Why is there parking on Fifth and Forbes through Uptown? (Oakland: how much, houses)

[ferraris]

Yesteray, while The Batman was ruining my commute, I noticed just how much space parked cares take up on Fifth and Forbes in uptown. Removing parking on those streets could easily allow for another lane or two to be added along these roads, which are quite prone to rush hour traffic. Hopefully the commission studying rapid bus transit between downtown and Oakland will come to a similar conclusion and add a bus lane.

It was so slow that people were deboarding the bus and walking. I see this happen fairly often, but yesterday more than half of the bus got off before we even got to Pride. No doubt most of them were in for a walk of a mile or more to transfer downtown. I wouldn't be surprised if they got there faster than the bus did, to be honest. It was to the point that the bus driver actually shut the engine off. The way it is set up now, we're inconveniencing thousands and thousands of people each day so that maybe a few hundred at most are able to park.

[BrianTH]

Parking has a powerful voice in local governments (for highly dubious reasons), but for what it is worth I agree with you, and I actually suspect the BRT study will recommend taking two full lanes (maybe both on one street, or one on each).

[robrobrob]

I used to take a bus through Uptown every so often. I notice two things, a number of people take the bus into town after parking on a side street, because of the free downtown zone, and two, there are way too many stops in Uptown.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by robrobrob

I used to take a bus through Uptown every so often. I notice two things, a number of people take the bus into town after parking on a side street, because of the free downtown zone, and two, there are way too many stops in Uptown.

I might notice the abundance of stops if the bus was moving.

You're right that lots of people do use Uptown as a make shift park 'n ride. There are plenty of discounted parking lots and side streets that they could use instead. A few hundred cars getting a parking space is not worth delaying thousands and thousands of other drivers and bus riders.

[BrianTH]

I'm also sure the BRT study will recommend fewer stops.

[robrobrob]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I'm also sure the BRT study will recommend fewer stops.

I understand that the trend is to have 50 meetings and to do a study before making a decision. However, I do think that this should be common sense. I would think that someone inside PAT, whether it is a driver or an administrator or both should look overy evey schedule and be able to make suggestions about this kind of stuff. There has to be someone who has the experience to make these tough calls without ordering a study.

[Bong477]

Can we get rid of parking on beechwood between 376 and the waterfront too? thanks.

[pman]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Parking has a powerful voice in local governments (for highly dubious reasons), but for what it is worth I agree with you, and I actually suspect the BRT study will recommend taking two full lanes (maybe both on one street, or one on each).

parking is also a useful way to buffer pedestrians from street traffic so they don't feel like they are walking on the side of a highway...BRT notwithstanding. I tend to like the idea of two lanes on one street with center island platforms but this would require buses to run in opposite lanes than normal and might be too expensive versus curbside pickup. we shall see.

[robrobrob]

Originally Posted by Bong477

Can we get rid of parking on beechwood between 376 and the waterfront too? thanks.

That would make way too much sense.

Most of those houses have driveways too so parking really isn't needed. However, backing out would be a nightmare.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by robrobrob

I understand that the trend is to have 50 meetings and to do a study before making a decision. However, I do think that this should be common sense. I would think that someone inside PAT, whether it is a driver or an administrator or both should look overy evey schedule and be able to make suggestions about this kind of stuff. There has to be someone who has the experience to make these tough calls without ordering a study.

That's actually been done, although they hired outside consultants to do it. For what they called The Transit Development Plan, they went route by route and made recommendations, and in fact many of those recommendations have been implemented.

In this case, they recommended converting these to what they called "Rapid Bus" routes, which was a phaseable plan, the first phases of which would include simple things like cutting the number of stops. They may well just do that, but it appears they are using this money (most of which is federal) to build the case for upgrading the service on this route much more.