Skip to content

Recent Comments



    The woman with the shopping bags really isn’t the problem. Think about the pedicabs already using the NB Embarcadero bike lane.

    The planners are well aware of the pedicabs being a problem: right now the lane is 5′ wide, and the pedicabs are just a few inches short of that, so if you’re on a bike you can’t pass a pedicab without moving out into traffic, and if you’re driving a car it’s a bit scary to pass a pedicab whose left wheel is on the line. If they go with two one-way tracks (I hope not), they need to make them wide enough so you can pass pedicabs, because you wouldn’t be able to move out into the street or onto the sidewalk, you’re stuck between two curbs. A two-way track (my preference) would hopefully be 13′ wide like the one they’re planning for Terry A Francois, which would be wide enough that you can pretty comfortably pass a pedicab as long as there isn’t also another pedicab coming at you in the other lane.



    I commute occasionally on the Embarcadero and took a few helmet cam tracks. I am now thinking it should be a key part of the cycling advocate toolkit to collect helmet cam data to bring to these meetings to drive home to planners – and more importantly the SFMTA board and BoS – the specific repeated conditions that drive the needs. I’m not talking about the extreme anecdotes, just the simple repeated cobditions that lead to an increased probability of incident.

    Just saying “the pedicabs” is not as compelling as a cam shot of waiting behind one for 2 blocks while pinned in by traffic. Or displaying the move needed to get to the left turn on North Point.

    This is another place Strava data would be useful – what chunks are avoided? I turn on North Point to avoid the wharf, but what does the data say?



    I went to the open house and saw that this project is still very much in the early stages: no concrete plans yet, they’re thinking about either doing two one-way bike paths either side or one two-way path on the water side. It sounds like they’re looking to build separated bike paths like the contraflow lane on Polk, which is nice. Today’s open house appeared to be mostly for asking people how they use the street and what they think the issues are.

    There will be workshops in the fall that get down to the details, but it sounds like this will be a pretty challenging project to figure out. Moving the MUNI tracks was ruled out, so any space gained from removing the bike lanes on the city side can’t be reused on the water side. Moving curbs, storm drains and streetlights is a pain but probably needed, and apparently there’s an ADA requirement that there be a 4′ buffer zone between the traffic lane and the bike path curb (the new Polk Street lane apparently avoids this by being on the other side of the street). There are also 5 different street layouts along the route, and different demands for curb access in different places, which makes things more complex.

    I was glad to hear that SFMTA is already looking into a temporary fix for SB Embarcadero between Sansome and Battery (where the bike lane disappears for most of the block, then reappears next to a right-turn lane; apparently this is a dangerous spot), and after that NB Embarcadero @ North Point is in their sights (where the bike lane ends and confused tourists end up in the streetcar track).

    On the south side, the Embarcadero project will connect to Terry A Francois Blvd, which I heard is getting a 13′ two-way bike path (apparently that was already being planned but I just hadn’t heard about it yet). On the north side, it will connect to some sort of street calming / shared space thing that’s now going on on Jefferson between Hyde and Jones and will eventually spread east to Powell.



    The street level lanes SB suck rocks. A 2 way track on the water side eliminates the brutal right hooks, battery and one other where we get sharrowed into a right turn lane.

    I worry about peds using the cycle track if it’s at sidewalk level – perhaps a curbing and green paint will make it clear.

    It’s a lot easier to pass a woman with shopping bags than a limo parked in the lane



    Most of the streets in SF were laid out when traffic volumes were much lighter, speeds much slower, and “jaywalking” was not against the law. Perhaps a “redesigned” model for streets should include pedestrian crossings at 200-300 food intervals (rather than 400-600), and mandating minimum 10-15 foot sidewalk widths – “restoring the balance” to how things were before the ’50s car-centric culture became the norm.



    I’m not convinced this is even a semi-win for bicyclists and pedestrians. So many garages in Duboce Triangle are just used as “storage units” for household junk. The owners park their cars on free street spots with S Permits. Instead of Farrell’s code repeal, I like to see the law maintained and enforced *requiring an automobile to be housed in a garage* — or the property’s curb-cut is removed within 3 months. If people can report “cars parked more than 72 hours” for ticketing, they can report garages that don’t house vehicles just the same. We give away public space by allowing curb cuts for these “garages”, but if they don’t house cars, we should be reclaiming the streetscape. Not passing laws giving a pass to taking street space and then just storing old Ikea junk behind the curb cut.



    Scofflaw cyclists!



    The city is proposing three alternatives, none of which is appropriate for the a the large group cyclists who use the Embarcadero as a primary route for commuting to an from work. While the SF Bike Coalition’s and one of the city’s proposals for a sidewalk level two way track may be appealing for tourists and the “broader spectrum” that the SFBG is laudably trying to serve, it would be disastrous for commuters and other cyclists who commute by bike in large part because it is a fast and efficient way to move around the city. Would any serious cyclist consider riding on the track shown in the illustration above – having to slowly follow the woman whose shopping bags would cause her to weave back and forth across the lane and negotiate tourists walking down the sidewalk level path? I think not. For these riders, the separated two way path would be the equivalent of closing Fell and Oak streets and rerouting all car drivers onto Page Street.

    Put in the separated pathway for the “broader spectrum” that would undoubtedly be better served by such a configuration, but please do not take away the commuter cyclist-friendly street level green lanes that are now appropriate to most of the 800-1000 commuters and recreational riders that use this route on a daily basis.



    We could have our driver licensing standards tightened up, like some European countries, but the automotive and petroleum industries would probably exert subtle, or even no-so-subtle pressure to keep as many drivers buying cars and burning fuel as possible. Like one of the oil companies had a slogan: “It’s not just your car–It’s your FREEDOM!”



    I am so going to be there! All I can say is lets get it done ASAP. I would like to see the first option which is a two way PROTECTED bikeway on the waterfront side. Done right with no water-downs and I know it will be a HUGE SUCCESS! I just want to see this project start construction ASAP with the least amount of wasteful unnecessary political red tape and government bureaucracy



    Stanley Roberts, Walnut Creek and peds right of way. It’s not ONLY Walnut Creek that has this big problem, SF is just as bad. But the big question is, again, where are the cops? all these “stings” they have once in ten years is less than useless, they have to do it daily with a huge fine, money talks.



    Like this? One can dream…



    In the US, could we just impound the car that was used in the infraction rather than specific applying blame to the owner of the vehicle (can’t accessories to crimes be appropriated and held as evidence?). The owner wouldn’t need to self incriminate, but someone would have to pay to release the car.



    Everything the TSA does is security theater.

    It sounds like Linton Johnson is the correct person to contact about this. Information here:

    BART’s last official word on this seems to be here:

    The entire federal “color code” system has been retired, but BART still chooses to maintain George W Bush era security theater.


    Michael James

    The red lanes do not work. It keeps a certain percentage off but I see dozens of cars use the lanes for blocks at a time. Enforcement is the key. If the motorcycle cops would go out once in awhile and enforce the traffic laws, people will learn.



    It’s not legal, because of the wording of state law regarding transit only lanes. The SFMTA were talking about lobbying the state to get this changed, but as far as I know this hasn’t happened.



    Heading west, the bus-only lane is almost universally ignored between 8th and Van Ness (as well as the no-left turn at 10th and 11th). I have never seen anyone pulled over. That being said, they really need to reconsider the bus-only lane right in front of the Orpheum. There are such bottlenecks there with taxis and buses stopped in front of the theater, as well as the fact that there’s no room for a dedicated bike lane there, that drivers are almost forced to ride in the bus lane. Not very well considered at that location. Otherwise they just need to make a example with enforcement periodically and it should clear up.



    I can’t fathom why there is not enforcement of the box-blocking people with a big fine. That would clear things up quickly.


    John Rogers

    I support the red lanes. It’s telling what lengths we need to go to, to get some drivers to obey the law. Look at the Octavia/Market intersection; cameras, threats of fines, a dozen signs, concrete barriers, bollards… Every morning riding into downtown, I am astounded by how brazenly drivers ignore the Bus/Taxi lane on Market St. Hundreds of times I’ve seen people drive all the way down Market in the lane, and not a morning goes by without seeing multiple violations. Sometimes drivers are obviously confused or lost, but most of the time I think it’s just “I’m in a hurry and can’t be bothered, I’m going to get away with it, and it’s no big deal.”



    I believe legally bicycle is not allowed. I’m use to ride regularly on this stretch. There really isn’t a good alternative to the red lane. So I pay attention when there is a bus coming from behind and try to stay out of way. This is fairly rare though.



    The UK situation is different because they do not have our protections against self-incrimination. So in the UK, even if there is no clear shot of the driver’s face, the driver can only get off the ticket if he reveals who else was driving. He cannot remain silent.

    Otherwise the ticket defaults to the owner of the vehicle. The UK has a rather dubious “right to silence” protection and it can be taken into account at trial if you fail to volunteer information or refuse to answer questions.

    In the US, no such requirement to incriminate oneself or others exists, by virtue of the 5th. And a clear photo of the driver is hard to get, especially as those who know they will be breaking traffic laws use visors, dark glasses, baseball caps and other devices to prevent a clear face shot.

    Many red light camera tickets have bee successfully fought here on that basis and speed cameras, which are common in Europe, barely exist in the US.



    The usual reasons. Access has to be reserved for emergency vehicles, shuttles, delivery trucks, contractors’ vehicles, trash vehicles, access to private garages and driveways, transport for seniors and the disabled, and so on.

    So you cannot literally block access to private vehicles, which means you’re back to the same old enforcement issue.


    Jamison Wieser

    You can learn more about the project to redesign Market Street here. The draft environmental study report should be out later this year.



    Camera enforcement, like in the UK
    You’re sent a notice in the mail, complete with a picture of your vehicle in the bus lane and a through-the-windshield picture of the driver.

    It’s effective:

    Though I believe this kind of enforcement in illegal in CA due to privacy regulations.


    Elias Zamaria

    I have always wondered why the BART restrooms were permanently closed. I saw the signs on some of them saying it was for “heightened station security”, and I thought it was maybe a lie to cover up the fact that they couldn’t afford to clean them. I didn’t know the TSA had anything to do with it.

    This looks like security theater to me. I seriously can’t understand how 9/11 can be used as an excuse to keep restrooms locked for over 10 years. Somehow, I doubt that whatever they are protecting us against is as harmful as the risk of disease from urine and feces in the streets and escalators. Even if it is, can’t they just put a sign on the door saying that whoever walks into the restroom accepts responsibility for whatever bad things happen to them? I wonder if the TSA can be petitioned to change their policy, or if it will be this way forever.


    Jeffrey Baker

    Driver education?



    Won’t someone think of the koalas?!?!



    Does anyone know a source for the law regarding bicycling on the red painted lanes? I had a Muni driver on 3rd street tell me I wasn’t allowed to ride on them.



    Can’t happen fast enough. I just hope the cycle tracks are wide enough to accommodate the diversity of riders that will use the route, including room to get around pedicabs. I love the pedicabs, but not being stuck behind them when I’m in a hurry.



    I think that MIGHT be coming early next year if they don’t delay it again. The SFMTA board and the supes have been talking in circles about it for years now.


    Thomas Rogers

    I’m hoping to be there tonight!



    Curbs. They are widely used in other countries as well as on the T-Third.



    That would require a painful spine transplant for too many politicians



    How does that change anything? SF BRT should not be designed around Marin County deficiencies. Nor should SFMTA succomb to its own sunk costs – a matter I warned them about several years ago, yet they continue to through good money after bad.



    I’m wondering why we don’t just close Market St to regular auto traffic in general? There’s really no reason for autos to be on Market. Maybe allow delivery vehicles during certain hours or something but otherwise how amazing would it be to finally have space for the F and bus lines to move unimpeded and also make biking a pure joy!



    I already have private parking on a Page Street parking lot and would rather see zero parking on Page (in fact, it would be best if the City built underground garages and eliminated all surface parking, no exceptions). I also am strongly in favor of car sharing programs. However, I am not in favor of exclusivity contracts doled out by City Hall, without going through a public auction. Best to have these spots simply metered parking with 48 hour time limits, so that whomever parks there is paying for it.



    Just a block away from the proposed site is a California Parking lot (Franklin & Page). Several of the spots in that lot are leased by various car share programs. The retail price of a parking spot in that uncovered/unsecured lot is $255/month, or more for a reserved spot.



    People have to live somewhere. They can live a lower impact life within walking distance to downtown and Caltrain or they can live in the sprawling exurbs. For the good of humanity, we need more people living closer together, where they use less resources.

    Menlo Park will grow up one way or another, it is inevitable. This development seems like a decent one to me.



    Seriously? A permit is only $10/month? That is fricken crazy! I assumed it was more like $150-$300.



    The best way to make parking more available to everyone is to meter all spaces and raise prices.



    yes, if it meant that nobody else had access to the otherwise public room and your exclusive use extended beyond what is considered customary fair use. How can you argue otherwise?



    JC Daceux and the exclusive advertising kiosks that they have across the city was a wholesale privatization scam inked during the Willie Brown administration. Our sidewalks and airspace have been privatized and the only thing the public gets in exchange is several heroin and sex shacks (i.e., the “public restrooms”). Really bad example to use!



    A Progressive’s remedy for a failing “progressive” policy is always “more of the same at twice the cost.”



    That is privatization. Pernicious privatization, because fuzzheads can’t recognize it. I am in favor of banning all parking n streets, but giving a single party exclusive rights to use public property without putting it out to bid at public auction is cronyistic privatization.



    If SFPD is going to start ticketing pedestrians for entering crosswalks with red blinking hand with 25 seconds left on the countdown, this will be on SFMTA. The blinking red timing seems random. Sometimes it is appropriate for a disabled nonagenarian, whereas other times, it is appropriate for the other 90% of pedestrians out there who don’t need an eon to cross.



    Mayor Lee is not on-board with Vision Zero. He barely even pays lip service to it. Please vote him out of office next election: Anyone – a Republican, Green, or other Democrat would all be better than Ed Lee.



    The only way to make SF safer is to underground cross-city vehicular traffic lanes, and reduce surface street speed limits to 15mph.



    “terrorists” – the new “meddling kids”


    Upright Biker

    The really good things about these lanes is that they make infractions obvious and hard to get out of using the “how could I have known?” excuse.

    As long as the cops are willing (and have the resources) to enforce these lanes, it should help.

    But, honestly, isn’t there a better solution than having to paint all our roads like it’s Christmas?



    This is great. Along Market, people block the box, which holds up many of Muni’s key lines. It’d be awesome if they also put in camera light enforcement on every intersection along Market.