Where I grewed up, they had at least four street name signs at every intersection.
But in SF, not so much. You gotta use other clues to determine location sometimes…
Click to expand
Well the SFMTA has a new tack on Scott Street betwixt Page and Fell for this year.
So last year, the SFMTA felt that these particular blocks of Scott were filled with “high speed” drivers “speeding” through the place and the SFMTA felt that the simple four way stop intersection of Page and Scott was “confusing for everyone.” Here we go:
In fact, Page and Scott is not “confusing” at all. As stated, it’s a simple four-way stop, about as comprehensible as possible. And in fact, Page and Scott does not experience “heavy vehicle volumes.”
But hey, if you want to say that Hayes and Scott has heavier traffic volume these days, especially during the evening drive, well, we agree on that, SFMTA. Before, this traffic would have been on Divisadero, but recent “improvements” to the DivCo have lessened the DivCo’s capacity.
Here is the result of the “improvements” to Divis:
But now it’s 2014 and that was then and this is now. The SFMTA is articulating new rationales for doing what it wants to do. They’re contained in the Scott Street Traffic Diversion.
Let’s check it out:
Motorists who drive through a neighborhood – rather than to a local destination – can cause congestion on residential streets.
WELL GEE, I SUPPOSE THAT’S TRUE. BUT MOTORISTS WHO DRIVE TO A LOCAL DESTINATION – RATHER THAN DRIVING THROUGH – CAN CAUSE CONGESTION AS WELL, RIGHT?
The City proposes restricting traffic on Scott Street to make it more comfortable for residents, bicycle riders and pedestrians.
OK, SFMTA, WHY DON’T WE RESTRICT TRAFFIC ON _ALL_ STREETS TO MAKE _EVERYBODY_ MORE “COMFORTABLE?”
An extra-large bulb-out at Scott and Fell will require all southbound automobile traffic to turn right onto Fell Street; bicycle riders and pedestrians can continue on Scott. This will reduce Scott Street’s appeal as a cross-town route, making it a more pleasant place to walk, bike, and live.
SO YOU WANT DIVISADERO TO BE A _LESS_ “PLEASANT” PLACE?
Access will be maintained to all homes and driveways, and changes will be made to improve Divisadero Street to accommodate diverted traffic.
OH, I SEE, YOU WANT DIVIS TO HAVE MORE GREEN LIGHT TIME AND, LET’S SEE HERE, HAIGHT, PAGE, OAK, FELL, HAYES, ETC TO HAVE LESS GREEN LIGHT TIME. ISN’T THIS KIND OF A ZERO-SUM GAME? WHY SHOULD THE CITY BEND OVER BACKWARDS FOR THE RICH HOMEOWNERS OF SCOTT STREET?
Changes to Scott Street were initially requested by neighborhood residents unhappy with congestion and idling vehicles.
OK, SO WHAT ABOUT EVERY OTHER STREET IN SF? ARE YOU GOING TO POLL RESIDENTS OF ALL THE OTHER STREETS TO MEASURE THEIR “HAPPINESS?”
Restricting southbound traffic would greatly reduce this issue for several blocks both north and south of Fell Street. Residents who live on Scott between Oak and Fell would have to approach their homes from the south when driving, but would still have access to their driveways and would be able to exit the block to either the north or south.
WHY NOT THIS, SFMTA? WHY NOT SAY THAT ONLY SCOTT STREET RESIDENTS CAN PARK ON SCOTT STREET? I’LL BET THAT WOULD INCREASE THE HAPPINESS LEVEL OF THOSE MILLIONAIRES EVEN MORE. ARE YOU GOING TO DO THAT NEXT, SFMTA?
With the proposed traffic diverter, drivers would still be able to park on both sides of Scott Street on the block between Oak and Fell with a U-turn required to reach parking spaces on the west side of the street. The traffic diverter would not remove any parking spaces from Scott Street, though bulb-outs at other locations in the project area will each remove 0-3 parking spaces.
WHY DON’T YOU JUST COME OUT AND SAY HOW MANY PARKING SPACES YOU’RE GOING TO TAKE OUT, SFMTA? OH, THAT’S NOT YOUR STYLE, HUH?
Biking on Scott Street in the southbound direction will be significantly calmer, with fewer automobiles to share the road with.
FEWER BUSES TOO, RIGHT? IN FACT NO BUSES AT ALL. AND YET, HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE RIDE ON BUSES ON SCOTT THROUGH THIS SACRED AREA ON A DAILY BASIS. WHAT ABOUT THEM?
Scott Street will no longer be a convenient route for driving in the southbound direction.
BECAUSE IT WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE, RIGHT? WELL, WE AGREE ON THAT ON, ANYWAY.
For drivers with destinations within the Alamo Square or Lower Haight neighborhoods, either Divisadero or parallel neighborhood residential streets could be used.
WELL THANKS, CAPTAIN OBV!
For drivers currently using Scott Street for longer stretches, Divisadero will be improved to make it the preferred route through the area.
UH, NO IT WON’T. SIMPLY.
Driving north on Scott Street would not be restricted under the proposal, though raised crosswalks and speed humps will be added.
WHAT’S THE SPEED LIMIT ON SCOTT, SFMTA? HOW MANY PEOPLE “SPEED” ON THESE TWO BLOCKS BETWIXT PAGE AND FELL? OH NONE, ALL RIGHT. BUT YOU’LL PUT IN “SPEED” BUMPS ANYWAY, BECAUSE, BECAUSE…?
Because of improvements the SFMTA will be making to Divisadero in conjunction with this project, neighborhood streets such as Steiner, Pierce and Broderick would not be expected to receive noticeable changes in automobile traffic – in fact, some cross-town traffic on these streets may switch to Divisadero as well.
THIS IS PIE IN THE SKY. THIS IS THE SFMTA’s BIG ROCK CANDY MOUNTAIN. IF THE SFMTA WANTS TO FAVOR NORTH-SOUTH TRAFFIC OVER EAST-WEST, IT CAN, OF COURSE, BUT AT THE EXPENSE OF EAST-WEST TRAFFIC, OF COURSE. ISN’T THIS A ZERO-SUM GAME, SFMTA?
Changing the traffic signals on Divisadero Street will ensure that the increase in the number of cars using Divisadero will not slow down the 24-Divisadero, and could even improve Muni service in some stretches.
THIS IS PIE IN THE SKY. THIS IS THE SFMTA’s BIG ROCK CANDY MOUNTAIN. OH WELL. HEY SFMTA, WHY NOT CHANGE THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS ON DIVIS RIGHT NOW, IF DOING THAT WOULD BE SO GREAT? SIMPLY, DIVERTING TRAFFIC ON SCOTT WILL NOT IMPROVE BUS SERVICE. SORRY, SFMTA. SORRY TO HARSH YOUR MELLOW, SFMTA.
Click to expand
If you want. There’s really only one block that’s kind of steep, but think of all the stop signs you won’t have to blow through.
They used to have a kind of bike lane on the left side of Oak but it’s gone now.
But the right side looks all right and traffic doesn’t move all that fast so it works.
(Coming back is a different story, much steeper going uphill on neighboring Fell and Page.)
“Upcoming Tenant Convention
Please join me and tenant leaders from the Richmond and Haight-Ashbury for a Tenant Convention to be held on Saturday, January 18th at 1:00 p.m., at the Park Branch library (1893 Page St. between Cole and Shrader).
It will build on the momentum that was generated by the Our Richmond/No Eviction event that I convened on December 4, which drew over 70 participants from the Richmond eager to talk about what can be done to stop the eviction crisis that is tearing apart communities in District 1 and throughout the City.
Come and learn about what you can do if you or your neighbors are being faced with eviction and help us to plan for legislation to fight back.
This gathering is sponsored by the San Francisco Tenants Union, Housing Rights Committee, Causa Justa/Just Cause, Senior and Disability Action and ACCE.”
[UPDATE: Now let's hear from famous Jim Ross:
"I lived on Scott Street, between Oak & Fell during the last traffic circle experiment. Was nearly hit four or five times walking to Haight Street for coffee. That is a very residential neighborhood, one reason it is good to bike through. But also, a bunch of pedestrians should not have risk life and limb to cross the street…"
Indeed, Jimbo! Pedestrians wanting to cross Page would hear a car coming from a half-block away. What should they do? Would the drivers slow down? The peds wouldn't know. Very bad! All this so that Page could eventually become a "Bicycle Boulevard?" All this so that cyclists wouldn't have to worry about getting tickets for California stopping? Ridiculoso!]
Here it is, from our incompetent SFMTA:
You know what, SFMTA, do you know what you should be “passionate” about? Do you know what your primary function is? It’s to operate the fucking transit system.
So how well do you think you are you doing, SFMTA? Do you think you all are doing a spectacular job? Really?
So why not this, why not say, “We’re the SFMTA, we’re MUNI and we don’t do a very good job these days but we have a pot of money to spend on the Lower Haight and we think this kind of project would be a good use of taxpayer money.” You know, as an introduction, to build credibility with your audience.
Anyway, let’s get to a few of the more glaring issues with the so-called “Wiggle Community,” fka the Lower Haight.
Oh, here we go:
Click to expand
Let’s read the boxes here:
“With intersecting bike routes and heavy vehicle volumes, this intersection is confusing for everyone”
OMFG, SFMTA, WTF? The intersection of Page and Scott doesn’t have “heavy” vehicle volumes. NOT AT ALL. Also, it’s a simple four way stop. It’s not “confusing for everyone.” WTF are you smoking, you SFMTA hippies?
“Heavy vehicle congestion from drivers using Scott as a cut-through to Fell and Oak.”
OK, as stated, Scott Street just doesn’t have heavy vehicle congestion. Hey, SFMTA! Do you know about the ongoing, daily disaster you all created called Octavia “Boulevard?’ Well guess what. It has “heavy” vehicle congestion. As does Oak, which routinely backs up going all the way up to freaking Alamo Heights. As do other streets intersecting with Octavia due to how the lights are timed. What color is the sky in your world, SFMTA? And what’s a “cut-through?” Is it street? I think it is? How about this, SFMTA, you all name me a street and then I’ll make a up a name for the surrounding area and I’ll call it a “community.” How about the “Ashbury Southern Heights (ASH) Community?” Then, I’ll critercise all those mofos who use the southern part of Ashbury Street to “cut-through” my made-up “community.” And then I’ll blame ALL “congestion” on people who don’t live in the “community.” That’s what you’re trying to do here, SFMTA. Every street in SF is a “cut-through,” using the phrase the way you all use it.
“Haight Street has buses and commercial activity, and is less comfortable for biking.”
Biking isn’t necessarily “comfortable,” SFMTA. And it never will be. I know you all are addicted to spending money, but this rationale is exceptionally weak. It’s right up there with using “transit justice” to justify the wasteful nine-figure Central Subway subway to nowhere project in Chinatown.
“Bicyclists don’t yield to pedestrians, particularly in the downhill direction”
Well, yeah, that’s right. Like Haight and Pierce, for example. I’ll tell you, I’m surprised the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition branch of the SFMTA would allow a publication to come out what talks about enforcement actions and what has a photo of an SFPD officer. I guess this is the SFMTA throwing a bone to the peds?
Anyway, read through the whole seven pages for more SFMTA boners.
Speaking of which, the SFMTA is back with the traffic circles.
All right,about a decade ago, the very same SFMTA was dead-set on putting traffic circles in the Haights, specifically on Page and Waller. The SFMTA said it had numerous studies praising traffic circles. The SFMTA said that “the community” wanted traffic circles. The SFMTA was wrong. The SFMTA had a vote by the neighbors and it lost by about a three to one margin – all 11 proposed traffic circles got voted down. Anyway, the plan was to have them become gardens or whatnot. So, for the SFMTA to list unsightliness as the first reason for the SFMTA’s failure, well, that’s a little disingenuous, IMO. So the reason the SFMTA can now claim it has “installed traffic circles with success and community support” in the Richmond District recently is that the SFMTA didn’t allow a vote. If the SFMTA allowed a vote on any particular traffic circle, the SFMTA would lose. So, no more voting, bingo bango.
This is horse doody:
“Traffic Circles Then & Now
In 2003, the SFMTA experimented with removing stop signs and installing traffic circles at several locations along Page Street. Many residents complained that the circles were unsightly and deprioritized pedestrians, and they were removed. However, in recent years the SFMTA has installed traffic circles with success and community support, using improved outreach, design, and signage.
Are there places in the Wiggle where you’d like to see traffic circles today?”
Is the SFMTA saying that it has “improved” the design of traffic circles the past ten years? Perhaps they’ve done research on the number pi? Perhaps they’re thinking traffic ovals? Traffic ovoids? IDK.
Anyway, just because you lie about stuff, that doesn’t mean people will necessarily believe you, SFMTA.
“Subject: Page St. Traffic Circle Hearing TOMORROW
Date: March 17, 2004 1:30:06 PM PST
“Dear SF bicyclist,
The 9-month long Page and Waller Traffic Circle Pilot program is coming to a
close, and the Department of Parking and Traffic is holding a public hearing
TOMORROW, THURSDAY MARCH 18TH to hear from residents and users of the
street. This is your chance to voice ideas, concerns, and opinions about
this traffic calming experiment. Each of the 11 proposed circles will be
voted on by residents living within a block, and voting will conclude March
25th. The circle receiving the highest percentage of votes (over 50%) will
be installed on a permanent basis, with consideration for others that also
receive 50% or more of the vote.
The meeting will be held:
6:30pm-8pm this Thursday, March 18th
Park Branch Library
1833 Page St. at Cole
The SFBC supports the concept of the traffic calming circles, but shares the
concerns of many other residents and neighborhood groups, including Walk SF
and the Haight-Ashbury Neighborhood Council, that:
1) there was not sufficient neighborhood outreach or involvement prior to
2) more education and public outreach is needed to users of the street to
convey safe and legal behavior at the circles
3) pedestrian right-of-way is being compromised with the current circle
Although we don’t think the current design is perfect, we are encouraging
our members and other residents living along the Page and Waller corridor to
VOTE YES to give the circles a chance to be improved upon.
Given the right education, signage, and enforcement, we believe the circles
will benefit the neighborhood and cyclists by being the first step toward a
true bicycle boulevard on Page St.
A bike boulevard is an innovative bicycle facility that is often applied to
residential streets that parallel major arterials. It consists of three
1. stop signs placed only on side streets to give priority to the boulevard
2. traffic circles installed in at least some of the intersections to slow
cars down to 10-15mph while allowing bikes to maintain momentum
3. diverters, barriers or forced turns that prohibit automobile through
access on the bike boulevard while continuing to allow cyclists,
pedestrians, and emergency vehicles through.
A bicycle boulevard treatment applied to Page St. could dramatically reduce
the volume and speed of traffic, and reduce or eliminate stop signs, making
bicycling along Page much easier, safer, more efficient and pleasant. It
would not “close” the street to cars- drivers would still be able to access
every point along Page, but using this neighborhood street as an auto cut
through would be a thing of the past.
Although the DPT is not considering a full bicycle boulevard currently,
Thursday’s meeting will be a good chance to voice your support for this
concept, and build support among local residents.
You can find out more about bicycle boulevards at:
DPT’s web page on the circles is at
Because of vocal opposition to the circles, it is particularly important for
people to come and speak at the hearing about the benefits of traffic
calming and a bicycle boulevard along Page St. For more information,
contact me (using the information at the bottom of this e-mail).
TALKING POINTS FOR THURSDAY’S MEETING
- There are problems with the implementation of the circles, but the concept
is good. We need better signage (yield to peds pop-up signs, and stops
- A full bicycle boulevard (including side street stop signs, circles, and
diverters) will dramatically reduce car traffic on this residential street,
prioritizing the street for cyclists and pedestrians.
- Vote yes on the circles!
Thank you for supporting YOUR Bicycle Coalition and an improved bike
So Marina Times Editor in Chief Susan Dyer Reynolds had a kind of a breakdown a few months back, while she was piloting her giant BMW among cyclists on Page in one of the Haights.
“Curly sped up and so did I, pulling in front of his bike, and trapping him between my SUV and the car parked next to him. As he came to a screeching halt, I rolled the window down a couple of inches. What color he had in his pale face drained and suddenly the smug smile was gone. “Are you crazy?” he asked, his voice shaking. Any ability I had to be rational went out my spit-covered window. “If I was crazy I would crush you like a bug right now,” I screamed.”
There wasn’t much of a reaction to this cry for help at first. But then a tiny blog (tiny but with more readers than the picayune Marina Times it’s safe to say) made a post about Susan’s breakdown, so she then got a whole bunch of reaction, from all across the country, mostly negative.
And then she posted some message about how she was going to deal with all the negative reaction in the September issue.
And then the comments disappeared.
And now, we have this.
“Virtual Ku Klux Klan”
“$10,000 in stolen funds stuffed in her blouse”
“Giada De Laurentiis has a bulbous candy apple head.”
It’s wide-ranging, certainly.
Anyway, I guess that’s that. That’s all we’ll be reading from her on the matter.
But you can find the basic gist of all those comments here, and other places I guess.
It sure looks that way.
You’ll see a Genentech bus driving in some unexpected place and then it’ll stop to let one worker out.
I guess this makes sense since it’s a smaller company and the commute isn’t all that far, you know, compared to Google and the others.
Seen here on Page Street, to avoid congested Haight, to be lower-profile, to get around faster?
Click to expand
Why are your buses so big, G-Tech?
Perhaps you could get by with smaller vehicles?
Am I missing something here? Susan Dyer Reynolds penned a piece last month, you know, about her little incident with a cyclist on Page Street but now all the comments about her behavior have been removed. There was a whole mess of them last I saw.
Let’s see here, who about town is known for banning comments? Well, struggling blogger Eve Batey of SFAppeal banned me (for life!) from making comments on her blog a while back, for politely correcting her about the price of the fare for the now-defunct CultureBus, stuff like that. (I was just trying to help her, you know. Oh well.) And corrupt Willie Brown / Ed Lee lackey Randy Shaw of Beyond Chron / Tenderloin Housing Clinic, he bans comments all the time. Why’s that? He wants to get $90-something million from the City and County of San Francisco so that he can improperly influence the government into … giving him $100,000,000 the next go-around and he doesn’t want people talking about that?
Those are the two I can think of off-hand.
Anyway, I don’t think SDR planned on getting the response she got.
Do you think she received a lot of support from her rich white lady friends? I don’t.
Do you think she got negative comments from her peers? I do.
Maybe she’s learned her lesson.
OH MY. HERE COMES AN ACCOUNT FROM THE GREAT WHITE NORTH, SAN FRANCISCO’S MARINA DISTRICT. (THINK OF THE PLACE AS SAN FRANCISCO’S VERY OWN LITTLE SLICE OF MARIN COUNTY.)
LEAVE US BEGIN. TAKE IT AWAY, HELEN LOVEJOY / SUSAN DYER REYNOLDS:
OK, LET’S CHECK THE WICKTIONARY, YOU KNOW, JUST TO BE SURE: “A cause of misery or death; an affliction or curse.” CAUSE, YOU KNOW, I STILL DON’T KNOW WTF YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT, EXCEPTING FOR YOU NOT LIKING BIKES ON PAGE STREET, WHICH, BTW, IS A FUNNY PLACE FOR A RICH WHITE LADY FROM THE MARINA TO BE HANGING OUT ON A REGULAR BASIS. BUT ANYWAY.
Driving home one recent afternoon, I stopped at a four-way sign, looked all directions, and proceeded into the intersection. Out of nowhere, a bicyclist flew through the stop sign to my left, riding right in front of me, forcing me to slam on the brakes.
UH, YOU LOOKED BUT YOU DIDN’T SEE. MMMM…. PERHAPS THE CYCLIST WAS SURPRISED THAT YOU ACTUALLY STOPPED. I’D RECOMMEND A CALIFORNIA STOP INSTEAD OF THE WAY THAT YOU STOP.
I came inches from hitting him, but he didn’t notice. As he pedaled along the right side of the street, I pulled up next to his rickety bike, rolled down my window, and said, “You have to stop at stop signs just like cars do.”
RICKETY? I THINK THAT’S MEANT AS AN INSULT? NOW ACTUALLY, RICH WHITE LADY, I THINK BIKES ARE GIVEN MORE LEEWAY IN SAN FRANCISCO THAN CARS. KEEP THAT IN MIND THE NEXT TIME YOU VENTURE INTO THE HAIGHTS.
The scrawny, pale, twenty-something with thinning curly dark hair – wearing only Bermuda shorts, a T-shirt and, of course, no helmet – flipped me off and shouted a string of expletives.
SCRAWNY, PALE, THINNING HAIR? MORE DEETS! WE GOTS TO HAVE MORE DEETS!
I felt my Sicilian blood boiling as I kept pace with him.
“Why is it you think you’re exempt from the law?” Suddenly and without warning, like the snake that he was, Curly whipped his head around and spit at me from the passenger side.
SNAKES WHIP THEIR HEADS AND SPIT? OK FINE, RWL.
I was in the process of rolling up the window, so his wad of spit didn’t hit me. Instead, it bubbled slowly down the window of my just-washed car.
JUST WASHED? KELL DOMAGE!
I kept pace with Curly, rolling the window down part way again. “What you just did qualifies as battery in the state of California,” I yelled, “and you should be arrested for road rage.”
UH, NOT REALLY.
Curly laughed and flipped me off with both hands as he steered the bike with his knees.
UH, IRL? I DON’T THINK SO.
“What are you going to do about it?” he asked smugly. Curly sped up and so did I, pulling in front of his bike, and trapping him between my SUV and the car parked next to him.
UH, I THINK YOU’RE NOT SUPPOSED TO TELL PEOPLE STUFF LIKE THIS? I MEAN, YOU”RE NOT SUPPOSED TO PUT THIS KIND OF A STATEMENT INTO A NEWSPAPER, NO MATTER HOW PODUNK / PICAYUNE IT IS.
As he came to a screeching halt, I rolled the window down a couple of inches. What color he had in his pale face drained and suddenly the smug smile was gone. “Are you crazy?” he asked, his voice shaking.
YOU GO GIRL! YOU GO, YOU CRAZY RICH WHITE GIRL!
Any ability I had to be rational went out my spit-covered window.
HE DROVE YOU TO IT! JUST LIKE IN THE BURNING BED!
“If I was crazy I would crush you like a bug right now,” I screamed. “Fortunately for you, I’m not crazy – but the next person you spit at might be and they could run you over or pull out a gun and shoot you.”
Suddenly Curly was mute. Having made my point, and thinking maybe Curly learned his lesson, I rolled up the window and continued on my way home.
WOW, I THINK WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT THIS OFF. PICKING UP HERE:
More than ever, I believe it’s time to hold bicyclists accountable for their actions, and that means license numbers that are visible to cops, victims and witnesses – just like on the cars and motorcycles they share the streets with.
AND I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE PEDESTRIAN LICENSES – WHO’S WITH ME?
IN CLOSING, RICH WHITE LADY, YOU CRAY-CRAY.
AND NOT IN A GOOD WAY.