Skip to content

Recent Comments


    Roy Crisman

    Having sat on a jury in SF for a DUI + assault on an SFPD officer with a deadly weapon (white ford f-150), I don’t buy the “only 6 months” story (though neither of my comments have shown up there, yet.). We, the jury, determined guilt. We did not determine sentence…in fact we probably hemmed and hawed a bit in determining guilt because we didn’t know whether we could even have any (lessening) impact on sentencing due to the situation and evidence. The judge made the sentencing determination with some input from the prosecution (to go lighter).

    True, what the prosecution believes they can get a conviction for will greatly influence what level of charges they bring. But it is only guilt or innocence that the jury decides–it takes a judge to give “only” 6 months.


    Chris J.

    Gag. How could a “local artisan” ever agree to being in something like that?



    Most of the newer transportation bicycle companies like Public are using other forms of media for their advertising. Here’s what they are doing:

    Looking at this ad, you can see how much Ford is aping the transportation bicycle companies. The only difference is while Public is happy to provide product placement, we only see the Chevy Volt once in their ad.



    The only thing this ad demonstrates is that car companies will pay lucky fashionable cute young people money for just about anything. It’s like the hipster lottery, really. We could use a lot more of it too, considering how downwardly mobile we all seem to be these days.



    The U.S. cycling market is estimated to be $6.6 billion dollars. That is approximately the same size as the after market auto parts industry – so maybe the bike business could co-sponsor a NASCAR racer along with a cellphone company partner. Buy an effective TV ad for the whole industry? Yeah, not gonna happen.

    Sales in new bikes has dipped in several categories, and the industry has flat lined overall – though transportation cycling has spiked.

    Bikes are great, the bike business is not the place to look for marketing budgets.



    driving does, however, make it easier to avoid seeing the last people that haven’t yet been pushed out by all that gentrification…maybe that’s why a car is so necessary?



    The every half mile is a curious finding. Paris, Washington, and New York have stations spaced approximately every 300 meters, which is much different from a half mile. It looks like BABS attempted to use a similar rule, but with so few stations, the density just didn’t matter as much.


    Jonathan Alexander

    That list is so vague about what the actual improvements will be that I’m unsure whether I should be excited about it. Also, signals (and stop signs) have been shown to work poorly as traffic calming improvements.


    Jonathan Alexander

    It’s amazing how many moving violations by drivers occur in the background of the ad with Chief Suhr:



    I totally agree that BABS should be in places like RWC and that it is a good way to add capacity to Caltrain; I just don’t that with BABS very limited offering it should be there now, while starving SF of bikes that would get significant use.

    If an office park wants to pay to provide a station for its tenants, that seems reasonable (and I’d think it would lead to higher rents for the landlord); privately funded additions to BABS can have their own allocation.

    As far as I know BABS is still actively looking for a title sponsor… one would think with all the Fortune 500 companies in the Bay Area, it wouldn’t be hard to find a sponsor! Wells Fargo, Google, Apple, Levi’s, Oracle, SalesForce, Intel, etc.


    Jamison Wieser

    More children are killed each year (~250,000/year) by wreckless drivers than by any other preventable cause. It drops to number 5 when you include adults.

    50+ years on, this epidemic continues to make front page headlines almost every day. We know how we can fight it: corner extensions and bulbouts, that reduce the time pedestrians spend in the road and create clear lines of sight for drives, bike boxes and dedicated and physically separated bike lanes, street trees and planted medians help slow drivers drivers down if they create a feeling of being more enclosed. Narrowing lanes, two-waying traffic and (conversely) removing medians so drivers are closer together and closer to oncoming traffic have a similar effect. (drivers are generally really good about not swerving over that yellow line into a car coming the other way…

    We know how to attack this problem, but remove even one parking space (or take away a lane of traffic to create a safe bike path) and we’re treated like jerks, radicals, and called bike nuts for potentially inconveniencing a driver and hurting their feelings, instead of thinking first about the safety kids who are simply crossing the street.



    Your guest who asked why bicycle manufacturers don’t do ads like the car companies do pointed up a part of the uphill fight to get the general public interested in non-automotive transport. Weekend newspapers are full of car-dealer ads, some taking full pages. Network TV shows get a good portion of their sponsorship from Detroit and the foreign “marques”. Somehow my Facebook page gets periodic ads for the Chrysler 200 (and my last Chrysler car was a Dodge Aries about 15 years ago.). But compared to GM, Honda, BMW et al., the US bike makers are a “cottage industry” and don’t have the money for prime time TV ads.



    On the other hand, BABS hasn’t event tried yet to get stations sponsored by employers and office parks. They were waiting until they got one big brand name sponsor (like Citibike). I don’t know if they changed this.

    There’s been a lot of discussion about how to improve Caltrain capacity – and this seems like one of the cheapest ways to do that.


    Bruce Halperin

    Steiner to Divisadero is only three blocks, not five. Which makes this even more absurd than it already is.



    Yeah that makes sense and I don’t know RWC at all. But still, with SF getting 90% of the use and only 50% of the bikes, SF will get more use out of the bikes & stations.

    I agree that RWC and other Peninsula cities need & will benefit from BABS, but with scarce resources we should allocate the bikes to where they will get the greatest use (also, we should consider what will cost BABS the least… I am guessing with regional/satellite locations it is much less cost efficient for BABS to service those stations compared to stations located in a dense area).

    Long term (3-5 years?) once BABS is ubiquitous in the core markets (SF for sure, maybe SJ and the EB?) and is broadly recognized as a valuable transit resource and its funding isn’t as volatile, than we can come back and build out the secondary markets, such as RWC.



    A significant part of the problem in RWC is that the locations are nearly useless. They are close together in a small walkable downtown. Meanwhile, there are multiple big employers and office parks that are 1-2 miles away.

    Currently, 14% of Caltrain riders take a bike onboard, mostly for that last mile connection. The trains are crowded. It would be helpful if some people who take a bike on board could use bike share instead, but that only helps if the bikeshare station is where people want to go.



    She should have went to Popeye’s.



    Why doesn’t Trek, Specialized, Giant, et al make ads like this? I’ve seen Gary Fisher comment here. I wonder if he sees this he (or anyone else) might have some insight as to why there aren’t ads like this from the bike industry.


    Kevin J

    Did the Potrero View really publish a story about legitimate TEP concerns?

    Could it be there’s a community interested in constructive dialog with MTA? Where’s Sebra bitching about parking?



    But don’t we think Chevy is doing us a service? I mean, it’s saving us from the paltry bus service (24, 5, 21, 31, 22, 6, 71) and far-flung location (just smack-dab in the middle of the northern part of the City, not too many hill to bike or walk)? Oh, no? Yeah, I agree. This is really, really sad.



    I am extremely disappointed in Oakland today,
    and whoever is responsible for dismantling Latham Square Park.

    Rachel Flynn… ?

    This was a great first step towards a more pedestrian friendly downtown,

    and a better way of life for this thriving area.

    Every example of these safe pedestrian areas,
    (from Santa Monica to THE REST OF THE WORLD)
    has helped turn downtown areas into thriving marketplaces and cultural centers, not to mention making it safer for the thousands
    of people who are now flocking to this neighborhood – without cars.

    I thought I saw a brighter future,and started to feel confident that the people in charge were thinking ahead, and had the people’s interest in mind.
    Now I’m not so sure.

    Incredibly short sited…. sad day for Oakland.


    Bob Gunderson

    Good to see she’s not using her legs like a sucker.



    This is terrible.

    Also, not Streetsblog related per se, but (except for the park) the two places she showcases in the neighborhood have only been there for about a year each. While nice additions, they hardly define the (micro?) hood.



    Yeah, if you drove it you’d pretty much miss everything on that stretch, have to find a place to park (good luck), then go back and walk it to discover why you might have gone through.



    Pedestrian streets typically allow access for delivery vehicles at times with little foot traffic (ie. mornings). Accommodations (such as more designated disabled parking spots closer to Haight Street) can also be implemented.



    Great suggestion. As it now is, traffic proceeds very slowly along Haight Street on many afternoons greatly delaying Muni. If a few core blocks of Haight Street were closed to through traffic (except for buses and bicyclists) it would become less congested and more pleasant (it’d become a street much easier for transit riders, pedestrians, wheelchair users, skateboarders, etc. to travel). Perhaps this could be attempted as a trial on weekend afternoons (of for that matter on Friday afternoons…).


    Jamison Wieser

    I know you are not so clueless that you weren’t aware the Thigh street light rail was a two phase project. So it seems you are being willfully ignorant or purposefully denying that the T-line is not complete yet. The final operating plan is the T-line running between Sunnydale and Chinatown with a shortline running between Chinatown and Mission Bay.

    Unless you want to deny the project is only partially finished, and the current arrangement as an extension of the K-line is the final/permanent service plan, then yes, the line is not completed and you’re judging a half-finished project.

    If I’m a fool for understanding the scope of the project, then I’d have to call you a fucktard for spouting off on something you don’t understand.

    Like I said, the temporary arrangement subjects the initial T-line to additional delays from the moment it turns the corner at 4th & King. And it isn’t just my foolish opinion that for the train to make the turn it requires a turn phase. Only an idiot would not be able to understand that.

    If the T-line turned around at 4th & King, we’d have a control case we could use to compare performance and reliability of the Third Street segment on its own vs. combined with the JKLMN lines in the subway.



    RE: Bike Share

    Glad to see bike share is coming to the East Bay. I won’t use it but think it can be successful (wish they had it in my day at Cal!). Tucked in that article is the comment about the lagging performance along the Peninsula. Given, that bike share needs scale to work, at what point will BABS redistribute the bikes to better locations? I hate that local politics is hampering BABS with the regional approach. If SF is getting 90% of the use with 50% of the bikes, move more bikes & stations to SF… BABS can go back to the fringe markets (such as RWC) once it has reached scale in areas with more potential. Based on the SF Appeal article, BABS might be redistributing the bikes, but what is taking so long?! :)

    Second, I hope the lessons from the Peninsula are learned for the for the East Bay roll out.

    Here was the comment from the SF Appeal article:
    “In the lagging areas, the MTC intends to conduct a more thorough analysis to see if the conditions are met for a successful implementation. Bike share systems work best when stations are about a half-mile apart, according to the report, so that people can comfortably get from one destination to another under the half-hour time limit.

    Redwood City, which has averaged only 0.09 trips per bike per day, is looking into how to redeploy its system for greater success.”



    Here are two articles from Marin…

    San Rafael Police take bike training (I wonder if the bike police are increasing in size or if this is just back-fill?):

    Homeless Man Crashes his bike riding on Hwy 101:

    What’s even more head scratching about the incident, is that there is a Class 1 bike path from Corte Madera to Mill Valley adjacent to SB 101, right where this guy was. I wonder if he suffers from a mental illness that impaired his decision making?



    Its funny, sometimes Stanley focuses his show on the most irrelevant issues… I guess that is the pressure of creating content daily. Yes, in his piece he points out some small rule infractions, but that isn’t hard to do anywhere. Are the rule infractions causing an issue? What he should talk about is how dangerous 3rd Street is for cyclists between Terry Francois and King Street. Want to turn right on King Street? That is even worse… and throw in the crowding from Giants games and that area needs some infrastructural help.

    As to the content of the video itself… I ride there every day and have never seen the signs in the video. In front of the ballpark (conveniently not pictured on Stanley’s video) by the BofA ATMs near Willie Mays Plaza is a sign that reads “Bikes Yield to Peds”, which to me implies bikes are allowed to ride on the pathway in front of the stadium (admittedly, I had never noticed the sign before and only noticed it when I was trying to find the signs that Stanley showed in his video). Of note, I failed to find the no cycling signs Stanley found… maybe they are by Lefty O’Doul bridge? Given the signage indicating it is okay to ride bikes in front of the ball park, it makes me think he is intentionally editing his video to sensationalize his piece… Now, I will say, common sense says you should ride around Willie Mays plaza with so many people pre-game. Non-game days? It is totally legal.


    Richard Mlynarik


    So we “invested” $650 million to make a “light” rail line that is slower, less reliable, less frequent, and serves fewer destinations than the bus line it “replaced”.

    But we can’t “judge” it until we give the same corrupt contractor mafiosi another BILLION AND A HALF DOLLARS.” We just need to “wait”. Until it is “complete”. And “normal”. And a “car phase”.

    Seriously, if you’re not being paid to come up with this stuff you’re a fool.



    SAP Arena isn’t proposing to increase their own parking – they are proposing to double the amount of parking required for everyone building in the Diridon Station Area



    Yes, this really bothers me. Not just on transportation issues. The criminal justice system isn’t about closure for the victims, it’s about community safety.



    I agree w a lifetime license ban. I’m not excited about sending more people to prison, which seems to do the opposite of correct and rehabilitate, contrary to the euphemism used to describe the state’s prison system, but there has to be a reasonable and effective consequence to an action like drunk driving, let alone killing someone while drunk driving. I think a lifetime license suspension for the latter makes perfect sense – along with restitution to the affected families ($4700? Really?), treatment programs, probation, etc.



    This things miss the point of the justice system. We as a society punish people who commit crimes to protect all of us, not on behalf of the victim’s family.



    The law is supposed to be there to prevent him from killing his next victim. Even the family’s request should not be overriding the need to protect society. Prison and fines do little good though to prevent repeated offenses. The repeat rate for alcoholics is very high. The only way to really protect society from him is a lifetime drivers license suspension and a ban on him owning a car.


    Remy Marathe

    I’m really depressed now.



    What I have to say what should happen to this killer will get censored. There I said it in a round about way.



    Until and unless attitudes toward driver-caused collisions change, even the victims of vehicular manslaughter will collude with their family members’ killers.



    I’m with this. I really really really hate drunk driving but I still hesitate to call it evil. Rather than putting them in jail, a very lengthy license suspension with ZERO exceptions and a stiff prison sentence for violation would probably result in a net reduction in the amount of prisoners and a net positive in terms of deterrence and safety.

    The argument that someone can’t make a living without some sort of work exception rings hollow – it’s a lot easier to make a living with no driver’s license on the outside than it is to make a living in jail.



    Wait, so even this guy is getting his license back? What the fuck?!



    I agree. I think it the most significant change to the South Bay/Peninsula commute in the past 30 years at least. I would love more details on this story — when these changes will be implemented. I suspect 101 will still remain at full capacity as job growth continues, but the vehicles on that road will be full of carpoolers or company busses. Out of pocket, pay-for-use fees grab our attention and nudge us all toward needed changes. Long commutes in stop and go traffic drain us but we absorb them with poorer mental health and larger waistlines.



    The most obvious punishment here would be that he can never drive again. Of course, that never seems to be part of the consequences for killing while behind the wheel. Heck, we even install alcohol monitors to make sure that these people can still get behind the wheel, as long as they haven’t had too much to drink. Driving is a wholly unnecessary privilege. Give the guy a bus pass, and sentence him to 20 years in prison if he’s ever caught driving again.



    Is the plan for toll lanes on 101 really going to happen? That seems like a really big deal.


    Thomas Rogers

    I think the overall points about pedestrian fatality sentencing trends are accurate, but for this particular case- the Appeal article ( has a little more information about the victim’s family and their perspective, which I think could played a role in this sentence:

    “Before surrendering to authorities, Assistant District Attorney Tiffany Sutton spoke on behalf of Hanren’s father, Wenhan Chang, who had declined to attend today’s sentencing.

    Sutton said she had spoken to Chang and said he was relieved to hear that Brewer was remorseful for his actions.

    “He was happy the matter was going to be resolved,” Sutton said.

    She added that Chang had relayed that he did not want further punishment for Brewer.

    Conroy called the father’s statements a “remarkable statement of compassion.””


    Jamison Wieser

    sebra leaves left a comment on that post which illustrates exactly why the general public should not be making service design decisions:

    “If you look at a typical expense sheet such as the one we have for the Irving Street project, you will see that everything on the list costs over $100K each. The bulbouts are $300K each, think about that next time you see one. Two or three bulbouts equal a new bus. Most people feel putting more buses in service is a better way to improve Muni service.”

    Muni definitely could use more vehicles, but they don’t drive and maintain themselves. So you’d need to add at least three more bulbouts-per-year for the operators, a few more bulbouts-per-year for the maintenance staff, a few more bulbouts-per-year for parts… And it’s not like SFMTA has unlimited space for all this, so eventually SFMTA would have to spend dozens or hundreds of bulbouts to buy more property for facilities.

    Plus there’d be all the extra traffic caused by more busses pulling in and out of each stop and turn more lines into what we have on Geary with multiple articulated busses hitting a stop at the same time and blocking traffic. That would just slow down traffic, and Muni service with it, even further and require more busses, and that’s how we end up with 8mph service and busses stopped longer than they spend moving.

    I guess you could lengthen the stop by eliminating some parking spaces…


    You could make the one-time investment in a bulb-out that among other things, 1) spares a bus the time and hassle pulling in and out of the traffic lane, 2) places passengers physically closer to the bus and eliminating travel time getting to the bus that couldn’t pull in and more when we have to get a car, 3) places waiting passengers out the way of the sidewalks and reducing pedestrian traffic that is getting worse and worse all the time.


    Karen Lynn Allen

    I notice that the Chronicle photo date indicates a month from now. This is not, however, an event in the future. It occurred this morning.


    Jamison Wieser

    Having helped draft the transportation section of the City Charter, I can confirm that giving Sebra parking is not in there. Muni however is priorities 1-5.

    Regarding parking and traffic, the goal is all about effective and efficient management and an example would be using SF Park to reduce the amount of circling drivers are forced to do.


    Karen Lynn Allen

    Words fail.


    Jamison Wieser

    The interstate highway system is not fully funded.

    Come to think of it, San Francisco hasn’t identified full funding for the upkeep and maintenance of our roadways in perpetuity, so let’s stop repaving them until that’s taken care of.