Today’s Headlines

  • Driver Shoots Pedestrian Who Yelled at Him After Near Miss at Golden Gate and Broderick (NBC)
  • Muni Fares Rise, But You Won’t Hear Mayor Lee Say Riders Are Getting “Nickeled and Dimed” (SFist)
  • SFMTA Hearing Friday on New Haight Traffic Lights for Muni; Fell/Oak Rain Gardens Coming (Hoodline)
  • Palou Ave Streetscape Improvement Project Community Meeting to Be Held Thursday (D10 Watch)
  • SFMTA Launches Survey on San Jose Ave Bike Lane (SFBC); SF Weekly Looks at Raised Bike Lanes
  • Central Freeway Removal Has Made Room for 1,000 Housing Units Going Up in Hayes Valley (Hoodline)
  • Study: Uber Riders in SF Have Far Shorter Waits Than Taxi Riders (CityLab)
  • BART Launches Station Clean-Up Effort (SFGate); Approves 325 New Electronic Bike Lockers (SFBay)
  • BART Board Eliminates Own Perk for Lifetime Free Rides for Members After Leaving (CoCo Times)
  • More on Bay Area Bike Share’s Stall (KQED); “Bay Area BikeMobile” Teaches Kids to Fix Bikes (SFGate)
  • Proposed Bus Stops at Muir Beach Dropped After Complaints From Marin County Neighbors (SFGate)
  • Bicycling in Marin County Outpacing Rest of State (Marin IJ); More Marinites Telecommuting (MIJ)

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Prinzrob

    On the NBC pedestrian shooting story: The neighbor they interviewed stated that the pedestrian was “jaywalking across Golden Gate Avenue…”. However, illegal jaywalking only applies when crossing between two signalized intersections, whereas this section of Golden Gate Ave only has stop signs. The pedestrian would still be required to yield the right of way to cross traffic, as would any drivers need to yield to pedestrians already in the street, but stating that he was jaywalking and crossing illegally is inaccurate. Of course, even an illegal crossing would not justify the shooting, but news outlets that run comments like these without corrections fuel the confusion and the knee-jerk victim-blaming that so often occurs.

  • Michael Morris

    the survey only classifies the Marin biking increase as an increase in “bike trips.” which hopefully means there was an increase in biking trips that would have otherwise been done by car. The biking in the photos was only people crossing the golden gate bridge, this is great exercise, but biking as a recreational exercise is not what we should be concerned about, that replaces a gym, not an automobile. The mention of safe routes to school was nice to see, start ’em young!

  • murphstahoe

    The biking in the photos was being done on the East side of the bridge, which is only open for bikes in the AM commute. Given their age, no packs, (and the Santa Rosa Cycling Club – non local – jersey seen on one of the riders) these people might not be commuters, but there are a *lot* of people who commute over the bridge. I commute to and from the bridge (taking a bus which drops me off at the South end) and I see a *lot* of commuter cyclists headed to Sausalito/Mill Valley area. Those are very high value bike commute trips as they remove traffic from key bottlenecks – bridge/doyle/lombard/ferry.

    It makes for a better photo to have a lot of cyclists in the picture, commuters are more likely to be riding solo.

    And don’t forget…

    “Let’s have a moment of silence for all those stuck in traffic on their way to the gym to ride the stationary bicycle” – Earl Blumenauer.

  • Transpo_nerdette

    The picture shows people biking on the east side of the bridge, which is open to cyclists on weekdays. Some of them could very well be taking commuting or other transportation trips to San Francisco. Keep in mind the survey would also count driving to the beach or to the gym as a trip… so even biking for recreation/fitness can replace recreational car trips.

    Also, biking as a recreational activity is often a gateway to biking for transportation, and helps increase understanding and awareness of other road users when a new cyclists gets back behind the wheel 🙂

  • RoyTT

    I don’t have chapter and verse to say that is incorrect but I was pulled up by a SFPD cop for crossing a street in the middle of a unsignalled block, and he said I was jaywalking. He didn’t issue a ticket and just gave me a warning. But it was made clear to me that I was jaywalking and I have to admit that I knew I was in the wrong but did it anyway.

    There’s an obvious real-life distinction between jaywalking on a quiet street and on a busy street, and of course busy streets are more likely to be signalized. But I am not aware that distinction is enshrined in statute.

    Obviously nothing in this case deserved the horrific outcome, but it is worth pedestrians and cyclists (not to mention other drivers) always bearing in mind that a lot of people drive around with guns and that road rage can get you killed no matter how much in the right you technically are. Sometimes it is better to just walk away than remonstrate.

  • Prinzrob

    I wish I was surprised that the police officer who stopped you was misinformed about pedestrian law, but unfortunately I have heard a lot of similar cases. The fact that so few people understand and adhere to pedestrian right-of-way laws speaks to how little we value the safety of vulnerable road users in our cities.

    Some clear diagrams illustrating what constitutes legal and illegal crossings in California can be found online at http://www.meaforensic.com/jaywalking-and-unmarked-crosswalks.

  • gneiss

    RoyTT – the police officer was wrong, and was likely simply harassing you for what they percieved as ‘dangerous’ behavior. Here’s what the vehicle code has to say about crossing between two unsignalized intersections: “The Vehicle Code does not prohibit pedestrians from crossing roadways at places other than crosswalks, except between adjacent intersections controlled by traffic signals or police officers. Local authorities may adopt ordinances prohibiting pedestrians from crossing streets outside crosswalks.” http://catsip.berkeley.edu/california-vehicle-code

    This is one of the reasons why I have grave concerns about the SFMTA’s plan to signalize all of the 4-way stop sign intersections along Haight Street. In essence, it criminalizes behavior that makes the street safer by forcing motorists to slow down and look for people crossing the street. I think a much better plan would be to make some of the intersections 2-way, but with more extensive grade changes and textured pavement at those locations to better indicate that they are part of the pedestrian realm.

  • murphstahoe

    it is worth women bearing in mind that a lot of men…

    oh never mind

  • voltairesmistress

    Thanks for that link — very helpful. I learned something.

  • ladyfleur

    Oh, I bet only 1 in 10 cops would get that diagram right. For the general public it would be 1 in 100.