-
-
-
Follow Streetsblog
Recently Posted Jobs
- Campaign Manager, 4 days ago
- Policy and Government Affairs Manager, 4 days ago
- Field Director, 3 weeks ago
- Designing Cities Fellow, 5 weeks ago
- Policy Analyst/Advocate (Full-Time Position), 6 weeks ago
Word On The Street
“Having a bike - in particular a cargo or kid-carrying bike that can do the most to replace a car for many trips - not on street level near the street is liking keeping a car on its side and having to ask neighbors to help roll it over every time you need to use it.”
– Todd Edelman In response to "Planning Commission Approves Higher Bike Parking Requirements"
-
-
Recent Comments
Hot Topics
EYES ON THE STREET
Contribute to Streetsblog San Francisco
Email tips@sf.streetsblog.org or send them anonymously. Tag your photos, links, and videos with "streetsblog".
Calendar
- Monday, May 20
- Tuesday, May 21
Archived Articles
Categories
Blogroll
Copyright Notice
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Todd Edelman
The system planned for SF and the Peninsula has worked well in D.C. and other places, but is it the best solution for all the mass transit interfaces needing last-mile solutions (not just in the Bay Area) and the relatively unique terrain here?
There are mature systems focused on the rail commuter needing a bike all day, or at least just to get someone back and forth to the work site from the station (OV fiets in the Netherlands http://www.ov-fiets.nl/) and new station-less systems starting in Hoboken http://www.hobokennj.org/2013/04/hoboken-to-launch-1st-hybrid-bike-rental-bike-share-program/ and Tampa. The per bike price of these systems is far less than the the Bixi-based system planned for here. Also see http://www.blogtalkradio.com/mcofc/2013/01/09/bikeshare-disrupted
So, what’s up with this? In early 2010 after my team won one of the first prizes in the Copenhagen bike share design competition http://www.openbike.se in a field of 127 international entrants, I spoke with people from SFMTA and VTA, offering my services (a bit of consulting to help them select the best solution – by the way our design was only a concept, part of a brain storm to give Denmark and its capitol the best solution.). The response was cold: BAAQMD (acting alone?) had already decided on a system with stations and so on and I was asked only if I had already participated in a working system. The actors behind the competition in Denmark did not seem to care about this– in a place where upwards of 50% of trips are made my bike in some areas.
I am also curious why the Alta Bike Share CEO just changed jobs — a month before the launch of CitiBike in NYC. http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20130423/TRANSPORTATION/130429958
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Jeffrey Baker
I came here wondering the same question. Often while wandering the wastelands of Oakland I wonder how Caltrans came to possess so much of it. Did the city just yield it to Caltrans in the 50s? Did the state make a one-time payment? Did they seize it by imminent domain?
in response to Park Areas Under Central Freeway Downsized to Retain Caltrans Parking
Jeffrey Baker
Yeah, putting the station next to Caltrain is crazy, unless there is a full-time rotation of trucks hauling bikes to the station, or from it, depending on the time of day.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Mom on a bike
TV news: mouthpiece of the bygone generation
in response to Today's Headlines
mikesonn
Stay classy KTVU!
in response to Today's Headlines
thielges
Historic Faber’s Bike Shop destroyed by fire: http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Fire-Rips-Through-SJ-Bicycle-Shop-in-Historic-Building-204843711.html
in response to Today's Headlines
M.
Bring lots of friends, we’ll provide paper for your feedback and will film your ideas. No more balkanization of neighbourhoods, no more $$$ wasted and civil strife! We’re over 700 sigs on our petition but more’s better: http://www.change.org/folksforpolk
And do introduce yourself and get your Folks for Polk button, Mikesonn, et al.
in response to Today's Headlines
mikesonn
I’ll be there on Tuesday!!
in response to Today's Headlines
M.
Folks for Polk has just previewed the new props for Polk St. and it doesn’t look good. They need feedback, we need solidarity! ATTEND THE SFMTA OPEN HOUSES! 1. Tomorrow, Sat. Apr 27, 10-1; 2. Tue. Apr. 30, 1-5:30. Both at the church at 1600 Polk (at Bush)
in response to Today's Headlines
Michael M.
Melissa,
I personally would recommend not responding to people on this thread as it could be people trying to draw you into admitting fault. Just a thought. Lawyers are pretty damn sneaky. Be careful and I hope you get justice.
in response to Video: Geico (Partially) Blames This Cyclist for Getting Doored
murphstahoe
Geographic discrimination! (implied smiley times 40,000)
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
M.
Absolutely! The real problem on ‘both sides’ is that we are being extremely parochial, each neighbourhood having an ‘exceptionalist’ credo and acting as discrete entities. Too few with a global approach. We are one city, one people, one planet.
in response to Today's Headlines
Anonymous
This is pretty exciting!! although a useful number of bike would be much more exciting. I hope this helps bring much needed improvements to biking in downtown/financial district and SoMa, areas with fast car speeds and multilane traffic with little to no dedicated bike infrastructure.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Nicasio Nakamine
Way to have vision, guys. Ho-hum.
in response to Park Areas Under Central Freeway Downsized to Retain Caltrans Parking
Clarrissa
This is a fantastic summary of the issues that we at TransForm and our partners across the region are highlighting in this last stretch before the final adoption of the PlanBayArea.
Our elected officials and representatives need to be reminded of the very comments you all raise. The EEJ scenario, crafted with community needs in mind, is the environmentally superior alternative because of the progressive planning policies it incorporates. I urge you to speak out at the remaining public hearings and to write comment letters by May 16th.
Stay tuned on TransForm’s website for more ways go get involved. Here’s that link again! http://www.transformca.org/advocacy/rtp-scs
in response to Wider Highways? Bay Area's Smart Growth Plan Has Some Glaring Mistakes
Anonymous
To be on par with New York’s 10,000 bike project, SF should have 1000 (about 1/10th population).
Actually, I would expected it to be more popular in San Francisco, so they should probably have even more than that.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Anonymous
I see myself and maybe other Rincon Hill and South Beach neighbors checking bikes out to go Safeway at 4th and King or the nearby Mission Bay Library or to Exploratorium at Pier 15. Ooh! Looks like I could visit my partner too (and vice versa)!
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
murphstahoe
They are putting 10,000 in New York and a lot of people own bikes there. If I am going somewhere I don’t want to lock my own bike up and risk theft, the bike share is perfect.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
mikesonn
Plus, we apparently are getting a very limited roll out. Why put it on Nob Hill over say the entire Mission or EMB areas? You are looking for ways to say this won’t work when the answer is that we are half-*ssing this (we need 10,000 bikes), not that it isn’t on top of Nob Hill.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Andy Chow
I guess some people ride bikes uphill (not slight uphill but real steep ones) like some people like vehicular cycling. If there’s a system that allows one way bike downhill that’s what many people would do. It is not usual since more people in the East Bay casual carpool to San Francisco but take BART or AC Transit to return in the afternoon.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Bruce Nourish
If only biking around most of downtown SF weren’t horrendous, and this rollout had 10x as many bikes.
Details, details.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
mikesonn
Blame the MTC, they wanted regional distribution which spreads out all the bikes and makes all the stations fail. If it ain’t highways, the MTC don’t want it.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
mikesonn
people bike up hills, it isn’t hard and it happens all the time. excuses Andy. Excuses. You don’t bike up hill, doesn’t mean every else doesn’t.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Andy Chow
With residential area it would be competing with individual bike ownership. The current model is to target transit users to address their last mile problem and the limited on board bike capacity for Caltrain, BART, and buses.
You will notice that there’s no bike station in Nob Hill. With the SF geography, bike transportation will not be attractive in certain areas. If you put a bike station there, people would only use it to go downhill and the management would have to truck the bikes uphill.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Anonymous
I think the point was to link employment sites with mass transit — the so-called “last mile” problem. Of course, with time and more funding, the rest of the city should get linked up too — residential areas, etc. Seems to me the problem with this launch is not the selected geographic range but rather the number of bikes provided.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Anonymous
I agree. GGP could still allow cars but make cutting through pointless/time-consuming, and parking something you pay for anywhere in the park. Those two measures alone would solve much of the uglification of the park, while still allowing people to take a scenic drive through the park now and then.
in response to Today's Headlines
Anonymous
I agree with @Jamesboat:disqus , and I would add that DPT should be ticketing the s*&t out of drivers who continue to think they are kings of the road and completely disregard the painting on the road that shows where they are supposed to park. Motorists seem to think that they can do whatever they want (how hard is it to stay within the lines?) and I think tickets will help correct this. I don’t understand why the city won’t just make the whole lane green with bike symbols everywhere, red paint on the curb, and signage which tells drivers to stay out of both the bike lane *and* the buffer. But these things, combined with enforcement, this will do the trick.
I also agree that, though JFK isn’t the real fight since it definitely wasn’t the worst worst place to ride a bike before the cycletrack, it is an important test piece. After all, if we can’t get it to work in someplace as easy as JFK were you don’t have residents parking there overnight bitching about wanting free traffic and where a lane of traffic was not taken away, we’ll never get it to work elsewhere where it really matters.
Finally, I totally agree though that the real go should be to get cars out of GGP, or at least get rid of traffic cutting through and free parking.
in response to Today's Headlines
MrEricSir
That’s it?! Seriously? Are they setting this up for failure on purpose, or because they don’t care?
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
L. Scott
Realizing that this is a limited-release due to funding constraints, I’m disappointed that the locations appear to geared towards employment sites rather than residents. Hopefully, we can do better as the program expands.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Easy
Assuming they’re going to distribute them equally, I don’t think 20 bikes next to the Caltrain station will cut it.
in response to SFMTA Releases Preliminary Map of Bike-Share Station Locations
Mark Dreger
Or will the City be leasing all of the land and be retaining the parking to pay for the rest?
in response to Park Areas Under Central Freeway Downsized to Retain Caltrans Parking
Mark Dreger
So let me get this straight – because Cartrans makes a certain sum of money renting out the land for parking, they expect at least as much from the City if they want to turn it into a park.
No concern for what might be better for the community (you know, those who got a lower and wider freeway rebuilt right over their heads)? $$ talks, I guess.
in response to Park Areas Under Central Freeway Downsized to Retain Caltrans Parking
Ryan Brady
Well yeah, that too.
in response to Wider Highways? Bay Area's Smart Growth Plan Has Some Glaring Mistakes
gneiss
The big problem is people don’t see how this is supposed to be a connected network from Market Street to the museums. If only the city would get it all linked up (Market > Wiggle > Oak/Fell > Panhandle > Museums) and add bike share, then people would see how it’s suppose to work for tourists as well as locals.
As it stands currently, we have only disjointed pieces of the route in place which lets people attack them separately. If the city could get it’s act together and complete this path, we’d see far fewer attacks as people from from the suburbs could use it effectively with their kids rather than needing to drive in first.
in response to Today's Headlines
Sprague
HOV lanes can be useful whenever there is congestion if access to them is restricted to high occupancy vehicles at those times (for example, there has been some talk of extending the hours of the HOV lanes on I-80 in the East Bay – I believe there was at least informal consideration of having them in effect on weekends, too). HOV lanes are a real boon to transit lines routed in freeways.
in response to Wider Highways? Bay Area's Smart Growth Plan Has Some Glaring Mistakes
mikesonn
Having all our state’s transportation resources being dumped into a mode of travel which requires a private investment that averages $9,000 per year to own and operate sounds horribly classist to me as well.
in response to Wider Highways? Bay Area's Smart Growth Plan Has Some Glaring Mistakes
Ryan Brady
Paying for faster driving seems horribly classist to me. Sort of like the 1st class lines at airport security.
in response to Wider Highways? Bay Area's Smart Growth Plan Has Some Glaring Mistakes
mikesonn
It works fine 99% of the time. But adding a few more markings would help. I disagree with adding soft hit posts because of car-free days.
in response to Today's Headlines
Jass
The problem with JFK wont be solved over time. Thats a huge tourist draw, the people parking there next week have probably never been.
If the design didnt work a year ago, and doesnt work now, it wont work in 6 months. Add soft hit posts in the middle of the buffer. Mark every parking space with a P. Add more bike symbols in the bike lane.
in response to Today's Headlines
OctaviusIII
Don’t forget that HOV lanes can only take about 1400-1600 cars per hour, and they’re only useful during peak hours.
in response to Wider Highways? Bay Area's Smart Growth Plan Has Some Glaring Mistakes
Anonymous
yeah good point. I just mean, if commenters on the richmond blog have their way and the lanes are redone although I hope that’s not likely. Or if the “lesson learned” is that the lanes don’t work for SF. but I agree, bit of a non-story.
in response to Today's Headlines
mikesonn
Why is it dying on JFK? It works! Vehicular cyclists are just moaning and groaning and the city half-*ssed their attempt and has provided little to no enforcement. Pretty much, the JFK lanes are a non-story but we keep hearing about it. Why?
in response to Today's Headlines
Anonymous
Yeah, I do think Polk, fell, oak, etc are more important fights. But I also think the parking protected bike lane design will be really useful in many parts of the city, especially South of Market where the 3-6 lane arterials and double parking make the bike lane very unwelcoming to unseasoned riders. I think parking protected bike lanes would really help separate from fast traffic and avoid most double parking, but not if the idea dies on JFK.
in response to Today's Headlines
mikesonn
I agree that people think the bike lane is the problem (making the park ugly, narrowing the area for cyclists, putting peds at risk, etc) when it is really the CARS all over the park that are at issue and the bike lanes are just bringing that to light.
CAR-FREE GGP!!
in response to Today's Headlines
Sean Rea
“Fixing” GGP was just an easy win to make everyone feel good about all the hard work they’d done. Go team!
in response to Today's Headlines
Anonymous
Since it represents a new design (parking protected) there’s a lot more at stake than just the bike route itself. I love the new lanes, it’s so strange to for me hear the critiques of them because it sounds so hostile and conservative
The bike lanes ARE a distraction from making GGP car-free though
in response to Today's Headlines
Winston Parsons
Hey, here’s a wild idea: how about in addition to focusing development around existing transit lines, we also increase transit service regionally so that people all over the Bay Area have options; we can also reduce congestion/pollution/auto costs/deaths by expanding service. Funding is always an issue; we really need some elected officials to own and advocate for these causes.
in response to Wider Highways? Bay Area's Smart Growth Plan Has Some Glaring Mistakes
mikesonn
We need to stop fighting about JFK. It is a distraction. Fell. Oak. Polk. These are the fights we need to be fighting. The bike coalition will die from a thousand cuts because some vehicular cyclists are whining like their favorite toy got stolen while every day commuters are being put in harms way not a mile to the east.
in response to Today's Headlines
Bret Lobree
Wow. What a great post. fwiw, I have ridden or walked my bike on many of these “streets” on my quest to ride every road in SF. See rideallofsf.tumblr.com As I’m riding more and learning more. So awesome.
in response to The Ghost Streets of San Francisco
gneiss
I get the feeling that traffic engineers are playing catch up with the Bay Area population demographic shifts. The plans which CalTrans are now proposing were developed 10 years ago before the economic crash, but only now coming to light because of planning and funding schedules. Instead of recycling these plans, they should scrap them, restart from scratch, and take a hard look at the demographic shifts taking place in the bay area where more people are living in higher density areas. We’re talking about billions of dollars to reduce by minutes commute times for far flung suburbanites rather than real productivity gains for the majority of people living in the core areas.
in response to Wider Highways? Bay Area's Smart Growth Plan Has Some Glaring Mistakes