Once we know the extent of the impact of the city's vaccination mandate , we will restore as much service as we can, and then increase frequency on high ridership routes to reduce crowding and wait times as resources allow. We are proposing to restore five of the seven pre-pandemic routes that are currently still suspended, although some of those routes would be restored with some changes to balance resources.
The 2 Clement would be restored to Presidio Avenue and California Street and operate every 15 minutes all day on weekdays. The 21 Hayes would be restored every 15 minutes to Grove and Hayes streets.
These routes are especially important to access hospitals such as St. We also heard the need for more connections to Caltrain, between Potrero Hill and the Financial District.
This responds to the need we heard for connections to Fort Mason and nearby grocery stores. Daily frequency, every 20 minutes. School Trippers : Most pre-pandemic school trippers — such as the 8, 23, 29 and 44 — will return to service in time for the start of the academic year.
This service provides extra afternoon buses on existing high demand routes that serve San Francisco public schools. School trippers begin their route at a school site, pick up students and continue as normal, providing added capacity and reducing crowding.
See the full list of schools with trippers here. Late Night Service: Service hours will be extended from 5 a. View the discussion thread. Skip to main content. More: 58 in last 48 hours. Share this: Facebook Twitter Email. How to Ride Muni Your handy guide to buses, Metro lines and streetcars. Muni Forward See what Muni improvements are happening near you. Muni Projects Browse our full list of improvement projects. If you've sat and watched train after train pass you by without room to fit, you know we're not even serving the capacity of today, to say nothing of planning for tomorrow.
Maybe you've had to disembark a train that's become disabled? Our tunnel is over-capacity downtown already with literally no way to significantly increase that capacity.
Even if Muni had the budget, we can't run trains more frequently above ground because of the traffic jams it would exacerbate underground. As we grow as a city, we need to increase the capacity and efficiency of transit under Market Street, but also throughout San Francisco.
Transfers are an essential part of any good transit network, not a single-purpose one. One only needs to look to New York or Montreal in North America, or cities like Tokyo, London, Paris, or Moscow internationally to see that transfers are precisely what allow a city's transit system to grow into a comprehensive network. What makes transfers work, however, is very frequent service and the ease of transferring.
Transferring from, say, the 38 Geary to the 24 Divisadero can be an exercise in inner zen, waiting for up to 20 minutes. The trick here is frequency: The M-Market would run every 2 minutes, making the worst-case scenario a two minute wait. By contrast, it takes the N-Judah an average of 4 minutes just to enter the tunnel from Church and Duboce, or 6 minutes for the J-Church from Church and Market.
If you really want, you can try it today: disembark the J at Church and Market, enter Church Street Station, catch an inbound K, L, or M, and if one arrives within a few minutes, you will handily beat the very same J to Van Ness. And that's with an incredibly inefficient transfer. Saving time, much improved reliability, increased capacity, and a broader network are the benefits which drastically outweigh the negatives of a transfer.
Phase 1 : Low Cost On one hand, we could literally start phase 1 today for essentially no cost. Ideally, however, we would extend the Church Station entrances to the Muni above ground stops, so there's a quick transfer option. This would involve 2 hallway extensions, with 2 optional staircases and faregate construction to shorten platform distance.
This would involve no additional track work. Most cheaply, this would happen via cut-and-cover from just south of Market on Church to above ground at Hermann and from Duboce Park to Duboce and Guerrero, with the remaining sections above ground. The costs of this 2. An alternate, which could provide cost reductions, would be the extension of the N along Duboce as part of a redevelopment of the existing raised freeway structure.
This is a bigger-term vision, marrying current projects and existing project visions from the SFMTA with the network of plans we're discussing here. Phase 4 has a wide variability in cost due to options between LRT and subway. While this is a substantial amount of money, keep in mind that, at the low end, we're talking less than the cost of the Central Subway. That's astounding when one considers how much interconnectivity this vision could provide San Francisco.
Everything we're discussing here is rail or subway at a minimum, with the low-end possibility for extending the Van Ness Rapid line as BRT though we would prefer the rail option. Why can't the tech companies pay for this? We never said they couldn't! But we're not really talking about it here either
0コメント