Skip to content

Recent Comments

  1.  

    Affen_Theater

    Fix the story headline to say “San Mateo COUNTY” … “San Mateo” is a city.

  2.  

    Martha Wang

    <<o. ✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤:::::::!be842p:….,….

  3.  

    Martha Wang

    <<o. ✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤:::::::!be842p:….,…

  4.  

    Frank Kotter

    Exactly, you excuse your lawbreaking by self justification that it is the ‘safest thing to do’ this is the exact reason that people roll through stop signs on a bike and they are right.

    You are actually endangering people but feel this is ‘the safer thing to do’. I guess to actually take responsibility for your actions would require change and abiding the law. That would suck for you I bet.

  5.  

    Lego

    …and when we try to improve transit speeds, by red lanes and many other measures, some targeted at equalizing the massive favor that cars enjoy – the motorheads come out in full force to retain the privilege to keep transit inefficient and blocked by the car-first design scheme.

    It’s a system, with balances; hardly represented by your singular, personal travel example. But if that’s the way you wish to view vast complex systems, that is well within your rights. You can help by prioritizing transit politically year-on-year, then one day it will meet your (and so many others’) needs

  6.  

    Mark

    re: changing travel behavior.

    Provide a transit system worth taking and more people will use it. As I pointed out in the below thread, it took over an hour to go 2.5 miles on MUNI when it’s a 12 minute drive even with 19th Ave. traffic. Want me to take public transit from SF to SJ? Let’s see..a 50-minute drive versus 2+ hours juggling MUNI and Caltrain. Thanks, but I’ll pass on transit.

  7.  

    Mark

    Sadly, it’s a 24/7 problem.

    MX is right. Provide top-level service with what’s already in place before jumping the gun with ridiculous proposals that either won’t amount to much or will be impossible to achieve.

    Around 10am on Saturday morning it took me 75 minutes to get from 28th/Taraval to Ocean/Victoria via the L and K. 2.5 miles without any egregious delays.

  8.  

    RichLL

    Monday morning absenteeism is a notorious Muni problem.

  9.  

    RichLL

    I’ll take that as a total inability to refute me.

  10.  

    mx

    How about just having “a high level of light rail service” for the San Franciscans already right next to light rail lines. Because the KT outbound is reporting a 30 minute headway on nextbus right this instant. It shouldn’t take “new strategies” to deal with that problem; it just requires not being horrible at your job.

  11.  

    94110

    The San Carlos project can also be looked at as an attempt to prevent quad tracking HSR: http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/2010/01/development-oriented-transit.html

  12.  

    murphstahoe

    LOL

  13.  

    HorriblyConfused

    As somewhat alluded to in other comments, keep in mind that BART is not the developer for these sites. That said, your general criticism on slowness is likely very accurate. BART is the one who can start the development clock. Not sure if they have to do an RFP after they decide what they are doing…

    The affordable housing component could take 1-5 years to pull the funding together for from fed/state/local money depending on what they are trying to do. That can’t start until after getting site control from BART. I’m assuming it is a ground lease, but have no idea. Financing for market rate housing could be faster, but it is also not simple–and would likely require phased construction…. so you can roll construction loan to perm and/or use for-sale unit proceeds as a source for later phases.

    All said, a long process once it gets going. Probably made longer by stalling on decision making by BART. But I really don’t know much about BART processes.

  14.  

    joechoj

    For all the anti-bike commenters: I get your irritation that bikes often ignore traffic laws and markings. If you only drive, I could see how how you’d think, “Hey, I have to wait/stop/merge. Why don’t bikes?” Here’s what you’re missing if you haven’t ridden bikes on city streets: roads have not been designed with cyclist and pedestrian safety in mind, and neither have the laws. The reason people on bikes tend not to think the laws apply to them is because they so obviously… well, *don’t* apply to them. If laws and infrastructure were designed to help protect people of all travel modes, I guarantee they would be taken seriously by all but a selfish few (same as with car drivers).
    It’s the same the world over: if you don’t give a faction buy-in to the system, they have to reason to to buy into the system. If you’re seriously wondering, and not just trolling, the next time you see a bicyclist blow through a stop sign at a T intersection with traffic only coming from the left, instead of thinking “Why shouldn’t they have to stop, too?”, try thinking “Why *should* they have to stop, too?” (There’s no traffic conflict.) Until cyclist and pedestrian safety are encoded into our laws, signs, and street curbs, think of cyclists’ violations as one part self-preservation and one part passive resistance (in active form!).

  15.  

    RichLL

    Not at all, I am sorry when I do it. But sometimes my judgement tells me it’s a better choice than the alternatives, despite the drawbacks.

    And just to be clear, what you are saying is that when you ride your bike you never, ever fail to come to a complete stop at every stop sign and light, without exception?

    If so, you’re probably the only cyclist in SF who does that, and you should be sainted.

  16.  

    Frank Kotter

    Ok ‘law’. You are willfully breaking it by invading a bike lane and you are unapologetic about it. I break none as I ride my bike. When you park in the bike lane, you are forcing the users to engage traffic which will cause injury and death. That your justify your actions by placing any negative consequences of your illegal actions on anyone but yourself is sociopathic but not surprising.

  17.  

    RichLL

    Calling a law a “rule” doesn’t get you off the hook for breaking it. Ditto “regulation”

    And just because you conveniently and self-servingly decide that the laws you break aren’t important or don’t endanger anyone misses the point as well. We don’t get to pick and choose which laws apply to us. They all apply.

    We do however pick and choose which ones we will break – you have your reasons and I have mine. No difference.

    And, as already noted, a car that is not moving is not putting you in danger. It’s the ones that are moving that you need to worry about.

  18.  

    Frank Kotter

    Also, ‘my’ rule breaking (as you lump anyone not in a car together for whatever reasons you may have) doesn’t endanger anyone but ‘myself’ whereas your lawbreaking directly endangers others.

  19.  

    Frank Kotter

    Ah, fair enough. Well, except for the fact that this is exactly what you are doing. BTW. I do indeed follow the rules of the road when riding. So the hypocrisy in this specific conversation rest with you-.

  20.  

    RichLL

    And you justified your law breaking by claiming that it doesn’t inhibit the flow of traffic. So breaking the law is OK as long as you personally think so?

    The law is the law and we all break the law from time to time because we feel justified somehow. Dressing up your law-breaking as somehow being OK doesn’t cut it.

  21.  

    Frank Kotter

    Ah, so your law breaking you have justified to yourself but that of others is unacceptable. Thanks for the clarification.

  22.  

    JustJake

    Developers indeed will sit on a property, until the financing looks rosy. Everyone seems to think building projects of this size are easy & automatically profitable. That would be wrong. As far as Oakland hiring policies… the actual availability of competent skilled tradespeople in Oakland is low, and the hiring requirements are high. Contractors required to hire undertrained and unexperienced workers drives up the cost noticeably, and puts a big dent in productivity. Not all, but many of the local hires don’t really want to work, and think the employment is somehow by-right. It is what it is.

  23.  

    Jeffrey Baker

    Why does Oakland’s hire-local policy figure into it? Wouldn’t it be straight forward to slap a couple of easements or covenants on the title and sell the development rights to a private party? That seems to me like the path of least resistance. No private developer is going to sit on a prime site for decades like BART has.

  24.  

    njudah

    it’s amazing how many dumb things uber and lyft drivers do because they don’t know and don’t care about traffic rules or basic decency. it’s a shame we don’t have some system to regulate people driving passengers around town, maybe have the local transit authority get involved and certify them as being actually competent and Not A Criminal before driv….oh….RIGHT..gotta suck up to Ed Lee’s patrons!

  25.  

    cultuurfreak

    If we turn all the streets into parks, where will those that are forced to used cars go? You know, the invalids, the morbidly obese, &c. &c. They are people too!

  26.  

    crazyvag

    With TOD, how much less parking is built than with non-TOD that’s say a few miles away from a station. Don’t we still see high parking requirements like in the apartments built in Mountain View?

  27.  

    JustJake

    Walnut Creek Bart has also had approved plans for housing directly on BART property for a few years. That alone does nothing. The determinate factor is whoever has the funding to cough up. Low income/BMR & senior housing units can get preferential financial incentives. Other type products, you’re on your own. BART doesn’t have/want/can’t afford ownership of the housing, they can really only facilitate the land availability.

  28.  

    JustJake

    I’ve been involved in both Milpitas and Oakland, and Hunters Point as well. 18 months from dirt work to occupancy is the norm for an 80-120 unit sized project. The planning/approval aspects are entirely separate. MacArthur is/was indeed a very slow project, for a plethora of reasons. Oaklands local hiring mandates are a real hurdle to productivity. Expect the remaining phases at MacArthur Bart to be completed in 18 months each.

  29.  

    AlanTobey

    Note to BART: the North Berkeley and Ashby stations have been available for housing-over-parking for about the last 45 years. In which decade do these fit in your aggressive plans?

  30.  

    OaktownPRE

    I’ve watched all the new housing going up near the the Great Mall in Milpitas at the new Milpitas BART station and for some reason those apartments take months to go up, not years (decades) as has been the case at MacArthur BART. Milpitas has the same seismic standards as Oakland I’m sure and they put in the same sewers and streets. There’s something more going on at MacArthur than just that. I don’t know if it’s just an epic level of incompetence or what, but another ten years to fill in that parking lot it a joke.

  31.  

    JustJake

    At MacArthur Bart, first they completed the new parking garage, to replace the existing slots that were surface parking. Then the low-income 112 units were completed last year. Robert-Obsyashi was the general contractor. The owners & architects were making changes during the course of construction, adding rooftop solar and various other changes, which slows things considerably when deviating from the original contracts. Simultaneously, the overall site work and access from the surrounding streets was carried out, and the joint trenching to feed utilities into the future units was installed, along with internal roads, sewers and storm drains. The remaining projects/units will be done in phases, and additional units will be ready for occupancy in waves, with final completion due in 2025 for the very last units. Sad, but this is the methodical nature of the current planning/approvals/bidding/construction in Oakland with current level seismic engineerng and inspection processes.

  32.  

    Anna Marrie

    of course dog training is training the owner. Dogs can’t read. Dogs give a rats booty about structure and societal norms. We decide that stuff and then once we apply it consistently we are trained and of course ergo so is the dog. I’m not an untrained motorist. I just want your stupid bicycle built for two schmucks and baby off the road. Go to Golden Gate Park. Roads are for the transportation of thousands of strangers. Why is your baby here? Just poor judgment. (“oooohhh , but it’s legal”) So what? It’s stupidly negligent. Just a pet peeve I guess. I find it astonishing.

  33.  

    Anna Marrie

    no, not “IN LIFE” but in general. Meaning, Ive never encountered a drunk driver that I am aware of. I bet lots of people have not. Doesn’t mean they aren’t right next to me but I can’t say that for sure. I only mentioned two things that I experience on a daily basis (not in theory).
    Also, I’m talking about legal behavior that I would prefer be illegal. Because they are dangerous and could result in death just like the already illegal dangerous behavior of driving drunk. You are kinda making my point for me.

  34.  

    James Brown

    Check out this video for a pretty typical example of biking Valencia street at this time of night:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5aK_dyQjhk

  35.  

    Jeffrey Baker

    This article doesn’t look very critically at BART’s claims to transit-oriented development. Of the mentioned opportunities, BART has built almost none in the last 15 years. The MacArthur Station transit village is planned to be 675 homes, and has been in planning for ten years. The only thing that’s actually been built in those 10 years is the 112 below-market-rate units, which started in 2013 and were completed in 2015. Literally not even a single shovelful of soil has been turned over toward the building of the other 563 units. It will probably be 2025 before they are done. I’m not exaggerating: 2025 is actually the planned completion date. That’s about 35 units per year, a rate that one person could build single-handedly with ordinary tools and a pickup truck.

    I don’t really want to call out BART’s directors personally, but what the fuck is wrong with them? Why can’t they get these projects built just a teensy bit faster? When I moved to the Bay Area in the 90s I was really optimistic about all the planned improvements, but it seems that it takes literally a lifetime to build even a handful of stick-built shoeboxes. This agency and the members of its board should be publicly excoriated for these squandered opportunities, and then, of course, be defeated in elections.

  36.  

    JustJake

    OMG. “The long-debated San Carlos Transit Village, now under construction, will bring 202 apartments to the former San Carlos Caltrain Station parking lot along with 26,000 square feet of commercial space. The project was scaled down in multiple iterations from a proposed 453 apartments.”. Quick, somebody alert Hanlon & Trauss… here is another chance to file a lawsuit, grandstand, and generate AstroTurf publicity. Someone had the gall to downsize a housing project.

  37.  

    roymeo

    Wait, why are you diving into specifics? How about just accept that its “a funkton”?

  38.  

    roymeo

    Probably your friend should work to get things changed or shut up.

  39.  

    roymeo

    If the issue is law-breaking, why are you casting stones?

  40.  

    StrixNoctis .

    “Not like the cars slow down and let you in because they see your lane is
    obstructed. We are not quite at peak selfishness, but we are well on
    the way.”

    I disagree. Out of the way too many evenings I had to wait behind motor vehicles that were blocking the bike lane on Valencia Street, only ONCE did a motorists kindly allow me to merge left into the lane to pass. All of the other MANY times I was stuck behind bike lane blockers, the motorists didn’t give me a chance. Many of them squeeze almost bumper-to-bumper so I can’t merge. I often end up having to take the risk of squeezing through narrow spaces to lane split, and risk scratching vehicles. When the traffic is moving fast but not leaving openings for me to merge, I end up having to dismount my bicycle and walk it on the sidewalk, which sometimes leads to dealing with the other problem of selfish, Valencia Street pedestrians who loiter outside of businesses and block the sidewalks (on some nights) and refuse to allow others to pass.

    The ill-mannered, selfish crowd that frequents the Valencia Street business establishments these days is why I don’t like to visit the businesses on Valencia Street anymore after decades of frequenting some shops & cafes on that street.

    I’d avoid Valencia Street entirely if I knew of another flat-land route I could take to commute between my house on Bernal Hill to/from Market Street.

  41.  

    roymeo

    Not stopping where prohibited in the road is probably the most basic driving or cycling skill there is. If you cannot do that safely then I question whether you should be on the roads at all.

  42.  

    roymeo

    Hodor.

  43.  

    roymeo

    Hodor!

  44.  

    hailfromsf

    I’m not a cyclist. When I was, I would always stop and wait my turn at intersections.

    But that’s beside the point… Don’t be one of those assholes that block traffic, and don’t think that pointing out other assholes on the road justifies your behavior. That’s flawed, childish non-logic.

  45.  

    Jame

    I’ll happily share a recent-ish experience. As I was biking along, as usual I am scanning ahead to see potential obstructions. Once I notice one, I start planning how I will leave the bike lane and merge safely into traffic. The when varies based on the street, the typical traffic level and the number of cars.

    This street in question is a two lane street where cars tend to go a bit too fast, but the street design changes, it gets more crowded and cars slow down. On this 3/4 mile stretch, the speed limit is 25, but at the beginning many cars go 30. By the end they slow down due to traffic lights, school zones and more things to be aware of. The bike lane ends in the area where traffic slows. It is downhill and the street is mostly residential with gradual curves.

    Anyway there was a moving van or other huge vehicle blocking the lane. I see it, and I want to leave myself with plenty of time, so I start to signal and keep glancing rearward to leave the lane, as it is approaching the place where it becomes sharrows. I planned to just stay in the lane the whole way. Many cars zoom by and ignore my obvious body language. As I am running out of room a car takes pity on me and notices it is congested just past me, so she just slows down earlier to let me in. As I am merging into the lane, I see/hear a car progressing speedily a ways back near one of the curves. The next thing I know is they try to make a quick move into the next lane and end up causing a collision. No one was hurt but there was significant car damage.

    Obviously I couldn’t go and check out the outcome and I continued on my way, but it was clearly an accident caused by an impatient driver.

    Which leads me to my point, on a bicycle, when your lane is obstructed, you don’t have much time to move over, particularly when the road is busy. It is actually worse if you need to come to a full stop and start again, because on a road with even 20mph traffic, you will be traveling much much slower if you are starting from a stop. If there are multiple obstructions, you risk merging into dangerous traffic several times. And if you are going “bike speed” you are at risk of an impatient person driving dangerously to pass you while you take the lane. The drivers selfish quest for convenience can lead to you getting seriously injured.

  46.  

    farazs

    > Every time you encounter an illegal or inconvenient
    > act on the roads you should welcome it as an
    > opportunity to practice your acceptance of an
    > imperfect world.
    I do. Absolutely no stress issues or conflict out on the road. Doesn’t stop me from expecting or aspiring for better from myself, and from others around me. I can accept that it happens, but not that it must always be so.

  47.  

    RichLL

    Wrong on both. I never said that blocking a bike lane was either legal or acceptable. What I said is that it is inevitable and that it is not dangerous unless you make it so.

    And yes, you should show tolerance, not least because you probably expect tolerance from others when you break the law. Every time you encounter an illegal or inconvenient act on the roads you should welcome it as an opportunity to practice your acceptance of an imperfect world. Nobody promised you that life would be perfect.

  48.  

    farazs

    More than that, you routinely present illegal behaviour as legal and acceptable out of sheer ignorance. Luckily, I have very high tolerance for your kind of behaviour, so here we are.

  49.  

    RichLL

    That’s funny because I am debunking you for the benefit of other readers.

    I accept that other road users will do illegal and annoying things. You seem incapable of that.

  50.  

    farazs

    As wise man said: “This is a public thread meaning that anyone can reply to anyone.”
    Well, may be not a wise man, but a wise comment nevertheless. But mostly its about exposing your nonsense for what it is, for the benefit of other readers.