transportation services, improved pedestrian areas and safer bicycling, especially in underserved and low-income neighborhoods of San Francisco. We recommend that the housing under consideration for Mid-Market include as few parking spaces as possible, with the greatest share of what parking there is going to car-share vehicles. We remind you that Mid-Market is one of the most transit-rich parts of the city. It is served by all the light-rail lines, as well as by BART, most of the major Muni bus lines, and by Samtrans and Golden Gate Transit. We also remind you that San Francisco, according to city charter, is a transit-first city. For all these reasons, we also encourage you to eliminate the short-term parking garage planned for the project. Besides the fact that the project is in a transit-rich part of the city, as already mentioned, there are two other municipal garages nearby � the garage at 5th and Mission streets and the garage at the Civic Center. Below are several sections of the Transportation Plank of the San Francisco Green Party platform relevant to parking: C.3. The San Francisco Green Party recommends that the City prohibit new parking facilities in the downtown district north of Townsend and Division, east of South Van Ness and Van Ness Avenues, and within 500 feet of a transit-preferential street anywhere in San Francisco. A few cities in the U.S. and many in Europe have reduced parking in their downtowns as a means to reduce traffic and promote alternatives to the automobile; San Francisco should emulate these successful programs. C.5. The San Francisco Green Party recommends that the City eliminate parking requirements for new housing, starting with affordable, senior, and Single-Room Occupancy, and institute maximum parking limits for new housing. The specific maximum limits should vary by neighborhood, ranging from a high limit of one parking space per housing unit in less transit-friendly areas such as parts of the Sunset and Bayview, to a low limit of .25 parking spaces per housing unit in neighborhoods such as downtown, North Beach, and the Mission, which are densely populated, already congested with traffic, and well-served by transit. Parking requirements in new housing are subsidized by developers for the private benefit of relatively wealthy housing consumers. These changes will result in lower housing prices for consumers as well as higher profit margins for developers. Parking requirements should never be an impediment to housing construction. C.9. Mandate car-sharing parking pods in every neighborhood and in new developments, preferably in highly visible and accessible locations. Car-sharing permits residents to have access to cars without having to invest in permanent ownership. The pay-per-use system of car-share cooperatives and nonprofits saves residents money and reduces car use. Sincerely, Sue Vaughan and John-Marc Chandonia, co-chairs of the Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party CC: Ramon Romero, chair of the San Francisco Redevelopment Commission Jeremy Nelson, Transportation for a Livable City 1028A Howard Street San Francisco, Ca. 94103 May 1, 2005 Ramon Romero Chair, San Francisco Redevelopment Commission San Francisco Redevelopment Agency 770 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, Ca. 94102 Commission.Secretary(a)sfgov.org Dear Mr. Romero: The Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party promotes social, economic and environmental justice through the expansion of inexpensive and appealing public transportation services, improved pedestrian areas and safer bicycling, especially in underserved and low-income neighborhoods of San Francisco. We recommend that the housing under consideration for Mid-Market include as few parking spaces as possible, with the greatest share of what parking there is going to car-share vehicles. We remind you that Mid-Market is one of the most transit-rich parts of the city. It is served by all the light-rail lines, as well as by BART, most of the major Muni bus lines, and by Samtrans and Golden Gate Transit. We also remind you that San Francisco, according to city charter, is a transit-first city. For all these reasons, we also encourage you to eliminate the short-term parking garage planned for the project. Besides the fact that the project is in a transit-rich part of the city, as already mentioned, there are two other municipal garages nearby � the garage at 5th and Mission streets and the garage at the Civic Center. Below are several sections of the Transportation Plank of the San Francisco Green Party platform relevant to parking: C.3. The San Francisco Green Party recommends that the City prohibit new parking facilities in the downtown district north of Townsend and Division, east of South Van Ness and Van Ness Avenues, and within 500 feet of a transit-preferential street anywhere in San Francisco. A few cities in the U.S. and many in Europe have reduced parking in their downtowns as a means to reduce traffic and promote alternatives to the automobile; San Francisco should emulate these successful programs. C.5. The San Francisco Green Party recommends that the City eliminate parking requirements for new housing, starting with affordable, senior, and Single-Room Occupancy, and institute maximum parking limits for new housing. The specific maximum limits should vary by neighborhood, ranging from a high limit of one parking space per housing unit in less transit-friendly areas such as parts of the Sunset and Bayview, to a low limit of .25 parking spaces per housing unit in neighborhoods such as downtown, North Beach, and the Mission, which are densely populated, already congested with traffic, and well-served by transit. Parking requirements in new housing are subsidized by developers for the private benefit of relatively wealthy housing consumers. These changes will result in lower housing prices for consumers as well as higher profit margins for developers. Parking requirements should never be an impediment to housing construction. C.9. Mandate car-sharing parking pods in every neighborhood and in new developments, preferably in highly visible and accessible locations. Car-sharing permits residents to have access to cars without having to invest in permanent ownership. The pay-per-use system of car-share cooperatives and nonprofits saves residents money and reduces car use. Sincerely, Sue Vaughan and John-Marc Chandonia, co-chairs of the Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party CC: Sue Lee, president of the San Francisco Planning Commission Jeremy Nelson, Transportation for a Livable City __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

bike plan update template
by susan vaughan 01 May '05

01 May '05

Here's my final draft of the BPU letter. Sue 1028� Howard Street San Francisco, Ca. 94103 May 1, 2005 City Hall, Room 244 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place San Francisco, Ca. 94102 Dear Supervisor: The Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party promotes social, economic and environmental justice through the expansion of inexpensive and appealing public transportation services, improved pedestrian areas and safer bicycling, especially in underserved and low-income neighborhoods of San Francisco. We believe that Bicycle Plan Update, which you will soon be considering, is in need of improvement. The plan fails to do a number of things, which are enumerated below: 1) The update does not express a connected network of bicycle paths and lanes, following the desired lines of travel of current bicyclists. Such a network should be treated as a single public works project; 2) The update does not prioritize the completion of recommended sections of the bike network; 3) The update should be improved to reflect best practices from throughout the world. Such a document would include greater use of contra flow lanes in small alleys in SoMa and other parts of the city and the placement of bike lanes on very slow streets in residential neighborhoods; 4) The update does not recommend slower speed limits on some bike network lanes in residential neighborhoods; 5) The update does not specify quantitative standards such as the creation of a minimum number of bike lanes or miles bike of lanes added per year; 6) The update should � but does not � reflect an increase of 25 percent in the number of bicycle network miles; and, 7) The update does not commit the city to accomplish goals by any particular date. Below are some of the deficiencies of the Bike Plan Update in your district. Sincerely, Sue Vaughan and John-Marc Chandonia, co-chairs of the Transportation Working Group of the San Francisco Green Party CC: Aaron Peskin, aaron.peskin(a)sfgov.org Gloria Young, board.of.supervisors(a)sfgov.org __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: [Transpo] more event followup
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 01 May '05

01 May '05

Wonderful. I received the previous e-mail and will be in touch with Dave Room (who wants to be a PANELIST when we do our next event -- I think he should be). I'm going to check with Michael Connor (O'Connor?) about doing the event at The Independent for Ross. Someone else also suggested Cole Hall at UCSF. I'll look into both those places. Sue On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 09:19:28 -0700 John-Marc Chandonia <jmc(a)sfgreens.org> writes: > Once again, great event! We netted $176 and got about 15 more > people > on our newsletter. We kind of forgot to plug voter reg, so we > didn't > get anybody to register Green. > > I put all the items back in the office. There were a couple I > didn't > know what to do with. There was a pouch of pens and a filled out > Santos Reyes petition that I didn't know what to do with: they're > in my mailbox in the office. I think Jim might have brought the > Reyes petitions, so I copied him on this message. > > JMC > -- > John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) > http://www.dolorespark.org/ > _______________________________________________ > Transpo mailing list > Transpo(a)sfgreens.org > https://list.sfgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/transpo > >

1 0