• Comically slow boarding and alighting.
• Drivers who don’t know their routes, and no automated stop announcements to help you.
• Poor signage, even at major transfer points like the San Rafael Transit Center.
• Many stops don’t have shelters.
• Freeway bus pads don’t have crosswalks.

This list could go on and on (for a good primer on Golden Gate Transit’s overall suckitude, check out this blog post from The Greater Marin). But out of the many problems I’ve encounter on their buses practically every day, one has been eating away at me lately more than any other: I’m tired of seeing the Clipper “Christmas lights”, and I’m not going to take it anymore.

Some background on Clipper

Clipper is the Bay Area’s smart fare card – it works on most major buses, trains, and ferries throughout the Bay Area, including BART, Caltrain, Muni, and Golden Gate Transit. I’ve been using since 2010. It is very convenient, and on routes where it is widely used, it really can speed up boarding dramatically – just tag and take a seat. On a few select agencies who have distance-based fares like Golden Gate Transit, you also need to “tag off” so that your card will be charged the correct fare. Because of this, most GGT buses have Clipper readers at both the front and back doors.

Clipper Christmas lights: not festive, just annoying

For some absurd reason, Golden Gate Transit’s policies actually seem to allow the drivers to keep the rear-door devices switched off the majority of the time – when they are turned off or otherwise not functioning, they display the “Christmas lights” shown at right. The result is that, at a major stop, the Clipper user has to go against the flow of people exiting at the rear door just to tag off.

Even more absurd is that Golden Gate Transit’s policies actually encourage the driver to keep the rear-door closed at most stops. Here’s what the agency’s Twitter account told me recently:

“We prefer customers tag on & off at the front card reader to ensure they pay the correct fare. / Rear doors are used primarily for disabled passengers or at stops where it is absolutely safe to do so (driver discretion).”
Golden Gate Bus (@GoldenGateBus)
February 25, 2013 (in two tweets)

Never once have I had a driver check when I tag off to “ensure” that I “pay the correct fare.” It seems likely this policy is an attempt to decrease the possibility of someone tagging on at the front and tagging off at the back well before there stop to ensure the lowest fare. I think the possibility of fare evasion is no excuse to treat all Clipper customers like this. So why do they have those readers there in the first place? I asked @GoldenGateBus:

“Thanks for your question. We have card readers in the back of our buses for our disabled passengers to tag off and on.”
Golden Gate Bus (@GoldenGateBus)
February 25, 2013

As many GGT buses have wheelchairs lifts that operate from the rear door, these readers are there so that wheelchair-bound Clipper users can tag on and off according to the agency. Even though this “policy” kind of sounds like bunk, let’s just assume that is how GGT wants it all to function. As a daily rider of the system, I can tell you that even when someone in a wheelchair boards at the rear door, the driver doesn’t make the rear-reader operative. I’ve never seen that happen – I have seen the driver take the person’s Clipper card to the front to tag on for them many times.

What should happen

Clipper is a tremendous asset to the region, and Golden Gate Transit is privileged to be able to provide access to it for its customers. Some transit systems in the region haven’t been able to come online and accept Clipper yet, in part because of the limited availability of readers like the underutilized ones at the back doors of GGT buses. GGT owes it to the region to use these devices like they were meant to be used.

Golden Gate Transit must institute a reasonable Clipper policy – the readers should be turned on at the back doors at all times, just as they are at the front. This will speed up boarding and alighting and maybe even encourage more people to get Clipper cards. If they aren’t willing to agree to these terms, and they truly insist on having these devices turned off more than 90 percent of the time, then the agency needs to surrender the devices back to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission so that they can be given to another agency that doesn’t currently take Clipper (I suggest a few possibilities in this tweet).

If you ride GGT, I encourage you to tweet @GoldenGateBus every time you see a shut-off reader using the hashtag #ClipperGate, and include a picture of the “Christmas lights” if you can. Since the folks at GGT don’t seem to ever ride their own vehicles, it is up to us to show them how their policy negatively affects the riders who use Clipper and underutilizes these valuable regional transportation assets.

Next blog post in…

To the readers, subscribers, and friends of California Streets,

After a summer hiatus to run a camping program for individuals with developmental disabilities (learn more at travelcampkrem.wordpress.com), I’m back and plan to start posting regularly again. Thank you for sticking around. Please subscribe via RSS or email to stay up-to-date on posts, and for even more content and conversation about sustainable transportation, join our hundreds of followers on Twitter or Facebook.

A lot has changed since my last post nearly six months ago, both in my life and in California’s transportation scene – for one, I now live in Marin County. The challenges of being car-free in the suburbs have provided a lot of frustration for me so far, but also a lot of inspiration. I look forward to bringing you more original content in my indignant and geeky style.

Thank you for your support. Please join me in sending California’s thoughts and prayers to the East Coast as they begin to recover from the impact of Hurricane Sandy.

Matt Nelson
@calstreets

In an interview with California Streets last week in advance of the announcement, RelayRides founder Shelby Clark said he hopes this will help many families ditch their private autos and instead use shared cars.

“I think there are plenty of families who fall in between the number of cars that they need – they sometimes need a second car, and usually end up rounding up and buying two”, Clark said. “We want to help them round-down and borrow a car from their neighbors when they need it.”

The expansion will use a key exchange model – drivers will simply arrange to give the keys to the renter. This allows car owners to enroll and start making money from their vehicles right away, but it is a departure from the model RelayRides has used in the launch markets of Boston and San Francisco. In those markets, a hardware device was installed in vehicles allowing renters to unlock a reserved car with just their membership card.

Clark downplayed the notion that key exchange would be any less convenient for renters and instead emphasized how much easier it would now be for car owners to get involved. He also referenced the company’s partnership with GM, that will make all cars enrolled in the OnStar service “RelayRides-ready” when it goes online later this year.

“We aren’t moving away from electronic access”, Clark said. “Think about Airbnb – thousands of people use that sites and have no problem with key exchange.”

Clark also thinks the market will come up with ways to improve on the key exchange model, such as having a lock box or leaving the keys with a neighbor. Key exhcange also “reduces costs and operational complexity” for the company, he said, making this nationwide expansion possible.

Previously on California Streets: “How I Learned That Peer-To-Peer Car-Sharing Perpetuates Urbanism: My First Trip With RelayRides“

Wait, what? The SFMTA has known this deficit was coming for years, and instead of exploring options to cut costs or generate new revenue, the stewards of our Municipal Railway have actually been toying with the idea of defunding the system even further by allowing kids to ride for free. Some of the options they’ve been ignoring include (list non-inclusive):

• Expanding parking meter enforcement to evenings, dubious holidays, and Sundays;
• Making motorists mitigate more of their negative impact on the city by putting meters in more neighborhoods, congestion tolls, and steeper fines;
• Make service more efficient for riders and more cost-effective for the agency by reducing stops and idling time;
• Renegotiate unfair work orders; and,
• Make agency employees pay for their own transit passes.

Now, under this board’s watch, we are potentially facing what new SFMTA chief Ed Reskin calls an “honest option” – making even deeper cuts to Muni service. Board chariman Tom Nolan went on to call this “right-sizing” of Muni service a “laudable and important goal.”

The company line, of course, is that all options are back on the table, but expect angry rhetoric from free-parking freeloaders at upcoming budget town hall meetings in opposition to anything that would constitute a minor inconvenience to motorists. The SFMTA will likely respond by indefinitely tabling these proposals and will instead address the deficit the easier way – by attacking Muni service. They know that any backlash from that action will be less than the backlash regarding, say, meter expansion, in part because of the challenges to organizing Muni’s diverse ridership. After all, riding transit isn’t a lifestyle for most folks in the way that driving is (readers of this blog excluded) – it is simply a way to get to work. Most of our fellow riders aren’t passionate about transit issues, they simply want their bus or streetcar to come on time and not be too crowded.

We need to communicate to our fellow riders, to the SFMTA board and to Reskin that cutting service is not an “honest option” for this transit-first socially conscious city – passing the pain off to those who depend on Muni will not be tolerated any more. We must stand up for the silent majority of city residents who rely on Muni everyday. We need to speak up at the town hall meetings, rant at board hearings, and even occupy One South Van Ness if necessary to get our point across that Muni service will not be the MTA’s ATM any longer.

This year brings the 100th anniversary of the Municipal Railway’s founding – San Franciscans of that era had the foresight to found a system that would belong to the public and be used for the good of the public. Now, our generation is tasked with defending “The People’s Railway” for posterity. Our task is not dissimilar to that of the “freeway revolters” who protected our neighborhoods and parks from a state highway-building assault – if this city is to continue being a city of the 99 percent, then we must prioritize mobility for all above the needs of transient motorists just passing through.

Weigh in on the SFMTA’s budget deficit and the possibility of service cuts by attending a town hall meeting, speaking at a regularly scheduled board meeting, or emailing sfmtabudget@sfmta.com.

During overnight hours
(from the end of regular service until opening of regular service)

Saturday, Feb. 18th: 4,200 riders
Sunday, Feb. 19th: 9,100 riders
Monday, Feb. 20th: 2,300 riders

All-day service

Saturday, Feb. 18th: 230,600 riders
Sunday, Feb. 19th: 178,000

For comparison:

Saturday, Sept. 1st, 2007 (highest ridership for a Saturday): 278,600
Sunday, Feb. 5th: 112,700
Sunday, Feb. 12th: 121,000

Updated 2:50 p.m.: Ridership numbers released today show BART had a really big weekend during the closure, including its fifth busiest Saturday ever.

Possible alignment for the Broadway streetcar corridor in Oakland.

Officials will soon launch a new study on the potential costs and benefits associated with building a streetcar line in Oakland (a city which, in the interest of full disclosure, this writer hella loves). This isn’t the first time The O has looked at bringing back rail, but the lack of any viable funding plan means the cars won’t be rolling any time soon.

The idea is to lay rail down a corridor roughly from MacArthur BART to Jack London Square via Broadway – backers promise that the permanency of the rails and catenary would then encourage economic development along the corridor in a way that a bus line could never do. The streetcar corridor would also link established employment centers including Kaiser and Alta Bates Summit Medical Center to BART, Amtrak, and the ferry terminal, as well as the future East Bay Bus Rapid Transit service.

Currently Broadway is served by a number of AC Transit lines as well as the popular Free B shuttle. The shuttle is, as the name implies, fare-free, and operates on an annual budget of nearly $770,000. It is claimed to result in nearly $10 million in purchases for merchants along the corridor, but streetcar backers have their eyes on an even bigger prize – they hope to replicate the success of Portland’s groundbreaking modern streetcar line, which has reportedly resulted in billions of dollars of development in that city.

A search of hotels within a 15-minute transit ride of the Moscone Center in San Francisco using Google Hotel Finder.

A new tool from Google lets users find hotels based on travel time – now it is easy to see hotels that match simple criteria such as “within a 10 minute walk of the convention center” or “no more than a 20 minute transit ride away” . This tool could disrupt the mostly complacent online travel search industry, which has failed to focus on the role transit and walkability plays in the lives of travelers visiting unfamiliar cities.

It is nowhere near as detailed as Walkscore’s Apartment Search tool, which lets you drill down Craigslist housing listings based on advanced criteria such as the proximity to specific bus lines. The interface is also somewhat clunky and Google admits the tool is currently an “experiment”, but hopefully other travel sites will feel the need to step up and offer similar functionality. Give it a try at google.com/hotelfinder.

The totally rad folks at OpenPlans are trying to answer these questions. The non-profit org, whose mission is to promote sustainable mobility with new technology and open data, launched beautiful.st on Valentine’s Day – the site presents users with photos of two streets and asks one simple question: which is more beautiful? All data collected will be publicly available online for anyone to download and parse. [Atlantic Cities]

Spring Street green bike lane in downtown L.A. Photo by LADOT Bike Blog.

The lane in question is on Spring Street, which is sometimes used as a stand-in for a 1920s era big city in car commercials. An especially smug editorial in the L.A. Times claims that the shade of green used on Spring is the problem, as it apparently cannot be digitally edited out. But the real problem is about street space according to a representative from Film L.A., the entity that helps film crews get permits to shoot on-location in the city. From LA Weekly:

“Because they took out a traffic lane, there are difficulties putting filming vehicles on the street,” says Audley.

He estimates that in 2012, about 10 percent of filmmakers who would have otherwise shot in downtown L.A. have stayed away because of the lanes.

…

Film L.A. first learned of the Department of Transportation’s plan for a bicycle-friendly Spring Street when officials asked the org to “move any film crews” that were in the way, according to Audley.

Now, he says his group is deep in negotiations with the mayor (and bicycle advocates) in anticipation of more bike lanes being constructed on surrounding streets — particularly “upper Main, [which] is a heavily filmed area.”

So is it the lane’s shade of green or the loss of some green that is really driving this controversy? Is a street that accommodates non-motorized modes of travel simply unfit for selling cars? Thankfully, LADOT appears to be holding firm on the green bike lane for Spring Street, and we hope that the department’s plans for more green bike lanes aren’t delayed or dialed back just because they may not be film-friendly.