Skip to content

Posts from the Bicycling Category

11 Comments

A Month After Kate and Heather’s Deaths, Mayor Lee Takes Action

The vigil for Kate Slattery. Photo: Streetsblog.

Last month’s vigil for Kate Slattery. Photo: Streetsblog.

It’s a little over a month since two cyclists were killed in one night on San Francisco’s streets: Kate Slattery, who was killed South of Market, and Heather Miller, who died while riding in Golden Gate Park. Today, in a rare move, Mayor Edwin Lee, after talks with the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, issued an Executive Directive to bring safety improvements to the locations where they were killed.

The Directive includes instructions for:

  • SFMTA to deliver near­-term safety improvements on 7th and 8th Streets in the next nine months
  • The SF Recreation & Parks Department (SF Rec & Park) and SFMTA to deliver near­-term safety improvements to reduce speeds and vehicular through­-traffic on JFK Drive in the next six months
  • SF Rec & Park and SFMTA to initiate a study of expanded traffic calming and traffic restrictions in Golden Gate Park within the next three months

More details on the complete directive in a moment. First, some background.

The San Francisco Bicycle Coalition started pushing right away to get some action in response to the horrors of June 22. Streetsblog readers should take a moment and add to their letter-writing campaign by clicking here.

Brian Wiedenmeier, the Bicycle Coalition’s new executive director, has been in near constant contact with the Mayor’s office, SFPD, and SFMTA. In his own words:

Over the last month, the Mayor’s office has reached out to us, along with several city agencies, to meet regularly and develop a plan of action in light of the tragic fatalities on June 22. Informed by what we are hearing from our members through the 1,500 emails directed to the Mayor, we are approaching those meetings with the goal of seeing prompt, specific safety improvements delivered not just to the sites of two fatal collisions, but to streets across San Francisco.

We are urging the Mayor to demonstrate his commitment to Vision Zero by ensuring city departments take immediate actions to implement protected bike lanes, deliver significant safety improvements to the streets that saw the tragic fatalities of the past month, ensure SFPD focuses enforcement on the most dangerous traffic violations and speed the delivery of Vision Zero projects.

Read more…

53 Comments

Streetsblog Talks with Lisa Feldstein about BART

This post supported by

Outgoing BART Board President Tom Radulovich endorsed Attorney and Planning Instructor Lisa Feldstein for his replacement. Photo: Streetsblog.

Outgoing BART Board President Tom Radulovich endorsed planning instructor Lisa Feldstein for his replacement. Photo: Streetsblog.

20-year BART board veteran and current board president Tom Radulovich announced yesterday that he will not seek re-election this November. Additionally, he endorsed a replacement: Lisa Feldstein, an instructor at the University of San Francisco. It looks as if Feldstein is going to have quite a bit of competition for Radulovich’s seat. That said, Streetsblog figured it worth talking with Feldstein to find out what she’s all about and to learn her vision for BART. Streetsblog caught up with her yesterday afternoon at a coffee shop near the Balboa Park BART station.

*

Streetsblog: Let’s start with the obvious question. Who are you and why do you want this job?

Lisa Feldstein: I’m a planner and transportation geek and I care a lot about BART. It’s the spine of the region and there’s a lot we need to do so it serves today’s commuters. I grew up in NYC. My grandfather drove a city bus and my dad was from San Francisco. He always talked about San Francisco like it was paradise on earth. So I went to law school in Berkeley, with a plan to return to the East Coast. But I met my spouse. BART has been part of my life ever since, getting to and from jobs, Berkeley law, which I graduated from in 1992, and then I went back to school in 2007 to get a planning degree.

SB: So this is hardly your first foray into politics and planning?

LF:  I was appointed to the San Francisco Planning Commission by former Supervisor Tom Ammiano. Then from there I took a job with a non-profit, teaching public health professionals in planning. The idea was public health professionals have to clean up from planning decisions. Planning and public health started as one thing, and they separated. Planners made non-walkable suburbs which helped with communicable disease but led to chronic disease.

SB: Such as diabetes and heart disease from the lack of exercise?

LF: Public health people had figured out what the problem was but had no idea how to intervene so my job was to teach them at the front end so they could work with planning departments.

SB: And now it’s generally recognized that bad planning leads to bad public health outcomes.

LF: Right. And the partnership [between health and planning] has been very successful, putting health elements into general plans.

SB: You had a law degree. But you decided to go back and study planning, even though you were already working in it?

LF: My daughter was young at the time. And I burned out on all the travel, but I liked the teaching part. So I went back and got a PhD so I could teach.

SB: You’ve been doing that for a while. So you want to get back into hands-on work with BART?

LF: I like the idea of being able to stick my hands back in and make some positive change on issues that I’ve been thinking about for so long. Some of that is transportation specific, but a lot of it has to do with equity.

SB: How so?

LF: BART is not that old a system, but it was created for a white middle class, mostly men, and that’s not really the ridership anymore.

SB: Right. If you look at old pictures of BART, the ridership is very, well, monochromatic.

LF: Today’s ridership is much more diverse, racially, socially, economically and we don’t have a single commute pattern anymore.

SB: It’s not just people commuting from the suburbs to Market Street.

LF: Lots of people, particularly low income, are commuting from suburb to suburb. BART is over capacity and it doesn’t serve the needs of the Bay Area’s population today.

SB: Right. So if you’re working a night shift, BART kind of sucks.

LF: When I was studying for my qualifying exam in planning, the last Transbay service was like at 12:02. If I missed it, I had to walk miles to get a bus that ran all night. So I’ll be advocating for extended service, but I understand there are real issues with maintenance. BART has to have buses, at least, that run all night.

SB: You’re talking about a dedicated service?

LF: Yes, to help people work swing shifts, night shifts and weekends.

SB: What are some other things you hope to work on with BART?

LF: The platforms at rush hour; they get backed up onto the stairs. It’s a matter of time before someone falls–we need to manage the capacity.

SB: Sounds like you would support peak pricing, like commuter railroads back east.

LF: Part of BART’s problem is it’s not quite commuter rail, but it’s not quite a subway either. You can do peak hour pricing, but BART’s already expensive. The pricing structure looks like commuter rail, so you end up creating further inequities for people who don’t have other choices. Lower income people have the least flexibility, but you’re now asking them to pay more. BART doesn’t even have monthly passes, so if you moved to a peak-ride cost, you have to first do something about passes.

The other problem, especially for low income people, is BART is connected to 28 other transit systems. It’s outrageous that when you transfer from BART to Muni you get a discount, but not in the other direction. AC transit used to have the reduced fare for transfers, but they had budget problems. So that was something that just got eliminated.

SB: Travel to Europe, to a city such as London, and you have one card and one fare and you can ride anything. We have Clipper–but there are still so many different agencies with different fares. Why can’t we get the fare structure more rational?

LF: The Europeans have the advantage that the government structure is more centralized. The government can say “you’re going to do it this way.” But here–and it’s the same with land use planning–every jurisdiction does whatever it wants.

SB: Which is why we have a suburban-style McDonald’s with a drive through on Ocean on a major transportation corridor?

LF: Or the one near me on Haight and Stanyan. But even near a BART station, usually, once you get back to ground level, it’s not BART’s jurisdiction. But it’s not as if BART always does a great job either. Look at the plazas at 16th and 24th and Mission. Read more…

29 Comments

Advocates Renew Push for West Alameda Estuary Bike and Pedestrian Bridge

This post supported by

Cyndy Johnsen (glasses) and Lucy Gigli in the coffee shop "office" of BikeWalk Alameda. Photo: Streetsblog.

Cyndy Johnsen (glasses) and Lucy Gigli in the coffee shop “office” of BikeWalk Alameda. Photo: Streetsblog.

There are few places in the Bay Area where the expression “you can’t get there from here” more aptly applies. Stand at the estuary at Jack London Square, and one can see the west Alameda piers clearly, just a half-mile away. But try to get there and it turns into a two-mile-plus circuitous trek that requires back tracking towards Oakland to the entrance of the tunnels. By bike or on foot, it means a miserable, loud, and uncomfortable journey through the Posey Tube, with its narrow sidewalk and railing.

“We know a bridge is the only solution that is really going to solve Alameda’s west-end traffic problem,” said Lucy Gigli, President of the volunteer organization BikeWalkAlameda, in a meeting with Streetsblog at Julie’s Coffee & Tea Garden on Park Street, one of the organization’s unofficial offices. “It’s the most favorable solution that will meet the long term goals.”

That’s why Gigli, Cyndy Johnsen (another advocate and volunteer with the group), and BikeEastBay are pushing for a bike and pedestrian bridge across the estuary–one similar to the Bay Farm Island Bicycle Bridge, which spans the San Leandro Bay inlet to the Oakland Estuary. That bridge, which was completed in 1995, is roughly 860 feet long and cost $3.5 million. It is also the only bike-and-pedestrian drawbridge in the U.S. The bridge to Jack London would be longer, of course, and, according to an initial study, would cost roughly $60 million. “People say it’s too expensive, but people don’t really know; some say if it’s just for bikes and peds, who’s going to use it?” said Johnsen.

But the arguments for building the bridge are clearly delineated in BikeWalkAlameda’s material:

  • The Posey Tube/Oakland Connection is identified as the number one priority in the City of Alameda Bicycle Master Plan.
  • Pedestrians and bicyclists are limited to the Posey Tube walkway, which is so narrow that it cannot accommodate wheelchairs, bike trailers, or two passing bikes even with the increased width created in 2016.
  • Tube capacity is limited and congestion is growing.
  • A ride or walk through the Tube exposes one to sooty walls and smelly, toxic fumes.
  • For this short crossing, bus access is limited and costly ($2.10); the bus capacity for bicyclists is limited to only two or three bikes per bus.
  • During peak hours, bike racks are often full, which makes the service unreliable for bicyclists.
  • The bus and shuttles do not provide alternatives to the tubes and are subject to traffic delays.
  • The Estuary Crossing and Target shuttles have limited hours and 30-minute headways.

From the shortline of Jack London Square, west Alameda is tantalizingly close, but getting there by bike or foot is an ordeal. Photo: Streetsblog.

From the shoreline of Jack London Square, west Alameda is tantalizingly close, but getting there by bike or foot is an ordeal. Photo: Streetsblog.

Read more…

14 Comments

Streetsblog Talks with Supervisor Jane Kim, Part II

This post supported by

D11 Supervisor Jane Kim at her desk in City Hall. Photo: Streetsblog.

D6 Supervisor Jane Kim at her desk in City Hall. Photo: Streetsblog.

Two weeks ago, Streetsblog did a Q&A with San Francisco Supervisor Jane Kim. Kim was on a trip to New York and arranged to do the interview by phone. Unfortunately, the connection was intermittent, there was some miscommunication, and the interview had to be cut short. A few days later, Kim asked Streetsblog if we could continue the conversation. Fair enough. (Since Kim is in a tight race for the California State Senate seat for District 11 with Supervisor Scott Wiener, Streetsblog will do another interview with him as well).

In this follow up, Streetsblog talked with Kim about the State Senate, the search for a new police chief, Transbay and more topics of importance to livable streets advocates. But first on her mind was Tuesday night’s marathon budget negotiations, which didn’t turn out entirely as she would have liked.

*

Streetsblog: So the Board was here past 10 pm–the budget passed and there will be a sales tax increase on the November ballot.

Jane Kim: I supported the point-five sales tax measure, because it’s a swap out of our existing sales tax.

SB: But not the .75 percent increase that passed?

JK: I wanted the city to look at alternative revenue. It [a sales tax] is ultimately a regressive tax. I don’t want to depend on that for essential city services,

SB: What else then?

Read more…

15 Comments

SPUR Talk: Gabe Klein on Technology and Past and Future Cities

This post supported by

Transportation guru Gabe Klein presents to an audience at SPUR in Oakland. Photo: Streetsblog.

Transportation guru Gabe Klein presents to an audience at SPUR in Oakland. Photo: Streetsblog.

Gabe Klein, entrepreneur, writer and former head of transportation for Chicago and Washington DC, spoke yesterday afternoon at the Oakland office of the San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association (SPUR) about how technology can be guided to shape the future of our cities.

He put up a slide with a chilling number on it: 1.24 million–the number of people killed in car wrecks every year globally. That number will reach 3.6 million by 2030, as driving becomes more prevalent in the developing world. He wondered why people tolerate so much carnage. “We [the US] lost 35,000 people on the road last year–an increase of 10 percent because gas was cheap and people were driving more.”

Sadly, those alarming numbers don’t even account for deaths from automobile pollution or rising sea levels and other effects of global warming. “The transportation sector is spewing out more [greenhouse gas emissions] than everything else,” Klein said. Global warming “…is man made. We’re the only country with people who think it’s not real; convenient if you’re a Koch Brother, but not for the rest of us,” he quipped.
Read more…

1 Comment

Accomplishments and Looking Ahead at the Golden Wheel Awards

Scott Wiener addresses the audience during the Golden Wheel Awards. Photo: SFBC.

Scott Wiener addresses the audience during the Golden Wheel Awards. Photo: SFBC.

Last night the Golden Wheel Awards were presented at the San Francisco War Memorial and Performing Arts Center in downtown San Francisco. This year’s winners: Nicole Ferrara, Executive Director of Walk San Francisco, and Assemblyman Phil Ting.

The event, which was attended by some 300 planners, city staffers, advocates, and other officialdom, celebrated recent accomplishments in making San Francisco a more people and bike-friendly place. But it was also a fervent call to action.

To kick off the ceremony, the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition’s new executive director, Brian Wiedenmeier, talked about his main goals for the organization. “People who bike in San Francisco should look like people who live in San Francisco. We must include more people of color and lower income residents,” he said. “I pledge we will continue to fight hard for protected bike lanes throughout the city. On Market Street alone we call for fully separated and protected bike lanes from Embarcadero to Octavia.”

Read more…

156 Comments

Collecting Data to Push for Safer Biking on Valencia

This post supported by

One of some 50 cars that blocked the bike lane on one side of Valencia between 16th and 17th at the peak hour Tuesday night. Photo: Streetsblog.

Altogether, some 50 cars took turns blocking the bike lane on the west side of Valencia between 16th and 17th at the peak hour Tuesday night. Photo: Streetsblog.

During yesterday evening’s rush hour, safe streets advocates, organized by Catherine Orland, District 9 representative to the Bicycle Advisory Committee and longtime member and volunteer with the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, started collecting hard data about how often the bike lanes on Valencia Street are blocked by motorists. Take a wild guess what they found: the bike lanes are a de facto loading-and-drop-off zone for cars.  Read more…

No Comments

Eyes on the Street: Tenderloin Sunday Streets

This post supported by

IMG_20160710_130542

Nathan Woody of the San Francisco Yellow Bike Project pauses while working on this slick little two-wheeler during Sunday Streets in the Tenderloin. Check out those tassels! Photo: Streetsblog.

Sunday from 11 to 4 p.m. it was the Tenderloin’s turn to enjoy its streets free of car traffic. The route followed Fulton St. between Hyde and Larkin, Larkin to Ellis St., Ellis to Jones St., Jones to Golden Gate Ave., and Golden Gate back to Larkin St. The streets were filled with various activities and opportunities, including a “kid’s bike swap” with the San Francisco Yellow Bike Project, seen above, where families could bring their children’s bikes to have them repaired or, if necessary, replaced for free (or with a donation).

That wasn’t the only thing available for Tenderloin families. A petting zoo was set up in the new bike lane on Golden Gate. Note: that’s the only time anything should be parked in that bike lane.

RoadHog IMG_20160710_113741

Usually it gets our goat when some turkey hogs the bike lane. Photo: Streetsblog.

Read more…

No Comments

Streetsblog Talks with Supervisor Jane Kim

This post supported by

Jane Kim during Bike to Work Day. Photo: SFBC

Jane Kim during Bike to Work Day. Photo: SFBC

Supervisor Jane Kim represents San Francisco’s District 6, which includes the Civic Center area, Mission Bay, South of Market, and the Tenderloin. Kim also sits on the SF County Transportation Authority’s Vision Zero Sub-Committee, where last week she took SFMTA to task for not moving fast enough to install safety measures that might have saved the lives of Kate Slattery and Amelie Le Moullac, two cyclists killed in her district on a route she cycles herself.

Streetsblog did a phone interview with Kim, who is currently traveling on the East Coast, to find out her hopes and vision for how San Francisco can make its streets safer and less dominated by automobiles.

*

Streetsblog: You may have seen a photo circulating around—I saw it on the SF Bike Ride Crew’s Facebook page—of SFPD cracking down on cyclists on the Third Street bridge for riding on the sidewalk. Meanwhile, during the vigil for Kate Slattery, safe-streets advocate Randall Dietel tracked a car with a radar gun blowing through a red light at 65.  How do we get SFPD to focus precious resources on stopping deadly activities?

Jane Kim: We have been asking for more enforcement from SFPD and SFMTA but that’s just one way of changing behaviors. Speed was a factor in the case of the two recent fatalities. This is something the board has been asking for since 2014. I do see southern station [officers] a lot on Folsom, between Sixth and Seventh. I see them ticket cars in the mornings, but it’s not consistent throughout the day, and these [the speeders that killed Slattery and the one that sped past her vigil] occurred late at night. And that’s probably when the speeding is really occurring; we need to see this enforcement at night. Read more…

164 Comments

Guest Editorial: Driverless Cars Could Wreck Livable Cities

This meme which floated around last week illustrates why driverless cars offer little progress towards building sustainable cities." width="580" height="435" /> A tweet by Jon Orcutt illustrates why driverless cars offer little towards sustainable cities.

A tweet by Jon Orcutt illustrates why driverless cars offer little towards sustainable cities.

Over the past year driverless cars have been promoted as a panacea for livable cities. The storyline is that driverless cars will help reduce car ownership, free-up urban space for walking and biking, and help reduce death and injury. The USDOT has joined the parade with its “smart city challenge,” awarding Columbus, Ohio a $40 million prize to implement a demonstration project that includes incorporating driverless cars.

San Francisco was among the finalists for this award, but it might be a good thing that the city fell short. San Francisco’s political establishment – the mayor, Board of Supervisors, and its proxies at the SFMTA and Planning Department – frequently talk up their sustainable transportation ambitions, but by and large, when it comes to decisions about San Francisco streets, they pander to motorists. With driverless cars and other “connected” vehicles, the pandering may intensify. We’ll see more, not fewer cars.

Here’s why. Read more…