This was the team that tied SFGov up in knots with an injunction for four long years.
Posts Tagged ‘Muni’
FLASHBACK: Watch a Young Jack Bauer Meet with Dennis Hopper in Front of City Lights Bookstore a Quarter-Century AgoMonday, March 2nd, 2015
[UPDATE: Extended Dance Version here – I’m afraid this has become an earworm.]
The film Flashback had bad reviews for the most part, but don’t let that stop you from enjoying 25 year old footage from a pre-streetscaped,* pre-SFMTA* North Beach:
You see, at the beginning Jack Bauer was the uptight one and Dennis Hopper was the hippie – that’s the whole movie.
And it’s the later version of Big Audio Dynamite doing the audio – quite bouncy with plenty of orchestra hits and Rolling Stones samples.
Oh, and note the old-school MUNI bus at 0:03 in the window reflection…
*AND THAT WAS THE WAY WE LIKED IT!
“If I do what I wanted
I just don’t have the time
I want to ride my motorcycle
Into the sunshine
My tv is laughin’
Makin’ me feel small
Like I’m sad in a cell
All I can is these walls
And I never want to see another shopping mall
To be what I will
I’ll keep it up till
Or I won’t have nothing at all
This is my life
I’m livin it, I will pay
But why should I care about all that today
I need a head start
And I don’t want to stall
Gonna take a bulldozer to break down the walls
And I never want to see another shopping mall
And I know ’bout all the graveyards
Tumble-down farms and shacks
I’ve gotta get out on the highway
And I’m not comin’ back
There’s a small town in the mountains where I’ll do my thing
It’s this Credit Card Livin’ I find Stifling
I wanna see the river turning into the falls
Been down for so long now I wanna stand tall
So I’m packing my belongings and fear into my hold-all
And I never wanna see another Shopping Mall
Once we get out of the 80’s the 90’s are gonna make the 60’s look like the 50’s
Woah! Whew! I aint had a rush like that since the Berkeley Riots!
It should be kicking in by now
Ugh. I actually got him.
Here’s What Bus Drivers, Bike Riders, and Pedestrians Think of the New DOUBLE RIGHT TURN at Fell and MasonicFriday, February 27th, 2015
This MUNI operator used to be able to pick up at Hayes and Masonic southbound and then easily continue straight on Masonic towards Haight. But now #43 Masonic drivers need to get into the #2 lane as the #3 lane is now a mandatory right turn onto Fell. So click click goes the left turn signal as the bus driver begs the stalled traffic for a little help:
And if you’re coming from inbound Hayes to southbound Masonic on a bike, you now have two lanes to jink across if you wish to continue on along Masonic:
This is why some, including those at the SFMTA/SFBC disfavor DOUBLE RIGHT TURNS. Note also the driver who’s improperly cutting across from lane #3 to lane #2.
And of course, now more drivers are blocking the box / sitting on the crosswalk:
On it goes at Fell and Masonic.
Someday I’ll figure out what the SFMTA is going for here.
MTB Legend Gary Fisher Calls for Ouster of Ed Lee – The Mayor’s Misstep on Polk Street – Small Biz vs. Big UrbanismFriday, February 27th, 2015
[UPDATE: It begins. The lily-white urbanists vent against Asian-American optometrists on Yelp. JUST ONE STAR FOR YOU, DR HIURA! GOOD DAY TO YOU, SIR!]
Let’s see if I can pay off on the headline here.
“OUT! This guy can not get away with this, are we this stupid?”
And here’s what GF was riffing on:
Now mind you, this is from an “urbanism” advocacy outfit straight outta Park Slope, so I’m sort of wondering why the Mayor’s handlers even let him make off-the-cuff remarks on this topic. Here’s the offending graf, which one assumes is properly transcribed:
“I’ve heard from many different groups,” Lee told Streetsblog. “I know we want to make the streets safer, make it bike-friendly, small businesses don’t want to lose parking for their constituents… I can’t have a particular position on it except to endorse the most balanced approach that they have because there’s issues that should not be in conflict. We shouldn’t promote bicycle safety over pedestrian safety over cars and parking. I think they’re all going to be important.”
First of all, why would you even have your executive speaking directly with activists in the first place? It’s like sending President Nixon out to the Lincoln Memorial at 4:00 AM to talk with the hippies about the Vietnam War. Second of all, Ed Lee can’t even handle a little Question Time at the Board of Supervisors without having the questions submitted in advance and without having an underling type up a reply for him to read into the record, so why would you have him give the bad news to the activists themselves? The StreetsBlog isn’t an SFGov-funded non-profit like the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition or the Tenderloin Housing Clinic, right?
And Ed Lee thinks he’s playing it safe with all this talk of a “balanced” approach, but look at what he says – he’s literally saying, “We shouldn’t promote bicycle safety…” Now that sounds like a complete sentence if you quote only that part. But the Mayor’s talking about cyclist safety vs. ped safety, so I’m not sure what he’s talking about. I was thinking the design of the SFMTA-designed “bulbout” at the deadly southwest corner of 6th and Folsom could be an example of this, but I don’t think this was on Ed Lee’s mind. Frankly, I don’t know what the Heck he was talking about.
So all that leaves Mr. Mayor wide-open for castigation. I’m not sure how much pull any one particular optometrist has on the SFMTA (check out this doc – it’s amazing*), but this coincidence allows a reference to SF’s VisionZero 2024 to come into the headline. Ed Lee ends up seeming like an out-of-touch Mr. Magoo:
I don’t know, if you’re pushing a “balanced” approach, but you don’t have an exec who can talk right, because he’s out of practice, because he was appointed to his position so he never really needed to get into practice, it seems foolish to afford advocacy journalists a chance at actual journalism.
But that’s what happened here, on the topic of Polk Street.
*Wow, these people with bidnesses in Polk Gulch are mostly American millionaires, but look how they self-describe:
Click to expand
And what about the poor guy who can only describe himself as “European?” Poor little feller.
And I’ll tell you, I’m shocked at the amount of time SFMTA chief Ed Reiskin has spent on the back-and-forth about a single solitary block of SF when his primary mission should be sweating the details of getting MUNI up to par…
Work with me here, people.
“Focus on the Five – Using multi-year collision data, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) is focusing on enforcing the five violations that are most frequently cited in collisions with people walking. The goal is to have half their traffic citations be for these five violations.”
And then let’s extract all the five-digit CVC section numbers cited in the official SFPD report, plus let’s also throw in a CVC number for the pedestrian who died last year after getting hit by a MUNI bus on Geary around Baker.
(And let’s ignore all the the lower-case subsections like 21950(b) and the like, treating 21950(a) and 21950(b) as the same violation, for example.)
And then lets throw all the extracted numbers into Excel for a Sorting.
And then let’s eyeball the numbers to separate them out:
So those are your top “five violations that are most frequently cited in collisions with people walking (and bicycle riding, but I don’t think that affects the numbers too much.)
Here they are, in order of frequency:
So how does that compare with this list from politicians?
“Focus on the 23 Five” campaign to target the top five causal factors of pedestrian crashes – running red lights 24 (California Vehicle Code 21453(a)), running stop signs (California Vehicle Code 22450(a)), violating pedestrian right-of-way (California Vehicle Code 21950(a)), failing to yield while 2 turning (California Vehicle Code 21801 (a), and speeding (California Vehicle Code 22350)…
See how that works? 21950 and 22350 are in there, but CVC violations on the part of pedestrians, like 21456, 21954, and 21955 have been omitted from the list.
Is the official “Focus on the Five” about pedestrian safety or “pedestrian rights?”
I’m thinking it’s about pedestrian rights, like the right to jaywalk, that kind of thing.
Is SFGov serious about SF Vision Zero 2024, a “program” that has the goal of ending all transportation deaths in San Francisco long after all the pols who voted for it have termed out?
Well, how can it be if it’s afraid to enforce traffic laws for political reasons?
If you want safety for pedestrians, wouldn’t you want them to be afraid of getting cited for jaywalking?
No? All right, well then keep on doing what you’re doing, but you’ll never ever achieve Vision Zero 2024 the way you’re going about it, SFGov.
SFMTA PCO’s seem to like citing this car daily, to the tune of $103 a day for the crime of parking too near a crosswalk:
Presumably, the owner has left it there for a few days, not realizing her mistake.
So, what’s stopping the SFMTA from citing this car every hour for the same violation? There must be some internal policy, one that I’m not aware of.
What if the rest of the SFMTA operated as effectively as the Parking Control Officer division?
I wonder what that would look like…