Skip to content

Recent Comments



    Nice attempt at wit. Better luck next time. You must be really bored, to be replying to six-month old comments.



    Space for buffer can be made by narrowing all the other lanes. Would that still require a traffic study?



    Lets hope it takes fewer years to complete Polk than it has to complete the 8th/9th and 1st/2nd Ave protected lanes in New York. Its been between 5-7 years on those and we’re still waiting.


    Jym Dyer

    • The KRON4 site is kind of a pain, but the segment is also on YouTube:

    I left a comment there that goes something like this:

    • Certainly the SFPD’s role in #VisionZero would be enforcement, but that’s not really what Vision Zero is supposed to focus on. In cities where it’s implemented correctly (and not watered down by politicians), it is predominantly a data-driven approach to making streets safer by changing their infrastructure.

    For folks unfamiliar with this intersection, bicyclists heading south are led onto a frontage road with wayfinding sharrows, and end up in the wrong place to make a left/east turn if they don’t see the unusual concrete channel. That’s why they’re using a crosswalk.

    A true Vision Zero treatment would be more along the lines of wayfinding markers to a green bike box on Octavia at Market, some dotted lines curving over to the green bike path on Market, and permission/signal priority for bicyclists to make a left turn.


    Jym Dyer



    Jym Dyer

    @twinpeaks_sf:disqus – Wow, good find, that didn’t appear in the video. That marking would appear to indicate that this is a Bicycle Path Crossing per CVC § 231.6(a).


    Jym Dyer

    @MrEricSir – Agreed. After 1989 it terminated for years at Mission. The newspapers predicted “post-apocalyptic conditions” but in fact the flow was fine. It was a ridiculous and disastrous waste to extend it to Market.



    It’s a perfectly fair comparison! The bike rider was riding in a legal and responsible manner. The car driver broke the law. Put blame where blame is due.


    Jym Dyer

    Your logical fallacy is tiresome inane off-topic irrelevant barftastic crap. (The formal label hinges on the Latin term for “barftastic.”)


    Jym Dyer

    @cwalkster – Um, newsflash, this has never been a bikes-only project. Never. It has always been about livable streets.

    Instead of ranting about Aaron, how about taking the mainstream media to task for misrepresenting this as a bikes-vs-everyone issue? They even whipped up a #PolkBikeWar Twitter hashtag for the event.


    Jym Dyer

    @cmu – Which two streets?


    Jym Dyer

    @Gezellig – The continuous “ribbon sharrows” have been abandoned as a Request To Experiment (RTE) option by the MUTCD. Oakland has tried these out on 40th Street. Personally I think they’re confusing because of their resemblance to bike lanes (despite the sharrow stencil).


    Jym Dyer

    @NoeValleyJim – I don’t doubt that there are people in the SFMTA quite willing to comply with Director Brinkman’s amendment. (Possibly the folks who came up with the original, pre-watered-down treatment.) The question is how to connect those who want that to happen with making it happen.


    Jym Dyer

    @BBnet3000 – Actually I think Noah’s comments duly focused on the only thing that could salvage this project, the data that the SFMTA gathers, per Director Brinkman’s amendment. Surely you’re aware how crucial the data-gathering done by Janette Sadik-Khan’s DoT was in New York to fend off the groundless opposition to liveable city treatments.


    Jym Dyer

    Let’s not be hasty here. Was the building wearing a helmet? Was the toilet high-viz?


    Jym Dyer

    I know @keenplanner and he is the real deal. What he’s written here is entirely sincere.


    David Ciani

    “The junction in question has a path for bicycle riders headed southbound on Octavia as they prepare to make a left turn on Market.”

    Uhh… the left turn from Octavia on to Market that this sign prohibits?


    Jym Dyer

    @gneiss – Even with material evidence in the form of a video showing the “ran a red light” witness herself, entering the crosswalk during a yellow light, those charges were pursued.



    Parking protected bike lanes would make a lot of sense. I hope it’s in the long-term plan for both Howard and Folsom, but buffered bike lanes now bring immediate relief – I suspect protected bike lanes, particularly with the change in parking, would take many public meetings and whatever environmental review SFMTA customarily does for protected bike lanes.



    I used the lane this morning and was genuinely surprised and delighted. I kept thinking, “did they do a road diet?” [There are three traffic lanes to the left of the bike lane]. Apparently not (if I read this piece correctly).
    And they did more than just add the buffer. Before 9th, they colored the bike lane green and added a white perimeter stripe to make it more noticeable – as the above photo shows.They also added a supersharrow just after 8th.

    My pet beef with Howard is the Third St. intersection due to the right-turning traffic by the hotel. It desperately needs to place the bike lane on the outside of the right lanes.



    I’d be happy if they just resurfaced the Townsend bike lane – it’s so bad now that I avoid it as much as possible, particularly eastbound from Seventh to Caltrain.



    There’s still a lot of deciding to do. Stay in the conversation.



    Agreed. It’s appalling, a huge disconnect in a city that prides itself on innovation and compassion. Progressivism seems to have been relegated to issues of personal style while politically we’re so used to grasping low-hanging fruit that we’ve forgotten how to reach higher. It shouldn’t be this hard.



    I notice that this guy Neal is not wearing a helmet. Another good example set by the SFMTA.



    If there is a pedestrian at the end of every cycle and they keep pushing the button to get an instant green every time the crosswalk turns red, cross traffic would never move. If cross traffic never moves, they will be encouraged to run the red light. That is not inconveniencing the motorist. That is increasing safety for pedestrians and drivers. Everyone has to wait their turn.



    Has the Mayor’s optometrist approved the plan?



    Not gonna do much until the bike lanes on Folsom and Howard aren’t also doubling as truck loading zones…. The wide green bike lane isn’t much help when you have to keep cutting into traffic.



    Yeah, don’t pay that gd citation.


    Marven Norman

    Many treatments of a good Vision Zero strategy would make bike lanes unnecessary to begin with. Speeds simply won’t go down as much just by painting the road as they will be redesigning it. Paint is a decent interim, but it can’t substitute for actual change.



    I would’ve been impressed by this five years ago..



    Here we go again SFMTA, once again doing little pieces of wasting time, while other cities have moved past this squander minimal garbage and this hit and run bike lanes BS, this street like other one way streets in SOMA need PROTECTED bike lanes, preferably PARKING PROTECTED bike lanes. In fact these streets like Howard have enough space to implement them and still retain the same or most of the parking. I don’t understand why it hasn’t happen yet, but in other forward thinking cities implementing protected cycling infrastructure would be done in the matter of months, but instead here in SF it takes an UNREASONABLY long amount of time, more like decades. The problems of an inefficient and BROKEN planning process.

    As I said I’m looking to the day when PROTECTED bike lanes will be implemented on all the one way streets in SOMA, because they make sense and provide the SAFEST experience which would attract new riders.

    The only protected bike lanes in San Francisco SFMTA has ever done right was the one and half block of Polk St, of course it should have never taken 10 years to make it happen because that’s just so BS for it to have taken that long.

    Oh one more thing when PROTECTED bike lanes are implemented on those one way streets in SOMA, if ever???, put them on the left side, it’s better that way and it makes sense like the NACTO Design Guidelines for protected bike lanes on one way streets.


    StrixNoctis .

    Yeah, the irrelevance acts as a smoke screen from the original topic and has me thinking he might be a motorist pretending to be a cyclist.

    The article is about a decent cyclist who followed the rules and was a benefit to our society but got removed from this world by a motorist who evidently didn’t drive safely.



    Great – but the street that really needs it is Townsend



    Only if he’s talking in the absolute–design doesn’t matter if you have to stop ALL bad behavior. But I bet he could see the difference between the amount of bad behavior when comparing a 10 and a 25 mph speed limit universally, turning every single intersection into an all-way stop vs. what we have today, etc.



    But this is easier. #justsayin





    I commute from SF into Marin, usually using a combo of bus + bike.

    Oh my, SFPD incident? Sounds fun.

    Can shoot you an email if you have an address you don’t mind posting here (I don’t think Disqus allows for user-to-user messages, unfortunately).



    Do you commute from Marin to SF or vice versa? I’d like to chat with you about a little incident I had with the SFPD….



    Update: if anyone’s curious, here is Sausalito’s final approved proposal currently under review by Caltrans:



    Thanks Stanley for insulting every architect and designer who does believe that their work makes a difference in the quality of everyday lives. Design does matter; it may not eliminate all bad behavior, but good design will encourage “good” behavior.



    You’re comparing an imagined street where slightly raised bike lanes somehow makes it impossible for someone to drive up to the sidewalk vs. imagined streets with no cars on them at all as anyone can just pull up to the curb outside a business.



    I wish that were true but it is not David. It comes out to protected bike lanes for 25% of Polk, non-protected bike lanes for 50% and nothing for the remaining 25%. We currently have non-protected bike lanes for 50%.

    So the gain was 25% (or about 10 blocks) of protected bike lanes overall. Not nothing, but not that much.

    And nothing will happen in a few years if we sit back and take this decision. MTA will do nothing unless we compel them to do so. They in fact will never revisit this, unless we get a very bicycle friendly Mayor in 2020.



    You have to be blind to see self-righteousness amongst the cycling advocates and not from Save Polk Street.



    To clarify on “San Jose’s Willow Glen Road Gets Road Diet…”, the street affected is actually Lincoln Ave. which is the main commercial strip in downtown Willow Glen. There’s no Willow Glen Road though there are plenty of Willow This and Glen That streets in this area.

    And yes the naysayers are out in force claiming carmageddon. Some have reported that it now takes a half hour to traverse the half mile road diet segment (i.e. 1 MPH!) though others have difficulty confirming that it has added more than a few minutes delay in the most congested hours.

    Another odd complaint is that during rush hour bicycles travel faster than cars, as if the order of the universal order has been upended.

    Last Friday was the first day of the road diet and that morning was quite chaotic as commuters were caught by surprise. But today just a week later the situation is much better. I think many of the commuters who were using Lincoln Ave. as a shortcut for north-south crosstown commutes have now shifted to more appropriate roads like Highway 87 and Almaden Expressway.

    For sure the situation for bicyclists and pedestrians has improved remarkably. Bikes no longer need to take the lane and pedestrians are no longer exposed to a swerve-around hazard while crossing the uncontrolled mid-block crosswalk: this is when one lane of cars stop to let the pedestrians cross, peds advance in the crosswalk, and then someone swerves around in the other lane, nearly hitting the pedestrians. Now there’s only one lane per direction, virtually eliminating this hazard.

    This road diet is an experiment done on the cheap. I heard that the budget was $25,000. The pavement is being resurfaced anyways and hence will need a full restriping. The current road diet stripes were painted with cheap temporary paint. A wide array of traffic sensors have been deployed to measure the effects of the road diet and detect whether it degrades the conditions on surrounding streets.

    Overall the neighborhood was quite supportive of this road diet experiment. Even most of the naysayers were open to the idea of this data driven approach. In three months the data will be analyzed and presented back to the community to decide whether to keep the new striping configuration.



    That made me think. In cases where I’m connecting to the 14/14L or ECR buses, I’d just been taking the most direct path to Mission/Goethe. But I mapped it and it looks like Misison/Sickles is almost the same distance, but a bit less hazardous. It just seems like farther away, so I’m glad I checked the distances. Thanks.



    Yeah, I like Farallones – when I’m riding north I just take it to San Jose and onwards.

    Most of the time my problem is that I’m going somewhere in Daly City (either Top of the Hill or Hillside Blvd’s bike route). I also end up passing through on foot when taking late night transit because Mission/Goethe is the closest OWL stop to me.



    Absolutely. I think the Mill Valley-Sausalito Path was originally conceived as a primarily recreational one but I know I’m not the only one these days using it for commuting purposes.

    As for this particular intersection it’s a mishmash of bordering and overlapping jurisdictions…the city of Sausalito, Marin County, and Caltrans.

    I spoke with the main engineer on the project from the City of Sausalito and he said there is a final preferred alternative for improving the intersection but that it’s currently going through the funding and Caltrans encroachment permit application processes.



    My experience is that not only do they not know the CVC, they will frequently make it up as they go along.



    We need to make sure this is in front of SFMTA during the re-design process of this intersection. This is the perfect place to implement this, especially after the failed past attempts. There is plenty of space and a compelling safety consideration to argue for this.



    Oh, I know that problem! Former Merced Heights dweller, myself.

    Depending on what part of Mission you want to get to, though, I’d recommend from Merced Heights going down Orizaba (or whatever your north-south street is) to Farallones, which is not bad for biking as it’s pretty flat and relatively low traffic. When Farrallones ends at San Jose take the pedestrian bridge to Alemany and then by that point you’re not far from Mission.