Posts Tagged ‘lanes’

Any Traffic Issue can be Solved with MORE CONES – If Troubles Persist, Simply Add MORE CONES

Tuesday, October 25th, 2016


A Crazy New SFMTA Plan to Allow Bike Riders to Run Red Lights on Fell and Oak in the “Panhandle-Adjacent” Area

Tuesday, October 4th, 2016

Here it is: The “Fell and Oak Streets Panhandle-Adjacent Bikeway Feasibility Study”

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.”


Monday, August 1st, 2016

Here’s the bumper sticker:

7J7C9544 copy

And here’s the TaxiMemoFinal from our ineffectual SFMTA:

Capturefsdddhghgh copy


  1. Boy, this memo sure is hard to find. Any reason for that?
  2. Is the bumper sticker aimed at the SFPD, reminding them of how to enforce traffic laws?
  3. Or is the bumper sticker aimed at SFMTA PCO’s, reminding them of how to enforce traffic laws? What’s the point of this?
  4. Should taxi drivers simply stop in a travel lane and then have passengers walk across the bike lane?
  5. What about the Lyft and Uber TNC’s, the new taxis? Couldn’t you make the same argument about authorizing them to do the same thing?

Our SFMTA Lacks the Energy to Keep Up with the Foot of Golden Gate Avenue, So Unofficial Orange Cones Mingle with White Posts

Friday, July 29th, 2016

For a few days anyway, you’d see just a pair of white safe hit posts from the SFMTA here at the foot of Golden Gate near Market. But then along comes the unofficial SFMTrA to put the unofficial orange cones, which instigated the SFMTA into putting in the white posts, back up.

7J7C9261 copy

So this is how the story ends, with the lazy SFMTA asking for more money to do what it’s paid to do already and some dude maintaining the orange cones on a regular basis…

After Being Criticised, Our SFMTA Puts Up “Safe Hit Posts” on Golden Gate Avenue

Monday, July 18th, 2016

These two white posts have been installed at the foot of Golden Gate:

7J7C8728 copy

Here’s the view from Market:

7J7C8760 copy

The unofficial orange cones are still around though.

I suppose this closes a chapter on the book of the new Golden Gate Ave bike lane

The “SFMTrA” Puts Up Traffic Cones on Golden Gate Avenue

Thursday, June 30th, 2016

Here’s the scene at the foot of Golden Gate yesterday during the Evening Drive – what’s new is the orange traffic cones:

7J7C7925 copy

Our SFMTA didn’t put up the cones, the SFMTrA did. See?

CmKF7wvUkAAlw05 copy

So of course these cones are unofficial (unlike this one from last week, when a made member of our City Family put an orange cone near the curb so drivers wouldn’t run over the legs of people warming up in the slow lane of Market inbound).

On it goes

The Advisability of Riding Your Bike Through the Bunker Road Tunnel Whether the Light is Green or Not

Tuesday, June 28th, 2016

Here it is, your Bunker Road Tunnel* to Rodeo Beach and beyond.

The driver of this old Datsun(!) pickup truck seemed to be giving this cyclist a little bit of room, but then a shout came out…

7J7C7821 copy

…from this guy going the other way. So whoops, the Datsun driver moves a yard or two to the right. Thusly:

7J7C7822 copy

Bikes have dedicated lanes in this tunnel but cars don’t. Does that mean that bikes don’t have to wait up to five minutes for a green light the way cars have to? I know not. The surfer dudes in the 4WD pickup could not possibly look more like Marin Locals, like Regulars on this stretch of road, but the driver was surprised to see a cyclist going the other way? Now because it’s a tunnel, shouting works, but what if dudes had had the radio on and couldn’t hear? There could have been an accident.

Seems that waiting for the green would be safer. There’s room for debate, I suppose. (I think I’d want to see a sign saying it’s OK for bikes to proceed afore I ran a red light…)


A single-lane tunnel carries Bunker Road from the Rodeo Valley to U.S. 101. Built in 1918, this tunnel is known as Baker-Berry Tunnel but also known as the Bunker Road Tunnel or the Five Minute Tunnel. A date stamp on the western entrance to the Baker-Barry Tunnel lists 1994, which may have been the year the tunnel was retrofitted for earthquake protection or reconstructed for other reasons. Additional work was completed in 2013 to allow for wider approaches for bicyclists. A traffic signal governs the flow of traffic into the tunnel, since only one direction may proceed at a time.

*Some mock the Yelp for rating a tunnel:

“Solid four-star tunnel… Screw you, Yelp.”

“What can I say, it’s a hole in the”

Wow, That was Fast: Here’s the New Bike Lane on the Twitterloin Part of Golden Gate Avenue – Lots of Congestion Already

Wednesday, June 22nd, 2016

So I heard that the beginning part of Golden Gate in the ‘Loin, the Tender / Twitter -loin, was going to get a bike lane just a few weeks back. And I says to myself, I says, “I better check it out afore things change.” And I did but then I thought, no, neighboring McAllister is a much better way to travel inbound, even though our SFMTA / DPW just recently rejiggered the traffic lights in front of the troubled Hibernia Bank Building most unhelpfully.*

But then a week later, I saw this – it’s just a paint job, for now:

20160617_064739 (1) copy

Speaking of signal timing, I think you’d really need to hustle to make the green lights. I’ll be satisfied to be delayed by just one red light from Polk to Market – prolly the one at Hyde Leavenworth.

Anyway, speaking of that area, drivers turning right from GG onto Hyde just might get in your way. A lot. We’ll see how this works out.

Oh, and here we go – on the same day, just by coincidence, I came through in a car. Lots of backed up traffic, as one might expect, oh well. See the pedestrian timer? The light turned red soon after and it was stop and go at each intersection even though traffic was not backed up at the intersection with Market, oh well:

IMG_9643 copy

So now Golden Gate seems more like the foot of troubled 6th Street, which is the SoMA street what GG feeds into.

IDK, maybe I’ll start using this part of GG every day. The new bike lane is in beta, more or less, so we’re not yet aware of all its issues.

Well see…

*So they take the trouble to make the foot of McAllister a two-way street and things seemed to be working out, but then they make the intersection with Market a mess with blocked #5 Fultons all over. Perhaps this is due to nearby construction? Our SFMTA has a real problem with traffic light timing – it’s like it doesn’t care a whit. The SFMTA isn’t a safety organization, it’s an un-safety organization. This isn’t a money problem, it’s a management problem. Sry.

Wow, the New “Red Carpet” Transit Lanes of Market Street Really Stand Out

Tuesday, May 3rd, 2016

Or “so-called red carpet,” if you’d prefer.

7J7C5134 copy

‘Cause that’s what people call them.

Even though they’re not.

The Dog What DIDN’T Bark: Mansion-Dwelling Millionaires in the Western Addition Seem to Have No Problem with THE URBAN SCHOOL Construction

Tuesday, January 26th, 2016

What’s this? It’s just a simple massive 50-feet steel beam double-parked for a long time in front of historic million-dollar-plus mansions.

IMG_9743 copy

Why? Well, it’s a part of the lengthy, noisy extension at THE URBAN SCHOOL, a private high school what costs three times (3x) as much as tuition at our University of California campuses.

And yet, nary a peep I’ve heard from the nabes.

Just saying…