Skip to content

Recent Comments


    Nicholas Littlejohn

    Would we like to have back tons more traffic, pollution and danger to cyclists and walkers? Then we should make parking free on Sundays.



    If we only subsidized public roads for the transport of goods, our transportation system would cost a minute fraction of what it does now. Nonetheless, I would gladly pay $10 more for a bicycle if it meant not paying $100 in property taxes to subsidize the private use of roads that I don’t use.



    Email the mayor ( and the SFMTA board ( Everyone should do this, and attend the meeting if possible.


    Thomas Rogers

    It may be too late, but what’s the best way to communicate a pro-Sunday-meters voice? I tweeted a message to @mayoredlee but I don’t exactly have legions of followers ( The Livable Streets group had a post encouraging in-person attendance tomorrow (4/15/14, 1 p.m., City Hall, Room 400), but I can’t make that. Do emails to just go into a black hole? Looking for some suggestions here, even if change is unlikely.


    Jamison Wieser

    For those who think politely asking drivers not to kill children is weak sauce,

    Don’t worry, the SFMTA is also putting the word out to Muni riders that it’s our responsibility to not get hit by traffic. Perhaps this was meant to coincide with the SFMTA’s decisions to scrap safe boarding platforms at Metro stops to preserve traffic and parking?


    Kevin J

    I see a lot of mentions of funding measures, but the SFMTA has killed any chance I’ll vote to give them any more money to spend on free parking instead of Muni or northbound bike lanes on Polk.

    Until the SFMTA get’s there head’s out of there asses and recognizes those of use riding our bikes south to work also ride them back home in the northbound direction, I’m voting no.

    I don’t want to see another penny go to the SFMTA making drivers happy instead of Muni service and public safety. Let’s show the SFMTA that we don’t want our money wasted on parking by voting against everything until they start getting serious about their job.


    Mom on a bike

    Now there are no more relaxing Sundays enjoying/brunching/shopping in distant neighborhoods.

    ….Because you can’t figure out how to operate a meter and put a couple hours’ worth of coins in it? Which amounts to what fraction of the tip you’re leaving for brunch?

    Oh yes the “If Muni were reliable…” canard again. Let’s all take a moment to ponder the meeting of “cause” and “effect.”



    I personally don’t find it very relaxing circling for 30 minutes to find a parking spot in SF’s distant neighborhoods because all of the spaces are locked up until Monday morning.



    I absolutely hate Sunday meters. If Muni were at all reliable, it wouldn’t be an issue. I’d much prefer to ride, but not take 90 minutes to get anywhere and be made miserable in the process. Now there are no more relaxing Sundays enjoying/brunching/shopping in distant neighborhoods. Using specifically tagged e-mails as a gauge of public interest might not be the best method…there have been several petitions submitted on the topic, all opposed.



    What’s especially frustrating about the Sunday Metering fiasco is that Berkeley and Walnut Creek (of all places) are moving forwarding with metering on Sunday and EVENINGS at the same time as SF is scaling its hours back.

    This makes no sense from either a parking policy or budgeting standpoint. Clearly Lee is itching for the votes of the Old Guard.



    Sounds like nothing short of a legal challenge will stop Lee from killing the meters. Some stupid political consultant is running our city (Pak?).


    Mario Tanev

    Lee, Reiskin, SFMTA and the media are pulling wool over our eyes on Sunday parking meters.

    The spin is that there is some debate, some options on the table, and that somehow this is all to get support for transportation funding measures, which would allow Muni to increase service. Another variant of that is that while Lee is not compromising, Reiskin is rebelling.

    But look at the budget prepared for vote tomorrow:

    WHEREAS, The SFMTA Board desires to eliminate enforcement of parking meters on Sundays between the hours of 12 pm and 6 pm including the four hour time limit for parking at a meter on Sundays effective July 1, 2014;

    While the new transportation funding and the increase in service are all conditional, there is NOTHING CONDITIONAL about relinquishing Sunday parking meters. Furthermore, there are NO OPTIONS in the budget. The resolution states that Sunday parking meters shall be eliminated, period. There is no mention of the more reasonable option to just scale down enforcement on Sundays, or increase education.

    It is very evident that someone is applying real pressure on the SFMTA and its board on this, and for the first time it seems nearly CERTAIN that Sunday meters will be relinquished.

    And then when the funding measures don’t pass, not only will there be no service increase, Muni will have to CUT SERVICE.

    This budget should be opposed, UNCONDITIONALLY. It’s a bad budget, made under a lot of political pressure on SFMTA leadership and staff. While the SFMTA board is appointed by the mayor, SFMTA staff is not. Ed Reiskin is accountable to the board, not the mayor, so it’s highly disturbing that SFMTA staff is presenting a proposal that is straight from the mayor’s office.

    Streetsblog should stop feeding us this red herring, too. It keeps us complacent, thinking that somehow thinking reasonable heads will prevail. But what’s going down tomorrow is complete betrayal of transit-first, SF businesses, shoppers and common sense. This will set a really bad precedent. SFMTA and progressive transportation policy will be severely damaged by this reversal. It will feed into the narrative that parking meters are somehow a failure that nobody wants and everyone will look back with fear towards more parking meters. This narrative was already played in SF a few years ago after Oakland reverse a meter raise, causing local politicians to cite it as an example. Now you will have other cities cite San Francisco as an example. Also people will cite the reversal on Sunday meters as a reason not to extend meters to evenings. In effect, if this comes to pass, rational parking policy will regress further back than before Sunday meters were even instituted.


    Kevin J

    But those are just car owners. If those had been cyclists it would be a serious matter, but we have all seen how the SFPD will not only let drivers get away with murder, but conspire with the killers to put blame on the victim.

    That should just sound like I’m some conspiracy nut, but it really is how he runs the police department.


    Upright Biker

    Um, that was weird.


    Dark Soul

    I try my best freetype….

    You people can go ahead agree on their one-sided focus on improving safety all you want while others agree on the other side.
    Let me guess they going start changing the streets when there a collusion between a Human or a Bike Person and a Vehicle ..They going start changing that part of the street because there was Human Related Accident with a car. (Random Ex.Street Changes on Fulton +
    26th Avenue or Quintara + 47th avenue) I am sure they will either add wider sidewalks/Traffic Lock to either improve reliability to Muni or People…. To obstruct the traffic making more dangerous to drive and more result in mass accident even on the sidewalks.

    *No Safety Overall* *Not Balanced*
    Safety only goes to 1 area instead of all around.

    I have Seen Bike people ignores warning signs (sometimes run stop signs) resulted in accident with either MUNI BUS or Car. A Street Change was inserted in the area after blaming the drivers. When people ride bike they should be aware these rules that should not to be ignored or they will get accident and the drivers get jailed because of the accident

    Also for people who crossing a crosswalk should look all directions just to secure the safety of your self and if a child is in your hold don’t let them pass you or unsafe happening occurred like the recent accident between a “3year old and truck driver” on Fulton and 43rd avenue.

    Beside that, I have nothing against safety or bike safety as i am bike person/car driver/street walker/muni bus rider. It would be best if both side of feedback would be hear before making quick changes to embrace safety.



    Even if the TA has an expenditure plan they have to stick to, under the new policy, they can use “Highway Program” funds to construct complete streets.

    Also, “El Grenada” is spelled “El Granada”.


    Mom on a bike

    Hello and welcome to Streetsblog. If you have some point to make about how increasing safety for one user of the road puts another in danger, fine, but how about writing in clear, understandable sentences and backing up your assertions with some sort of citation or reference?



    and i’d love them to install parklets, make that area more vibrant! =)



    can’t wait until they fix the bike lane!



    “But this type of project — infrastructure that reduces highway congestion by providing safe alternatives to driving — is surprisingly difficult to fund in San Mateo County.”

    No one should be surprised by this, San Mateo county has traditionally been hostile to rapid transit, bicycling and walking. They voted against joining the BART District in 1963, which is the main reason it is so hard to get from San Francisco to Silicon Valley today.


    xc ❄

    Probably an opportunity to showcase her business, and the thought of “at least it’s an *electric* car”


    Upright Biker

    Wrong again!

    Drivers operating at low speeds, even in congestion, have more time to react and, even in the event of a collision, are less likely to injure someone or be injured themselves.

    There’s this thing called “physics” that you should study up on…



    Posting this in a couple of spots on StreetsBlog … I set up an easy way to send a message to Mayor Lee, Ed Reiskin, and the SFMTA Board via a petition:

    Each person that signs is firing off an email to those recipients asking that they leave Sunday parking meter enforcement alone.



    If folks want an easy way to send a message to Ed Lee, Ed Reiskin, and the SFMTA Board, I’ve set up a petition at here:


    Kevin J

    By including Polk, does this mean there will be bike lanes in both directions, or are the politicians hoping we’re to stupid we won’t noticing there protecting car parking over public safety.

    Unless they are puting bike in both directions, this is just more of Mayor Lees corrupt bullshit and that assbag should be drive out of office.



    But unsafe for the drivers in the road .



    From what I understand, the developer is funding a sidewalk extension, repaving, and supersharrows to better tie the Wiggle onto Market Street. But MTA knows more than me, obviously.



    Apparently, people who drive drunk and murder people with cars get their car licenses back.

    OK then. I guess people who get drunk and murder people with guns should get their gun permits back, too. That makes about as much sense.



    Sounds like someone should sue the Transportation Authority for violating the County ordinances. Maybe that might wake them up.


    Jamison Wieser

    In many cases that’s true, but 4th & King is a special case where a freeway touches down at an intersection where two rail lines merge through interlocking switches that prevent certain movements (neither trains or cars can go east while a T-line is training, and it all make sense when a service planner is drawing it on a whiteboard) and the problems go away when both lines are crossing perpendicular, but the SFMTA studied the problem and concluded they couldn’t do anything about the signaling or intersection design any sooner than the Central Subway would come along and rebuild it with priority signaling anyway.

    If the T was going to be a permanent extension of the K they would have probably would have continued the tracks running down the median and crossed into Mission Bay under the freeway next to the treatment plant where the train could run on ground instead of the expense of a bridge. But then there would be a different turn for the T-line north into the Central Subway.


    Upright Biker

    Wrong, dude.

    Congestion results in slower traffic speeds, which gives pedestrians and bicyclists a fighting chance of both avoiding and surviving accidents.


    Bruce Halperin

    This could all be solved now if they simply added Transit signal priority at 4th and King for both the N and T lines.



    But, but Rob Anderson, people!!!?! Did anyone vet this with him?



    Vison Zero / Walkfirst Complaints are being inserted….to embrace congestion to cars which give more chances of getting in accident with human beings.



    Thank you very much Aaron and Streetsblog for covering this issue. The proposals to improve pedestrian safety and improve Muni access, speed and reliability on Haight, Masonic, and Stanyan look great. As to Stanyan Street, a two-way cycletrack on the western edge (between Frederick and the Panhandle) would be an appealing option, since this would greatly reduce the number of potential automobile-bicycle conflict points (such as intersections and driveways/parking spots) and because a large amount of the bike traffic (I’m guessing) is headed to Golden Gate Park anyway (and a bike path along the edge of the park increases such access).


    Jamison Wieser

    Sebra Leaves will be happy to see the SFMTA has found a much cheaper alternative to wasting money on bulbouts and boarding platforms: make it Muni riders’ responsibility to not get hit.

    So why can’t the SFMTA solve all the speed and performance problems by asking drivers not to slow down Muni?



    I would go the opposite direction and show city residents hopping in a Volt and heading across the Golden Gate for a day trip hitting fun spots in Marin: walking in Muir Woods, relaxing on Stinson Beach, shopping in Fairfax, etc.


    David Baker

    I’m stoked about this list. I hope the SFMTA folks will tell us more soon. Second Street early rollout! Anything would be great, even some reprinted Sharrows. Hope it means that, and more, soon.


    Karen Lynn Allen

    Anyone who would drive from Alamo Square to The Mill is an idiot. It is at most three-tenths of a mile (even from the far SE corner), an 8 minute walk.

    I am not a fan of the Volt, but I do see it has advantages for long trips that extend beyond the range of current electric cars. Chevy should have shown hipsters coming to Divisadero from, say, Bakersfield or Redding. (They could have parked their car at Alamo Square and left it there the whole day.) Sell the road trip, Chevy. That’s about all you have left.



    The cluelessness was already present in the very concept “microhood.”



    Sounds like a start, but we’ll see if they our elected leaders and SFMTA are REALLY SERIOUS about it, I won’t believe it until I see the PHYSICAL PROOF. Also when it comes to bike lanes lets hope that these lanes provide REAL PROTECTION in other words (PROTECTED BIKE LANES) where needed like on most of Market Street and other downtown streets that need it, maybe even PARKING PROTECTED BIKE LANES on one way streets in SOMA


    Bruce Halperin

    I noticed that too. Woohoo!

    This is also the first I’m hearing of a raised cycletrack on upper Market.



    Market/Duboce/Buchanan in construction. Anyone know where to find info on that?


    Aaron Bialick

    Well, I was counting the two blocks the time lapse shows traveling on Steiner southbound, and Divisadero northbound, before and after Hayes.


    Roy Crisman

    I think the whole country could do with an actual debate (after a basic philosophy course) as to the various aspects of punishment that we think are worthwhile, cause there’s a whole slew of things: retribution, revenge, reparation, reform, deterrence of others doing the same, deterrence from that person, etc.


    Roy Crisman

    The jury I sat on for a driver accused of DUI and assault with a deadly weapon on a SFPD officer (with his white Ford F-150) only determined guilt or innocence. And while I’m sure there were sentencing guidelines and limits, we’ as the jury, were not informed of them or allowed to consider them for our finding of guilt. After our finding, the judge determined guilt within those limits and guidelines.

    Too much of the language here is blaming the jury for a light sentence (either implied or direct) when it is solely the judge’s decision after a guilty verdict is found.

    Sure, a lighter charge may pursued (or not even pursued at all) because of what a prosecutor thinks a jury will convict on. But we’re missing the story here where a conviction on a charge is made and then the judge decides that the crime doesn’t deserve much of a punishment.


    Nicholas Littlejohn

    Bicycles sell grassroots, by word of mouth. No huge budget needed or wanted.


    Nicholas Littlejohn

    Is that the word for a vented microwave hood?


    Nicholas Littlejohn

    “Now we drove half a block to be here at Popeyes, our local neighborhood chicken spot.”


    Nicholas Littlejohn

    Pretty embarrassing. Cycling with her friends would have made a better spot. At least the car should have been plugged in so it would be electric.