Skip to content

Recent Comments

  1.  

    M.

    Let’s get real. Answer these questions honestly:
    1. What’s your average driving speed in SF? On freeways?
    2. How does the likelihood of killing a non-driver in a crash change with every 10mph more in speed?
    3. What’s the actual speed limit in SF, unless otherwise posted?
    Still gonna say you *always* drive in a law-abiding and safe manner?

  2.  

    droolingsheep

    He seems to have a better ground game. I see his signs all over the place.

  3.  

    Easy

    Townsend needs a westbound bike lane on the first block leaving the Embarcadero – I keep getting buzzed by cars passing on the slight uphill when I’m riding on the sharrows.

    The signal lights need adjusting too. It’s difficult to start biking from 3rd St when the light changes, and not get stuck at Lusk. Because of this, and because Lusk is just a glorified driveway, there’s a lot of non-compliance with that traffic light.

  4.  

    DrunkEngineer

    Quoting from the MTC Routine Accommodation Document:

    In accordance with MTC Resolution 3765, agencies applying for regional transportation funds must complete this checklist to document how the
    needs of bicyclists and pedestrians were considered in the process of planning and/or designing the project for which funds are being requested. For projects that do not accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians, project sponsors must document why not.

    According to the resolution, the checklist is intended for use on projects at their earliest conception or design phase. This guidance pertains to transportation projects that could in any way impact bicycle and/or
    pedestrian use, whether or not the proposed project is designed to accommodate either or both modes.

  5.  

    NoeValleyJim

    Peskin is really a terrible human being, does Christensen have any chance at all against him? I would love to support her but don’t like wasting my time.

  6.  

    NoeValleyJim

    Privately owned cars don’t belong on Market Street. I think that cabs are fine and maybe even Uber and Lyft, but Market Street is no place for amateur drivers.

  7.  

    NoeValleyJim

    I always pass through bond measures to my tenants. And I pay much more than that in property taxes.

  8.  

    voltairesmistress

    Sorry if my comment seemed off topic and rambling. Hope this is better: In a nutshell: candidate talking points on transit are governed by the latest outrage, not the underlying key issues. To wit: cable car dangers are not a key issue; creating true mobility for all residents is. Wish candidates WERE talking subways and dedicated surface transit for example, not the latest headline.

  9.  

    murphstahoe

    While I am sure it was thrilling to see Lance Armstrong riding in the wiggle, I find it very disturbing that he is not only using EPO again, but has a motor installed in his rear hub. I guess he is banned and no longer subject to UCI/WADA rules. Good to hear his handling skills are intact, that dude could really carve the corners.

  10.  

    hp2ena

    That article read like a stream of consciousness. I thought the focus was supposed to be on candidates’ POV about cable car conductor safety? What does stop consolidation have anything to do with cable car conductor safety? There’s something I’m not thinking of…

    But instead of Peskin’s education campaign, I’d implement some design changes. ASAP. Like installing pedestrian islands on California and closing northbound Powell between Jackson and Washington to traffic, to name a few.

  11.  

    voltairesmistress

    Reading the Examiner article about the D3 race and its candidates making sympathetic sounds about the dangers for cable car operators, the removal of bus stops, etc . . . I am reminded how difficult candidates find it to be brave. Nobody wants to say that if we want true mobility, we have to either build subways or structure our surface transit to operate more like subways would. That means spacing stops 4 blocks apart mostly, creating separated dedicated transit lanes, and changing the lights so that buses and trams rarely stop except for at their dedicated loading zones, and running a few lines with such frequency that one typically waits 2-4 minutes inbetween conveyances. Instead the candidates keep trying to chase every vote, please every constituent or interested party who wants change but only as long as it means not having to change little bit themselves, like walking one more block sometimes or having to buy cards or individual fares before boarding. Or the big one: eliminating parking spots to create dedicated transit lanes, protected bike lanes, or a good pedestrian experience. Afraid we are still kind of a Zero Vision city.

  12.  

    jd_x

    Gotta agree with @Caleb. It’s really not that hard. I mean seriously, just look at this:
    https://goo.gl/maps/8pPjI

    It’s pretty obvious you can’t drive in the ridiculously bright-colored red and green lanes, and there are arrows all over the road point right and signs that say right turn only except cabs and bicyclists.

    I think the problem is that motorists have come to expect that, unless there are flashing lights and/or sirens, they don’t need to pay attention. As a motorist, there is no reason you can’t see all the signs on Market. And if a motorist can’t deal, then slow way down or just don’t drive at all.

  13.  

    Dark Soul

    Add Bus Red Lane Between Taraval and Judah
    ..
    28R would remain stopping at 19th and lincoln

  14.  

    p_chazz

    Yep. Lots of drivers making illegal left hand turns from EB Market Street to NB Front Street. When they almost run me over, I point to the no left turn sign and mouth the words “no left turn.”

  15.  

    jonobate

    Not if you also implement congestion pricing.

    In any case, congestion is not directly related to traffic accidents. There have been multiple studies on this issue, and none have established a clear causation between congestion and accident rates. However, there is a clear relationship between roadway design and accident rates, so this is where accident reduction efforts should be focused.

  16.  

    Caleb

    This isn’t as a result of signage design or roadway design. The design does not get any clearer. This is user error.

    An aside: if drivers paid even a tenth as much attention to the signs and markings of the roadway as they do the various illuminated screens inside their vehicle, it would be a safer world for us all.

  17.  

    p_chazz

    But wouldn’t that vastly increase the traffic on SOMA streets, which are already congested and just set the stage for more accidents?

  18.  

    Bob Gunderson

    Rage caps aren’t an answer. Can’t you help me out? How many people on bikes killed & injured people on the streets of San Francisco this year?

  19.  

    Bob Gunderson

    ..

  20.  

    bourbon

    It’d be great to go against the special interests, cultural norms and the bloated sense of driver entitlement and start ticketing them for driving in bike lanes, parking in bike lanes, making right turns without merging, failing to stop at red lights before a right turn…. you know, the illegal behaviors that are actually causing cyclist and pedestrian deaths.

  21.  

    Jamison Wieser

    On the topic of Vision Zero, work on the Upper Market safety improvements is getting underway. City crews are scraping off the old marking as putting down guides for the new striping.

  22.  

    NoeValleyJim

    All that would indicate is that more than 50% (if true) of the cyclists on a very slightly traveled (for bicycles) corridor broke the law.

    The heavily traveled corridors of Valencia and Market Street have good bike lanes and unsurprisingly, well-behaved cyclists as well. Build infrastructure and people will use it.

    What route do you use to walk? Google maps has me taking Sutter and then Market and then Main on my bicycle. If that is your route I would be surprised to find that 50% of cyclists were breaking the law. I will go check it out after work and tell you what I think.

    I agree that cyclists should stay off the sidewalk, btw. Except for the very brief act of entering or leaving the roadway, there are almost no good reasons to be on the sidewalk for anyone over 12.

  23.  

    mx

    They actually have been ticketing drivers fairly aggressively right around 10th and Market where this accident took place. From what I’ve seen, when SFPD is out there, there’s often a line of 6+ cars waiting to receive tickets for proceeding straight eastbound on Market instead of making the right onto 10th.

    I do think a lot of drivers on Market are simply confused by all the signs, restrictions, and non-standard designs. You could have 100 SFPD officers out there giving tickets every day and behavior wouldn’t improve that much. To me, that indicates a broader problem with the design rather than just an enforcement problem.

    Not making illegal left turns from the right lane into a very loud and obvious streetcar should be reasonably obvious however.

  24.  

    DrG

    No, you walk with me on the streets I walk to and from my work from Post and Mason down to the Temporary Transbay Terminal.

  25.  

    roymeo

    Applying the James T Kirk Method of Home Computer Repair on poor Bob G?

  26.  

    jd_x

    If only SFPD wasn’t out wasting their time ticketing bicyclists, one of the lowest threats to safety in the city, instead of automobile traffic on Market St (and SOMA in general) engaging in all kinds of behavior that was *actually* killing and maiming people.

  27.  

    NoeValleyJim

    Come meet me on Market Street and we can count them there. Almost all obey the law on Market Street, the most heavily traveled bicycle corridor in The City. I have actually done the counts myself.

  28.  

    NoeValleyJim

    I notice you failed to answer the question. I have been in a car thousands of times in my life and I have never observed the operator (including myself) slavishly follow every law. Almost all drivers speed and I can show you the studies to prove it.

    I myself am far more law abiding on a bicycle than in a car because I do not want to be hit. I always stop at stop signs on my bike.

    Car drivers are far more reckless than cyclists, kill far more people and arrogantly point fingers at others for picayune grievances.

  29.  

    NoeValleyJim

    From the SFMTA 2013 Bicycling Census:

    76 percent were observed wearing helmets, the highest level on record, and 95 percent correctly utilized the facility rather than riding on the sidewalk or in the opposite direction.

    You are incorrect in the facts sir and have no evidence to support your assertion.

  30.  

    DrG

    Then I challenge you. You come and walk with me and I’ll PROVE to you that more than 50% of bicyclists break the law.

  31.  

    DrG

    If only one life is damaged, isn’t that enough? ISN’T THAT ENOUGH???? If that one life’s damage could be avoided by simply following the rules, shouldn’t the rules be followed? Or, may be YOUR life isn’t worth very much. But, sorry, MINE IS.

  32.  

    DrG

    I’ve had my vision checked many many times: 20/20 in both eyes with full field. Now, I suggest you have your brain examined.

  33.  

    SF Guest

    I’ll go you one better — when I rode a bike with the exception of riding in the Presidio I obeyed all traffic laws including stops and red lights. I retired from riding understanding the risks and I’m the one who will pay for other people’s mistakes. 20 years ago more cyclists followed the laws and didn’t feel above it.

  34.  

    jonobate

    Drivers could use Townsend, Bryant, or Folsom (or Brannan or Bryant or Harrison) to get to King/Embarcadero. That’s the beauty of a street grid. Alternatively, they could use US-101 and take the last exit before the bridge.

    As a ‘phase 1′ for the freeway touchdown, the best approach would probably be to touch the freeway down at Mariposa in the space just to the east of the Caltrain line, where the northbound I-280 roadway and Mariposa St exit ramp are currently located. Then, extend a surface road directly north to meet 16th St, opposite Owens St. At that intersection, drivers could access downtown by turning left then right onto 7th St, or right then left onto 4th St, or right then left onto 3rd St. Or, they could continue onto Owens to access Mission Bay itself.

    Once Caltrain is put underground, a boulevard could be constructed feeding the Mariposa/I-280 touchdown directly into 7th St. This would help with driver navigation, but is not required before the freeway is removed, as the existing street grid has enough spare capacity to absorb the traffic. The multiple routes to downtown make up for the fact that none of them are very high capacity.

    Any additional congestion on US-101 should be dealt with by converting one or two lanes to express lanes, so that you can pay a toll to bypass congestion. If additional traffic on surface streets becomes a problem, it can be likewise be dealt with by implementing congestion pricing for central SF to discourage driving trips to downtown.

    Additionally, some of the excessive number of entrance/exit ramps through downtown should be removed to keep traffic flowing. The Central Freeway should be removed, as should the 4th/5th St interchange – the eastbound merge slows everything down, and the interchange takes up far more valuable city center land than is necessary.

  35.  

    Ziggy Tomcich

    They’re not removing a bike lane. They’re removing bicycle sharrows, which are completely useless in protecting us. Every single near-miss I’ve encountered has been within a few feet of a bicycle sharrow. Getting rid of those useless bike sharrows along that 1/2 block section from King Street and directing bike traffic onto Townsend is the best short term solution to make biking safer in that area.

  36.  

    MrEricSir

    Wait Bob, I thought you hated bicycles. If they’re the same as motorized vehicles, shouldn’t you like bicycles as much as the almighty automobile?

  37.  

    Bob Gunderson

    Common sense from Sherrie Matza. Bikes are exactly the same as motorized vehicles and should be subject to the exact same traffic laws (but not any additional bike infrastructure)

  38.  

    NoeValleyJim

    And you never go 26 in a 25 MPH zone. And you always use your blinkers and never ever double park for a minute to let out a passenger.

  39.  

    ClaireB

    What is the SFMTA doing to reduce trucks on King Street? What is the SFMTA doing to reduce truck drivers who don’t pay attention to what’s in front of them on King Street?

  40.  

    Andy Chow

    Then how would drivers go from 7th to King/Embarcadero? Should they go Townsend, Bryant, or Folsom?

    There’s also a problem with any new ramp at 16th Street, where the freeway sits on top of Caltrain. There also safety issue when increasing traffic at a grade crossing.

    101 is log jammed north of 280 because of Bay Bridge traffic. Without 280, a lot of these downtown traffic would be diverted to city streets to skip the Bay Bridge traffic. Bayshore Blvd, Potereo, San Jose Ave, South Van Ness, Guerrero would see more regional traffic and become the next 19th Ave or Lombard.

    The other purpose of Caltrain extension is to provide new transit option to compensate for reduced auto capacity. It is not just getting people closer to downtown but make cross region trips faster with direct transfer to/from Caltrain in downtown SF.

  41.  

    mx

    “Market Street Driver Makes Illegal Left Turn From Right Lane Into Streetcar’s Path”

    This happens all the damn time. Not usually into a streetcar, fortunately, but illegal left turns on Market. The signage is terrible (hard to see because it’s in usual positions, frequently says “no turns” which drivers aren’t expecting), taxi drivers frequently don’t care, and the legal alternatives can take huge amounts of time due to freeway gridlock in SOMA.

  42.  

    hailfromsf

    As a very frequent cyclist in the area, I have to say that hands down, the biclyclists are far more egregious in their disregard for traffic laws and pedestrian safety than the drivers.

    Just a couple weeks ago I was walking through the wiggle, and just after I stepped into one of the crosswalks, some guy on a bike blew through the stop sign, fully tucked, easily doing 40mph just a couple feet in front of me. Seriously freaked me out. Not once have I ever seen a driver of a car pull a stunt like that on a small neighborhood street.

    Then at the VERY NEXT crosswalk, it happened again, except this other guy only blew through the stop sign for my crosswalk at about 20mph and he was nice enough to give me a courtesy whistle to the effect of “look-out-I’m-about-to-blow-through-your-crosswalk-instead-of-yielding-to-you.”

    When I bike through there, I will stop and allow pedestrians and other cars to take their rightful turns, but more often than not, some other cyclist behind me will swerve around me and blow through the intersection anyway. It’s embarrassing, really.

  43.  

    hailfromsf

    A hit-and-run asshole who doesn’t yield to pedestrians? I don’t think so.

  44.  

    David Marcus

    Point well taken.

  45.  

    Ziggy Tomcich

    We’re talking about 1/2 a block of King street between 3rd and 4th which is extremely dangerous and has taken the life of a cyclist. How do any of you think this 1/2 block can be made safe for bicycles in the short term? There’s no parking to remove. The only solution is to remove a southbound traffic lane, creating a huge bottleneck. It’s not even a bike lane they’re removing; it’s removing those useless bike sharrows. I’m all for protected bike lanes, and I’m all for a complete redesign of the Embarcadero that includes a two-way protected bike lane all along the waterfront. But in the short term, that 1/2 block shared bike/car/bus/cement truck lane is a dangerous bobbytrap that puts unsuspecting cyclists lives at risk. I’ve fallen into that bobby trap it is pretty terrifying. In this case I think the city is doing the right thing by removing the uttery useless sharrows and encouraging people bike on Townsend. I’d love to see signage directing bikes to Caltrain and AT&T park, and install a protected bike lane along Townsend that funnels directly from King Street making it clearly obvious where cyclists should go. All of SOMA is confusing for biking because of piecemeal infrastructure. The bike lane along the Embarcadero should continuously connect to Caltrain and AT&T park via Townsend without f^$King useless bike sharrows forcing bikes to play roulette with trucks gunning it to accelerate onto 280.

  46.  

    roymeo

    But, self, how long did it take you to be comfortable doing that? Well, OK, it did take a while, and is not fun dealing with the crazy auto traffic, ticket scalpers in the bike lane, pedicabs, people jumping out of cars, etc.
    Just because I eventually learned to navigate it doesn’t mean it is 8-80 friendly.

  47.  

    SF Guest

    You made a ridiculous claim that 100% of car drivers break the law. I have not had a citation in over 20 years and I don’t run red lights or stop signs.

  48.  

    NoeValleyJim

    Which “stats” are that? Show me the proof.

  49.  

    roymeo

    I rode home from Embarcadero BART to Dogpatch along the Embarcadero to 3rd St / Terry A Francois most of the past year…the only time I regretted that direction was when a game was just getting out, though I’d have to take market or something west of the freeway on-ramp to have any improvement/safety. Sure it is congested but it’s much faster than driving through it.
    I wasn’t going to beat my Strava results, but I’m not sure about “impossible”.

  50.  

    jamiebronson

    Hey pal, i am not the one who brought up renters. it was you. So they are your holes not mine. Goodbye.