Skip to content

Recent Comments



    Yeah, I don’t get how the occasional comment on here seems to falsely pit bike vs. ped vs. transit improvements against each other…as if they were somehow mutually exclusive instead of hugely overlapping and interconnected needs. Or as if people who bike never walk or take transit, which is of course absurdly far from the truth.



    There is PLENTY of call to improve MUNI. There are two huge ballot measures in place to add massive chunks of funding to MUNI. There is a ballot measure that would be DETRIMENTAL to MUNI and the vast majority of commenters on this blog support A/B and are against L.

    This is an orthogonal problem to improving conditions for cycling. And I consider improving conditions for cycling to be very important because so many people are actively trying to hamstring improvements to MUNI – ironically while claiming that the problems with MUNI are the reason we need to have free parking, more parking garages, etc…



    The story about the Novato bike crash is an absolutely maddening failure at several levels of government. Failure by traffic engineers to protect the children who used that road around the horse stables. Failure by local politicians to prioritize safety on local roads. Failure by the police to properly investigate the crash (he was traveling 65 mph on a 45 mph limit road). Failure by the District Attorney prosecutors to more vigorously collect evidence and build a negligent manslaughter case against the driver.

    And since all parties settled without accepting liability, it is unlikely that anything will change on that stretch of roadway, despite the $1.12 million settlement. If I may editorialize here, any community where adults abdicate their responsibility to protect the most vulnerable among us in order to promote “convenience” has a serious sickness. The leaders in Novato should be ashamed of themselves.



    If you’re not a cop, you’re little people!



    why did you mention your fish aquarium?



    The infrastructure is fine. It’s the hills dammit! from where I live in the sunset i can safely get to SFSU in about 20 on a bike minutes because it’s mostly downhill. But going back home, it would take me 45 minutes because Its uphill. furthermore, If i bike to campus I get to class tired and sweaty. Even still, the 29 can get me to SFSU in roughly the same time as it would take me if I rode my bike, and it can get me home 20 minutes faster. Therefore, even though muni has it’s weaknesses, it’s better for me to take the 29 than it is to take my bike.



    How is that irony? The article mentions studies and efforts to improve transit to SF State, and says that despite unreliability, transit is highly used, and not just the M line, bus routes that serve the university are also heavily used. Where do you get the notion that there is no outcry or push to improve the M line? SFCTA is looking into long term improvements.

    As Henderson says “there’s got to be another way [to mitigate traffic impacts of the university and growth]. MUNI and BART are a huge part of that, but so is walking and biking, especially for students who live close to the university. I’m not sure where you found the irony in that or the dismissal of transit.



    Special privileges for special interests. Cops and Fire get to park for free, guaranteed wherever they work. They are exempt from the We Hate Cars laws in SF, just like the politicians who enact them.



    You really seem to have a chip on your shoulder given the theme of all your comments.

    All I said was that in addition to helping students have an easier time biking (my parenthetical phrase, in case you are reading-impaired), it’s ironic that there’s no outcry/push that Muni M line needs to work more effectively for the students trying to get to school (and that Muni has a whole needs to be brought to the level that would be expected for a world-class city, which hopefully is the standard that San Francisco aspires to).


    Tom H

    I’ve had periodic curiosity about these parked cars, but this answer is not very surprising. The Park Station bldg could be quite a lovely little building set in a nifty little location if fixed up well. If the PD or Rec/Park ever get the $$ to do capital improvements, then I hope that the City can make the station look a little more approachable and appealing. The chain link and barbed wire fence and parked cars make it look like an abandoned vehicle lot.


    Upright Biker

    In a similar vein, I’ve had a running conversation with Rec & Park about North Beach Pool employees who feel it is within their rights to park _on_ Joe DiMaggio Playground. It wasn’t until the death of that poor woman under the wheels of a Rec & Park vehicle last year that the edict finally came down that employees may not drive and park on/in the park itself. They still try it from time to time to see if anyone’s still looking. And they find out pretty quickly that people are.

    So, yes, they’re cops and they’ve got a hard job. Yes they all drive in from the suburbs because they can’t afford to live here, and parking is expensive. But no one is letting me park for free in the park near my work because I have a hard job and parking is expensive. And from a safety standpoint, there really should not be be frequent driving and parking in areas where pedestrians are not expecting to encounter them.



    If in a sincere manner you truly cannot envision bike lanes at any point on campus, there’s always SFSU’s own proposal I linked. That SFSU Master Plan proposal seems to find a way to incorporate lanes between buildings (some as close as–gasp–50 feet to each other…how *did* they pull it off such an imaginative design feat?!). But I suspect sincerity is not really your game.

    Purposely obtuse contrarianism is cuter on kids.



    So you say I gave a nonsensical reason. How would you incorporate a bike lane with the existing pedestrian paths on the SFSU campus? Is there any extra space on the paths?

    Your photo shows a bike lane that is not between any two buildings on campus. Look now who is not making any sense.



    They’re hypocrites who only work for themselves and the laws don’t apply to them unless they do something really egregious and obvious. Otherwise the skies the limit for them to do as they please. They are a very lazy group of police officers here in San Francisco and get away with a lot due to poor dispatch and management. I had a cop hassling me on my own leased rental due to a crazy roommate. He came in to sit in my kitchen after I moved in my fish aquarium. When I asked him why he had nothing better to do he responded “I have all the time in the world”.

    Well he lost his job when a neighbor reported his cruiser being on his property all of the time. They investigated and filed 8 misdemenors against him and there was an article in the paper that he was going to lose his job. These officers are poorly managed and get away with a lot of leisure time on the job.



    I am just happy Captain Greg Corrales is out the door.



    The Tenderloin SF cop shop is at 301 Eddy and as far as I can tell, it has little or no parking. So I think the cops just park where they can.



    I am sure the cops could park both their official vehicles and their private vehicles in the Kezar lot for free. But the Kezar lot is often full during the day with UCSF workers and others, so the lot would then have to turn away more paying customers if they let dozens of extra cop vehicles in there. And that would lead to a loss of revenue for Parks and Rec,

    I’d guess that instead Parks and Rec simply suggested setting aside that unused pathway instead for the cops, but it would have been better to formally designate it as a parking lot in that case.



    Thanks for the comments and background info!

    As someone who used to live in Ingleside not that far north of Brotherhood, man is it a huge barrier! A ped/bike bridge connecting the two parts of St. Charles would be a big help not only for SFSU but people living in the area.



    Oh nice, yes, let’s include that sneaky phrase ‘fit 20-somethings’ to remind the rest of us that we can’t bicycle unless we’re young and engaging in a thrill sport.

    I’ll phone up Europe now and tell them the news.



    How many articles should we show you where ENUF has said “Transit sucks on Potrero hill, so please do not charge for meters”.

    It is a very demoralizing way to promote driving.



    The novel notion of fixing MUNI is the catchphrase of all bike haters, because they know that fixing MUNI is such a heavy lift, that it allows them to demonize cyclists as being anti-transit without having to actually fix MUNI.



    The above comment is a great example of an excuse defending the status quo for nonsensical reasons. Yet when SFSU tries even half-heartedly it manages to find room:

    Again, this is the “we can’t have ____ in ____ because ____” thing…as if SF were the most unique city in the world whose design challenges had never ever been encountered by any other city.

    Next are you gonna say we can’t have bike infrastructure because….sourdough/Anchor Steam/ fog? (oh wait, someone already mentioned SFSU’s weather as a supposed reason…which is hilarious).

    You mention the Netherlands and people say “well that’s the Netherlands. They’re compact and dense.” You mention Davis and people say “well that’s Davis. They’re sprawling and have low density.” The excuses never end.

    Anyhoo, even in SFSU’s central core there’s plenty of room for adjacent bike lanes:

    SFSU’s Master Plan itself even acknowledges this. The following proposal replaces the current no-bikes-on-core campus with proposed key bike routes:

    There’s room.



    As a student who was part of this class and did a lot of research on Muni and the future improvements it will receive, the reason why cycling to campus is so important is because buses like the 28 and 29 will be running overt 100% capacity WITH all of the Transit Effectiveness Project improvements in 2030.

    Moving people off of public transit by encouraging them to cycle is not a suggestion we came up with: Its how big cities with congestion issues solve their transit problems. we took this idea from the SFMTA’s strategic bicycle plan which in turn took the idea from other european countries.


    Liz Brisson

    I had the pleasure of sitting on the review panel for Professor Henderson’s class’s final presentations. I think there are some fantastic ideas that were generated (some more feasible than others) and I organized a brownbag for SF city agency staff that has inspired some additional conversations. hp2ena’s comments regarding the 19th Avenue Transit Study ( ), which is now launched into its next phase of work as the 19th Avenue/M-Ocean View Project (see ), are accurate. As a part of that project, we would re-gain the right-of-way from on-street parking and the median light-rail to re-purpose for a separated bike path on west side of street, as well as wider sidewalks and a landscaped median. The M-Ocean View would be re-routed through Parkmerced with the SF State station at Holloway on the west side of street so SF State visitors would not need to cross 19th Avenue, removing this major conflict point. To get back to the east side of the street, we would build a bridge over Junipero Serra between Font and Randolph Street that would also accommodate pedestrian and cyclists providing connection between Parkmerced/SF State and OMI and Parkmerced/SF State and Daly City BART . We will be doing more design work this year before launching environmental review next year and will proactively seek more guidance from the walking and cycling communities (schedule for these activities to be announced soon-you can opt in to our email list from the SFMTA website page) about needs and desires to be folded into the design (I’m thinking walking and cycling tours would be a lot of fun!) There’s no need to pit the need to improve cycling access against transit access. They are both important and complementary. That said, the soonest we can get the 19th Ave/M-Ocean View project built is many years out, so its worth thinking about simpler and lower-cost solutions in the meantime. I remember several of us were very intrigued by the potential for an elegant and low-cost bridge that could be built across Brotherhood Way at St. Charles, and thought this could be a good Safe Routes to Transit grant application. This was a barrier that students in Professor Henderson’s class identified as a big one for campus access from Daly City BART. Anyone with specific questions about the 19th Avenue/M-Ocean View project is welcome to contact me directly at or 415.522.4838.



    Interesting article. Can you figure out why there are so many police cars parked right in the middle of the street on Eddy at Jones? I have yet to pass by there when there is not at least one police car blocking a full lane of traffic.



    Looks like the campus of UC Davis is much larger than SFSU. The buildings at SFSU are not too far apart and are connected with pathways for pedestrians.
    In the current layout there isn’t enough room to add bike lanes between buildings on the SFSU campus.



    They’re of course not mutually exclusive, though. Even if SFSU had a dedicated multimodal (BART/Muni/bus/…even HSR? :D) station on-campus it would still make a lot of sense to push to improve the on-campus and neighboring bike infrastructure.

    As it stands now probably the lowest-hanging fruit is giving the thousands of students who live within a mile or so of campus better biking options. A second would be something like a better set of bike options from Daly City BART to campus for all those East Bay commuters.



    This is indeed not the first time I came across this sort of “suggestion”: transit sucks and will not be fixed, please, y’all fit 20-somethings, start riding bikes to make more space on transit for others.

    It is a very demoralizing way to promote cycling.

    Moreover, the university has a lot of students who commute from East Bay, Marin county and elsewhere in the region.



    The “But we can’t have _____ in _____ because _____” excuses are always hilarious.

    Meanwhile, universities given to more extreme weather than SFSU practically celebrate it:

    Oh, because it’s *precisely* their infrastructure that makes it a no-brainer to bike around regardless of the weather.

    From the Sac Bee, “Rain and storm clouds didn’t deter these bicyclists from wearing their shorts at (sic) flip flops at the UC Davis campus in Davis, Calif., on Thursday, September 25, 2014.”


    Karen Lynn Allen

    Hilarious! At the University of Minnesota, 8500 kids bike to class each day. Luckily for Minnesotans they only have snow, not fog to contend with! And their temperatures only drop to 10 below zero, not a chilly 45 degrees! Weather is definitely what is stopping SF State students from biking.



    And funny enough, there happens to be just such a large university town in the Central Valley that gets far more extreme (much colder in winter, much hotter in summer) than SF ever sees + Tule fog + more precipitation and has one of the highest bike modeshares in North America:

    Davis in February fog. Looks like plenty of bikes still got out. They don’t exactly cancel class because it’s foggy.

    What’s the difference? Long-standing and pervasive commitment to infrastructure:

    early parking-protected cycletrack, 1960s, Davis

    Bikeway undercrossing I-80, Davis

    When you make biking around a no-brainer, people will even brave the elements because it’s still the best way to get around. This is true whether in Northern Europe or North America–but the infrastructure has to be there.



    Meanwhile, the horror of other universities in California that dared to build infrastructure for both people on bike and foot:


    UC Santa Barbara


    The horror!



    I find it ironic that when the article mentions that the Muni M streetcar line is packed with students but “unreliable,” the solution seems to be that the students need to start biking.

    How about the novel notion of fixing Muni so we have good, reliable service like other world class cities! (in addition to helping students bike)



    Fang talks about how he was instrumental in the SFO extension.

    11 years later, if you try to take Caltrain to BART to SFO, you have to switch from Caltrain to BART at Millbrae, take it to San Bruno, switch to another train, that will then take you to SFO – despite there being a direct track from Millbrae to SFO.

    That switch is because the ridership of the Millbrae to SFO track is not high enough to justify running the trains (which were operational when the extension opened). There is no reason to believe that this will change. That’s a pretty expensive ornament.

    The garages at the 4 stations on the extension have operated well under capacity since opening. Those garages now serve in large part as cheap airport parking – which BART honestly underprices at $6 per day compared to $13 at Anza (you have to buy a BART ticket while Anza takes you on a shuttle, but at Anza I tip the valets and drivers close to what a BART ticket would be). Basically it’s very convenient to drive to BART and very inconvenient to take Caltrain to BART. That’s backwards.

    Summary – this huge project was poorly planned and scoped. If James Fang wants to take credit for this project, then the blame lands on him.


    Duste Allen

    Fact: The intersection of 19th and Holloway is just awful. As someone who lives in this area, who takes Muni and rides a bike, I don’t blame students for not wanting to ride their bike to campus. Not only is 19th a cut-throat kill or be killed road to be on, but trying to maneuver 19th and Holloway as either a biker or pedestrian is like playing chicken. Unfortunately, any plans to make 19th and Holloway any safer are many, many years out and Dist. 7 Supe doesn’t really care much about a fix right now.



    Those pedestrians all got killed trying to cross 19th, so it’s no problem.



    That’s like saying that Mark Zuckerberg is the poorest person of the 5 richest people on the planet.

    When we claim the area around SF State has “inhospitable weather” I think it’s time for the human race to pack it in, we’re just a bunch of loser pansies. Our forefathers would be embarrassed.



    I guess you need to be told it doesn’t rain (or snow) any more in that corner of town than in the rest of the city. So are you seriously trying to tell us some gray skies and a little fog are not ‘hospitable’ for cycling?!? Even if this area experienced the dense tule fog like what’s found in the Central Valley (hardly ever), your comment would be moronic–biking around is a thousand times safer than driving in those conditions.


    Tom H

    FYI, I think the mode split in the TDM plan represents all campus affiliates, not just students. If so, I suspect that the student drive alone rate is lower and the student walk/bike rate is higher.

    IMO, the issue is the percentage of commuters who live within 2-3 miles of the campus or 1/2 mile from a BART station who are currently driving and how can we retrofit the nearby areas to facilitate better bicycling (or walking). Also, free/unregulated parking on Junipero Serra Blvd certainly doesn’t help.



    What you see as anti-bike I see as pro pedestrian. The last thing SFSU needs is bikes buzzing peds in crowded plazas and on narrow paths.


    sebra leaves

    This weather is the least hospitable in the city. You can hardly expect to combat that problem with infrastructure.



    Love these! BART -> SFSU with a right-of-way like that would be really powerful.



    Hah. Yeah. Though lots of students do live within a mile or two of SFSU. And most of them don’t bike to campus.

    That being said if there were a protected bikeway going directly from Daly City BART up 19th Ave that could help a lot of the BART commuters to SFSU. Daly City BART to SFSU is a classic “last-mile” problem and it’s a particularly inhospitable mile to bikes.


    Jeffrey Baker

    Your comment seems to presuppose that the new span will stay up in a major quake.


    Jeffrey Baker

    I guess not putting the campus out in BFE didn’t come up?



    I believe as part of the 19th Avenue Transit Study, there will be plans for a separated bikeway on some part of the street. I don’t know where on 19th in the campus vicinity. I also know that as part of the plan, there may be a multimodal bridge built just north of Brotherhood to accommodate the realigned M-line, as well as a bike-ped connection. Consult Liz Brisson of the SFCTA for more details.

    As for the bikeway by the entrance, I believe SF State wants to redesign the entrance to coordinate with the 19th Avenue Transit Study. The Urban Design Studio of the Urban Studies and Planning department (which I was also a part of) presented recommendations which can be found at



    Not all the pics seem to work one more try.



    I got inspired to think of possibilities and made some drawings. Below is a possible route from SFSU to BART. (sorry for the missing L)

    But there are many more routes necessary. A very easy route would lead next to Lake Merced blvd to Sunset blvd and than along Sunset all the way to GG Park.



    Sadly, it does not appear this person’s postings are anything but earnest and sober in the writer’s mind. Data from SFPD show that over 60% of all reported crashes with pedestrians are ‘driver at fault’ — and clearly, in many cases, the person getting hit is either dead or so seriously injured as to not be able to provide a counterpoint, so that percentage by all common-sense standards is likely an undercount.

    But the poster has ‘personal experience’ that is apparently statistically sound and factually indisputable.

    Moreover, not only does he/she observe a different reality than the data show, he/she is also able to determine state of mind and intent on the part of the individual people walking. A lot of judgement being cast, for someone who references Jesus’ grace in their post.



    –> Infrastructure is a huge factor:

    1) Despite being a major bike route, Holloway has no physically separated lanes at any point, just sharrows, conventional lanes and double-parking (and really, at points, double-driving) lanes.

    2) 19th Ave has no infrastructure. Sometimes people just bike on the sidewalks.

    –> Institutionalized Anti-Bike policies:

    1) SF State forbids biking on-campus. Overzealous campus popo will hand out tickets for riding your bike on campus.

    2) On that note, overzealous campus/area SF police in general. The only ticket I have ever ever received for biking through a “Stop” sign was at the roundabout at Tapia/Arballo/Font by an SFSU officer.

    *First of all, it’s crazy that a roundabout even has a stop sign in the first place

    *Second of all the policeman was clearly trolling for tickets. Practically no one else was around and it was a quiet evening. I was ironically avoiding going through campus so as to avoid a ticket for riding there.

    I’m also pretty sure I would’ve been fine if I had just been biking on the sidewalk, as I saw someone else do right past the police officer (which he did nothing about).

    Btw, when you get a ticket for going through a stop sign, it’s the same code and fine as if you were a car. Since biking is still a minority activity, it still very much attracts undue attention from police due to illusory correlation ( I’m not a college student and I even found the resulting $200 fine breathtakingly absurd (and it motivated me to finally sign up for the SFBC!). Imagine if you’re a poor college kid.

    These institutionalized cultural and insane financial biases against biking + poor infrastructure all very much contribute to low modeshare in the area.