Gary Hewitt
@garyhewitt.bsky.social
120 followers 220 following 110 posts
Husband, Father, & Transit Planner. I do all my own opinions.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
garyhewitt.bsky.social
The “What is your car payment?” outtakes.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
When you forgot to publish a new GTFS file before the service change.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
They lowered the fare to 50 cents for three years.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
Systemwide ridership is still not close to their peak ridership in 1985 when they had no rail service.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
Talk to SANDAG. There is a process where they can provide GIS files to Google for them to update maps. contentpartners.maps.google.com/welcome?visi...
contentpartners.maps.google.com
garyhewitt.bsky.social
The Padres throwing elaborate parties for their executives while claiming they can’t pay their employees a living wage is not the best look. Doing it at a city park for free is 🤌.
@lorenagonzalez.bsky.social @seanelorivera.bsky.social @sdcitycouncil.bsky.social
garyhewitt.bsky.social
I see a 46-train schedule coming in the near future. Take a look at who is on their Board.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
Should they have built a station here based on the community plan? Maybe not, but is does serve as a park-n-ride, which has some utility for the community. If SB 79 was in place, they definitely would not have put a station here.
Reposted by Gary Hewitt
ndrew.bsky.social
remember folks, we cant have gun restrictions because if we do the federal government will occupy our streets, imprison people without due process, ship dissidents to foreign gulags and things of that nature
garyhewitt.bsky.social
✅ Physical inactivity

😅
garyhewitt.bsky.social
VOSD will not acknowledge that Board of Supervisors seats are nonpartisan. Referring to all local officials as Democrats or Republicans has contributed to local politics’ divisiveness. We need space for the 25% of registered voters who aren’t members of either party to serve in elected positions.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
I support dense housing near transit. But we need safeguards preventing cities from sabotaging transit service to avoid housing obligations. Otherwise, SB 79 risks becoming a Pyrrhic victory that harms both housing AND transit goals.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
The perverse incentive: Local cities may prioritize avoiding SB 79 impacts over improving public transportation. We could see transit expansion slow just as California needs more ridership and many transit agencies face financial strain.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
Transit capital projects already face enormous barriers: regulation, local opposition, funding gaps, and years-long approval processes. SB 79 adds another layer where agencies must weigh: “Will this new line trigger housing mandates that kill local support?”
garyhewitt.bsky.social
SB 79’s intentions are admirable - it aims to address California’s housing shortage and increase transit ridership. Transit-oriented development IS crucial for climate goals and affordability. But implementation matters.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
Even worse: existing commuter rail stations could face closure. If a city wants to avoid SB 79’s housing requirements, shutting down a station becomes a viable option. This would impact current transit customer while technically complying with the law.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
I’ve already been asked/directed by cities to cut current and planned bus service levels to avoid the existing CEQA streamlining requirements. SB 79 applies to “major bus rapid transit (BRT) stops” - cities might downgrade service frequency or eliminate BRT designations to sidestep the law entirely.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
As a transit planner, I’m concerned SB 79 may inadvertently halt new high-quality transit projects in California. Local elected officials on transit boards will not likely approve new projects where they would lose land use control.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
There are all these militias that were supposedly organized to fight back the unconstitutional overreach of the federal government. They are actually a bunch of pussies that never really cared about the constitution.
garyhewitt.bsky.social
To keep up the shtick, Newsom’s team needs to post “SOME PEOPLE ARE SAYING SANDWICH GUY WAS TREATED VERY UNFAIRLY. THEY SAY HE WAS JUST TRYING TO EAT DINNER. I WILL LOOK AT PARDONING HIM DAY ONE.”
garyhewitt.bsky.social
People will start parking outside the zone and walking, so they’ll likely need to extend the zone south into Barrio Logan. The zone limits look like the existing Downtown parking district borders, which they likely did for convenience.