Posts Tagged ‘pedestrian’

Do These Jaywalkers on 30 MPH Masonic Realize That Somebody Died in This Exact Place Doing the Exact Same Thing?

Thursday, December 17th, 2015

Highly risky:

IMG_8808 copy

Reverse angle:

IMG_8827 copy

I’m guessing no, they do not.

I suppose I harp on this Trader Joe’s issue…

Apparently, People Use the Pedestrian Bridges Over Geary Quite a Bit – A Newsflash for our SFMTA SFCTA Alphabet Soup

Friday, December 11th, 2015

Just saying

7J7C0112 copy

I don’t know if it was such a great idea to build these bridges and I also don’t know if it’s such a great idea to spend big big bucks to tear them down…

The Unit Block of Masonic: A Daily Game of Frogger with Traffic Going 30 MPH in Both Directions

Tuesday, December 8th, 2015

Get up to speed here.

The limit here, betwixt Pine and Geary, is 30 MPH

IMG_8808 copy

This is poor planning.

This is San Francisco.

SFCTA Confirms Public Comment Cards for Geary BRT Stolen – But Some Returned “Anonymously” – Comment Deadline Extended

Thursday, November 12th, 2015

Here’s the latest on this issue, from the SFCTA, below.

If our SFCTA wanted to handle this issue with the least possible effort, then I give it an A+, or a passing grade if we’re grading pass/fail. Another approach would have been to notice another meeting and yada yada.

This project has been on the radar for a long, long time, but I never really paid attention to it until the pedestrian bridges issue came up. If the SFCTA were a person and we took what it said seriously, I’d tell you that our SFCTA is in deep denial on this bridges issue.

(And how much would a BART spur under Geary end up costing, like a billion dollars a mile, like our already-failed Central Subway? Is something like this unreachable pie in the sky? IDK.)

Anyway, here it is:

“To the Participants at the Geary Bus Rapid Transit Project’s November 5, 2015, public comment meeting:
Thank you very much for the time you spent coming to the meeting to learn about the project and for submitting comments on the Draft Environmental Document. Your input is important and appreciated.
Unfortunately, we wish to provide notice that during the meeting, at approximately 7:10 p.m., sign-in sheets with your personal contact information and a few completed comment cards were stolen, at least some of which were later returned by mail anonymously. We sincerely apologize for this incident and have contacted the police about it.
We take your privacy seriously. When we share publicly the comments submitted to us by community members, our policy is to remove any personal contact information. We do not share any personal contact information with third parties, nor do we condone the use of stolen contact information by others. Please let us know if you receive any suspicious communications from anyone who would not normally have access to your phone number or email address. It may help with the investigation of this incident.
Third, in response to these extenuating circumstances, we are extending the public comment period until November 30, 2015, and we encourage you to contact us if you submitted a comment card at the public meeting before 7:10 p.m. and are concerned about whether we received it.
Feel free to contact us to verify your comment’s receipt, or simply submit another comment, via email at gearybrt@sfcta.org.
Regards…”

Here’s One of the Pedestrian Bridges that Our SFCTA Now Despises – 99% of Us Can Use It, Of course

Tuesday, November 10th, 2015

Here you go, click here and then Control-F for the phrase pedestrian bridge – 26 mentions you will find.

Can you see anything positive at all mentioned about the bridges of J-Town? Perhaps our SFCTA doesn’t think there are any? Or perhaps it thinks it’s writing an advocacy document and so it feels free to lie? IDK.

There were about a dozen people on the bridge when this photo was taken – they’re hard to spot:

7J7C8703 copy

And if these bridges aren’t up to standards, well, then why hasn’t anybody sued us over accessibility? Perhaps they are up to standards?

And oh yes, DEAR SFCTA – YOUR QUICK AND DIRTY GEARY BRT PROJECT AIN’T TOO QUICK, NOW, IS IT?

Oh well.

Our SFCTA SFMTA Tries to Impress the Feds But Loses Box of Public Comment Cards? – Geary BRT – 75 Million Smackers

Monday, November 9th, 2015

Is this the box what got swiped from the basement of St. Mary’s the other day?

7J7C8633 copy

I think it is!

(That’s what some railfan/urbanist/Googler told me, and this particular demographic has ne’er lied to me yet.)

And what’s that, the whole point of this meeting was primarily to be able to tell the FTA that we had a meeting so give us some money money money?

“As the San Francisco Examiner reported, Geary BRT is jockeying for a $75 million grant from the Federal Transit Administration’s Small Starts fund, which may be awarded after public input is taken on the draft environmental impact report.”

And this drive for money is what fuels the SFMTA’s rabid hatred of the pedestrian bridges in the Japantown area on Geary?

Oh, I see!

Gentle Reader, check out any EIR, draft or whatever, then control-F for “pedestrian bridge” and then brace for the haterade. Shouldn’t an EIR, draft or whatever, outline the pros and cons of destroying the ped bridges? And hey, does the SFCTA want to tear down all structures in town what aren’t 100% ADA compliant right now? Oh, no, just these bridges?

(I should say that the SFCTA is already on secret double probation for the disastrous Central Subway and the failing T-Third, among other crimes and misdemeanors.)

On It Goes.

Will the Geary BRT be a good thing? IDK. But certainly, the honest answer to this question won’t come from our SFCTA. (Perhaps we should pay them $75 million to recommend doing nothing and then we’d be better off, IDK. )

7J7C8630 copy 7J7C8627 copy 7J7C8622 copy 7J7C8584 copy 7J7C8583 copy 7J7C8577 copy

Latest SFCTA SFMTA Public Meeting Promoting the #38 Geary BRT a Kind of Fiasco – Ped Bridges in Japantown in Peril

Friday, November 6th, 2015

1. Will the Geary BRT end up being a good thing? IDK.

2. Will the Geary Merchants Association ever accept it? No, definitely not.

3. Will our transit overlords figure out a way to placate Japantown, which is up in arms over the pending destruction of the pedestrian bridges connecting the north side with the south side? Probably, but I don’t know how they’re going to do it.

Here’s some video of Geary merchant David Heller berating said transit overlords, with county worker Peter Lauterborn playing the role Dr. Ian Malcolm from Jurassic Park:

How many Seinfeld-ian moments did I see last night afore I left? A whole bunch.

Oh, and some monkey wrencher(s) stole the registration sign in sheets and some filled-out comment cards? Whoops. Is this kind of thing akin to Target getting hacked and having your email address spread about? Sort of.

On It Goes…

Frisco Finally Gets Around to Fixing the Hanging Lanterns Above the Great Southern Entrance to Japantown – Here’s What They Look Like

Thursday, October 15th, 2015

First, it was all like this, like for a looooong time:

7J7C5696 copy

But now it’s all like this, all fixed (except for the tagging, which might qualify for Landmark status at this point, but oh well):

7J7C8032 copy

So that’s good.

(Hey, how’s the seismic safety for all what you can see in the background there, on Geary and Post from Fillmore to Laguna and including the big ugly Peace Pagoda [L]andmark? Oh, not good? Uh oh.)

Now what’s the next step? Hopping lanterns, Miyazaki-style, natch:

Hopping_lantern copy

Someday

Five Seconds of Masonic: How Trader Joe’s Shoppers Play a Deadly Game of Frogger Every Day – And No One Cares

Tuesday, October 13th, 2015

From west…

7J7C8041 copy

…to East:

7J7C8042 copy

And here’s the caboose of this jaywalking / jay-running train:

7J7C8040 copy

I’ve been tilting at this windmill for a while now. At first on SFist back about 2007 or so and then on this tiny blog. The first TJ’s shopper death came a few years back. The next will come tomorrow or next year or in another five years, something like that.

What’s that, the speed limit here is 25 MPH and cars come through “speeding” all the time? Well, not really. Average speed for southbound traffic is fairly low. And for northbound, it’s not all that fast either. And oh, the limit on this stretch of Masonic is 30 MPH.

What’s that, Planning and DPW and the all-knowing, all-seeing SFMTA have a plan for Masonic and it’s coming soon? Well, not really. The project wasn’t as “shovel-ready as promised so they’ve loaned the Masonic-designated pork for other stuff. A “new” Masonic will eventually come, but not above Geary and TJ’s and all the photos you can see are all from north of Geary.

That’s the update for 2015.

SFMTA Spokesmodel Paul Rose Costs Us Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars Per Year, But He Sounds Like a MUNI UNION Flack

Monday, October 12th, 2015

Yes, over $200,000 in his Total Cost of Employment (TCOE). (You want to get into this, well, we can get into this.)

Here’s the new stuff:

It does not appear the bicyclist was traveling in a bike lane,” said Paul Rose…

I’d expect this kind of sophistry from a MUNI operators attorney, but not a spokesmodel from the SFMTA.

Hey, is this the same Paul Rose who committed this? Yep. Oh what’s that, Paul, you acknowledged your mistake and you didn’t want to get into why you committed such a boner? But that’s how you learn, right?

Let’s move on, to the SFPD:

Bicyclists are supposed to travel in the bike lane,” reminded SFPD Officer Grace Gatpandan…

This statement is 100% non-operational, and I don’t know how many words you’d need to add to fix it.

Do I expect better from SFMTA / SFPD?

Yes I do.

Should I.

IDK

BTW, I’ve “gone around” MUNI vehicles thousands of times, both inbound and outbound, on Market Street since the 1980’s. It’s not illegal, is it? Tell me how I’m wrong here.

Show me the police report and I’ll tell you who was at fault here, except 1) it doesn’t exist yet and 2) the SFPD holds onto its PRs really really tight so I’ll never see it even after it comes out.

Hey, is the SFPD part of the SFGov “City Family” known to favor SFMTA operators when it comes time to assess fault when SFMTA operators get into accidents, or, in the words of the SFMTA, when SFMTA operator commit “traffic violence?” Yes. Yes it is.

Oh well