Skip to content

Recent Comments

  1.  

    jd_x

    “While all the bikers are lined up being petulant ninnies, we’ll be moonwalking back and forth across the crosswalk.”

    Sounds like you are no better than the cyclists, huh?

    But seriously, I think this is awesome. It’s like Sunday Streets in the Wiggle but on a school night! It would be great to see all non-car modes of transit take over our streets, as it should be. I think you should organize more of these because pedestrians and bicyclist both get screwed by cars all the time, so thanks for helping join the efforts into one!

  2.  

    murphstahoe

    Hoodline called, they are happy you’ve come to visit and want us to keep you. But I think you’d be better off at Bob Gunderson’s blog.

  3.  

    Drew Levitt

    I was thinking about doing the same thing. Even better would be a sustained campaign of submitting complaints about unsafe driver behavior to Park District. The nice thing about Capt. Sanford’s decision to let complaints, not collision data, drive his enforcement priorities is that we can directly affect the balance of those complaints! What if, every time we bike the Wiggle, we pull over, wait for a driver to roll through a stop sign or cut off a person walking, and call in a complaint?

  4.  

    twinpeaks_sf

    Just hypothesizing: judged by the angle of the car in the 2nd photo, it looks like another illegal right turn hook.

  5.  

    The Colonel

    The San Francisco Anti-Crybaby Crew is also staging a counterprotest! We’re encouraging everyone who’s tired of cyclists willfully jamming up the rest of community to join us for MOONWALK FEST at the corner of Steiner and Waller. While all the bikers are lined up being petulant ninnies, we’ll be moonwalking back and forth across the crosswalk.

    Remember your Michael Jackson gloves!!

  6.  

    Jeffrey Baker

    I know many people can read for comprehension, but it might have been better if the headline, and the article, referred to the meeting as being on Tuesday, instead of “tomorrow”.

  7.  

    murphstahoe

    Capt Sanford fiddles while Rome Burns.

    Bicyclist vs car accident at Octavia and Market streets in #sanfrancisco bicyclist is seriously injured. pic.twitter.com/MtxaMIotFc— DB (@BoyerDina) August 11, 2015

  8.  

    murphstahoe

    I was mimicking Capt Sanford.

  9.  

    mike_napolis_beard

    Is there any way we can lobby for GJEL to change their name from “Accident Attorneys” to something a little more accurate? Every little bit helps – even if it means abandoning the alliteration.

  10.  

    Andrew Cohen

    biking safely does not equal biking legally. I bike for a living in SF and have thousands of miles under my tires in the city with very limited incident, do I follow the law? absolutely not, its just not viable…do I respect cars and other pedestrians? absolutely….i am very frequently trying to wave cars and people in front of me in busy intersections….

    however, if they are just pulling to a stop and I am moving, me stopping and them looking to see if I stop would take longer for both of us and leech my much coveted energy. again…if it costs no one else extra time, yes I just blow through intersections, obviously I am incentivised to not hit anyone/get it bc if I get hurt I not only get hurt, but loose my lively hood. what we need is teaching people basic rules to follow, ie only passing on left, staying out of door zone, keeping a straight path, signaling etc etc….and infrastructure that make it not so life threatening. yeah yeah keep dreamin i know.. until then tho, Ill take care of myself just fine and you can leverage those tickets against my non existent license.

  11.  

    caryl

    Thanks for the background. Sounds like a tough problem and I appreciate the thoughtful discussion. Too often, I think we build things without thinking about (and planning for) the impacts to our transportation infrastructure, so I was glad to see some thought going into ways we might mitigate Bay Bridge problems caused by the potential TI development – *before* they occur. While I realize there are complex issues involved, I just hope that the final solution doesn’t assume the status quo – that everyone will just drive everywhere they need to go. That solution isn’t going to work for anyone.

  12.  

    NoeValleyJim

    “SF Paratransit Selected as Paratransit System of the Year

    The SFMTA Paratransit Program was selected as Paratransit System of the Year by CalACT, the California Association for Coordinated Transportation, which is the industry association for small, rural and specialized transportation providers in California. The SFMTA was
    selected for its role as a leader in developing innovative approaches to providing services to its senior and disabled residents. SFMTA’s Paratransit Program was lauded for innovations such as the SFMTA-subsidized taxi program, allowing riders to purchase $30 worth of
    taxi value for $5.50; the Shop A Round program providing round trips to shops and markets; and its Van Gogh program, addressing social isolation
    by providing groups of seniors transportation to plays, movies, museums and other cultural events. The Accessible Services Paratransit Debit Card, which replaced paper scrip, was cited as a technological
    innovation that allows for more efficient electronic data collection and a more user-friendly customer experience. Congratulations to Kate Toran, Annette Williams and the entire team at Taxi and Accessible Services for your great work!”

    “By and large, the taxi companies have accepted the requirements of working with the city and have been great partners. We can say with assurance they consistently stand up and deliver, and it makes a huge
    difference to the program. In fact, customer satisfaction surveys consistently reflect scores in the high 90s for their level of service, reliability and overall satisfaction.”

    Do you have any reason to believe that these systems are other than what they are advertised? My friends who use it say that they are great. Some people will complain about anything, no matter how nice or cheap it is.

  13.  

    Xavier Harmony

    And you’re missing the point. Police shouldn’t be targeting violations based on complaints (which are subject to biases), they should be targeting violations based on data (like the “Focus on the Five” program).

  14.  

    caryl

    I don’t understand how businesses and their customers would be exempt from the congestion charge. Wouldn’t the charge apply to anyone who uses the ramps?

  15.  

    @saveybi

    FYI, the contamination clean up has been ongoing for 15+yrs on TI. Every year they find something new. This year, Congress gave them another $10M for clean up.

    It’s highly likely they will never build those 8K units. Lennnar has a history of bankrupting the LLC (TICD) after building & selling the luxury units and bolts on the affordable housing portion of the project.

    The current infrastructure is decaying and people are living with black mold, raw sewage backups, and exposure to lead and asbestos. There is no way for residents to deal with JSCO’s abuses because TIDA won’t intervene and there are no grievance policies in place to elevate the problems to the city. Supervisor Jane Kim doesn’t care and routes all resident complaints back to JSCO.

  16.  

    @saveybi

    Thoughtful reply, thanks. However, your premise that businesses and their customers will pay the congestion charge is wrong. As a matter of fact, ask Rachel Hiatt at SFCTA how much businesses and tourists will pay and she will direct you to Bob Beck at TIDA. Why wouldn’t she know the answer? I believe she does but doesn’t want to say it aloud. Because the response is NOTHING.

  17.  

    caryl

    It seems all of those groups will be included in the congestion charge, but that won’t address the 8000 new housing units being added over the next 15 years. If all those new residents drive to work every day, that’s a lot of additional traffic on the bridge, so we need to discourage that as much as possible. I would love to see improved transit options so that driving doesn’t always seem like the most convenient option. I like @NoeValleyJim:disqus’s idea of a sliding scale fee for those people who truly need to drive and can’t afford the fee, but my guess is that for a lot of people (including many who are lower income), they drive mainly because the transit options are so abysmal, not because driving is critical to their survival. Making transit options more attractive and driving less so seems like a good way to go, especially if a sliding scale fee is available to the very small number of people who absolutely must drive for some reason.

  18.  

    Althaea

    “That’s how it is when you’re biking on San Francisco’s car-dominated
    streets. You have to be constantly on the lookout, ready to anticipate
    unpredictable driver behavior, calculating how to minimize danger and
    stress.”

    And that’s the heartbreak of it all, because as bicyclists we have a right to feel good and to feel safe when we bicycle. By riding bicycles we are creating the kind of world that doesn’t have the sick stress, the danger, abuse, etc. that motor vehicles create yet almost like martyrs we suffer more, not less.

    I’m sure that some of the disgusting people in authority will never understand that.

    I read an interesting description about how karma actually works. The basic idea is that when you do something, it is like giving a gift to others. For example, by not eating animal products, one gives the gift of happiness and peace to other beings, of not having to fear for their life and experience the suffering and misery of their friends and relatives being killed and enslaved.

    There are many in positions of authority who are simply not skilled at giving gifts and actually cause more suffering in the world.

    But I encourage everyone to remember, during those times when it seems like too much, to remember that what you are doing is monumental and is benefiting many beings. By choosing to bicycle instead of riding in a motor vehicle, you are becoming creators of amazing worlds of peace and wholesomeness.

  19.  

    vcs

    The biggest part of the problem here is that nobody really has language to describe the actual problem. In terminology terms,I like “Scofflaw”.

    When I watch four cyclists blatantly cut off a police car in the middle of a Wiggle intersection, it *seems* that significant percentage of bicyclists simply have no conception of “right of way” and “don’t break laws ten feet away from the cops, you stupid moron”. These people are scofflaws, and if we want a civilized society, they either need to behave or be stomped out of existence.

    We can debate about the merits of the “Idaho Stop” and proper defensive cyclist behavior. But, if there is a Black & White Ford sitting there and you rolled through and got a ticket? Thats solely because you are irresponsible dumbass, and you had it coming. If you aren’t looking for Crown Victorias, what is the real likelihood you’re paying attention to pedestrians or anything else?

  20.  

    Lee Ross

    Chief Suhr put this Guy in charge of the Park Station. All these concerns are really being directed to the wrong person. Sanford is just a functionary sent out to Park Station to carry out policies put in place by Chief Suhr’s team. The Chief likes the media spotlight. Shine it on him.

  21.  

    murphstahoe

    Really? I would have thought a ferry to SF from Treasure Island at rush hour would be faster than driving….

    Oh – I see, you are comparing the current transit to driving, not the transit proposed to be coupled with the congestion pricing. Jeez, that’s not even clever.

  22.  

    murphstahoe

    You don’t understand, clearly your mind is made up. We get a lot of actual complaints about cyclists.

  23.  

    Amy Farah Weiss

    If you care about the issue of SFPD’s crackdown on bikes, your vote for Mayor this November matters!

    As an official Mayoral candidate of San Francisco, I support a “Yield for Safety” bike policy that would first be piloted (with evaluation) on the Wiggle. I would ask the SF Bike Coalition, Walk SF, and other Vision Zero transit safety advocacy groups to join the SFPD in developing a discretion training program for police officers and a “yield for safety” program for cyclists. Cyclists who in any way show reckless or endangering behavior to pedestrians, drivers, or other cyclists would be ticketed. The spirit of the law is to support safety and flow for all, and I have interviewed many SFPD officers about this matter who have told me that they are legally allowed to use discretion in ticketing.

    I produced this video via Neighbors Developing Divisadero in 2012 in support of increasing safety and flow on the Wiggle with the help of the Wigg Party: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqbKZYkswM4

    Let me know if you’d like to help me campaign on this issue. And remember, this November you can link arms with the social equity advocates, policy strategists, and culture makers who have joined forces to challenge the status quo
    of current leadership. Use ranked-choice voting and vote 1, 2, 3 to replace Ed Lee: Vote for me (Amy), Francisco, and Stuart in whatever order feels right for you. Check out my website and get involved at thinktwicevoteweiss.com.

  24.  

    shotwellian

    I spent 30 mins at at a 4-way stop in Sanford’s district earlier today and recorded 86 traffic violations by drivers, mostly incomplete stops. I’ll be bringing these “complaints” to the meeting tomorrow. If Sanford wants to conduct stings based on complaints (his declared rationale for the bike crackdown), then 86 complaints about drivers should be plenty, right? I’d encourage others to record your own complaints as well!

  25.  

    StrixNoctis .

    To me it looks like even the police car didn’t come to a complete stop. I’ll assume Sanford was driving that car since he’s the chief & representative of his precinct.

  26.  

    jd_x

    Awesome video. Hope there is a huge turnout of cyclists tomorrow night. Time to reign in an out-of-control police captain who ignores data to feed his own petty agenda.

  27.  

    jd_x

    I don’t think that is the sort of behavior we should be encouraging. Why should driving for entertainment get an exclusion when that act creates the same problems as those driving for utilitarian reasons? If we already have issues with people driving for utilitarian reasons, we *definitely* have issues with people driving recreationally.

  28.  

    @saveybi

    Charge the businesses, luxury hotels, their customers & tourists.

  29.  

    @saveybi

    the problem is not the people, it’s how the city plans to glean the money. Giving a pass to businesses, luxury hotels, and their customers while placing the burden on the backs of the working poor and middle class is definitely NOT the solution.

  30.  

    @saveybi

    Are you a regular user of the paratransit system? Simply knowing the service exists doesn’t make you an expert on its use or its extensibility.

  31.  

    Gezellig

    Mere days after California’s first Dutch-style protected intersection went live, now this!

    It looks like Menlo Park is proposing protected intersections at multiple intersections–hopefully they’ll stick to the crucial elements along these corridors that make these robust, low-stress treatments for everyone passing through regardless of mode. For example, the lack of a transit-stop pass-behind separated bike lane in the top rendering is worrisome.

    Still, it’s encouraging that communities are now seriously proposing such designs at intersections. With one live in Davis already, it’s already passing from That Exotic European Thing That’ll Never Work Here to something that’s already been built a mere 75 miles away.

    So, uh…SFTMA? Next time someone brings protected intersections up are we still going to get told “the culture isn’t ready for it yet” or “no one’s ever done that”….?

  32.  

    Donovan Lacy

    I completely agree, and I think a lot of folks have a hard time being able to tell when a bicycle is going 5-10mph. I think that there is an impression that bicycles are going faster than they really are when they go through an intersection and that cars are going slower than they really are.

    I winder if someone has developed a phone app that functions like a radar gun.

  33.  

    Xavier Harmony

    When I was living in Australia I once got a ticket for rolling through a stop sign. The police officer said I had to stop for 2 full seconds for it be considered a stop. Absolute BS.

  34.  

    NoeValleyJim

    Anything that decreases automobile usage and congestion is a huge win for the working poor because they overwhelmingly take Muni. Muni is much faster when congestion goes down. Congestion is overwhelmingly caused by private automobiles.

    Your premises are exactly backwards. Get on the 14R someday and take it to the Excelsior at 5 PM and tell me who is riding it. Removing private cars from The Mission would help these hard working people ge home to their families at least 15 minutes faster. Your proposals only help the middle class and wealthy monopolize more of the public resources

  35.  

    NoeValleyJim

    You mention a real problem and one that the MTA should address by setting up a sliding scale fee program. I don’t think it should be free for anyone to cross the bridge, but it should cost a nominal amount, like 25 cents, for people who have lower incomes.

  36.  

    NoeValleyJim

    You are apparently unfamiliar with The City’s excellent Paratransit system. I suggest you familiarize yourself with it before embarrassing yourself any further.

    http://www.sfparatransit.com/

  37.  

    Gezellig

    Absolutely. “Channelized” turns for cars are an example of LOS-centric planning which saves cars few moments in turning but is much more dangerous for people on foot/bike.

    Add in the teardrop-shaped protective island and smart signalization of a Dutch-style protected intersection and it all hums along smoothly and safely.

    Not only that but this kind of infrastructure is low-stress and simply pleasant to use. This encourages more trips to be made walking/biking than might otherwise be the case.

  38.  

    caryl

    My understanding is that this proposal is aimed at addressing the very real congestion problems on the Bay Bridge, which are only expected to worsen with the new development on TI. Increased traffic is a problem for everyone, regardless of their income, so it makes sense to me that we would want to discourage people who choose to live on TI from driving a private vehicle on the bridge. I hear your concerns about how this might impact lower income people who need to drive, but do you have a better solution for solving the Bay Bridge’s capacity problem?

  39.  

    CamBam415

    I really like it when the bike path/crossing is set-back from the intersection so that cars are forced to ‘square up’ (facing forward at the crossing). As a cyclist, I feel much safer and as a driver it is less stressful. Sunriver, OR has their bike paths cross way back from the roundabouts and it is great (Cottonwood Dr at E Cascades Rd roundabout is a good example too).

  40.  

    Andy Chow

    If you saw a double parked car with emergency flashers in the outer Sunset the last weekend, or a car making a sudden right turn from the left lane, it must be one of those TNC drivers clogging the streets with low capacity vehicles waiting for their customers. If the outcome is that these vehicles take ridership away from high capacity transit vehicles, I don’t that to be a benefit. They are also less efficient than traditional taxis where random customer can’t just hail a random vehicle, forcing cars to circle around, or double park.

  41.  

    jd_x

    Great article. Was really happy to see that. At this point, it’s clear that what Captain Sanford is doing is ridiculous since clearly ter is debate among reasonable people about the validity of the laws requiring bicyclists to come to a complete stop when they have clearly yielded. If you are a police captain with limited resources, it is irrational and petty (or serving a personal vendetta) to waste these resources on laws which clearly have questionable validity. This discrimination needs to end, and we need more supervisors to speak out.

  42.  

    twinpeaks_sf

    Great write-up by the one supervisor in this town actually focused on the realities of multi-modal transportation.

    But we really need to stop circulating that incorrect map of the Wiggle route…

  43.  

    CamBam415

    Two comments:

    1. I found this interesting blog on the cost of transit modes in Vancouver and thought folks here would enjoy it: http://movingforward.discoursemedia.org/costofcommute/

    2. For the IJ article, it would be interesting to see traffic by commute vs off hours, # of vehicles by direction and where trips start/end. Many EB drivers use the RSR bridge as a Bay Bridge alt route to/from SF/Peninsula and the IJ article only addresses volume as # of toll payers (yet the back-up in the afternoon isn’t in the toll paying direction). Also, as Petaluma and southern Sonoma add housing, I am sure more people are commuting through Marin to SF and the EB. I guess my question is how much of that traffic would be addressed by increased housing stock and how much would be addressed with better transit (rail?) through Marin to SF/EB.

  44.  

    jd_x

    “I’ll ask my neighbor with her wheelchair bound daughter and elderly mother to shlep them via Muni to their doctor’s appointments and physical therapy. Or maybe you suggest they figure out how to do it on bikes + Muni?”

    This is exactly why we need statistics because people like you don’t understand the difference between anecdotes and statistics of the larger population. Just because not everybody can take public transit, bicycle, or walk doesn’t mean we can’t make alternatives to driving better. There are plenty of excellent examples where cars are needed (like yours), but for every one of those, we can find many more where a perfectly healthy, non-disabled person can easily take public transit, bicycle, and/or walk yet chooses not to. These latter are the problem, and if there were less of them, it would be much easier for those who truly need to drive (your example) to be able to do so. And again, the way we determine how the net benefit pans out to society is through statistics (which are in effect equivalent to everyone providing their own anecdote and then weighting them all equally).

  45.  

    Gezellig

    First signalized protected Dutch-style intersection in US now complete in Davis!

    http://www.davisenterprise.com/local-news/davis-dutch-intersection-first-ever-in-u-s-unveiled-with-no-drama/

    Looks like SFMTA’s “that’s never been done (in the US) before” argument will now have to go by the wayside.

    Awesome that Davis is leading the way on this–I’m planning on going to check it out in action this weekend.

  46.  

    Andy Chow

    People who need cars or somehow wedded to their cars don’t have to live Ma Wan, Discovery Bay, and probably shouldn’t be on Treasure Island. Those who chose to live in these communities in Hong Kong did so for the cleaner air and less noise, despite reduced transportation access. I believe that people who want to live on Treasure Island will accept reduced transportation access in exchange for better air, less noise, reduced crime, etc.

    Also the reduced transportation access is reflected in the property prices and rent. In Hong Kong, there are other car-free islands that have relatively lower rent, but ferry is the only transportation on and off the island. They also have the option to live above a subway stop in the city center, but at a higher cost.

    People who drive have plenty of housing options by living further away but with better highway access. I don’t think that from a policy perspective we should encourage car owners to live on the island. I think it is better for those who choose not to drive because the transit access to basically anywhere is relatively short (being of the center of the Bay).

  47.  

    gneiss

  48.  

    jd_x

    “The only discrimination here is against low, moderate & middle income residents.”

    Like I said, and to which I provided data, anything that benefits cars over public transit always is a net loss for low income people. If anecdotes will help you: for every one low income person that drives and is disadvantaged by such changes, more than 1 low income person who takes public transit is now helped. Again, this apparently doesn’t make sense to you, but it should: owning a car is much more expensive than taking public transit.

    Now, Treasure Island is not a bastion of public transit given it’s unique geography. But that doesn’t mean it can’t easily become one. And by providing more public transit options — which is cheaper than driving — you make the island more accessible for low income people.

  49.  

    Xavier Harmony

    Do you know who do care? Those that care about road safety driven by hard data – like the “Focused on the Five” program was designed for.

  50.  

    kceem

    Meanwhile, two local businesses (Val De Cole and Ashbury Market) were broken into over the nights this weekend while these stings were diverting resources that could have been patrolling. Good thing the SFPD is on top of protecting those that matter in our Park District.