Skip to content

Recent Comments



    Re: “New SFPD Park Station Captain Wants to Crack Down on Cyclists for “the Protection of Life”

    Ugh. When are we going to get some leadership in the Board of Supervisors or Mayor’s Office to stand up to this biased, non-backed-by-data crap from SFPD that the threat bicyclists pose to public safety warrants the ridiculous attention SFPD devotes to it? I want the cops to have to stand up there, show the data of how many are injured by bicyclists and how many by cars, and then show that their efforts (tickets, manpower, money, etc.) match this split. I’m sick of this non-evidence-based, hackneyed moral lecturing from SFPD about something they do not understand.

    And if they are going to spew all these moral lectures about bicyclists being cars (because, you know, even though they weigh about the same as a pedestrian, have no onboard power like a pedestrian, and travel at speeds closer to that of a pedestrian, somehow they considered more akin to cars rather than pedestrians), then they could at least give bicyclists equal treatment compared to motorists when it comes to honest investigation of incidents.

    Bicycling in SF, like in any city, will never expand much beyond current levels until the police are working with bicyclists, not against them. Until they understand that, excepting the very small minority of bicyclists who truly are dangerous, having more bicyclists (which means treating them fairly) will improve everyone’s public health.



    Basically another example of Uber trying to double dip. If they want taxi rights, they need to play by taxi rules and not TNC rules.


    Andy Chow

    They can do that they’ve always been doing, just ignore the law. The whole TNC thing got started when Lyft started it and Uber jumped on it to try to kill Lyft. They were not allowed at airports and force their way by paying fines for the drivers that got caught.

    It is never legal to hail a TNC vehicle on the street. People can still get their TNC ride on side streets. Because you can’t hail a TNC vehicle, that why you don’t want these vehicles stopping on Market and wait for their pick up, like all other private vehicles that we don’t want on Market.


    Christopher Childs

    We already regularly see UberX drivers (among others) thinking they are taxis and driving in red-striped lanes and ignoring the Market St turn-offs. With enough enforcement activity of the new turn bans and the resulting complaints from UberX drivers, Uber would likely be forced to black-hole a large part of Market St. Having “Taxi” be the only option on Market, and not Uber or UberX, would be quite the black eye.


    Bob Gunderson

    I still have a few motorist allies left! I’m pretty sure London Breed & Mayor Lee would vouch for me given their abysmal ridership this month.


    Upright Biker

    The entirety of Grant Ave from the Chinatown Gates through North Beach to Filbert should be pedestrian and deliveries/drop-off only.


    Upright Biker

    If the current closure and construction hasn’t resulted in gridlock, then nothing will. Especially not removing one lane of auto traffic in the tunnel. This will also give us the opportunity to widen the sidewalks on that block on either side of the tunnel, which would be great for businesses+pedestrians in Chinatown and Union Sq.


    Upright Biker

    I ride some combination of this route (either Grant or Stockton, depending on my mood) nearly every day. The challenge of Grant as an 8 to 80 bikeway is that first hill at the Chinatown Gate. It’s a killer. Widening the sidewalks would make it more pleasant and accessible for pedestrians, and a raised bike lane in either direction would make cycling a breeze.

    Julie’s know for getting things done (NB Library, Joe D Playground & Pool, Pioneer Park, Central Subway) so I have no doubt if the D3 people support this it will happen.


    Upright Biker

    Could not agree more, esp. about the contra-flow lane.



    How does it feel to know that most residents of an entire city would throttle you, Bobby?



    Pay no attention to that man behind the windshield, Julie. He cruises SF looking in his rearview mirror such that all the world is one big blind spot.


    Mike Fogel

    Along with wider sidewalks and physical protection between people driving & people riding bikes:


    Andy Chow

    In the northbound direction there’s Grant as alternatives for bikes. Grant is at least calm enough and does not have transit. In the southbound direction, it goes downhill and cyclists can take the lane.

    I think Stockton is safer overall if auto traffic is not diverted away from the tunnel. If they don’t use the tunnel, they will have to go south via Montgomery, traveling extra blocks with more intersections with bikes and peds, increasing risks for collisions.



    Were the original poster sincere I’d say they might be surprised at how many kid-having 40+ year olds regularly hop on a bike to get around SF as well as other parts of the Bay Area (quite a handful of whom regularly post here!) but some people prefer their tired, hackneyed stereotypes.

    So, that’s fun for them, I guess.


    Dexter Wong

    Everyone wants a piece of Stockton St., but we all must share or the street will clog with gridlock.


    Bob Gunderson

    Leave Stockton tunnel alone, Julie! Walking & biking was always intended to be an afterthought and to encourage people to drive cars like normal people.



    I believe a major hurdle to coordination between agencies is mistrust between the different regions. I think there is a fear that the more political influential San Francisco would dominate any future transportation projects.



    I’d rather close down Grant to cars and make THAT street ped and bike friendly, and have Stockton transit, peds, and loading only. Stockton tunnel can (and should!) have ped and bike improvements. But unless there is bike infrastructure on Stockton, these improvements would be moot.



    Sometimes it feels like Wiener is the only one of these turkeys who lives in San Francisco



    Can’t we get something like these?



    Pretty sad results…do the Sorry Six in the picture at top care about Muni or the people in this city that take the 700,000 trips on it each day?



    Stanley Roberts: It’s frustrating to see Stanley catch all those traffic offenders but can’t ticket them. Seems there should be SFPD there to cite them.


    Bob Gunderson

    My sincere and heartfelt thanks to those supervisors who have bravely dug in their heels and said no to this challenge. Not once have they gone on Muni, even for a short distant trip within their tiny district! They couldn’t even do it for a photo-op either so they don’t give their vehicle loving constituents the impression that they support the shame cab for poor people.



    One has to wonder the opportunity cost of SFPD’s refusal to enforce moving violations. Not only do you have the city income from traffic tickets, but there’s also the economic benefit of people being able to go to work instead of laying in a hospital bed.



    A little off-topic, but about those decimated soft-hit posts, I’ve always been very discouraged by how they clearly don’t do anything to protect bicyclists (and effectively state that the City thinks it’s more important motorists don’t damage their car than bicyclists not be hit). However, I did recently happen to be riding by when a street cleaner was at work and noticed that it just went straight over them. The inanity of this still astounds me, but it gave me some comfort to know that most of the damage of those soft-hit posts must be from the street cleaning …



    Which is why there should be some sort of enforcement of rules like these planned…but this is San Francisco, so we’re totally out of luck on that front.



    and hard physical barriers are generally incapable of letting Muni do its thing



    Re: “Market Street Turn Restrictions”

    It is great there will be officers in place physically directing automobiles to follow the law for the first two weeks. However, if the plan then relies primarily upon the presumption motorists shall voluntarily choose to follow the law and refrain from turning onto Market Street where it is prohibited, then the entire gambit shall fail.

    From regularly blocked “protected” green bike lanes to row after row of decimated soft hit posts, it should be abundantly clear to SFMTA planners and officials that the absence of significant traffic enforcement on Market Street means anything short of hard physical barriers shall continue to fail to prevent motorists from choosing to break the law whenever and wherever it suits them. Signs and paint do not work.



    The mayors of NYC make a point of riding public transit regularly. If they can do it, Ed Lee can, too. He has a security detail.


    Alexander Vucelic

    free Parking



    What an appallingly disgusting excuse, but then again quite typical. “Its for the kids… that I have to rape the environment…”


    Totally unqualified to be a leader. Totally.



    BS. The king of – what country is it? I think Norway or Sweden – rides public transit. I think it is failure if a person is so “successful” that they can no longer exist as a normal human. Such people are not qualified to be leaders.

    He could always shave his mustache or wear a hoodie.



    Everyone below 7 should be recalled. If you are elected to represent and manage a city and cannot do the most basic thing like carry through on a minor commitment to use your city’s public transit network, you totally suck. And not just as an elected representative, also as a human. Fuck you Breed, Yee, Tang, Lee, Farrell, and Cohen. Please resign immediately!



    While I don’tknow whether Supervisor Farrell is driving or a passanger, it is disturbing how many people view their car as a mobile living room or office rather than potentially deadly heavy machinery. When you say that you can have quality together time with your children while you are in the drivers seat you are in essence normalizing distracting behaviors, like turning to look at your kids, that have potentially deadly consequences. Many times we hear that parents who looked away from their road at their kids for”just a second” should get a hall pass if they cause an injury or death on the street. I say to Supervisor Farrell, if you want to spend time interacting with your children, please don’t do it while concentrating on not killing your fellow citizens in the city.



    Governing would be freaking great if it weren’t for all those damn constituents.



    For crying out loud, I have a very demanding tech job and managed to take my kid to preschool on MUNI, including a transfer from Noe Valley to the Excelsior. It was the highlight of my day because in that circumstance I had nothing to do but interact with my son.



    How many would recognize him? The old governor of Massachusetts rode the subway every day to work in the state house. When people did approach him, it was called doing his job and listening to the voter.



    Could it be that Mayor Lee can not ride Muni without being bombarded by people?



    So just to be clear…..When Farrell drives he’s paying attention to his children in the car?

    If that’s the case I feel really really scared.



    Except that walkers and bicyclists are NOT alllies in SF.

    Wow. Says who? Do you think people who sometimes hop on a bike never use their two feet to walk? Or that people currently on the sidewalk have never hopped on a bike?

    There’s no such thing as -ers and -ists and -ians, but rather trips made by various modes. That’s some crazy tunnel vision.



    “According to aide Jess Montejano, Farrell needs to drive because he’s busy, and his time in his car with his kids is often “the only time he gets to spend with them.””
    Farrell’s favorite excuse is that automobile = family-friendly.



    The City is now packed with self-entitled transplanted wealthy little creeps that only care about their own particular issues. It will only take another burst bubble to remove them to some place like Austin Texas

    Hah! Funny you mention Austin. There, those in charge are actually doing a somewhat laudable job to sincerely address infrastructure inequities. There’s less need to “whine” that the city isn’t adhering to best-practices when they’re actually one of the first cities in North America to be building treatments such as Protected Intersections:

    Though these are well-documented as being safer for all modes (whether going by car, bike, foot, mobility device), hitherto SFMTA has flat-out refused to consider them.

    I’m not sure if it’s “whining” to hold SF public officials accountable for actually doing their jobs.



    Some people prefer their small-minded preconceived notions about Anyone Who’s Not Them in the world.



    So half of our elected officials, including the mayor, can’t be bothered to put on a smile and try riding Muni for a couple of days? What excuse are Lee and Farrell offering up now? Even Kim, who lives within walking distance of City Hall and so has a pretty reasonable excuse for low participation is doing better than these guys.


    Ziggy Tomcich

    Biking is not a fad and it’s not a local phenomenon. Cities all over the world are seeing an explosion in people choosing to ride their bikes in every demographic because riding a bike sucks a lot less than driving or riding public transit! Most trips in urban cities are less than 4 miles; an easy distance on a bicycle. The cost per user for urban bicycle infrastructure is a tiny fraction of what we spend on roads and mass transit. San Francisco is actually lagging far behind other US cities in development of protected bicycle infrastructure. Pittsburgh, Seattle, St Paul, St. Louis, Washington DC, NYC, Eugene, Denver, and Minneapolis are all building more protected bike lanes in faster than San Francisco. Protected bike lanes make biking safer and more viable for everyone by physically separating traffic lanes from biking lanes. It’s puzzling that San Francisco seems to have more anger and opposition to these bicycling improvements than most other US cities.



    You mean the Me Generation. Or more accurately, the “Me ME ME!” generation who wants to pave the earth and destroy the atmosphere for future generations rather than suffer the slightest personal inconvenience.

    Your kind got 35% of the vote on Prop L last time around, it seems like you car-first types are a dying breed around here to me.



    What makes you think I am a trust fund baby? I grew up in a trailer park and went to school on the GI Bill after serving three years in the 82nd Airborne Division. What have you done for your county? Or for your City for that matter, other than claim some unique privilege based on birthright?



    I read Seth’s comment wrong–I thought the 21-year old was the son of the driver.


    Aaron Bialick

    My mistake. Corrected it.



    That part is entirely accurate. The driver was arrested and charged with child endangerment (among other things).

    But yes, the 21 yo man probably does not have a 15 yo son, as the Streetsblog headline implies.