The Coalition for Fair, Legal and Environmental Transit have filed a lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court against the city’s pilot program for the tech shuttles. Here is a draft of the lawsuit.
“We have observed with our own eyes, and looked at numerous research studies that show the shuttle buses are impacting our communities and our neighborhoods by increasing the cost of housing, and causing rising rents and in fact even heightened eviction activity in areas adjacent to shuttle shops,” she said.
The lawsuit alleges that the city’s pilot project violates California vehicle code by allowing private shuttles to pull into red zones designated as bus stops and state environmental law that requires a review of any project with possible environmental impacts. READ THE FULL STORY HERE.
A “Mission District Resident” being scared of Mission Street…the irony is not lost….
Where did “mission resident” say he was scared of Mission Street.
I took him as simply saying that shuttles should pick up where the passengers live, and not in some more distant location.
And I suspect most tech workers live west of Mission, and probably west of Valencia.
Hey, I got a great idea, Einstein: let’s all have giant Muni buses pick us up and drop us off at our doors!
Are you even trying anymore, or are you just on autonomic nervous system auto-pilot, barfing up whatever crap you can muster?
2Beers, I made no statement about the size of any bus so I have no idea why you attribute that to me.
What I did say is that there are different kinds of buses, on different routes, serving different purposes and populations, and with different cost structures.
You appear to have a problem with that for reasons that are not evident.
So, you group google buses with Super Shuttle, as opposed to Muni. Got it.
If you can’t discern between a small Super Shuttle van and a giant fucking google bus, or the difference in their routes, you’re too stupid to be posting on the internet.
Ok, schmuck, you win: next time you call for a Super Shuttle, let’s send a nice, convenient google bus and have them pull into your driveway.
I hate to break it to you, but you’re a moron.
These activists can’t possibly think that if the shuttles are outlawed, that tech workers will suddenly move down to the Peninsula, can they?
We can hope, can’t we?
I don’t think they’re doing much thinking.
If we go back to no shuttles, air pollution will rise and traffic will be worse.
Yeah, because using CalTrain, carpools, and electric cars, and encouraging people to live closer to work, aren’t possible.
They are carpooling.
…in giant, out-of-place vehicles that make many trips with just a few people on board.
The slope ain’t that slippery, my friend.
Enjoy your Saturday.
Freedom and liberty? Oh, holster that firearm.
I think getting your “freedom” undies in a bunch over a property owner being told what he can and cannot do with his property is perfectly justifiable.
I think getting your “freedom” undies in a bunch over what route a shuttle should take to best not disrupt a community is silly.
Zaphod, I’m not saying where the shuttles should stop. That is purely a private matter between the shuttle riders and their employers.
I assume that the employers know where their employees live, know what their preferences are, and arrange the stops accordingly.
As long as the vehicles are allowed on the streets they take, according to whatever size and weight regulations apply, it is quite simply none of anyone else’s business where they stop.
The so-called tolerance of SF is vaporizing. In recent weeks I’ve heard people wanting to stop workers taking a bus, they want to stop people renting out a room in their home for the odd night, and stop people paying gas money to ride in someone else’s car.
WTF is going on? And whatever happened to freedom and liberty? I’m fairly damn sure I don’t want to stop people doing what they want. And yet everywhere I turn, others seem to want to regulate private, personal acts.
Edit: I said “over half a mile” above. I forgot about a couple guys that walk a lot further than that.
(and, again, I’m not saying half a mile is far or an inconvenience or anything to wine about; I’m saying it to make my point that two more blocks is not a big deal)
John, you’re right that the shuttles are about convenience, but you’re wrong about what the most important convenience is.
The whole point of the shuttles is convenience over driving, not absolute convenience of where the pick-up spot is. Convenience of where to be picked up has to be reasonable, but it does not have to be on the immediate block or two.
Example: I know plenty of people who walk over half a mile to their shuttles. Yes, half a mile is not that far in absolute terms (I say this to quiet the people who say, “oohhhh, half a mile is soooo far… cry me a river”), but it certainly is not right next door. And shuttle riders are willing to do this. Why? Because it beats the heck out of driving. Walk two more blocks? I think you’d be surprised.
Lastly, you do realize you’re lecturing somebody who rides the shuttles on how he will ride the shuttles? I kinda think I know what I’m talking about.
Holy moly! You guys have been busy!
Marcos – yeah, SVN is busy, but we’re in a city so of course there are going to be busy city streets. And I think it’s better than Valencia for the busses precisely for the same reason it’s busy: it’s more of a thru-way than a smallish neighborhood street. Plus there are two lanes so traffic can pass the busses pulling over.
John – I usually find you to be a voice of reason, but you really stepped in it this time ;). Anyway, I think you’d be surprised at how far some tech workers would be willing to walk to their bus. And if the masses of tech bus riders do balk at walking an extra two blocks if it makes everybody’s Mission a better place (which I don’t think they’d do), then the anti tech bus crowd really have a legitimate reason to complain.
And two beers: I’ve responded to your repeated name calling and distractions with with requests to stop and focus on an actual problem. You call that riding a high horse. I disagree. But, whatever: I don’t care about that. Curious: do you have any thoughts on SVN?
Every time you say something so asinine that I think you can’t possibly top yourself in stupidity, you prove me wrong.
Dudes, what part of the word “shuttle” don’t you guys get?
A shuttle picks you up at or near your home. A regular transit bus forces you to stand forever on some interminable sketchy street like Mission or Potrero.
And you wonder why people don’t want to wait there for their shuttle?
Yeah, South Van Ness is not traffic clogged as it is, it can handle plenty of more load. Precious Valencia Street must be kept pristine and free of annoyances.
Hey, Zap, get off your high horse. Your unsolicited response to me above dripped condescension. Sorry if my snark upset your cultivated sensibilities.
John, you freaking clown, you abomination of nature, when I call Super Shuttle, they don;t send a GIANT BUS down my two lane street.,a GIAN BUS that is a menace to pedestrians and bikers alike.
Are you really as stupid as you sound?
Take a course in reading comprehension, please. Zaphod, not two beers, suggested South Van Ness.
Every time you write a comment based on your misreading of an article’s or other comment’s content, you confirm your lack of intellect and critical reasoning ability.
CCSF has excellent, affordable classes to help you overcome your deficiencies.
TwoBeers is being disingenuous. He knows that folks won’t want to wait for a bus on SVN and that is why he is suggesting it.
He doesn’t get that the whole point of the shuttle is to stop where people live. When you call for the airport shuttle, they don’t suggest that you drag your bags across a few windswept block to a nondescript sketchy location and then just sit, wait and rot.
It’s very difficult for two sides to reach an agreement when the response to one side’s reasonable suggestion is met by the other with [1] caricatures and [2] assumption of motive.
Why don’t you evaluate the idea of So. Van Ness based on it’s merit from where you’re concerned and let the opposing side do the same? You still haven’t done that. All you’ve done is taken pot shots, invented motive and assigned blame.
There’s a reasonable compromise to this problem somewhere. Help find it.
Google, Yahoo, EA, et al, don’t _want_ to go down S Van Ness. There’s no cache in going down S Van Ness. No one who matters, sitting at a table at Farina Pizza, can see them on S Van Ness. There are no important eyeballs on S Van Ness. The techies don’t want to decamp on S Van Ness, They want to be on Valencia. It doesn’t matter that S Van Ness is an actual commuter street, with few bikes and pedestrians, and Valencia is a crowded commercial street.
You think the tech companies just chose Valencia and Dolores Park at random? It’s employer advertising.
Darn. I thought there was a chance at some actual useful dialog with somebody who opposes the tech busses. But instead…back to snark.
“Why not just shoot straight-up So. Van Ness?”
Dude, that’s three whole blocks from Tacolicious, and an insurmountable four blocks from Dolores Park. Are you crazy?!
So the problem is the routes and the frequency of trips? You know what…
Holy moly! These actually sounds like a couple of reasonable complaints! Are we really going to have constructive dialog instead of name calling and finger pointing???
As a tech bus rider myself (and a 10-year city resident, renter the whole time), I think you’ve got some valid points here. The routes down Valencia with multiple turns always seemed kinda stupid to me. Why not just shoot straight-up So. Van Ness?
Partial solution to invented cause of a real problem.