Posts Tagged ‘bikes’

Propaganda Watch: Masonic Avenue “Streetscape” Project Roundup

Friday, May 27th, 2016

Well, here’s the news:

$26 million plan to slow speeding traffic on SF’s Masonic Avenue

This piece is surprisingly evenhanded.

Hey, does any other government agency in Frisco spend so much time and energy promoting itself as the SFMTA? I can’t think of one.

7J7C6469 copy

So we’re going to take out the old trees that are already here to put in L.A. style trees and this is going to Change Everything? IDTS.

(Fundamentally, the SFMTA isn’t a safety agency, it’s an employment agency, oh well.)

But we’ll just have to wait and see how things shake out, add up all the pros and cons maybe a year or so after things get finished. Masonic won’t be changed all that much – it will still be slow and congested, more so, actually, and there will still be accidents. It’s not going to become an Injury-Free Vision Zero Corridor, with or without trees. Sorry.

Anyway, here’s some SFMTA propaganda that we pay for:

Masonic Ave Transformation Breaks Ground in June

  1. This project will not “transform” Masonic. It’ll basically be the same.
  2. Masonic will not end up being “much safer.”And nearby areas will become less safer, right? How will this all add up? We’ll see…
  3. The sewer system underneath is not “centuries-old.”
  4. How does the SFMTA know now when this lengthy project will end by “the end of 2017?” It doesn’t.
  5. Masonic is not “one of the flattest streets in the area.”
  6.  Masonic will not become “safer and better for everyone.”
  7.  Masonic doesn’t prioritize “only car traffic” currently.
  8.  All long, busy streets in Frisco qualify as “high injury corridors,” so that doesn’t make it “distinct” in any way, shape or form.
  9.  Question-time: Are severely drunk drivers killing people on Masonic a human behavior problem or a streetscape problem?
  10. Uh, Vision Zero 2024 promises to eliminate all transportation-related injuries by 2024 and in perpetuity. This impossible “goal” will never be attained, certainly not for all the Streets of San Francisco and certainly not for this 3000 foot stretch of Masonic, so VZ2024 is the wrong way of looking at things, sry. It’s more a marketing thing. Framing they call it. We’ll have a new vocabulary by the time 2024 rolls around, I can promise you that.
  11. So if 501 “neighbors” now signed a petition to cancel this project, the SFMTA would then do that?
  12. Oh boy, here comes the laundry list at the bottom. This project will slow down MUNI during the morning and evening drives – that’s one of the “main trade-offs.” Of course, our SFMTA turned down the chance to test things out by shutting down the rush hour lanes for a day, oh well.
  13. Hey, will rejiggering street parking on Turk “increase safety” on Turk? We’ll see.
  14. “Residential Parking Area Q” is basically a jobs program for MUNI. We could talk about that sometime.

Years of SFPD Enforcement Have Gotten Through to These Bros – More Respect for Pedestrian Red Lights on Market

Wednesday, May 25th, 2016

Five or ten years ago, these very same dudes might very well have pretty much ignored this red light for the giant crosswalk connecting Union Square with San Francisco Centre, but now they obey the red, pretty much.

7J7C6257 copy

Our Sad-Sack SFMTA, a Part of the SFGov, Violates SF’s Sign Posting Rules to Advertise Itself to You

Monday, May 16th, 2016

Here are the rules you have to obey.

And now here comes our SFMTA to remind you how great the SFMTA is:

7J7C6072 copy

7J7C6088 copy

I’ll tell you, I’m meh about this project for the 3000 feet of Masonic betwixt Fell and Geary and I’d still be meh about it even if the money earmarked came from planet Mars for free and even if all the work required could be done in just one day.

I don’t think Masonic will be “transformed.” I don’t think we’ll end up with a “new” Masonic.

I don’t think I like our SFMTA promoting itself like this…

Anyway, our SFMTA seta a bad example, but here are the rules what applies to you, Joan Q. Public:

“Tips for legally posting signs on public property

To legally place a sign on a utility pole, it must:

Be less than 11 inches in height

No higher than 12 feet from the ground

Conform to the shape of the pole

Be attached with tape or other non-adhesive material such as twine, string or other non-metal banding material

Include a legible posting date in the lower right hand corner

Be removed after 10 days, if the sign is promoting a date specific event

Be removed within 70 days of the posting date

Not be installed on historic street light poles*, traffic signal poles or traffic directional sign poles.

* Historic street light poles are on these streets:

Market Street from 1 Market to 2490 Market

Mission Street from 16th Street to 24th Street

Grant Avenue from Bush Street to Broadway Street

The Embarcadero from King Street to Jefferson Street

Lamp Posts on Fisherman’s Wharf from Hyde to Powell

Howard Street from 3rd Street to 4th Street

Lamp Posts within Union Square

Mason Street from Market to Sutter

Sutter Street from Mason to Kearny

Kearny Street from Bush to Market

A Few Beefs with the SFMTA’s Marketing of Its Plan to (Somehow) “Increase Access” to Twin Peaks

Tuesday, April 19th, 2016

Here you go:

Making Room to Enjoy Spectacular Twin Peaks by Aaron Bialick
Friday, April 15, 2016

But the SFMTA isn’t really making anything is it?

Access by foot and bike is pretty limited, the road that loops around the mountain top in a “figure 8” is underused by car traffic and the loop’s intersections are confusing.

OK, well, “access” by foot and bike will still be “pretty limited” after the SFMTA completes the scheme it came up with, right? And let’s take a look at that road, on a dreaded sunny day:

7J7C0776-copy

Now, would you say that the east (left) side of this figure 8 is “underused?” No, not at all!

car-free access

Hey, is being “car-free” a good thing? Like is it as good as being something like herpes-free? One wonders.

On Tuesday, the SFMTA Board of Directors will consider approval of a pilot phase…

This means that the SFMTA is going to do what it wants to do, with the little bit of money it can scrape up to enact its ideology.

The project was shaped with community feedback…

First of all, there’s no community up there atop Twin Peaks. Second of all, if there is, it’s tourists (international, national, regional, and local) and this plan cooked up by the SFMTA is about as anti-tourist as one could imagine.

We’d also create legitimate parking spaces at the center and south intersections to address the illegal parking that already occurs.

WHAT WHAT? So all these People With Cars, the hundreds of People what congregate up there sometimes, they’re parking on the side of the highway “illegitimately?” So it’s legal but it doesn’t comport with SFMTA ideology? Or maybe it’s illegal, but our SFMTA hasn’t seen fit to put up signage what explains things nice and clear for visitors who don’t really have a good handle on English? And so all the scores of places where people park now and, indeed, the past century, all of that was not and is not “legitimate?” Whoo boy.

So the plan is to decrease access IRL and advertise this paint job (that doesn’t add ANYTHING) as one what will “increase” access.

Will that cost anything? Yes.

Will it cost the vaunted SFMTA anything. No, not really. Just a bit of paint…

 

Our SFMTA’s Plan to “Increase Access” at Twin Peaks WIll Actually Decrease Access – Trying to Figure the Figure 8

Friday, April 8th, 2016

IDK, man. On the one hand, SFGov promotes the 49-Mile-Drive, but OTOH, SFGov wants to make it more difficult.

Take a look here down below – where are all these cars going to go after this plan gets going?

The plan, advertised as one what would “increase access,” will decrease access, obviously. Parking areas will be decreased by a whole lot. Oh what’s that, that’s a good thing AFAYAC, Gentle Reader? Well, fine – but let’s agree that taking out scores of places for people to park is going to make for a less-busy Twin Peaks, for better or worse.

And hey, are these people glorious Pedestrians / People With Bikes or are they terrible, horrible People With Cars? One simply can’t tell. Some locals walk and bike up here, but I see very few tourists attempting to do so. Mostly they come by tour bus or car, FWICS.

7J7C3442 copy   7J7C3450 copy  7J7C3460 copy 7J7C3463 copy 7J7C3465 copy 7J7C3466 copy

On It Goes…

Toddler Racing! – “2016 Strider Cup World Championship” Coming to Pier 35 July 29-30, 2016 – Youths Aged 2-5 on Balance Bikes

Monday, April 4th, 2016

Here it is:

2016 Strider Cup World Championship Presented by FedEx

It’ll look something like this:

People will be traveling from all over the world to get here.

StriderCupWorldChampionshipPoster

(Of course, you’ll want to get the Pro version, to give your bike tyke that extra edge.)

See you there, FRIDAY FRIDAY FRIDAY!

Optimistic SF Giants Fan / Scraper Biker Heads Into the 2016 Season as an Orange and Black Blur

Thursday, March 31st, 2016

7J7C2372 copy

A scraper bike is an ordinary bicycle that has been modified by its owner, typically with decorated spokes with candy-colored pinwheels and matching body and wheel colors, using tinfoil, re-used cardboard, candy wrappers and paint. Scraper bikes are credited for being popularized by Tyrone Stevenson in 2007 in Oakland, California,[1][2] and are an offshoot of the scraper culture of car modification.[3] The scraper bike gained notoriety in 2007 with the YouTube music video “Scraper Bikes” by Trunk Boiz.

Will the SFMTA/RPD’s Car Ban Plan for the East Side of Twin Peaks Increase Access or Decrease Access? Take a Look at This Photo

Tuesday, March 15th, 2016

Take a listen, to Phil Matier here.

And then take a look, at what an Ivy Leaguer / Attorney / Former Gavin Newsom Jogging Buddy Who For Some Reason Is In Charge Of Our Park System has to say here:

As he sees it, the plan “increases the recreational accessibility of the area and makes it safer for bicyclists and pedestrians.”

As for safety, we’ll have to wait and see. But as for “accessibility,” this is going to be a Big Fat Decrease.

Here’s the east side of Twin Peaks Boulevard as it looks when the parking lot at Christmas Tree Point is all fulled up:

7J7C0776-copy

Where are these people going to go? Not Twin Peaks, that’s for sure. This plan will decrease access, certainly. (Or is the SFMTA going to run a shuttle bus up here? IDTS)

And oh, here’s how Phil Ginsburg attains access himself, using a car:

7J7C1999-copy-450x675

Proposed Figure 8 for Twin Peaks: Let’s See if SFGov’s Half-Ass Overgoverning is Better than Its Half-Ass Undergoverning

Wednesday, February 24th, 2016

“No offense Homer, but your half-ass under-parenting was a lot more fun than your half-ass over-parenting.”

Joe Kukura does a good job here of explaining our SFMTA’s Twin Peaks Figure 8 Redesign Project.

Losing one lane of traffic should be no problem, but I don’t know where our tourists will be able to park after the SFMTA gets through.

They kind of make things up on their own now.

7J7C0777 copy

The fourth of July is prolly the busiest day of the year up here, for the fogworks shows you might be able to see some years

7J7C0776 copy

Rec and Park has no idea what it’s doing, as you can see, as per usual. What did they do, just put up some signs and walk away?

7J7C0778 copy

Anyway, that’s the update from the Wild West…

7J7C0741 copy

7J7C0702 copy

7J7C0697 copy

A Brief History of Division Street’s Homeless People in Tents, 2015-2016 – Plus Theories: El Nino v. Super Bowl 50

Wednesday, February 24th, 2016

Well, let’s go way back for starters, back when the Bicycle Thieves Of San Francisco aimed to steal your entire bike. They’d sometimes get caught with stolen bikes and car jacks.*

But these days, it’s bike parts thieves seem to settle for, so cyclists need to protect not just the frame but also the wheels, the saddle and the headset, and other bits too, if you can.

So that means that today’s bike thief needs room to store stuff and that’s where Division Street comes in. It’s been a good place to park a vehicle or pitch a tent without being bothered too much, plus it’s close to the action – it’s close to 7th and Market and the Main Library.

This is what things looked like under the I-80 before Fall 2015 as I remember things:

7J7C9019-copy

This is how I remember things being for a decade or two.

But then all of a sudden, instead of a few tents here and there, a bunch of tents popped up. They filled up practically every possible space in lines that stretched from Costco #144 all the way to South Van Ness. I’m guessing this occurred  anywhere from mid-to-late November 2015 to early December at the latest.

This is part of the north (aka west) side of Division on Dec. 13th:

IMG_9243-copy

Compare that with this shot of the same place on Dec. 9th

And this is the other side of the street closer to 10th Street at the end of December:

 

 

 

7J7C1705-copy

I’ll tell you, most of these hundreds of people are NOT bike thieves.

So why did they show up here at the end of 2015?

The Holidays? I could see why the SFPD et al might want to ignore things until after Thanksgiving, Christmas and whatnot.

El Nino? This would be a good place to stay out of most of the rain, of course, and the forecast was for lots of it coming soon.

Super Bowl 50? The corporate party part of Super Bowl 50 had lots of knock-on effects for SFGov – it seemed like each and every SF Department was gearing up. At the time I thought, well, this doesn’t look too good either, if this is the alternative to homeless people hanging out near Super Bowl City in the Financial.

Availability of Tents? I remember seeing truck upon truck delivering stuff here, something like an FM radio station with “Chuy in the Morning” written on the side, something like that. So sure, food, but tents too? IDK.

Those are some ideas, anyway.

I don’t know, if SFGov cleans out all these tents in February 2016, will that end shoplifting at Rainbow Grocery?

We’ll find out soon enough.

Anyway, that’s your brief history of the tents on Division from 2015-2016.

*Stolen from the trunks of boxy Volvos. It was a thing.