Skip to content

Recent Comments

  1.  

    Brian Howald

    Reading the comments on that first article was a depressing endeavor.

  2.  

    Mario Tanev

    In what sense? The local merchant wants to be able to stop on that street for a non-commercial loading purpose?

  3.  

    PaleoBruce

    > Who is this change really supposed to benefit?

    I am guessing, local merchants.

  4.  

    Doug Miller

    The only Realty Company with possible initials of DS that I could find would be Dream SF Real Estate. Although a search for agents with those initials might give better results.

    In the end, I don’t expect any results from the @SFPD. Best choice of action for cyclists is to ride in groups of 2-3 and take the lane. Doing otherwise is generally unsafe, bike lane or not. And cyclists have full right not to ride as far to the right as possible if conditions are unsafe.

  5.  

    Bob Gunderson

    I updated their sign.

  6.  

    murphstahoe

    IT WILL ALWAYS BE ARMY STREET

  7.  

    Mario Tanev

    The BID quote talks about “loading and unloading”, but that was already allowed (commercial vehicles were allowed). Who is this change really supposed to benefit?

  8.  

    Karen Lynn Allen

    One step forward, half a step back. In Europe, on the ever-growing miles of pedestrianized streets, loading and unloading happens in the mornings before 10am with the rest of the day ped only. The hotels and stores manage just fine.

    I’m not sure why San Francisco insists on staying at least a full decade behind Oslo, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Prague, Amsterdam, Florence ( the list goes on . . .) San Francisco, “The City That Knows How,” should be renamed “The City Controlled by Cranky Merchants.”

  9.  

    mike regan

    none of them are preferable. The more they do the more they screw stuff up. Leave it alone, every time these dumb *** do something they make it worse. We should get rid of the whole lot of them.

  10.  

    mike regan

    No again where do you think the people will go, do you think they will just disappear. No they will move to another ramp and it will double the traffic jams there. Everything you guys do these days is ANTI CAR, well I won’t have it I don’t know who put you guys in charge but I am going to work to get rid of you and your bike agenda.

  11.  

    mike regan

    once again you are waging a war against cars in this city and I will not vote for anyone who is in your army. The freeways have a purpose this freeway was the one thing that the city has done in over 40 years to improve traffic. Now you want to get rid out it. Well i say NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  12.  

    p_chazz

    I lived there looooong before Google was a twinkle in Larry’s and Sergey’s eyes. Lower Pacific Heights is realtor-speak. At least it’s better than “Baja Pacific Heights”, which really made me gag.

  13.  

    jonobate

    For what it’s worth, Google Maps says that Lower Pacific Heights is a sub-district of Western Addition, and that Post and Divisadero falls inside both.

  14.  

    p_chazz

    I remember when Post and Divisidero was the Western Addition. Now it’s “Lower Pacific Heights”. For awhile it was called “Baja Pacific Heights”. When I lived there, I called it “Pacific Depths”.

  15.  

    Bob Gunderson

    It should read “SSFPD Goes After Speeding Drivers “. The SFPD shows proper deference to drivers.

  16.  

    roymeo

  17.  

    Joseph

    I agree that Grant is a nightmare. So easy to get stuck behind people trying to turn.

    I think if they had re-timed the lights on Ellis@Powell to reflect the fact that there is no more traffic coming down Powel st, this project would have been much more effective. Instead you still have a long phase for southbound traffic, and a very short phase for East-West traffic (2-4 cars per cycle max), which results in a lot of backed up traffic trying to get to market and 4th st.

    I feel that if people were able to make the O’Farrell-Cyril-Magnin-Ellis zigzag without getting stuck for so long, the changes to Powell would have been more effective. For getting to Powell north of Geary, much easier to take post St.

    Maybe once Stockton is reopen they will pursue this more aggressively?

  18.  

    neroden

    Q: What do you call a police force which breaks laws instead of enforcing them?
    A: NYPD

    (OK, someone follow up with an LAPD or LASD joke please?)

  19.  

    neroden

    If you are (a) an employee of the bank, and (b) you know from their history that the police certainly aren’t going to do anything about the bank robbery, you are DAMN WELL GOING TO TRY TO STOP THE BANK ROBBERY.

    Consider that this analogy is perfect in this case.

  20.  

    neroden

    If we follow your argument, if you are dealing with a violent assailant like this motorist, it’s more appropriate to pull a gun and kill the motorist dead in self-defense.

    But I think it’s more reasonable to assume that the motorist was acting out of ignorance or negligence and ask her to be more careful rather than going directly to killing her in self defense.

  21.  

    neroden

    Politely confronting people about their bad behavior is almost always a good idea. How else are we going to have a functioning society?

    It’s quite clear the police aren’t going to do it for us!

  22.  

    SF Guest

    If you practiced this in Oakland I think you would change your tune quickly.

  23.  

    Gezellig

  24.  

    Susan Donovan

  25.  

    Anandakos

    Isn’t the City of San Francisco the granting agency for the permit to build? Maybe the application can get lost for a year? There must be some technical imperfection in the documents which would require a re-filing. Find enough problems and the owner will beg the City to take it off his hands.

  26.  

    Timothy53

    She can come forward and offer her story. Granting her unwarranted anonymity will never result in us hearing her story nor any police scrutiny of her crime.

  27.  

    p_chazz

    It is if her clientele share her disdain for bicyclists.

  28.  

    Marven Norman

    Moral of the story: do NOT try to directly engage motorists who violate rights. Just catch plate numbers, ride with a camera (or two), and file a complaint later.

    Second moral of the story: the three foot law has holes that would almost certainly have let the driver off anyway.

  29.  

    caryl

    Yes, on Mon Jan 25th at Virgils.

  30.  

    PaleoBruce

    O’Farrell (one way eastbound) is essentially dead end by the time you get to Powell, the only option for private vehicles is a mandatory left turn two blocks later on Grant (with private vehicle access to Market now blocked). Then Grant northbound is a true nightmare, in the afternoons at least because the only potential right turns are Post or Bush which commonly are gridlock parking lots. Not that I have a lot of sympathy for people trying to drive automobiles in that congested neighborhood, but it ain’t working out for them very well.

  31.  

    Gezellig

    Side note: are SF Streetsblog Happy Hours still happening?

    It used to be the 3rd Thursday of every month at Virgil’s Sea Room from 6ish onward, so was wondering if it’s on next Thursday (nothing’s on the calendar).

  32.  

    PaleoBruce

    > The licensing of bicyclists by municipality is legal in California (and other states)

    An interesting question, and technically true, but I have read Bob Mionske who argues convincingly that there is solid court precedence that criteria for denial of a bicycle license would require meeting heighten ‘strict scrutiny’ standards, and be not easy to do. In short, the courts have found that humans have a Constitutionally protected right to use public roads. Based on the right to petition the federal government in person, hence the right to travel interstate. Because not everyone can afford a bus ticket, and that automobile licenses are deniable (to children, to drunks, etc..), then bicycle licenses (or horse carriage) cannot be denied for any reason that doesn’t meet strict scrutiny standards.

    In short, bicyclists have a Constitutionally protected right to use the road.

  33.  

    rodzzz

    LOL to interpret a tap on your window as an ‘attack’ you must have an intense bias against the cyclist, suffer from serious cognitive dissonance, and overall just be a total dummy who shouldn’t be allowed to operate any sort of vehicle on the road.

  34.  

    rodzzz

    Tapping on a window is not violent, to interpret this as violent you have to have an ENORMOUS bias against the cyclist on top of suffering from severe cognitive dissonance.

  35.  

    murphstahoe

    Please show any cases where someone was charged for banging on a car window.

  36.  

    Brant

    C’mon Chris, we all know that “35 year old female scientist” is politically correct jargon for violent predator.

  37.  

    gneiss

    Yes, barely governed, just like this cyclist: http://sfist.com/2016/01/14/black_bicyclist_says_he_was_stopped.php

  38.  

    Mario Tanev

    The SFMTA is REMOVING the transit-only lane on Powell between O’Farrell and Geary: https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/agendaitems/2016/1-19-16%20Item%2010.2%20Traffic%20Modifications%20-%20Powell%20Street%20Pilot.pdf

    Apparently they’re already backtracking on pedestrianization, even before the evaluation.

  39.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Prinzrob – When opportunity knocks, mace it.

  40.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Jimbo – You apparently have no idea what “hate speech” means. Perhaps you should do some research from more reliable sources than your pals Dolph and Kearney.

  41.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Judas – #CoolStoryBro, I assume you have witnesses to back it up, right? Because, you know, the bicyclist has witnesses to back hers up.

  42.  

    Jym Dyer

    @Jimbo – The licensing of bicyclists by municipality is legal in California (and other states), but many municipalities including S.F. have tried it and abandoned it as not worth the expense and effort. That decision was informed by the staggering lack of impact bicyclists have on the public sphere, not misinformed by poorly-spelled vitriol as is apparent from your every comment.

  43.  

    Jym Dyer

    @p_chazz – It’s a stupid custom that does nothing but sustain a lack of accountability for the wielders of dangerous weapons. I ride this street and I am grateful to know to look out for a black Cadillac with DS RLTR plates.

  44.  

    Jym Dyer

    @gneiss – I don’t think the Weekly has made any attempt to define itself as progressive. Their market niche was as a weekly focusing on lifestyle and snark, an “apolitical” alternative to the Guardian. Of course, “apolitical” is nothing but an affectation, and they actually had some informed politics going on when Vince Bielski was there, but that was two decades ago.

  45.  

    Alicia

    More imaginary laws from the troll.

  46.  

    Jym Dyer

    ≖ Awful as the West Oakland BART shooting is, none of this coverage gets to an important comparison: Your chances of being killed by driving instead of using transit are much, much higher.

  47.  

    Austin Bennett

    I’m suggesting that you, in car, is threatened by someone on a bicycle. I’m not suggesting that women are non-threatening. I’m suggesting that bicyclists are non-threatening.

    I’m saying its cowardly to spray a bicyclist as you’re driving your vehicle away.

  48.  

    BW

    The picture was taken as the driver was driving away, not at the scene of the incident which would be behind the photographer.

  49.  

    BW

    We all wait to hear what she says. I wonder if it will be the same as the two witnesses stories.

  50.  

    BW

    Not so much a stranger if you just nearly killed them, wouldn’t you say?