Here’s the east end, with the McKinley Statue surrounded by traffic:
Posts Tagged ‘cars’
The Avenue Drive: Recalling the Time When You Could Drive Right Through the Middle of the Golden Gate Park PanhandleTuesday, August 19th, 2014
Clever Driver Boots Own Car to Avoid Theft on the Mean Streets of Ed Lee’s San Francisco: Presenting “The Claw”Wednesday, August 13th, 2014
And look, it’s from the people who brought us The Club, back in the 1980′s.
As seen in the projects near City Hall attached to an old Honda
Click to expand
I’ve never seen this before, Gentle Reader!
- High visual deterrence
- Unauthorized use deterrent
- Self locking
- Installs in seconds
- Fits wheels up to 12 inches wide
- Black vinyl dip protects wheel rim
- 3 Laser encrypted keys
- Plastic cover protects the lock from the elements
The SFMTA’s Secret Plan to Kick Lyft and Uber (But Not Taxis!) Off of Market – It’s Called “Safer Market Street” and It’s Coming Next YearThursday, August 7th, 2014
So apparently, the SFMTA is working on a plan to ban cars from parts of Market Street while still allowing them to cross over Market Street?
It’s called “Safer Market Street.”
Will kicking cars off of Market Street betwixt Montgomery and Eighth make Market “safer?” I don’t know. (But if the SFMTA wants to propose kicking buses and taxis off of Market, well then that certainly would make Market safer, IMO. )
I don’t know why we allow the SFMTA to do whatever it wants without getting something in return. Like, OK SFMTA, we’ll let you spend all this money on the porked-up Central Subway project, but in exchange, you’d have to bring MUNI up to the level of a mediocre big-city transit system.
Anyway, it’s easy to get tripped up with all the Orwellian names the SFMTA comes up with, like Great Streets! and “Livable” Streets and Safer Market and Better Market, but see if you can figure the words you can see below.
First up, a rep from the local government-subsidized urban renewal outfit uses the word pilot as a verb, because that’s the lingo:
“Lawrence Li (SPUR): Can you pilot some of these auto restrictions?
Some auto restrictions were piloted in 2009 and have since then become permanent. We do not
plan to pilot auto restrictions at this time due to environmental review constraints. However,
there is a separate project, independent of Better Market Street, called Safer Market Street that
is looking at implementing some auto restrictions between 8th and Montgomery potentially as soon as next year. The public kick-off for that project is planned for later this summer.”
And here’s a way for the SFMTA to stick it to the man, to fight back against those TNC’s by supporting cabbies:
“Kevin Carroll: There are private autos operating as taxis such as Lyft, Uber, etc. Will they be
allowed to drive on Market Street with these auto restrictions in place?
No. These services are subject to the private vehicle restrictions and would not be allowed on
Market Street with these auto restrictions in place.”
That’s all I know. Like I said, it’s secret, more or less, for now.
All the deets, after the jump.
Florida plates, BTW.
Or should I say, Florida plate, as this gold exoticar doesn’t have a front license plate, which is a no-no in The Golden State.
And of course, you’ve got less than three weeks after moving to California to deal with the California DMV, but I’ll tell you, most Lambos you see in SF aren’t properly registered with CA DMV.
Anyway, this car reminded of Dennis Rodman’s old ride, one that’s being used as a daily driver by a CCSF student.
Stay gold, Lambo owner. Bienvenidos a 415 / 628 / 650!
Uh Oh: The “Parking Angels” App is Coming – Something Like This Could Cost the Corrupt SFMTA MUNI DPT a Lot of MoneyMonday, August 4th, 2014
What’s this, a way for people to band together against our corrupt SFMTA?
You tell me, Gentle Reader
Hey, what would you do if you knew you were spilling tens of thousands of gallons of petroleum into our San Francisco Bay?
Our SFMTA had a question like this. It failed. Oh well. See below.
Guess what, our SFMTA now wants you to vote yourself a rent increase in order to give it more money. You’ll have your chance to vote on it November 4th, 2014.
SAN FRANCISCO (November 2, 2009) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is taking action against the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency following federal violations of the Clean Water Act and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
On the page:
- Overview and Location of Facilities
- Injunctive Relief
- Pollutants Addressed
- Environmental Effects
- Civil Penalty
- Comment Period
The City and County of San Francisco is a municipality organized under the laws of California that operates the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (“SFMTA”) and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (“SFPUC”). The SFMTA operates a diverse fleet of trolley cars, street cars, light rail, alternative fuel vehicles and 495 diesel buses that are serviced and re-fueled at facilities owned and operated by the SFMTA. The SFPUC provides water, wastewater and municipal power services.
Between November and December 2005, approximately 940 barrels (39,488 gallons) of red dye diesel fuel were discharged from one of the Municipality’s underground storage tanks (USTs) at the John M. Woods Motor Coach Facility (Woods Motor Coach Facility). The diesel spread through a piping system into a storm drain, through wastewater collection piping to a pump station, into Islais Creek and eventually San Francisco Bay.
The discharge was caused by a ruptured hose. The leak continued for several days, as sensors, flashers and alarm reports and other leak indicators were ignored. This failure by SFMTA to comply with federal requirements for the management of USTs resulted in the release of diesel fuel and Clean Water Act discharge and pretreatment violations.
After this spill, EPA conducted inspections at several of SFMTA’s facilities and identified violations of EPA’s spill prevention regulations at three of them: Flynn, Kirkland, and Marin.
The five facilities covered by this settlement are in the City and County of San Francisco:
- Woods Motor Coach Facility – 1095 Indiana Street
- Flynn Motor Coach Facility – 15th and Harrison Street
- Kirkland Motor Coach Facility – 151 Beach Street
- Marin Fuel Stand – 1399 Main Street
- Southeast Water Collection System Pump Station”
I passed by O’Farrell and Masonic a couple times the other day, so I’m noting what I noticed.
This pedestrian appeared to become irate both at the unorthodox delay she had for the green and at the driver of the orange Scion car for turning left on a yellow:
If SFGov wanted to engage in pedestrian calming, it would adjust the left turn time for traffic on southbound Masonic.
Next up is this driver, who hung a U-turn on a red light since it looked like there was no traffic coming east on O’Farrell. There’s no way that’s legal:
Here’s the prize – the quite small lower level lot of City Target West:
Hey, I know that Target paid for a couple traffic signals on Masonic, but perhaps there could be some adjustments? Perhaps we could just eliminate U-turns on southbound Masonic at O’Farrell? I mean, northbound traffic on Masonic has no chance to getting to nearby Trader Joe’s, right? So why should we bend over backwards for people driving to Target?
Moving on, down the street to quiet Ewing Terrace, where the brand new lights have just been turned on. It seems that all traffic on Masonic has to stop at random times even though nobody wants to cross Masonic? Why is that?
In most places outside of SF, there’d be a pad to detect the presence of a car coming out of the cul-de-sac and buttons for peds. Shouldn’t we be doing it that way instead? Mmmmm… These red lights for no reason delay MUNI buses, right? I seen it. Perhaps in the near future this signal will be able to detect the approach of a bus and then not turn red for no reason? We’ll see…
Sadly, most supercars you see in San Francisco aren’t properly registered in California. The reason mostly has to do with CA use tax, which comes due the second you start “using” your new ride by driving it around.
So some people end up paying $10, or $20, or $30 per mile during the short time they own and drive a Ferrari, for example.
So other people simply dispense with paying CA use tax, because it’s so pricey.
Here’s an alternative – Blancfleet. They say they’re opening up next week in the Bay Area.
“Blancfleet is the world’s first supercar sharing platform where car enthusiasts crowdfund and timeshare the supercars they love. Timesharing allows car enthusiasts on Blancfleet to spread the cost of owning, operating, and insuring a supercar with other car enthusiasts. On Blancfleet, there are no annual membership fees, no refueling requirements, no car insurance requirements, no car maintenance fees, no car storage fees, and no security deposit requirements. Timesharing also allows members to enjoy supercars with unlimited miles”
Is this a good idea for you? IDK. But it will be refreshing to see valid CA license plates on these cars. And if you’re tempted to buy a car like one of these, consider that lots of times people just end up selling a few months later ala the Porsche GT2 that Paul Walker died in - that car traded hands many, many times before it was destroyed.
Maybe you don’t want to buy a car, maybe you just want to rent.
Uh, Did Target Stores Pay the DPW $250,000 to Install Traffic Lights That Favor Cars Over Peds at O’Farrell and Masonic?Friday, July 18th, 2014
Here’s my beef from yesterday about the newish traffic light scheme at Masonic and O’Farrell.
But where did this scheme come from?
Oh, here we go - DPW Contract No. 2108J:
“The contract work will be funded through private developer funds for work at two signals along Masonic Avenue.”
The two locations:
“Masonic Avenue and O’Farrell Street” and “Ewing Terrace and Masonic Avenue”
Now Ewing Terrace I know about. One woman living on that street showed up both at the Target-sponsored and SFMTA-sponsored meetings complaining about how hard it was for her to head north on Masonic when pulling out of Ewing. She said it sometimes took her “20 minutes” of sitting at the stop sign waiting for a break in traffic in order to accomplish this task. So SFGov accommodated her with a big traffic signal that they’re putting in now.
But at Masonic Avenue and O’Farrell Street? I don’t know. It’s almost as if the lighting scheme was designed by somebody who works at Target.
The upshot is that northbound traffic and all the peds on the east side of Masonic have to wait for southbound drivers to make an awkward U-turn followed by a quick right to get into the small, lower-level Target / Starbucks parking lot.
I can think of a couple similar situations about town. At Market and Octavia, everybody on outbound Market has to wait for car drivers on inbound Market to turn left onto Octavia. Why? Because selfish Hayes Valley denizens had waaaaay too much input into the process. Nevermind that legal lefts are a rare thing on Market for a reason, never mind that lefts were already legal one block before and one block after Octavia…
And at Fell and Masonic, the traffic signals were rejiggered for ideological reasons so now three lanes of Masonic get green lights but not the fourth lane. Drivers will never get used to this arrangement, IMO.
And, similarly, peds will never get used to the current setup at Masonic and O’Farrell.
Anyway, I don’t have a problem with the new Target being there. I’m just wondering who paid for the crazy lights that just got put in next to the new Target.
An Unusual Traffic Scheme at Masonic and O’Farrell: Left-Turning Cars > Pedestrians? The Planning Gods Must Be CrazyThursday, July 17th, 2014
For some reason, the Golden Gods of the Planning Department / the SFMTA, the very same people who clamored for parking meters to operate on Sundays until they got it only to then say that they DIDN’T want it after all, unanimously, have set up an unusual traffic timing scheme at Masonic and O’Farrell. It’s unique.
Southbound drivers turning left get to go first, before car and bus drivers coming north and before peds on the east side of the street.
This is so that southbound drivers can make a U-turn and then a quick right to make into the small lower-level parking lot of the new City Target. About four drivers go left / hang a Louie at the start of each light cycle:
Click to expand
I approve not.
Now if you want to say that SFGov had a rational basis for doing this after some big study, well then maybe. But having peds wait seven seconds to go after the light turns green is contrary to every impulse every ped has.
For some reason, Planning or the SFMTA or whomever feel that its their responsibility to be at the forefront of experimentation with traffic. Like its their sacred duty or something.
I understand that they would freely admit that this is a kludge fix to accommodate the newly-opened Target store. I understand that they would say that this is temporary until the New Masonic Plan gets going. I understand that there’s a concern about southbound traffic backing up and possibly blocking eastbound and westbound traffic on Geary. BUT EVEN SO, this left arrow scheme at O’Farrell is NOT THE WAY TO GO. There are other ways of doing of what SFGov is trying to accomplish.
There are better ways of doing this.