Skip to content

Recent Comments

  1.  

    NoeValleyJim

    I kept my eye out but didn’t see you. Where were you?

  2.  

    Matt Laroche

    Supervisors Avalos and Wiener are on opposite sides of SF’s political spectrum, but I disagree that they’re “on opposite sides of the traditional political divisions”.

  3.  

    Mountain Viewer

    Maybe, Amsterdam (and other overseas locales) use more red lights (pun unintended) than stop signs for controlled intersections and for protecting pedestrians?

  4.  

    Easy

    It’s a great sign when you have two Supervisors that are on opposite sides of the traditional political divisions both arguing in your favor. Thank you Avalos and Wiener!

  5.  

    Easy

    Market doesn’t connect directly to Embarcadero, so I don’t think a lot of drivers find their way in anyhow.

  6.  

    GarySFBCN

    Like I’ve stated before, I’m not sure this is going to work in San Francisco, but holy crap, develop good data indicators and good data collection methods, establish solid baseline data, then implement it for 2 years and evaluate the outcome. Institute any needed changes to the ‘program’ by the end of year one.

    If more pedestrians, bicyclists and drivers are getting injured/killed and/or there are more collisions because of this law, scrap it.

    Otherwise make it permanent.

    Bicycle advocates may want to develop messaging that states why this benefits everyone, not just bicyclists.

  7.  

    Andy Thornley

    Ah, yes, a page out of “Idaho, the Golden Rule, the SFPD, and You”:

    http://sf-now.com/sf-bike/PKSF51_APT.pdf

    And San Francisco definitely needs to get competitive with Amsterdam on STOP sign eradication, and learn what those shark’s teeth mean (at least we’re using them) . . .

  8.  

    jd_x

    Interesting. I was wondering how they dealt with this in the bicycle capital of the world. Would love to hear more about this. It’s high time the US starts learning from the best, which is Northern Europe, when it comes to livable, safe cities.

  9.  

    murphstahoe

    Jym is right. It’s become self-fulfilling. At this point people who approach an intersection without a stop sign in their face assume the opposite road has a 2 way stop – the concept of an uncontrolled intersection is completely foreign (pun intended).

    We have a 3 way intersection on our street where the opposite occurs – the road T-ing into our street has a stop, but ours does not. Motorists come up to the stop sign, stop, and then proceed regardless of oncoming traffic which has no stop sign and a 35 MPH speed limit. They just assume that it’s a 3 way stop. Collisions are not very rare.

  10.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Nicasio Nakamine – If we return both Fell and Oak to their original two-way configurations, they could handle a road diet, and there’d be room for these lanes. Win/Win/Win

  11.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Jimbo – Well, here you’re inflammatory by instantly misrepresenting what was written in the comment you are putatively commenting to, which is trolling. Earlier, you were inflammatory by making false claims of racism on this site.

  12.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Micke – This is pretty much nationwide. Go overseas and STOP signs are rare, because they expect motorists to know and follow the rules for right-of-way. In the U.S. we have mostly given up on that and use STOP signs to try to slow motorists down a little bit.

    Last night I went to a book-reading by an author who’s making an inventory of STOP signs in Amsterdam. They’ve only found 3.

  13.  

    murphstahoe

    This is as bad a solution as saying put the cyclists on Page. Pedestrians should have full run of the park.

  14.  

    Dan Allison

    The phrase “Bicyclists shall always yield to others at intersections, …” is problematic. This could be interpreted as meaning they have to yield to everyone, even when it is their turn. Better words would be “Bicyclists will take their turn according to right-of-way rules at intersections, …”

  15.  

    ARRO

    To be honest, these turn restrictions have just made the whole downtown area more of a circus then it already was simply pushing “some” traffic off Market and slowing other streets and Muni lines. Market is still the same old same old with zombie pedestrians crossing willy-nilly in front of traffic and taxis/ride shares double parking wherever they please. The bike infrastructure is also lacking and inconsistent creating a conflict with motorists. There should be a complete re-design that incorparates dedicated transit lanes,a lane for private autos, and protected bike lanes. I’m pretty amazed at the lack of innovation and poor planning…

  16.  

    Mario Tanev

    Bikes have greater than 3% mode share yet do not get even 3% of all street space in San Francisco. Fell St is just part of the network, so it doesn’t mean that every st in the network should be equally fair. If it were equally fare, Fell St AND EVERY OTHER STREET would consist of at least one bus lane, whether it’s used or not. Further, bicyclists are a small percentage of Fell users because it’s currently a very dangerous street. Put a protected bike lane and see bicyclists increase.

  17.  

    Mario Tanev

    Troll alert (claims of racism without substantiation).

  18.  

    grrlfriday

    Great article, but you misspelled “supersede”. I know, I didn’t believe it, either.

  19.  

    Micke

    I think California is overdoing the stop signs in general. There are innumerable intersections where the stop sign at best has the functionality of a general speed reduction device, and where they, from a traffic-flow point of view, would benefit from being replaced by yield signs which would apply to everybody.
    Save the stop signs for where they really are needed, and reduce the tolerance for rolling stops where the stop signs remain – because they are needed.

    If, on the other hand, we would permit cyclists to roll past these stop signs provided that one is ‘hugging the curb’, or however you’d like to describe it, is probably going to increase the respect for the stop signs in other circumstances.

  20.  

    Jimbo

    inflammatory because i have a differnet opinion? I dont remember being rude.

  21.  

    Adam Long '13

    Isn’t there already a pedestrian-only path on the south side of the park and a mixed-use path on the north side? Why can’t the mixed-use path simply become a bike-only path?

  22.  

    NoeValleyJim

    SFPD will lose or mishandle the evidence, the DA will refuse to prosecute and the car driver will walk away scot- free, as has happened in hundreds of similar cases

  23.  

    Andy Chow

    Muni even with special runs can only reasonably handle a part of the crowd, without sacrificing regular service outside the park area. Event organizer also chartered buses to provide additional transportation. Obviously more high capacity option besides Muni would be helpful.

    A lot of people would have driven, but thought that TNC might be the next best thing. I don’t think that TNC is the solution here (but they obviously promoted their services during that weekend) but it has to be more than just take Muni.

  24.  

    NoeValleyJim

    One who repeatedly states deliberately false and inflammatory statements, even after being corrected.

  25.  

    Donovan Lacy

    There were lots of takers in the crowd. He was meeting with the SFBC today. Hopefully they offered to ride with him. I would definitely be up for joining that ride.

  26.  

    Donovan Lacy

    I was impressed by Captain Sanford’s willingness to listen to everyone’s concerns as well. I definitely think that he was a little surprised by the number of attendees at last nights meeting, given that it spilled out into the parking lot.

    I really liked the suggestion from one woman in the audience for him to borrow her extra peugeot and ride in plain clothes some weekend to get a feel for riding as just a normal cyclist as opposed to a police cyclist.

    It will be very interesting to see if his perspective changes after he gets out on his new bicycle a few times. It is definitely a good start, but I am still troubled that the Park Station is still only in the mid-20% range for the focus on the five and Captain Sanford’s goal is only in the high-30%.

    I thought that the stated goal was to issue at least 50 percent of traffic citations for the five most common violations that cause pedestrian injuries.

  27.  

    jd_x

    Seems like the SFBC would be a good candidate ….

  28.  

    Jimbo

    what is your definition of a troll? someone who disagrees with your viewpoint?

  29.  

    NoeValleyJim

    Sanford offered to get on a bike and ride around, if someone would ride with him. Do you know if anyone took him up on that offer?

  30.  

    NoeValleyJim

    Reported.

  31.  

    CarsRuleBikesDrool

    lame excuses is what landed me in jail after silly manslaughter charges, pedestrians belong outta my road!

  32.  

    jd_x

    Yeah, gotta agree. I think this is just your classic case of ignorance. Sanford, like most motorists, isn’t a bad person, just so unable to imagine anything but a car-centric culture that it is *very* hard to get him to step out of the movie he is in and watch it from the outside. He doesn’t understand bicyclists because he (nor any other cops) have done it, and our road culture is still so car-centric that it doesn’t force people to think about anything but from the perspective of the motorist. I think, however, that last night’s meeting as the cornerstone of a couple weeks of relentless hammering by those who bicycle might have helped him step back a bit and see how ridiculous this crackdown is and how biased he’s been acting. Let’s hope he’s more rational moving forward and he can truly make his community safer rather than feeding some biased perspective that actual makes his community less safe by discouraging one of the safest, healthiest, and most pleasant forms of transit.

  33.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Rebecca Gardner – Discourse about the “arrogance” (or “entitlement”) of people you don’t really actually know or read the minds of is of what value, exactly? Person X’s internal motivation is of what consequence, exactly, when they blow past you and you never see them again?

    All this emphasis on imputed motivations goes nowhere except into overgeneralizations, which are then applied to everyone on a bike, yourself included. It’s just not the road to go down. Elevate the discourse.

  34.  

    shotwellian

    That’s a good point about Geary, although then perhaps the solution is to move the start of the private car ban farther east, perhaps by forcing a right turn onto Front / Bush instead. Allowing westbound cars to stay on Market, especially when there are no almost no opportunities for them to turn *off* Market as they head west, seems like the wrong approach.

  35.  

    Nicasio Nakamine

    I hit “post” before I saw the username!

  36.  

    Nicasio Nakamine

    Oak/Fell are still major arteries with 3 lanes for all of the rest of the street. Utilizing the 4th lane for something that is sorely needed (dedicated bike lanes) has the upside of not slowing down Fell/Oak which have plenty of capacity beside the Panhandle.

  37.  

    murphstahoe

    ignore this troll

  38.  

    Jimbo

    why not move bike on page? oak and fell are major arteries and we still need to move the other 97% around who are not on bikes? a bike lane would take much more than 3% of the road width.

  39.  

    murphstahoe

    Why? Because it’s ridiculous to put more asphalt into the center of a park when we have hundreds of square feet of underutilized pavement right next to the park.

    Maybe the SFMTA should start with “OK, we’re going to get the cyclists away from the peds, for ped safety. Either we can put in 12 feet of pavement all the way through the panhandle, or put in a protected lane on Fell/Oak. Your choice.” This puts the onus on the NIMBYs to pick one of these options, or to choose to endanger pedestrians.

    It would probably even be cheaper to repurpose Fell/Oak lanes than to engineer new pavement in the park. It would probably even be possible to solely remove one lane on Fell and put in a bi-directional path in one former lane of Fell – the Fell lane would lead directly into it, and most eastbound cyclists are coming out of the park and it would be just as easy to go onto “wrong-way” fell and then turn right on baker – given that’s effectively what they do right now on the path.

  40.  

    Nicasio Nakamine

    I would be fine with a bike path, but it robs the park of a nice place to stroll.

    There is a unique situation on Fell/Oak in that they have four lanes only by the Panhandle. Given the importance of this connection between the Westside and Downtown, It makes sense to use these extra lanes as protected bike paths, extending the existing bike lanes on Fell/Oak out to the main body of GGP.

  41.  

    mx

    Geary is already a disaster zone through Union Square due to subway construction and general chaos through Mason or so. Plus it’s home to one of the most significant bus lines Muni operates. Shifting more private autos into that mess right now would not be helpful.

  42.  

    Nicasio Nakamine

    I was impressed by Captain Sanford’s willingness to both listen and respond at the meeting last night. I may not have loved all his answers, but they came across as reasonable – not someone out with a grudge.

    Less great: the data showing targeted enforcement of drivers and cyclists showed the Wiggle crackdown yielded a number tickets an order of magnitude greater than their auto-focused crackdown. Even Captain Sanford acknowledged that there is no shortage of bad drivers to cite – why the disparity?

  43.  

    mx

    A lot of people don’t actually get it (and some do understand but just don’t care). But painting lanes alternating red and yellow isn’t the answer either. The last thing we need is even more non-standardized color-coded pavement treatments. SF cannot make up its own suite of traffic control devices and expect the world, including tourists renting a car and driving in the city for the first time, to understand them.

  44.  

    mx

    “Rec and Park Proposes Panhandle Upgrades, But Protected Bike Lanes Needed on Fell and Oak”

    Why? Can’t the Panhandle accommodate a dedicated bike path and a separate path for walking/jogging? Isn’t a dedicated bike path (with proper well-maintained paving) with dedicated bike signals even better than a protected bike lane? Separate bike paths aren’t practical in many areas, but should be feasible in the park and panhandle.

  45.  

    Rebecca Gardner

    Which is why I wrote that we really need an Idaho Stop law here.

    I think we are on the same page here, you just don’t like the word arrogant. I do. C’est la vie. I’ll tell you why I call them arrogant jerks and the sort of person I am referring to as being arrogant. Last month I came to a full stop at a stop sign in the wiggle. I then proceeded when safe. A cyclist going over 20 mph came out of nowhere, blew the stop sign almost T-Boning me, then had the arrogance to yell at me, “REALLY! FUCK YOU!” He was 100% wrong so if that is not an arrogant jerk I truly do not know what is.

  46.  

    murphstahoe

    I guess.

    My problem is a little bit on the political side – because there are plenty of people, Ed Lee and John Sanford included who think that “people that slowly and cautiously go through stop signs” are arrogant jerks. I think that adopting their language to apply it to a subset of cyclists just perpetuates them applying it to the entire set. Which is why I avoid it altogether.

  47.  

    Rebecca Gardner

    So sorry. I apparently misread what you wrote.

    However, in my original post I wrote, I really cannot stomach the arrogant jerks that blast through stop signs at speed without slowing down at all. Ticketing the ones that slow down, look for cars and pedestrians, and continue should not be ticketed. So I do not see how that differs from what you just posted. I did not call the people that slowly and cautiously go through stop signs as arrogant. I called the ones that blow through intersections at over 20 MPH and never even attempt to slow down as being arrogant, and truly, that is how they are behaving.

  48.  

    murphstahoe

    Waste of his time right now. It would never get anywhere.

  49.  

    murphstahoe

    What? Wow.

    My point is that I think your assessment of what drives the stop sign runners is divergent from what’s really going on with that set of folks. And I said “I don’t think it fits” – because it’s just like, my opinion, man, not some well researched thesis.

    I don’t really believe that when I see someone taking those turns at 5-7 MPH in the wiggle they are expressing self-importance of egotism Maybe I’m wrong. This is just like, my opinion man.

    l think applying words like conceit, pride, self-importance, and egotism to someone rolling a stop sign in the wiggle devalues the meaning of those terms when we have some real actual scary monsters in this world.

  50.  

    Rebecca Gardner

    Your definition of arrogant fits my comment perfectly. Did you read what you typed or what I posted? If you include synonyms it makes my uses of the word as an adjective even more apropos. Synonyms include, conceit, pride, self-importance, egotism, and your post.

    Do you feel superior to everyone now? Good. Have a nice day.