Posts Tagged ‘bicycles’
Where is This Limousine Supposed to Offload Passengers in Front of Our State Building on Golden GateThursday, January 19th, 2017
Yes, that black Lincoln SUV thing is a stretched limo. It stopped in the new bike lane, as you can see.
Some in town would want the driver to double park far to the left in the slow lane so as to not block the now-sacrosanct new bike lane. Now I think that would be illegal, as is of course what the driver has done here:
So after all that, my question remains Where is This Limousine Supposed to Offload Passengers in Front of Our State Building on Golden Gate? I’m not really seeing any real legal options here. So parking as far to the right as practical seems like the least bad choice…
The King of Stolen Bicycles and Bike Parts, San Francisco, the West Coast Capital of Stolen Bikes – Building FrankenbikesFriday, December 16th, 2016
Harvest harvest time
Transit Not First: Bay Area Bike Share (aka “FORD GOBIKE”) Freely Double Parks on Market, Blocks MUNI BusesWednesday, December 7th, 2016
Let’s see here, oh, still an abysmal 2 star rating from Yelp. The Ford GoBike / BABS people could easily fix this situation by changing the wording of their marketing, BUT they don’t feel like it, Man, obvs.
Anyway, they’re still double parking their Mercedes Benzes on Market, and sometimes that causes problems for MUNI buses, as here near Second Street.
Illegal turns off of Market too – are the GoBike people allowed to do that? IDK. IDTS.
And oh yes, bikes aren’t transit, sry. You could pass a law that says that bicycles have something to do with transit, just as you could write a law what says cats are dogs for the purposes of a Leash Law, but that wouldn’t actually make cats dogs, right?
And here’s the defense of GoBike, seemingly written by an employee. I’m not saying an employee wrote this, but this is how an employee/owner might look at things, FBOW:
I am finding out that many people have given poor reviews because they thought they could pull a fast one and take off with one of the shared bicycles for a whole day for a measly $9. I’ve sometimes told tourists on the Golden Gate bridge that they should think of returning their bikes before they ruin themselves (they tell me I’m wrong, that they rented the bike for 24 hours…). There are dozens of perfectly decent stores around North Beach that will rent them a bike for $40. Bay Area Bikeshare is being penalized because folks choose not to read the price list (which is printed in large characters) and they are not familiar with how every bike sharing system in the world works.
But I don’t think you can try to “pull a fast one” without being aware that you’re doing it, I’m srsly.
Oh BABS, will you ever win?
Frisco’s Most Aggressive Driver is, and I’m Srsly, a “Tiffin Walla” Delivering Vegetarian Fare for “Green Tiffen”Friday, November 18th, 2016
Let’s see if I can pay off on the headline.
This ‘splains tings:
I’ll tell you I’m not a cop, so I couldn’t name you the numerous CVC violations I witnessed Fast and Furious over the course of about 20 seconds going from Market Sutter Sansome and then across Bush and then she lost me. Everybody has different standards for what’s appropriate driving, but geez, man. (It’s the electric assist what encourages this, IMO.)
Adrian founded Green Tiffin in fall of 2013 in San Francisco, although the idea seed was planted early in his childhood.
Now where was I? Oh:
– Guaranteed base hourly pay + delivery incentive
– Zip through San Francisco hills with Green Tiffin electric bicycles
– Look sharp in our delivery coat
– FREE healthy and sustainable lunch on workdays
– A pathway for development
– A fun and fast-paced working environment
I’ll tell you, a cab company in Frisco used to have a “racing” system of dispatch where the closest driver would be assigned a fare but others were free to swoop in to get there first – this was to prevent cabbies from lying too much about how close they were to the customer. Anyway, one time two cabbies working for the same outfit crashed into each other trying to win this game so that ended the racing system of dispatch.
And now Green Tiffen.
I’ll tell you Green Tiffen, I don’t think you’re on a “sustainable journey.”
What Happens When You Hail an UBER / LYFT to an Address Like 525 Market? – Temporary Chaos, That’s WhatWednesday, November 2nd, 2016
Market in the Financh is down to just one lane, in parts, these days, right? So you can’t just stop and wait for your fare to come down an elevator, right? Frisco aint Tracy, CA, right?
After getting yelled out by Bike To Work Day, Uber driver from the South Bay scooched on over enough to let more people squeeze by.
It’s just not possible to legally pick riders up like this, sry.
On It Goes…
A Crazy New SFMTA Plan to Allow Bike Riders to Run Red Lights on Fell and Oak in the “Panhandle-Adjacent” AreaTuesday, October 4th, 2016
The basic idea is to take out one of the four lanes of Fell and one of the four lanes of Oak along the Golden Gate Park Panhandle from the Baker Street DMV to Stanyan and turn them into dedicated bike lanes.
You don’t need to even look at the report to know that this idea is “feasible” – obviously, our SFMTA can do this if it wants to:
But why does the SFMTA want to do this? This is not stated in the report.
As things stand now, you can ride your bike on the left side of the left lanes of Fell and Oak, or on the right sides of the right lanes of Fell and Oak, or in any part of any lane of Fell and Oak if you’re keeping up with traffic (but this is especially hard to do heading uphill on Fell), or on the “multi-use pathway” (what I and most people call the bike path) what winds through the Panhandle.
So, why not widen the bike path again, SFGov? It used to be 8 foot wide and now it’s 12 foot wide, so why not go for 16 foot wide? (Hey, why doesn’t our SFMTA simply take over Rec and Park? You know it wants to.)
My point is that it would also be “feasible” to somehow force RPD to widen the current bike path (and also the extremely bumpy, injury-inducing Panhandle jogging/walking path along Oak) independent of whatever the SFMTA wants to do to the streets.
Anyway, here’s the news – check out page 12 of 13. No bike rider (or what term should I use this year, “person with bikes?” Or “person with bike?” Or “person with a bike?”) is going to want to sit at a red light at a “minor street” when s/he could just use the bike trail the SFTMA figures, so why not just allow them to ride on Fell and Oak without having to worry about traffic lights at all? And the pedestrians? Well, you’ll see:
“Minor Street Intersections
The minor cross-streets in the project area from east to west are Lyon Street, Central Avenue, Ashbury Street, Clayton Street, Cole Street, and Shrader Street. Each is a consistent width of 38’-9” curb-to-curb with 15-foot wide sidewalks. All of these streets are discontinued [Fuck man. How much colledge do you need to start talking like this, just asking] at the park, each forming a pair of “T” intersections at Oak and Fell streets. The preferred control for the protected bike lane at these “T” intersections is to exclude it from the traffic signal, allowing bicyclists to proceed through the intersection without stopping unless a pedestrian is crossing the bikeway. Due to the relatively low pedestrian volumes at these intersections, it is expected that people using the protected bike lane [aka cyclists? aka bike riders?] would routinely violate the signal if required to stop during every pedestrian phase, creating unpredictability and likely conflict between users on foot and on bicycles. This treatment also recognizes that in order to attract many bicycle commuters, the new protected bike lanes would need to be time-competitive with the existing multi-use path that has the advantage of a single traffic control signal for the length of the Panhandle.
Excluding the protected bike lane from the traffic signal requires installing new pedestrian refuge islands in the shadow of the parking strip. The existing vehicle and pedestrian signal heads currently located within the park would also need to be relocated to new poles on the pedestrian refuge islands.
Implementing these changes would cost between $70,000 and $150,000 per intersection, and require the removal of approximately four parking spaces per intersection. Over the eleven minor-street “T” intersections along the Panhandle (excluding Fell Street/Shrader Street which which has been discussed separately), the total cost would be between $0.9 and $1.5 million dollars and approximately 48 parking spaces would be removed.
This design introduces a variety of benefits and compromises [“compromises!” Or maybe “costs,” as in a cost/benefit analysis?] for pedestrians crossing to and from the park at the minor intersections:
– Pedestrians would be required to wait for gaps in bicycle traffic to cross the protected bike lane (which may present new challenges to people with low or no vision). Design treatments for the protected bike lanes (e.g., stencil messages, rumble strips, signs) should also be considered to clearly indicate the necessity of yielding to pedestrians to people on bicycles.”