Видео

What a waste of tax payer money that bridge was/is.Iliked the original one better

8 years later this isn’t finished

Please explain how adding lanes to the highway achieves your goal of fewer cars on the road???

hello, is this pilot project currently in-operation? how long (miles) does the automated shuttel bus operate?

🙌 p̲r̲o̲m̲o̲s̲m̲

Should set up a light rail loop

𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐦

I'm a train and I approve this video choo choo!

Of course no protected bike lanes which rules out bicycles.

Very informative presentation Grasi! I would love to see San Francisco implement this, traffic is getting out of control and we could use transit improvements!

Man, I should have earned my degree in Urban Planning, if one was even available when I was in University. A big paycheck, more than my teaching pays, to day dream engineering ideas that may not be built or done with other people's tax money. I oppose most of these concepts.

Most individuals who actually live and own on the Lower Great Highway are against closing the UGH.

Now a sidewalk along Lincoln is one of the few good ideas I hear now.

Planning for a future we are unsure of is a weak way to plan.

Bicycle traffic issues have all been explored before in many US Cities and the best way to go is to leave most major car streets alone and place bicycle routes away from these heavy traffic areas. Simple but you guys are trying to re-invent the wheels so to speak. lol

41st Ave, is a necessary through way and should be widened.

Public Parking along the streets is not enough and is mostly full because so many free parking spots have been removed for various projects. Restoring parking spaces must happen.

Your Pre Covid Data has many limitations which over shadow your ideas/plans for D4 when most of you don't live here or have only for a short time.

Neighbor Ways, as you call them, may be ok for folks using them part of the day but every other street around them get more headaches. I vote No!

Traffic Diverters cause accidents/injuries, especially after dark. You folks are too young to remember these were tried in the Richmond District 40 years ago and were soon removed because they made more trouble.

Raised intersections are one thing but random speed bumps should not be allowed on public streets.

All these proposals cost big tax money that is needed for more urgent issues in SF.

Over the past 30 years or so, Ocean Beach has been destroyed by too many visitors to the point that wild life and endangered species have been threatened and decimated. Fourth of July fireworks being a glaring example of abuse. How can US Park Service enforce no fireworks/fires/ raves if the highway is closed??

There are a majority of reasons most individuals/families do not wish to travel by public transit and thus forcing city residents toward this option will only cost waaaaaay to much when the funds should be used toward improving 19th Ave., Geary, Lombard, Portola, Third Street and Upper Great Highway so vehicles can travel along them more easily/quickly.

It is common sense that closing the Great Highway will not only bring more people from outside the city/area but also cause additional stress and inconvenience for home owners and businesses in D4. Traffic calming in this situation only increases congestion, pollution and energy waste.

The way you collected data on the Judah/G Hwy location is not valid as it can count people/bikes/animals coming and going more than once. This seques the data.

Rec/Park should not be the department in charge of these projects. Wrong and they will go over budget given any funds like they have done on so many other projects. Cal Trans is the the proper agency for the Upper Great Highway issues.

No kidding Mr. Mar, Cars need to be at least an equal part of Westside/Sunset transit choices as the farthest away from Downtown and the major freeways/bridges access. Most Seniors prefer the convenience and safety of private autos, especially after dark. New housing must include some parking for autos.

great discussions. Thanks for these uploads

Barbie's Abortion "Little Sister Debauchery" ruclips.net/video/l7kHQWIEBIU/видео.html

Your department has a false solution in mind and trying to sell it to the residents. No way should we have to pay for accessing city streets. The pandemic will have long term, if not permanent reductions in downtown street use. You’r 15 percent reduction in traffic are already done. Find another project to work on and drop this idea.

Pfft SF creates their own problem so they can justify their new taxes. This is just a perfect example. Homeless industrial complex is another. They wasted money on building out Moscone Center only to watch the conference leave for Vegas. All those extra bike lanes that are empty 80% of the time arent helping except during morning commutes., Those safe bicyclist ignore all the laws and block the lane when turning on red is legal. SF doesnt care about the poor at all thats just an excuse as usual. Why cant they clean up the radiation pollution at Hunters point or Treasure island? they will AFTER they gentrify the poor. My College didnt have a library for 3 years while they built sports facilities that arent even really used. On and ON it goes. From the top to the bottom its all one big corrupt city.

All congestion contributing from Uber and Lyft just charge them charging us will eliminate consumer to district.

This is not a BRT, it does not have level boarding, pre paid fares. and you still have to board one at a time. This is just bus lane

There is already a Westbound on ramp on the otherside of the island

Smart way to go for the future of the 38 .

Small electric cars must be introduce into law ( Required small space & no gas emission )

Cool. Can't wait to see them when they are done! :)

these new ramps will get rid of the stop sign ramps on the West Span and move Exit 4 to the east side of the island.

A lot of work went into these plans.

@Salvia02390 it's because most bus systems are cheap and unappealing to the general public. Buses are already used in most cities of the world as alternative forms of personal transit and serve little to no role in actual economic development.

@spirovision Thanks for your comments. We expect there will be positive benefits in reduced noise pollution due to congestion reduction impacts if a congestion pricing program were implemented. The San Francisco Department of Public Health will consider noise impacts as a part of the Health Impact Assessment (HIA) they are conducting for MAPS.

@tech4156 yeah they did, it was called the subway.

better yet if the buses running on BRT lines are electric trolleybuses. BRT is cheaper than LRT as it does not require steel tracks laid into the streets.

this seems a good idea, but, despite the fact of how attractive it looks on a diagram, imagine the traffic on Van Ness... its horrible!!! and adding that you're cutting 4 lanes, the traffic will be morbidly unthinkable and horryfing, I'd vote for a subway system or more frequent buses, honestly, BRT on Van Ness is not a good idea, from my point of view

If we have center islands, then we will have to get low buses that have doors on both sides of the bus. Hopefully we won't have many accidents from doors opening on the wrong side.

@utterbullspit San Francisco has been operating trolley buses since 1935.

Nashville has a BRT now. They are adding the elements slowly but surley. The platforms and light signaling are going in as we speak.

I'm very glad you San Francisco has decided to go with the trolleybus system. It's much more environmentally friendly than just plain 'ole buses.

People aren't as willing to take buses as they are to take a trolley or the metro, for mere aesthetic reasons and misconceptions. That's the hardest challenge to overcome