Posts Tagged ‘masonic’

Trader Joe’s Parking Lot Inconveniently Located Across Four Lanes of Traffic – Was This Good Planning?

Tuesday, February 21st, 2017

I say four lanes ’cause even though the unit block of Masonic is six lanes wide at this point, the outer two are almost always used for parking.

7J7C7213 copy

Anyway, this northbound lane is a de facto parking lot for Trader Joe’s #100. This is because the real parking lot is far too small. Of course, there’s a place for parking on the roof of the building, but you can’t use it. And of course these days you can also park in the lot of the former (and quite horrible, remarkably so, but also beloved by some) Lucky Penny diner (but that’s not going to last forever, as condos are slated).

Those shoppers queueing up to use the main lot line up all the way to Euclid sometimes, and even getting to the back of the line involves awkwardly driving going around a huge MUNI yard or a large swath of the inner Inner Richmond.

So people simply park for free on Masonic northbound and run/walk across Masonic, speed limit 30 MPH by the way.

Hey is this good planning? Nope. Hey who planned this design, the Planning Department? Yep.

Are you going to die by shopping in this fashion? Probably not, but somebody has already. Will somebody else die doing the same thing? Yes.

Special SFPD Park Station Community Meeting on Valentine’s Day Dealing with Violent Crime Uptick North of the Panhandle

Monday, February 13th, 2017

All the deets from Hoodline.

7J7C6915 copy

Signs of Full Employment in Frisco: MINI MASS HIRE at Target Stores, Saturday, Dec 10th, Noon – 4 PM

Friday, December 9th, 2016

(Ah memories, back when NOPNA tried to say NOPE-NA to City Target West. But even the millionaire landed gentry of the “NOPA” Western Addition shop here now, even though they hate the idea of living so close to a busy Target store. Of course, they’d still kill this operation if they could, but they can’t, so oh well. And oh, prices are higher here at a City Target than a regular Target that you can find down in the Colma Daly City Serramonte area oh well.)

Hey, does Target operate the Starbucks at Geary and Masonic? Sure looks that way:

20161208_160008-copy

The Shrouded Trees of Masonic – A Death Row for Flora – Imprisoned in Orange

Wednesday, November 9th, 2016

I think these trees will be the first to go as a part of the Masonic Something Something Project:

20161106_102303-copy

Not sure what the orange is for. Pretty sure these trees are on the chipper list, cause hundreds of them are.

Eventually, Frisco will plant more…

Bowling Pin Juggler Busker, Fell and Masonic

Thursday, October 20th, 2016

Wait for a red light and…

20161019_165219-copy

…gather your pins…

20161019_165230-copy

…and then wait for your money:

20161019_165229-copy

Also seen at Geary and Masonic.

Enjoy.

It Was PARK LIKE YOU FEEL DAY at Our Local City Target West: Diagonal White Parking Lines are All What’s Left of Mervyn’s, and Sears

Wednesday, October 19th, 2016

You can pave over white lines, but they have a way of coming back. Confused shoppers didn’t know which lines to obey, on this day:

20161015_085010-copy

Bye bye Sears.

aac-7410

Bye bye Mervyns.

2445869355_dd81927489_b-copy

Toyota Prius Driver Basically Drives Backwards on Fell in order to Make a Left on Masonic

Wednesday, October 12th, 2016

IDK, man, you can get away with this at around 10:00 PM or so, but the proper way to handle things during rush hour is to exit the Chevron on Masonic. Otherwise you end up blocking traffic for a minute or so, and you have all the concomitant honking ‘n stuff. JMO

20161010_1410242-copy

Let’s hope this Prius driver sees the mistake here…

Physical Graffiti: The Reason Why You Shouldn’t Park Your Excavators on the Streets of San Francisco

Thursday, October 6th, 2016

As seen on Masonic:

20161005_161712-copy

Welcome to Frisco:

20161005_161650-copy

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:

captureghghhhh-copy

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.”

It’s Official: The SFMTA’s Rental Car Partner “Getaround” has Turned One Parking Space into Two – One Simple Trick!

Friday, August 12th, 2016

Smart Cars sure are short, huh?

20160808_171340 copy

This looks like Gay Paree, except our version of the Smartcar Four-Two is actually a little longer than what those Europeans use.

Anyway, I don’t know how workable this is day-to-day, but there it is, two cars / one space.