-
-
-
Follow Streetsblog
Recently Posted Jobs
- Campaign Manager, 6 days ago
- Policy and Government Affairs Manager, 6 days ago
- Field Director, 3 weeks ago
- Designing Cities Fellow, 6 weeks ago
- Policy Analyst/Advocate (Full-Time Position), 6 weeks ago
Word On The Street
“How refreshing to hear someone say she changed her opinion after studying the facts.”
– Fran Taylor In response to "Advocates for the Disabled Say Free Parking for Placard Holders Must End"
-
-
Recent Comments
Hot Topics
EYES ON THE STREET
Contribute to Streetsblog San Francisco
Email tips@sf.streetsblog.org or send them anonymously. Tag your photos, links, and videos with "streetsblog".
Calendar
- Tuesday, May 21
- Wednesday, May 22
Archived Articles
Categories
Blogroll
Copyright Notice
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Anonymous
Yeah an example of a similar understanding is Harringtons, a consignment furniture store on 17th and Valencia. They share space with a public bikes shop and seem to be doing good business because of how open they are to all the pedestrian and bike traffic.
I forget if they have a loading zone, but you could make a convincing argument that parking in front of their store would harm the business more than a permanent loading zone.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Sean Rea
The SFMTA and the mayor have zero credibility on this issue at the moment. Wasn’t it last year they were planning to finish this by BtWD?
http://sf.streetsblog.org/2012/01/18/sfmta-finalizes-fell-and-oak-bikeway-design-will-it-be-ready-by-summer/
in response to SFMTA Aiming to Install Oak Bike Lane By Bike to Work Day
gneiss
If I was a merchant who had heavy or bulky items at my store in a dense urban environment, I’d try and be creative rather than reactionary. Instead of arguing that having ‘heavy or bulky items’ means their customers need to have on street parking, why not offer a delivery service for those items. If you banded together with other merchants, you could even spread the costs so it wouldn’t necessarily be an onerous financial burden. There’s no reason why shopping needs to be coupled with having to carry things away. Certainly furniture and appliance stores don’t anticipate you’ll carry away the items – that can certainly be extended to other things as well. Offering that service to your neighbors would be a good way of gaining trust and good will too.
As a final note – I would be more concerned about preserving foot traffic to my store than car traffic or parking. Last I checked, cars don’t walk into stores and buy stuff.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Jym Dyer
@disqus_y1CPwEpQUN:disqus – Did C.W. Nevius talk to you? His article didn’t mention Folks for Polk at all, which seems a deliberate omissions. A case of the media, not the participants, framing this as an ideologically monolithic wall. I’d say that letters to the editor are called for.
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
Karen Lynn Allen
I just checked the stats from 2009 American Community Survey info. (Wish there were more recent data.) Polk Street passes through three neighborhoods–Civic Center (from Market to Bush), Nob Hill (from Bush to Broadway), and Russian Hill ( from Broadway to the water.) In 2009, 2/3 of all households in these three neighborhoods did not own cars. (I would bet the rate is higher now.) Two thirds.
No wonder so few people are coming to Polk by auto. Who exactly benefits from parking on Polk Street? Who exactly is it for?
I don’t know why merchants think they are losing business by not having parking. I have on occasion biked down Polk Street. In 19 years of living in this city I have never driven to Polk Street to visit a store or restaurant. Why would I? What does Polk Street or its merchants offer better or different than I can find on Clement, Valencia (and other parts of the Mission), Noe Valley or Cole Valley? All these areas are less dirty and noisy, have better shops, and are more pleasant and fun to visit. All are less stressful to access by bike. The upper part of Polk Street is nice (though it mostly has businesses I can find closer to home) but as a bicyclist, you have to go through the gauntlet of lower and mid Polk to get there. Without some change on lower and mid Polk, that area will remain squalid and the businesses marginal to failing.
Polk connects the Civic Center to Ghiradelli Square and Fort Mason. Not only would merchants on Polk be more successful if parking were reduced and bike lanes put in, if Polk had no cars at all, only peds, bikes and transit, Polk would blossom and the merchants of Polk would do 300% more business instantly. It is just fear, stupidity and laziness holding them back. The SFMTA is not doing them a kindness by caving to it.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Jym Dyer
@Greg – Complete and utter nonsense. The opposition was screeching “Agenda 21″ at public meetings and fussing over a laundry list of complaints about bikes (but not cars, which do the same things), and even disparaging the life and limb of bicyclists before I posted that remark.
Besides, I’m just one voice. None of the parties involved in this stupid conflict are willing to mention unfortunate truths about cars. I’m totally off-message, and I can certainly always count on someone like you to point that out.
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
Mike
The space in the street where the cycletrack would go is being used to route pedestrians around the scaffolding, not for trucks.
in response to Oak Street Protected Bike Lane Still Held Up by Paint Shop Renovation
murphstahoe
Wow – a new shop. Well, nowhere to park, screw it.
Wow – a new shop. I’ll just lock my bike up to the rack.
There is no way to scale parking of cars to that level, even if you added a free parking garage, the cost of driving into the garage, weaving up to a spot, parking, and walking out of the garage is a deterrent to random exploration.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
murphstahoe
I presume, mr chazz, that you think we should completely discount the statements of the motorists of the Sunset and Richmond with regards to any changes on Fell and Oak, who are solely interested in a quick way to get to downtown from the outer neighborhoods?
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Joan
The bike valet is a great service. Some people will always need the bike on both ends, however, and the bike car service is necessary, too. There are so many people riding the bike car these days that there is no space, especially since those without bikes take all the bike car seats, forcing cyclists to sit on the floor or in the aisles. The bike car should be for cyclists.
in response to Caltrain's Warm Planet Bike Station in Jeopardy
mikesonn
A cyclist’s vested interest is surviving. And gneiss is right, a motorist is WAY less likely to stop and shop than a cyclist or pedestrian as the numbers already show is the case.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Anonymous
Multiple studies as well as common sense show that pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users spend more time and money locally than car drivers. Additionally it’s been shown that store owners often overestimate how many of their customers are arriving by car.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
gneiss
That’s simply not true. What is more true is that motorists driving through have no connection to the community. Only 15% of the people who shop on Polk arrive by car.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Anonymous
The shopowners have a vested interest in the street; their very livelihood depends on it, while bicyclists are just passing through. All they re interested in is a quick way to get from the Civic Center to the Northern Waterfront. They have no connection to the community.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Anonymous
Many people regard the SFMTA as captive to the SF Bicycle Coalition. Consider that the Polk Street bike lane was first proposed in September 2011 Did the SFMTA engage the merchants at that time?
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Anonymous
I think that it’s wise to pick your battles, and though it is annoying that the project is delayed, I will accept a temporary bad to create a long-term good.
I don’t think it would be a good move to create the impression that having bike lanes in front of your property makes it difficult to do construction. One of the great advantages of biking is that it’s a cheap and flexible alternative method of transportation. Let’s not lose sight of the forest for the trees.
in response to Oak Street Protected Bike Lane Still Held Up by Paint Shop Renovation
davistrain
Regarding “Banning protestors from BART”: The Constitution affirms the “right of the people peaceably to assemble”. If someone wants to ride BART to the SF Civic Center to protest whatever is bothering them, I don’t see a problem. If on the other hand they are causing a disturbance, and interfering with the normal activities of law-abiding citizens, there’s no reason why BART (or Muni) should tolerate this kind of behavior. Likewise, individual troublemakers should not be allowed to make everyone in the vicinity miserable.
in response to Today's Headlines
Tom Glendening
that works out to $10,000 bike. you could get more advanced bikeshare technology for under $2,000 bike. you could buy about 25 solid Trek bikes for each San Francisco bikeshare bike.
Check out new technology: http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2013/05/02/social-bicycles-brings-sharing-to-two-wheels/?mod=wsj_nview_latest
in response to Intrepid KTVU Reporters Expose the Shocking Story of Bike-Share!
keenplanner
Hmmm. How does continuing to provide parking sync with Caltrans’ stated support of greenhouse gas reduction goals? Complete Streets?
in response to Park Areas Under Central Freeway Downsized to Retain Caltrans Parking
keenplanner
Valencia was a huge gamble too. And the Embarcadero, and tearing down the Central Freeway. If a solution is obvious or intuitive, it doesn’t take much courage to stand up for it. History doesn’t remember the spineless.
in response to SF Still Waiting for David Chiu to Stand Up for Protected Bike Lanes on Polk
keenplanner
Especially since most of the merchants don’t reside or vote in the district.
in response to SF Still Waiting for David Chiu to Stand Up for Protected Bike Lanes on Polk
Alberto
Can we do this on Dolores, please?
in response to Separated Bike-Ped Path Coming to Mansell Street in McLaren Park by 2016
keenplanner
SFMTA drops the ball again.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
murphstahoe
The Catch-22 they don’t seem to get, is that in order to add MORE parking we’d need to build parking garages which would require us to remove retail, thus removing the need for all that parking. It is always thus.
in response to Today's Headlines
murphstahoe
In a discussion about safety as respect to cars, the answer was “I think the SFPD needs to start enforcing the laws on pedestrians and cyclists”. It turns out that every pedestrian (other than themselves of course) is literally doing a permanent jaywalking dance up and down Polk Street, and that’s why they get hit.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
mikesonn
Do we need to make sure the Save Polk types understand? Their stupidity (or whatever you want to call it) should not hinder my safety.
in response to Today's Headlines
guest
Work started today. Will be done (or mostly done) by Bike to Work Day next week.
in response to Oak Street Protected Bike Lane Still Held Up by Paint Shop Renovation
Karen Lynn Allen
In essence I agree with this, but Americans are notoriously bad with math. The baby boomer generation especially had poor math and science instruction as children, with the result that very, very few now have any acquaintance with physics, calculus, or even basic statistics. Throw a decimal point at them and their eyes glaze over. So they are unlikely to comprehend numerically-based arguments even if they are presented with them. If there is also a complete unwillingness to believe any facts no matter how simply presented (a pie chart?), it becomes almost hopeless. Worse, some people really would rather have polluted, noisy, filthy, congested, dangerous, crime-ridden streets than walk a few blocks or pay an extra 50 cents a couple times a week. Their math isn’t bad, their values are.
I completely agree the SFMTA should make their decisions based on legitimate analysis, not citizen fear or greed–after all, one assumes traffic engineers are capable of basic quantitative calculations. And that then the SFMTA should stick to that decision unless they can be shown their math is wrong. (Perhaps there are variables they haven’t considered.) But it would take buy in from both the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors that, yes, reality-based analysis is the way traffic planning decision in San Francisco get made, not via pitchfork community meetings. I think this is the core problem.
in response to Today's Headlines
Anonymous
1000 times yes!! that was my impression of the Open House. The level of discourse was all emotional and transportation planning should be fact driven.
in response to Today's Headlines
mikesonn
Math. The SFMTA just needs to step up and put the numbers out there. “These are the stats. These are the current travel patterns. This is how they will be impacted. You will see more customers with this option. Now, we are the professionals and we are going to do this because, based on the numbers/facts provided, it is the best overall use of the public right of way.” Conversation over.
in response to Today's Headlines
Henry
Those of you who support the Polk project with wider sidewalks and protected bike lanes are advised to come to these two meetings:
Middle Polk Neighborhood Association May Meeting
Monday, May 20th, 6:30pm
It’s A Grind, 1800 Polk St @ Washington, San Francisco
Nob Hill Neighbors Spring Meeting
Tentatively Scheduled For Wednesday, May 22nd, will post more details as date gets closer.
Old First Church, 1751 Sacramento St, San Francisco
(They are actually leaning towards against, but they aren’t really involved in Save Polk Street).
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Mario Tanev
What does “not enough parking” mean? It means demand for travel and business by car is suppressed by lack of availability. An easy way to improve availability of parking WITHOUT requiring extra space is to charge a market rate for the price of parking, i.e. SFPark. Under the most aggressive scenarios, 6% of parking spaces is to be repurposed. With 15% auto mode share, that equates to 0.9% basis points suppression of travel.
What does lack of protected bike lanes mean? It means demand for travel and business by bicycle is suppressed by lack of availability. There is no easy way to improve this without taking space. Installation of protected bike lanes increases bike travel by 50% to 100%. Assuming the lower number, and with 6% bike share, the increase corresponds to 3% basis points increase in travel.
So we’re talking about reducing travel by 0.9% (which can be easily mitigated by using market rate pricing) and increasing it by 3%, and some how the clamor is that there is “not enough parking? No, it should be that there are not enough protected bike lanes.
in response to Today's Headlines
mikesonn
I really like Ed, but he should not be conducting these meetings. The SFMTA pays people a lot of money for public relations/outreach. LET THEM DO THE TALKING!
in response to Today's Headlines
voltairesmistress
Really?!! I find that astounding, since demonizing bike riders is all about making our means of transportation seem frivolous. Since all of us are pedestrians part of the day, how does one make that alien? What did they say on tape?
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Anonymous
Why do you assume they treated the bike lane as a done deal? The public review period hadn’t come yet. I agree that Reiskin’s presentation at the MPNA meeting lacked information, but nothing had been finalized yet. What the MPNA and Save Polk did was kill any buffered bike lane options before they were even roughed out.
…and Option A doesn’t include a bike lane– it’s all sharrows north of Geary (just like it is today).
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Anonymous
Because the SFMTA treated the bike lane as a done deal. They failed to engage the community and Reiskin’s presentation did nothing to assuage them. But hey, the merchants support Option A, so there will be a bike lane on Polk Street.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Anonymous
I don’t see it as splitting hairs. You wrote that the SFMTA’s attitude toward the March meeting “put the Polk Street Merchants up in arms.” I pointed out that they were up in arms at the meeting even before Ed Reiskin’s presentation.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
bourbon
Is anybody making stickers?
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
Anonymous
Now you are hairsplitting. I never said it was an SFMTA meeting. It was a meeting at which SFMTA made a presentation.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Anonymous
the March meeting wasn’t an SFMTA meeting. It was a Middle Polk Merchants Association meeting.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Mike
I bet you Howard Chabner has a deal with the paint shop to prolong construction. I wouldn’t put it past him.
in response to Oak Street Protected Bike Lane Still Held Up by Paint Shop Renovation
Anonymous
I think that SFMTA gave the impression, express or implied, that the protected bike lane was a slam dunk and the March meeting was just window dressing. This put the Polk Street Merchants up in arms. If the public engagement had been handled better, the proposal would have had a better chance of getting accepted.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
murphstahoe
Their pocketbooks
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
murphstahoe
It doesn’t have to be a lot of people, it just has to be the RIGHT people. Surely you know this if you are an actual citizen of the United States.
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
murphstahoe
I had this discussion with someone at the meeting. She had been passed on the right, and right hooked that cyclist, who then punched her car. I asked if there was a bike lane, and she said yes. She muttered something about keeping the bike lane clear, then I drew out the diagram for her. She then of course claimed that she *HAD* merged into the bike lane but the cyclist then went between the parked cars and her car.
Which makes that particular bike lane the only non-door-zone bike lane in San Francisco, I guess. We’ll find out soon enough, I video taped the conversation and she mentioned where the turn was.
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
murphstahoe
One correction. They despise pedestrians too. I have it on tape.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
murphstahoe
families they are dooming…
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
voltairesmistress
M, I get tired of “conversations” with people who don’t marshal facts, just wild prejudices. Russian Hill Bookstore’s owner is a case in point. But today, for instance, I had a lively discussion and friendly disagreement with my cabbie who wanted to marginalize bicyclists. We parted on friendly terms, and I think he liked the tip too, but I told him to watch out for me out there and all the other cyclists. How can he now justify to himself hating bicyclists in his lane when one of them might be his customer the next day? As they like to say on “Homeland”, I’m playing “the long game” — for a change in attitudes towards biking and bike riders.
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
voltairesmistress
coolbaby, you may be right that SFMTA needs to gather and present a lot of information prior to or at the same time that they preview street design changes. Had that been done with Polk, the Save Polk ppl would not have had the fertile ground of fear and rumor to support their misinformation. As it is, the plans look bad for bicyclists on significant portions of Polk yet good for pedestrians. So maybe instead of having one pedestrian and one bicyclist injury each per month, we’ll get down to just injuring a cyclist each month who, no doubt, will be accused by the Polk dinosaurs of causing his/her own collisions.
I am already changing my spending habits on Polk to spend less or nothing at shops whose owners have actively promoted continued danger for cyclists — Brownie’s Hardware, Russian Hill Book Store, the Kitchen Store, Bow Wow Meow, Nick’s tacos, the liquor store at Pine, Flipp, etc. Do I expect that to change anything? No. But I feel better supporting merchants who respect me when I arrive by whatever mode.
in response to Tonight: Tell the SFMTA to Put Protected Bike Lanes on the Table for Polk
Karen Lynn Allen
MTAcial
adjective
Extremely slow, like the movement of the SFMTA.
Ex: The bike lane progressed on Oak Street in the usual, excruciating, MTAcial fashion.
in response to Oak Street Protected Bike Lane Still Held Up by Paint Shop Renovation